Skip to content

Poll: Who should be in 2013’s Hall of Fame class?

Nov 12, 2012, 9:00 AM EDT

Chris Chelios AP

With or without Gary Bettman and Donald Fehr, the 2012 Hockey Hall of Fame induction will take place tonight (you can see it on NHL Network starting at 7:30 pm ET).

While we reminisce about Joe Sakic, Adam Oates, Pavel Bure and Mats Sundin, the natural next question is: who’s next?

First, it’s important to note some of the ground rules. While it’s certainly not mandatory to hit the max level, each year’s class is capped at four members.

It’s always sexy to consider first-ballot Hall of Famers, too, so here are some of the biggest names eligible for induction starting in 2013:

Scott Niedermayer, Chris Chelios, Rob Blake, Rod Brind’Amour, Keith Tkachuk, Paul Kariya and Owen Nolan.

That’s already a formidable list of players, but what about some of the excellent contributors who missed out at least once?

Here are some of the most notable contenders from previous years:

Brendan Shanahan, Jeremy Roenick, Theoren Fleury, Claude Lemieux, Phil Housley, Eric Lindros, Sergei Makarov, Curtis Joseph, Gary Roberts, Steve Larmer, Tom Barrasso, Guy Carbonneau, Dave Andreychuk, Alex Mogilny, Markus Naslund, Rogie Vachon, Mike Vernon and John Leclair.

There’s little doubt that there are proponents of other players out there, so feel free to write-in candidates in the poll and/or mention worthy nominees in the comments.

With the four-player maximum in mind, go ahead and share your votes on who deserves to be enshrined in 2013.

(Names listed in alphabetical order.)

Note: to keep things simple, the “builders” category isn’t addressed. Feel free to discuss the merits of candidates such as Pat Burns and Fred Shero in the comments, though.

  1. irokkit - Nov 12, 2012 at 9:50 AM

    Bill daly and Donald Fehr

  2. rainyday56 - Nov 12, 2012 at 9:53 AM

    Builders: Gary Bettman, Jeremy Jacobs – NOT!

  3. hockeydon10 - Nov 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM

    The first three are locks.

    Shanahan
    Chelios
    Neidermayer

    After that, I’m torn on who should be next between Blake, Roenik or CuJo. I’d probably have to give the nod to Blake for his Cup win, two Olympic golds and a Norris trophy.

    • mrchainbluelightning - Nov 12, 2012 at 3:30 PM

      I went with the same 3 and Lindros

      • yzerfan75 - Nov 13, 2012 at 12:16 PM

        Shanny, Cheli, and Neidermayer for me as well… can’t believe Neidermayer isn’t already in!!

  4. mpg44 - Nov 12, 2012 at 11:10 AM

    No one…. If there are no games , then there is nothing else!!

  5. kicksave1980 - Nov 12, 2012 at 12:31 PM

    LARMER, Chelios, Fleury, and Mogilny.

    • kicksave1980 - Nov 13, 2012 at 1:24 AM

      I’m obviously catching a lot of heat about these choices. The reason I think Larmer is getting robbed by not being in the HHOF is the fact that he played A DECADE of NHL hockey without missing a single game. Oh yeah…and he was over a point per game for his career. Think about that for a minute. How is that not hall worthy? Guys miss games with sore backs, broken bones, concussions, etc…Larmer didn’t miss a game in the span of a decade, and was on the scoresheet every night.

      As for Mogilny, I think he should be in because he paved the way for every Eastern European player to defect and come to the greatest league on the planet.

      Chelios is self explanatory. I hated the way he left Chicago, but personal feelings aside, he was one of the best defensemen in the NHL for well over a decade.

      Fleury – Over a thousand games played, over a thousand points. That should get you into the Hall.

      That’s no slight on the other guys listed…these are just my choices.

      • mrchainbluelightning - Nov 13, 2012 at 1:15 PM

        You have Fleury and Larmer over Shanny and Neidermayer

        That’s why

        And Larmer was a nice player for a long time while never being the best player on his own team….ever. Early 80’s Savard was the better player and by the late 80’s-90’s Roenick was superior.
        Not missing Hockey games does not put you ahead of Shanny or one of the most accomplished D men in the history of professional hockey.

      • kicksave1980 - Nov 13, 2012 at 2:12 PM

        Fair enough, but the same argument against Larmer could also be used against Shanahan (unless you count the Hartford year). He definitely wasn’t the best player on his team in St. Louis or Detroit, and was nearing the end of the road in NY and his second time in NJ.

        Certainly, I do think that both Shanahan and Neidermeyer should both be in as well. I just think that Larmer has been left out for so long that it’s criminal. No, not missing games doesn’t get you in on its own, but being a point per game player over those games should. And Denis Savard would have been the best player on 99% of the teams in the league at that time, so I think being 2nd best to him can be overlooked.

