The Immaturity Keeping Alexander Mogilny Out Of The Hockey Hall Of Fame - An Article By Kevin Wong

[chizzler]

Longest post in hf history?

Great article. Best I’ve read in a while.

 

[wetcoast]

Looking back at some of the winger inductions into the HHOF post expansion and Mogliny certainly doesn't look out of place with Andreychuk, Ciccarelli, Gartner, Anderson, Barber, Gillies, Shutt and even Rod Gilbert (who had most of his priem post expansion).

People act as if the bar is Bossy or Lafleur when in fact it's really rather low.

Personally I'd rather put in Middleton or even John Tonelli as wingers before Mogliny but I think Mogliny does have a pretty legit argument.

That being said the argument to keep him out is a bit stronger, despite recent past "mistake" inductions into the HHOF.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

No matter what part you look at, Anderson should not be a HOF’er.

Except he totally should.

4th in all-time Playoff Scoring.
5th in all-time playoff goals
5th most all-time Playoff Game Winning Goals

Anyone who watched the Oilers dynasty knows how instrumental Anderson was in winning all of those cups.

Anderson was the reason we beat the Bruins in the Finals in 88.
And even without Gretzky, Anderson was an absolute force when they won the cup in 1990.


You can only count out Anderson if you don't think Playoffs count for anything.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Anderson is, to me, very much a borderline Hall of Famer, much like Joe Nieuwendyk. Just based on their regular-season stats' careers (neither of which was shabby -- they were both frequent NHL All Stars), they're probably not in, but close. (Anderson, by the way, was the first Oiler not named Gretzky to score 100 points in a season. Up to 1986, he was out-performing Mark Messier.) But when you look at their contributions to Cup champions and international-hockey champions, they're pushing to the "in" side, which is why they landed there. Anderson was a playoff-stud who always got better when the games got bigger -- the opposite of Keith Tkachuk or Joe Thornton. He was also consistently good: from 1980-81 through 1989-90 he was no "role player" (lol!), he was one of the elite scorers/wingers in the world (the one exception being his poor 1988-89 season).

Except he totally should.

4th in all-time Playoff Scoring.
5th in all-time playoff goals
5th most all-time Playoff Game Winning Goals

Anyone who watched the Oilers dynasty knows how instrumental Anderson was in winning all of those cups.

Anderson was the reason we beat the Bruins in the Finals in 88.
And even without Gretzky, Anderson was an absolute force when they won the cup in 1990.


You can only count out Anderson if you don't think Playoffs count for anything.

Anderson was a Mullen, Ciccarelli level scorer who happened to play in the most favorable circumstances possible. Put him on literally any other team and you're talking about a guy who's only occasionally remembered when talking about that era. Trumpeting him as the 4th best playoff scorer of all time looks great until you realize that 1-4 are his own teammates. Making him the 4th best playoff scorer on his own team.

Inducting guys like Anderson is how you get Joe Nieuwendyk in the HOF. And Nieuwendyk opens the door for even more mediocrity. Eventually we are going to end up with Claude Lemieux and this sequence of logic is the reason why.

 

[sr edler]

I truly admire and respect the guys/gals who make these long posts. Just like the Bure person.

That was Kevin too, no?

 

[Cursed Lemon]

He won one Rocket, was bad in the postseason, only had five seasons where he was meaningfully above PPG, only has two - two - top-10 scoring finishes, was 14th in PPG from 1992 to 2003, and was defensively uh...pedestrian.

If you want to induct him on the premise that he was the original defector, I could get behind that, but his actual hockey resume? His only case is that Dino Ciccarelli is in the HOF.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Anderson was a Mullen, Ciccarelli level scorer who happened to play in the most favorable circumstances possible. Put him on literally any other team and you're talking about a guy who's only occasionally remembered when talking about that era. Trumpeting him as the 4th best playoff scorer of all time looks great until you realize that 1-4 are his own teammates. Making him the 4th best playoff scorer on his own team.

Inducting guys like Anderson is how you get Joe Nieuwendyk in the HOF. And Nieuwendyk opens the door for even more mediocrity. Eventually we are going to end up with Claude Lemieux and this sequence of logic is the reason why.

Yeah.. The 4th best playoff scorer on what is widely considered to be the best team of all time.


Here's another team that had multiple Hall of Famers:
Detroit Red Wings 2001-02 roster and scoring statistics at hockeydb.com

Do you believe everyone outside of their top 3 scorers shouldn't be in the HHOF?

Anderson is the 4th highest Playoff Scorer of all time.
That's literally the end of the entire discussion.

Neither Joey Mullen's, or Nieuwendyk's playoff resumes resemble anything close to Andersons.
Anderson has DOUBLE their playoff points.

