1999 hall of fame controversy

[nanook of new jersey]

"Hockey made the switch to this cloak of complete secrecy in 1999 when a former player who didn’t quite make the cut complained and said it was an embarrassment to have his name besmirched as not good enough for the Hall."

This is from a recent thn.com blog. does anyone know who this player was? i can't figure it out.

Click to read more...

 

[seventieslord]

Who would have been up for induction for the first or second time in 1999? Glenn Anderson? Mark howe? Steve larmer? Cam Neely? Those are the only names I can think of. Two of them have since been inducted.

 

[MS]

Who would have been up for induction for the first or second time in 1999? Glenn Anderson? Mark howe? Steve larmer? Cam Neely? Those are the only names I can think of. Two of them have since been inducted.

Anderson played in Europe until 1997 so it wouldn't have been him as he wasn't first-time eligible in 2000.

Hawerchuk was somewhat surprisingly passed over on the first ballot in 2000, but that was a year later.

I remember someone here saying (even before he was selected) that Dick Duff was quite a squeaky wheel and felt that he deserved to be there.

 

[seventieslord]

Anderson played in Europe until 1997 so it wouldn't have been him as he wasn't first-time eligible in 2000.

Hawerchuk was somewhat surprisingly passed over on the first ballot in 2000, but that was a year later.

I remember someone here saying (even before he was selected) that Dick Duff was quite a squeaky wheel and felt that he deserved to be there.

That would surprise me. Despite everything I'v said recently on the topic, it's funny to think that he would think so highly of himself that he'd tell the committee his omission was a travesty.

 

[Vagrant]

With Mark Howe's still uncertain status, it wouldn't surprise me if a move like that could be the reasoning behind his exclusion.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

With Mark Howe's still uncertain status, it wouldn't surprise me if a move like that could be the reasoning behind his exclusion.

Good point and I can't picture Larmer saying it.

 

[seventieslord]

I can't picture Howe saying it, either... but maybe I don't know his personality well enough.

 

[LiveeviL]

Mikael Samuelsson's father perhaps?

 

[Big Phil]

Don't quote me on this but I remember complaints from families at or around that time. They were the families of Bill White and Rogie Vachon IIRC. I can't find anything on it but those two are the names that pop up when I think of it. Some family members of those men openly felt they deserved it and I know a couple years ago a member of Provost's family said something similar. The only one out of them that I think is getting betrayed is Vachon. He is clearly one of the best goalies of all time and deserves to be in there. 35 goalies in all are selected to the HHOF. He fits that mold. So did someone in Vachon's family lash out at the committee? Because if you talk to someone on these boards $10 says Vachon is almost always a glaring omission

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I believe Lorne Chabot's family has been quite vocal in trying to get him elected to the Hall. There is actually an online petition set up by one of his grandchildren to try to get him enshrined. Link

 

[MXD]

Don't quote me on this but I remember complaints from families at or around that time. They were the families of Bill White and Rogie Vachon IIRC. I can't find anything on it but those two are the names that pop up when I think of it. Some family members of those men openly felt they deserved it and I know a couple years ago a member of Provost's family said something similar. The only one out of them that I think is getting betrayed is Vachon. He is clearly one of the best goalies of all time and deserves to be in there. 35 goalies in all are selected to the HHOF. He fits that mold. So did someone in Vachon's family lash out at the committee? Because if you talk to someone on these boards $10 says Vachon is almost always a glaring omission

The thing is... If we go by HHOF standards, Provost's omission is actually MUCH worse than Vachon.

The other thing is... The man was dead for more than 15 years at that time. So if it's something about a guy, it's certainly not Provost.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

With Mark Howe's still uncertain status, it wouldn't surprise me if a move like that could be the reasoning behind his exclusion.

It's not really on-topic to the thread, but I figured people on this board would be interested:

A couple of weeks ago, Doc Emrick said on a Devils broadcast that he considers Mark Howe the one player who isn't in the HOF who really deserves to be - and Emrick is on the HOF commitee.

 

[reckoning]

A couple of weeks ago, Doc Emrick said on a Devils broadcast that he considers Mark Howe the one player who isn't in the HOF who really deserves to be - and Emrick is on the HOF commitee.

