Making the Case for the Biggest Snubs From the 2023 Hockey Hall of Fame Class
The Hockey Hall of Fame announced its 2023 inductees Wednesday, and as always, people had opinions.
On one hand, Rangers legend Henrik Lundqvist, one of the most likable people on planet Earth, was a shoo-in in his first year of eligibility. Canada's well-decorated Caroline Ouellette joins him in headlining the class.
With no disrespect intended to the rest of the class full of players who have cases of their own, there were some particularly egregious snubs this year if you ask me (and many of the lovely people on Twitter dot com)
Look, I don't want this to become the "Hall of Very Good" (even though some might argue it already has), and I'm aware only four men, two women, and a combined two in the builders and on-ice officials categories can make it each year. There's also some fun in the debate of it all and the different arguments for each player's case.
So here's my personal philosophy, the over-arching question I ask myself when I deciding if someone should really be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame, is this: Can you tell the story of hockey without mentioning this person? If the answer is no, they should be in.
In my mind, there are three huge misses this year in that regard.
Honorable Mentions
1 of 4
Let's take a quick look at some honorable mentions before we get into what I consider the three most egregious snubs of the year. And remember, there could be 30 honorable mentions, so I'll just touch on a few.
Sergei Gonchar: As I'll get into as it pertains to my top three, context is sorely missing when it comes to Gonchar's career. It's not his fault the height of his career also happened to be the Dead Puck Era in the late 90s post-lockout. Still, he ended up 17th all-time on the defenseman points list, and he boasts the most goals and points of any Russian-born defenseman in NHL history.
Patrik Eliáš: Two Stanley Cups, second in points by a Czech-born player, many appearances meddling on the Czech Olympic and International teams. Elias had a solid case to make it in a weaker pool this year, especially when you consider he had 1,026 points on a Devils team that prioritize defense first.
Chris Osgood: Here's where I think you differentiate between the Hockey Hall of Fame and a fictional NHL Hall of Fame. A goalie that has won three Cups, ranks 13th in wins, and ninth in playoff wins should be in the NHL Hall of Fame, even if he was playing behind one of the best teams assembled. But I understand the case for others just as much as his when it comes to hockey as a whole.
Corey Crawford: He's still young in his eligibility and he'll get there, I'm not particularly sweating this one even though he deserves to get in.
Henrik Zetterberg: I am a sucker for the Zetterberg late-round pick story, but like Crawford, he's young in his eligibility. Zetterberg's Triple Gold Status, 2008 Conn Smythe and overall contributions to the game should have him in eventually.
Alexander Mogilny
2 of 4Like many of you, I'm almost at a loss for words when it comes to the flagrancy of the committee once again snubbing Alexander Mogilny. Mogilny has been eligible since 2009 and we've seen a very long list of objectively worse players get their call every year since.
When Mogilny was at the top of his game, he was one of the best goal-scorers in league history, period. His 76 goals in 77 games in 1992-93 is the fifth-best goal-scoring season in NHL history. He would've won the Rocket Richard that year, but it didn't exist and situations like this are why I urge us all to steer away from individual hardware as an indication of Hall of Fame deservedness. Team accomplishments typically hold up, though, and Mogilny's got the international aspect of the Hall down with a Stanley Cup, Olympic gold medal, and a World Championship title.
Mogilny's whole situation is basically a case study of the importance of context when it comes to Hall of Fame selection. His 473 career goals leave him outside the top 50 all-time, but his goals-per-game average ranks 38th all-time.
And you wonder if Mogilny would've had a few more years to score more goals if he wasn't in the situation that arguably makes him more worthy of the Hall induction than any of his on-ice accolades. Mogilny paved the way for Russian greats in the NHL at just 20 years old, as the first to defect from the CSKA -- and effectively the Soviet military -- to play in the NHL after winning gold in 1989. He was also the first Russian-born player to don a "C" while Pat LaFontaine was out in 1993-94 with the Sabres.
There's much more to Mogilny's story, and all of it just adds to how appalling it is he was once again snubbed for the Hall of Fame. The four criteria are: playing ability, sportsmanship, character and contributions to his or her team and to the game of hockey in general.
It's starting to feel like the committee doesn't take the last criteria -- contributions to the game of hockey -- as seriously as it should. Mogilny's career on paper stacks up enough as he is a card-swiping member of the "Triple Gold Club" and as No. 4 all-time in points. On top of that, the NHL would look completely different if he hadn't made the bravest off-ice move in league history.