 

[theVladiator]

Great article. Do not like the title though, I do not think the picture article is painting is that of an immature person. Mogilny comes across as hard-headed, stubborn, honest and private person. Not what I would call immature. "Mogilny: hockey on his own terms" may be a better title (from my point of view at least). Gotta say, the article gave me some newfound respect for the guy. On the HOF question, I am not sure I care too much.

Others may disagree with that, but that's also in part why I think the article is great - it's not agenda driven, it lets the story speak for itself through facts and contemporary quotes.

 

[frisco]

Glenn Anderson
Dave Andreychuk
Leo Boivin
Guy Carbonneau
Dick Duff
Clark Gillies
Phil Housley
Bob Pulford
Joe Nieuwendyk
Harry Watson

Gotta have Steve Shutt on the list:

817 points in 930 games a lot of which was during the highest scoring era ever.

One Top Ten points/goals/points-per-game finish. All in 76-77.

Four point/game seasons.

Highest trophy finish: 11th (Lady Byng).

Spent the majority of his career on a line with two HOFers.

My Best-Carey

 

[supsens]

You kind of have to separate this out by era, because some of the very early (1800s - 1910s) inductees were chosen for being "early stars" who built the game rather than for how they stacked up against later players. Even some of the early/mid 20th century players, they were picked against a much smaller field of choices and so naturally the weaker ones in that field are going to compare poorly.

Arbitrarily cutting it off at guys who played the bulk of their careers after 1950, here are the worst players inducted IMO:

Glenn Anderson
Dave Andreychuk
Leo Boivin
Guy Carbonneau
Dick Duff
Clark Gillies
Phil Housley
Bob Pulford
Joe Nieuwendyk
Harry Watson

Almost all of these have in common that they were role players/second-tier scorers/"character guys" on good teams, thereby getting a lot of press and making a lot of golfing buddies around the league.

Umm only 3 humans have managed to put up more points playing D in the NHL than Housley did. 3
Lol so far from the ‘worst players’ list its crazy

 

[I am toxic]

May have already been said - Bure and Federov are in, Mogilny has to be in.

Even Dino and Shanny are in.

Not a good look for the HHoF.

 

[The Macho King]

May have already been said - Bure and Federov are in, Mogilny has to be in.

Even Dino and Shanny are in.

Not a good look for the HHoF.

Bure and Federov were markedly better than Mogilny.

Dino? Eh, you have a point there. Shanahan does have 3 post-season All-Stars, although he shouldn't be in either so that's fine.

We need to start knocking people out of the Hall.

 

[I am toxic]

Bure and Federov were markedly better than Mogilny.

Dino? Eh, you have a point there. Shanahan does have 3 post-season All-Stars, although he shouldn't be in either so that's fine.

We need to start knocking people out of the Hall.

I think Bure and Federov were better, but won't go as far to say "markedly" better for Bure - if he hadn't suffered injury problems then yeah Bure would have ended up being markedly better. But you make a good point.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Umm only 3 humans have managed to put up more points playing D in the NHL than Housley did. 3
Lol so far from the ‘worst players’ list its crazy

Funny enough, all three played at the exact same time as Housley. That’s what happens when scoring is way higher than any other period in history.

The difference between those guys and Housley is they actually played defense, while he ran around as a 4th forward. Even Paul Coffey was a better defender, and that’s saying something. Those other 3 guys won multiple Norris trophies, while Housley was a finalist all of 1 time. They played meaningful roles in Cup runs and gold medals and President’s Trophies. Housley was bad in the playoffs and scored a lot of meaningless points.

If Paul Coffey was his generation’s Erik Karlsson, the best comparison for Housley would be Keith Yandle. Look at a post-lockout scoring list and he looks impressive. Actually watch him play, and try to think of his most memorable moments, and the HOF conversation goes sideways really quickly.

 

[supsens]

Funny enough, all three played at the exact same time as Housley. That’s what happens when scoring is way higher than any other period in history.

The difference between those guys and Housley is they actually played defense, while he ran around as a 4th forward. Even Paul Coffey was a better defender, and that’s saying something. Those other 3 guys won multiple Norris trophies, while Housley was a finalist all of 1 time. They played meaningful roles in Cup runs and gold medals and President’s Trophies. Housley was bad in the playoffs and scored a lot of meaningless points.

If Paul Coffey was his generation’s Erik Karlsson, the best comparison for Housley would be Keith Yandle. Look at a post-lockout scoring list and he looks impressive. Actually watch him play, and try to think of his most memorable moments, and the HOF conversation goes sideways really quickly.