That's actually quite encouraging. Knowing someone on the committee is in support of Howe's induction gives a glimmer of hope that it may happen some day. I was worried he'd be forgotten.

Usually the committee members are not that open publicly about the topic. A few years ago Al Arbour was on OTR when he was on the selection board and was asked about the possibility of Butch Goring getting in. He refused to say whether Goring had ever been nominated, voted on, or if he personally supported his possible induction. It was all "I can't reveal any details about that".

 

[ted2019]

It's not really on-topic to the thread, but I figured people on this board would be interested:

A couple of weeks ago, Doc Emrick said on a Devils broadcast that he considers Mark Howe the one player who isn't in the HOF who really deserves to be - and Emrick is on the HOF commitee.

It's almost like Mark is being punished because His Dad went to the WHA for several years. Mark should have been inducted years ago.

 

[Mad Habber]

This sounds to me like Paul Henderson. There was a lot complaints at one point about his exclusion for the HOF with Tretiak in.

 

[Peter9]

In light of who is in, the exclusions of both Vachon and Provost are stunning injustices. I saw both play through their entire careers. It shouldn't even be close for either one.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Wasn't there a big push to get Larry Aurie into the Hall of Fame about that time (having to do with his retired number being 'un-retired' as a result of him not being in the HHoF)?

 

[Canadiens Fan]

This sounds to me like Paul Henderson. There was a lot complaints at one point about his exclusion for the HOF with Tretiak in.

If I recall correctly (and I may be wrong on this) I believe this controversy centred around the ceremonies for Team Canada 1972 as the team of the century. There was some talk about inducting the whole team to the HOF while some felt that Henderson was a glaring omission, especially in light of the fact that Vladislav Tretiak had been inducted.

On his website, www.summitseries.com, hockey historian Joe Pelletier wrote a nice article on the debate.

The man who gave up the "greatest goal in hockey history" is in the Hockey Hall of Fame, so why isn't the man who scored that goal also in the Hall?

When Paul Henderson slipped an errant puck past a fallen Vladislav Tretiak with just 34 seconds left he became a hockey immortal. His name is more synonymous with hockey and greatness than 85% of players who are in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

Yet he isn't in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

The always controversial question is should he be?

Henderson's heroics in the 1972 Summit Series will be talked about as long as hockey is played in Canada - in other words forever. His goal is considered by many to be one of the top 5 moments in Canadian history - not just sporting history but ALL history. His hockey heroics had far reaching effects on not only hockey but on an entire nation. So few sports stories can rival that level of achievement, and no other in hockey.

Because of his great performance against the Russians and in particular because of his dying-seconds winning goal, Paul Henderson's hockey legacy outdistances nearly everybody else's. For the rest of time he will be a hockey legend right up there with Rocket Richard, Gordie Howe, Mario Lemieux, Bobby Orr, Wayne Gretzky and precious few others. He will be forever remembered because of the great series against the Soviets and becoming the ultimate Canadian hero by scoring the winning goal in such dramatic fashion.

And therein lies the problem as far as the Hockey Hall of Fame is concerned.

Outside of 8 games in September 1972 Paul Henderson was an average to good player. He did great things in those 8 games, but he was not a "great" player - at least not by what Hockey Hall of Fame standards are or at least should be.

He may be held on the same lofty regard as Gretzky or Richard, but he was nowhere near their level of player. He was a solid winger who went up and down his wing in workmanlike fashion for over 1000 major league games, over 700 of which were in the National Hockey League. Unlike most Hall of Famers he never won a single post-season award or was named to an all star team. His best season was a 38 goal explosion in 1971-72 but his highest NHL single season point production was just 60 points. And he never won a Stanley Cup.

When electing players to the Hockey Hall of Fame, we must look at each players' career as a whole. We can not look at a small sampling of his career. When we do that it becomes obvious that Paul Henderson does not belong in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

That's alright. He doesn't need to be in the Hockey Hall of Fame. His status as a hockey immortal far exceeds most of the Hall of Famers. And he will forever be remembered in hockey folklore.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Putting Henderson in the hall of fame would be akin to putting Bucky Dent in the baseball hall of fame.