  6. 13datsyuk13 - Nov 12, 2012 at 1:02 PM

    Niedermeyer, chelios, Blake, shanahan

  7. desertfan - Nov 12, 2012 at 1:26 PM

    Chelios
    Lindros
    Niedermeyer
    Housley

  8. danphipps01 - Nov 12, 2012 at 4:14 PM

    Niedermeyer should be a first-year lock. Chelios is almost as likely getting the same treatment. Shanny’s probably getting in on the second pass. Blake or Lindros for the last, probably?

  9. jaker85 - Nov 12, 2012 at 4:15 PM

    Even tho he was a jerk off gotta throw Barrasso in sooner then later.

  10. thesneakysalamander - Nov 12, 2012 at 6:46 PM

    Housley is fourth all time in defenseman scoring, so he should get in. Two 600 goal scorers and two more with 500 tells me it will be an extremely hard year for a goalie to get in.

    BTW, why is Pierre Turgeon not on the list of possibles? He might not have the hardware, but he did score 500 goals, which tends to automatically get you into the hall.

  11. irokkit - Nov 12, 2012 at 9:43 PM

    Yeah , what about Tergeon…. Anybody but Lindros!!!

    No cups no Gold no respect no heart.
    I’d vote on Pierre McGuire before Lindros.

  12. dannythebisforbeast - Nov 12, 2012 at 10:41 PM

    Dunno about Lindros on hall of fame. I do know he had a ton of heart until injuries ruined him. I also know that I have been going to flyers game for 25 years and he is the only player that was singlehandedly worth the price of admission,could dominate any game at anytime, and you had to watch every time he was on the ice even when he didn’t have the puck.
    His is a story of what could have been

  13. atwatercrushesokoye - Nov 12, 2012 at 11:26 PM

    The only way Brind ‘Amour, Tkachuk or Nolan should get in is if they buy a ticket, they were all good but none were remarkable.

    Neidermayer is a lock, Chris Chelios will get in because he played for 36 years. In my opinion the rest of the players on that list were all good but none of them were great players who deserve to be enshrined forever. The closest one I think would be Mike Vernon.

    • hockeydon10 - Nov 13, 2012 at 8:45 AM

      “None were great players that deserve to be enshrined forever”?

      656 goals (13th all time)
      3 Stanley Cups
      Member of the hockey Triple Gold Club

      I think your thinking is a little clouded.

      • atwatercrushesokoye - Nov 13, 2012 at 9:56 AM

        Well under a point a game player who played a lot of years and thus accumulated a lot of points. He averaged 64 points a year over 21 years (31 goals, 33 assists) in my opinion he was one of the best 2nd/3rd line players to play the game but I don’t believe that he was truly one of the elite players of the game.

        Not to take anything away from Shanahan because he was a heck of a player, but in my opinion he belongs in the hall of very good.

      • hockeydon10 - Nov 13, 2012 at 7:33 PM

        Hall of the very good?
        Was around a lot of years and thus accumulated a lot of points?

        lol… you’re funny.

        Mats Sundin: 18 years, 564 goals, 1349 points
        Joe Sakic: 20 years, 625 goals, 1641 points
        Adam Oates: 19 years, 341 goals, 1420 points

        Brendan Shanahan: 21 years, 656 goals, 1354 points

        Looks pretty comparable to me. And that’s just this year’s HoF class.

      • atwatercrushesokoye - Nov 13, 2012 at 10:07 PM

        So what you’re saying is that Shanahan got less points in more years than everyone else? Oh wait he had 5 more points than Sundin in 3 more years….which means little cause I don’t think Sundin belongs there either.

        Let’s look at the numbers though:

        Sundin: averaged 75 points per year
        Sakic: averaged 82 points per year
        Oates: averaged 75 points per year

        So all 3 averaged more than 11 points per year than Shanahan did….not really comparable at all!

        Again Shanahan, and Sundin, were great players but would you ever consider either amongst the very best (top 5) players in the entire league for any period of their careers? The hall should be reserved for the best of the best.

  14. xjokerz - Nov 13, 2012 at 4:20 AM

    Shanny. But who cares no hockey means I don’t care

  15. mattmc20 - Nov 13, 2012 at 8:31 AM

    Shanny
    Chelios
    Blake
    Nedimeyer

    Those are the 4….

    • hockeydon10 - Nov 13, 2012 at 8:52 AM

      It’s hard to see the argument people have against this list. Just going on the big prize alone, before adding in all their other accomplishments…

      Shanny: 3 Stanley Cups
      Chelios: 3 Stanley Cups
      Blake: 1 Stanley Cup
      Niedermayer: 4 Stanley Cups

      Once you add in all the other accomplishments these four have, how does someone justify bumping any of them?

  16. irokkit - Nov 13, 2012 at 8:50 AM

    In 25 years the only player you saw worth anything was Lindross? You must’ve missed an awful lot of games because the flyers and had some excellent talent over the last 25 years. Lindross was big strong and outstanding hockey player. But his heart was a small is that a fly.!!

    • mrchainbluelightning - Nov 13, 2012 at 1:20 PM

      Lindros had a HUGE heart, Too big infact. The guy heard everything and took it it heart, kept coming back from injury after injury.