What are we doing here?
Rod Brind'Amour
3 of 4
Those of you who are familiar with my work know that I've been an advocate of Rod Brind'Amour's Hall of Fame campaign for years. I made my most compelling plea back in 2020 – and here we are again in 2023, still no Hall of Fame induction for the first and only captain in Hurricanes history to lift the Stanley Cup.
His resume alone stacks up against those already in the Hall. He had 15 seasons with 49+ points, 1,184 career points, captained a Stanley Cup team, and won two Selkes. His career even-strength faceoffs won percentage, 59.1, ranks No. 1 among NHLers with 600 games played. I could go on, but you've heard it all before, and the stats are more of his case for induction into the Hockey Hall of Very Good, which isn't the point.
The argument for his induction extends far beyond a piece of paper. Brind'Amour and his playing career are all of the good things about a loaded term – hockey culture – and none of the bad. I've been told hundreds of stories about Brind'Amour's dedication over the years. Former Michigan State teammate Danton Cole's recollection of Brind'Amour banging down the football facility doors to get a lift in while everyone else was celebrating the Fourth of July always makes me laugh.
He made sacrifices in the gym (legend has it he never missed more than two days of working out in his career), and outside of it (he averaged 24:18 time on ice in 2006, the season he captained the Hurricanes to a Stanley Cup at 35 years old). He revolutionized what it meant to be a hockey player with his workout regimen and dedication to health, a model contemporary players now look up to as a way to gain an edge or extend their careers.
The Hockey Hall of Fame officially states the following criteria as attributes in the player category: Playing ability, sportsmanship, character and contributions to his or her team and to the game of hockey in general.
No one in team history has given more to the Carolina Hurricanes than Brind'Amour, and those in the area know that Stanley Cup could've easily been the difference between keeping a team in Raleigh or eventually relocating.
And what has Brind'Amour given to the game of hockey?
That path to longevity many have since followed, an impact on non-traditional markets that Gary Bettman couldn't have even dreamed up, and – call me biased because I actually know the guy – but a certain faith in the concept of hockey culture that has been tested far too often these days.
You could argue he'll get in as a builder, with his unique contributions to hockey and his immediate and record-breaking success in his role as Hurricanes head coach. But other players already in the Hall have similar resumes, and it's not fair to penalize Brind'Amour's campaign as a player just because he's been an equally fantastic coach.
Rod Brind'Amour is hockey in North Carolina, and you cannot tell the story of the game of hockey in general without mentioning his contributions.
.png?w=256 "NHL Mock Draft")
.jpg?w=256 "Kucherov Landing Spots")
.png?w=256)
Jennifer Botterill
4 of 4
For those who don't know, the Hockey Hall of Fame rules since 2010 separated men and women in the players' division, stating that a maximum of two women can be inducted as players per year. So congratulations to Canada's Carolina Ouellette; the six-time world champion who won four-straight Olympic Gold medals (and six Silvers to boot) could not deserve the honor more.
But it was super disappointing to see the Hall once again declined to pick two women, and this is not an issue of "Hall of Very Good" vs. "Hall of Fame" at all. Jennifer Botterill is literally right there, and we can argue about the lack of space on the men's side, but the committee snubbing her when there was enough space raises serious competency concerns in my eyes.
Botterill, a five-time world champion and three-time Gold Medalist, has been eligible for the Hall of Fame since 2014. She's been the heart and soul of women's hockey since she stepped on the scene as the youngest member of Canada's first women's Olympic hockey team at the 1998 Nagano Games. She graduated from Harvard in 2003 as the most prolific scorer in American women's college hockey, winning the Patty Kaz twice.
As for big moments? Her final point in international play was the mic drop of the assist on the Marie-Philip Poulin game-winner at the 2010 Olympics.
She's since become an equal parts fun and important voice around the game of hockey, and her expertise is a pleasure to watch on the broadcasting side. This snub becomes more baffling and embarrassing by the minute. It didn't have to happen.
.png?w=480 "NHL Mock Draft")
.jpg?w=480 "Kucherov Landing Spots")
.png?w=480)
.png?w=600 "B/R NHL Staff Second-Round Predictions 🏒")