 

[Big Phil]

The thing is... If we go by HHOF standards, Provost's omission is actually MUCH worse than Vachon.

The other thing is... The man was dead for more than 15 years at that time. So if it's something about a guy, it's certainly not Provost.

I think they're both fairly close but I see a lot more support for Vachon even than Provost. There isn't much of a case against him to get into the HHOF, I haven't heard it yet

 

[MXD]

I think they're both fairly close but I see a lot more support for Vachon even than Provost.

Well, one is alive and the other is dead. There aren't many weaker goalies than Vachon in the HHOF, but there are A LOT of weaker forwards than Provost in the Hall.

Which is my reasoning.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Paul Henderson is in the Canadian Sports HOF. That's the one he should be in. He'd be in regardless, since the entire 72 Summit team was inducted a few years ago, but Henderson was in as an individual long before the 72 team was inducted.

I can't see Larmer griping about the HHOF. Not his style. He's probably one of the most humble people to play the game since I've been watching. Certainly one of the least-talkative. Not a guy who sought the spotlight. Not a guy who was a media darling.

I remember hearing that Duff was upset when he was passed over for Kharlamov and Neely in the 2005 HHOF class. Apparently Duff was actually quite close to making it in 2005. Don't know whether those two stories are reality, heresy or a little bit of both. When he was inducted in 06, there were a lot of people upset, but he was widely viewed as one of the best forwards not in the HHOF.

 

[MS]

I remember hearing that Duff was upset when he was passed over for Kharlamov and Neely in the 2005 HHOF class. Apparently Duff was actually quite close to making it in 2005. Don't know whether those two stories are reality, heresy or a little bit of both. When he was inducted in 06, there were a lot of people upset, but he was widely viewed as one of the best forwards not in the HHOF.

Strongly disagree with this statement.

Here is a very interesting (and quite long) thread on the best players not in the HHOF from 2005, the year before Duff went in :

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=141237

Now, there are probably 50 forwards mentioned in this thread as possible HHOF selections, and Duff isn't one of them. Lots of support for Anderson, Makarov, Propp, Provost, Paul Thompson. Zero for Duff.

In particular, 2 posts stand out :

- post #4 by reckoning mentions 20 different forwards (9 he thinks should be in, 11 who fall just outside) and Duff isn't one of them.

- post #43 by some guy called God Bless Canada where you list what you feel are the best 9 eligible forwards not in the HHOF. Again, Duff is not on the list.

_________

Duff was *completely* from out in left field when he was inducted in 2006, aside from the rumours you mention (which I found laughable at the time) that he felt slighted in 2005.

Let's not start with the revisionist history and start painting it like Duff was a guy people were talking about as potentially going into the HHOF. He simply wasn't even on the radar.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Putting Henderson in the hall of fame would be akin to putting Bucky Dent in the baseball hall of fame.

I see where you're going, but Henderson is a Canadian folk hero. The guy has appeared on postage stamps. Like the excerpt that Canadiens Fan posted says, the name Henderson will ring a bell in much the same way that the names Orr or Howe will in Canada. There is legitimate argument to whether or not he should be in the HOF. To the best of my knowlege, Bucky Dent could hardly claim any of these things. I think Putting Stephan Matteau in the HOF would be hockey's Dent equivalent.

Personally I wouldn't have any qualms with Henderson going in, but as GBC states, The Canadian Sports HOF is probably sufficient. The "But Tretiak is in!" argument was a very popular one a decade ago, and perhaps continues to be in more casual circles, but in reality it is a very poor argument for reasons that don't need explaination.

 

[reckoning]

- post #4 by reckoning mentions 20 different forwards (9 he thinks should be in, 11 who fall just outside) and Duff isn't one of them.

In my own defence, I was a lot dumber five years ago (how much time did I waste arguing with chooch). I've certainly changed my mind about Makarov and Lindros respectively. I knew little about Duff as his career was finishing when I started watching hockey. But since his induction, there's been lots of talk about him here and there's been lots of persuasive arguments in his favour. Not enough for me to conclusively say he 100% deserves to be there, but enough to convince me that it wasn't the gross error many make it out to be.