      Did you see the tears flow when he won the Hart? They were genuine, now yes, they guy obviously missed a TON of hockey. Musta missed the Yzerman, Sakic, Forsberg shows, and many others.

      But Lindros had a huge F’n heart

  17. irokkit - Nov 13, 2012 at 10:57 AM

    You gotta go a little further back then Mogilny defecting for paving ways….I loved Mogilny myself, but he was one of the players that benefitted from the Stastney’s as far as paving ways goes.
    Thanks to everybody for writing in, it brings me back to some great names and times.

    • mrchainbluelightning - Nov 13, 2012 at 1:23 PM

      Marian, Anton and Peter em up!

      But let’s not fool ourselves, defecting from CZE was big, but not as big as ditching on the USSR.

  18. yzerfan75 - Nov 13, 2012 at 12:18 PM

    Blake, Cheli, Neidermayer, and Shanny. Hands down.

  19. desertfan - Nov 13, 2012 at 1:16 PM

    How can anyone who has any understanding of this great game vote for Leclair, Fleury, Makarov, Carbonneau etc, etc over one of the games all-time stars -Lindros.

    He not only dominated them all but invented the power forward position-forget the whining about the politics outside the rink??????????????

    • hockeydon10 - Nov 13, 2012 at 3:03 PM

      He didn’t invent the power forward position. He was very big and very powerful, but that doesn’t mean he invented it.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Nov 13, 2012 at 6:18 PM

      Mark Messier anyone? Eric Lindros was a power forward but he didn’t create that, there were many before, Messier being just one example.

      Lindros was a big guy who came in with the label “the next one” and in reality he was just the next in a long line of good players. But when you look at his career arc, I would say there’s no way he belongs in the hall of fame. At best he’d be 5th on the list this year behind both Blake and Shanahan who I think will both get in along with Chelios and Neidermayer.

      • hockeydon10 - Nov 13, 2012 at 7:04 PM

        Great example. We can keep going back in time with more and more examples. Like Gordie Howe.

      • supercoop8 - Nov 14, 2012 at 3:04 AM

        Neely would be another example

  20. thomaspratt - Nov 13, 2012 at 11:06 PM

    We’re talking about the most watered down hall of fame in sports. I’m pretty sure they will all get in, if Oates and Ciccarelli are already in.

  21. hockeydon10 - Nov 14, 2012 at 8:37 AM

    “So what you’re saying is that Shanahan got less points in more years than everyone else? Oh wait he had 5 more points than Sundin in 3 more years….which means little cause I don’t think Sundin belongs there either.

    Let’s look at the numbers though:

    Sundin: averaged 75 points per year
    Sakic: averaged 82 points per year
    Oates: averaged 75 points per year

    So all 3 averaged more than 11 points per year than Shanahan did….not really comparable at all!

    Again Shanahan, and Sundin, were great players but would you ever consider either amongst the very best (top 5) players in the entire league for any period of their careers? The hall should be reserved for the best of the best.”

    So now you’re changing your arguement from “he was around a lot of years so he accumulated a lot of points” — which is true of three of this years inductees — to an arguement about points per year?

    Points carry less weight than goals. Not saying it’s right, simply that’s the way it is. 92 more goals than Sundin. The only player from this year’s class that could have had a remote chance at catching Shanahan’s goals total was Sakic and only if you dismiss Sakic’s final two years in the hopes that he would return to 2006-07 form.

    And you’re not even looking at who is already in the hall when trying to claim that Shanahan shouldn’t be in? Would you remove people that have been inducted already that have a lower level of performance than Shanahan? And you’re ignoring 3 Stanley Cups, 2 Olympic Gold Medals, World Championship Gold, 13th all time in goals?

    Thanks for the laugh.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Nov 14, 2012 at 4:18 PM

      The arguement is the same, Shanahan played a lot of years (21) which led to him accumulating a lot of points, but when you take a closer look he averaged only 64 points per year (very pedestrian) which is at a minimum 11 points less per year than any of the 3 you pointed to. Hence he played more time which makes his numbers look comparable when in fact they aren’t.

      Do you think Phil Kessel is as good as Evgeni Malkin? Probably not, no one does. But what if Kessel played more years than Malkin and was able to finish with almost the same career numbers as Malkin? Again the answer should be no, playing more years doesn’t upgrade how good of a player you were.

    • atwatercrushesokoye - Nov 14, 2012 at 4:29 PM

      To your last point, the Hall let in way to many undeserving players in the past, nothing you can do about that but that doesn’t mean they should let in more undeserving players in the future to make up for it.

      The Stanley Cup arguement is foolish, Brian McClellan has 4 rings, is he a hall of famer? Teams win Stanley Cups not players, not every player who were a part of a really good team deserves to be in the hall of fame. And Shanahan was a part of ONE Olympic gold medal team not two.

Sign up for Fantasy hockey

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. B. Ryan (1229)
  2. J. Drouin (1169)
  3. C. Giroux (1160)
  4. J. Quick (1114)
  5. N. Horton (1078)