Yes only a couple guys won the Norris big whoop, it’s not really something people can ’win’ the best Dman doesn’t always win the award. Not saying he should have won one, but back in the day people were probably voting without even seeing everyone play.
Fact is the HHOF is a record keeping building, it isn’t to give trophy winners more props its to keep an official record of who has done what and when your a top 5 producer at your position in history it would be fairly crappy record keeping to leave that guy out. Gretz and Mario won all the awards for years, it would be a empty ass hall if everyone for those 20 years were left out other than them. And no Yandle and his 550 points isn’t even close to 1200+

 

[Highmarker]

if you compare Mogilny and Bure their stats are similar.

 

[ElysiumAB]

Cliff notes:

Two Wongs don't a right.

 

[Mogo]

Mogo should be in the HHOF for sure

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yes only a couple guys won the Norris big whoop, it’s not really something people can ’win’ the best Dman doesn’t always win the award. Not saying he should have won one, but back in the day people were probably voting without even seeing everyone play.

The Norris voters were absolutely not voting without seeing everyone play. You realize it’s not a fan ballot, right? Even the west coast journalists were seeing Housley play a minimum of 3 full games a year. Division rivals more like 8.

And that’s not counting playoff games (which is probably a good thing for Housley).

Fact is the HHOF is a record keeping building, it isn’t to give trophy winners more props its to keep an official record of who has done what and when your a top 5 producer at your position in history it would be fairly crappy record keeping to leave that guy out.

Then he can rightfully enjoy a prominent place in the media guide and the US Hockey Hall of Fame, where he is relevant. Compared to other HOCKEY Hall of Famers, he’s an extremely weak pick. Arguably the weakest defenseman to make it since about 1950.

And no Yandle and his 550 points isn’t even close to 1200+

Yandle occupies a similar scoring rank in his generation (only 7 points shy of an identical 4th place) with a similarly empty resume in every other aspect. Boosting Housley for his point total without acknowledging the difference in scoring rates in the 1980s and early 1990s is a bad-faith argument, like saying Mogilny > Ovechkin because Ovie never scored 73 goals.

 

[supsens]

The Norris voters were absolutely not voting without seeing everyone play. You realize it’s not a fan ballot, right? Even the west coast journalists were seeing Housley play a minimum of 3 full games a year. Division rivals more like 8.

And that’s not counting playoff games (which is probably a good thing for Housley).




Then he can rightfully enjoy a prominent place in the media guide and the US Hockey Hall of Fame, where he is relevant. Compared to other HOCKEY Hall of Famers, he’s an extremely weak pick. Arguably the weakest defenseman to make it since about 1950.



Yandle occupies a similar scoring rank in his generation (only 7 points shy of an identical 4th place) with a similarly empty resume in every other aspect. Boosting Housley for his point total without acknowledging the difference in scoring rates in the 1980s and early 1990s is a bad-faith argument, like saying Mogilny > Ovechkin because Ovie never scored 73 goals.

Yes I know who votes, but without the tv coverage and internet of today it’s tough to watch everyone. And yep 3 games you can easily decide who is the best on that sample size right?
On top of that I’m not sure every team played each other 3 times a year, anddd never mind the poor coverage where reporters wouldn’t go on every road trip or bother going to every game.
Fact only 2 Americans have more points
Fact only 3 dmen have more points.
That’s a big deal. And one hell of an accomplishment.
Competing against those other couple guys who are known to be among the best of all time does not mean you don’t deserve what you earn.
You do understand they need more than six guys in an entire building dedicated to the history of hockey right?
His name has been written on a NHL scoresheet how many times?
Oh so anyone not as good or coffey and Bourque need not apply cool.
He earned his spot, deal with it

Oh and your ridiculous ovechkin point...what? Who did I say he is better than, nice made up point on a made up argument what are you even talking about?

 

[aufheben]

It’s Fedorov.

 

[Grantham]

I still remember when the Canucks got him. I was just a lad. I was in hockey heaven when I'd get to watch him and Bure play togehter, it still brings a smile to my face

When he was inspired, he could be better than Bure or any other player of that time. What a magical talent, and I loved his honesty and vulnerability. He was flawed, and he didn't really try to hide it. But when he was on, oh my!

Great article in OP. One of the best hockey articles I've ever had the privilege of reading anywhere. Bravo!

 

[Sentinel]

I would much, much rather have Anderson both on my team and in the Hall of Fame than Mogilny with all his ungodly talent.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yes I know who votes, but without the tv coverage and internet of today it’s tough to watch everyone. And yep 3 games you can easily decide who is the best on that sample size right?

3 full games is more than most people see of any non-conference opponent with the current schedule.

And 1990 was not 1950. There were national broadcasts and highlight shows covering only 21 teams. Realistically a full time hockey journalist was seeing more of Housley in 1990 Buffalo than he would have seen Yandle in 2010 Arizona.

On top of that I’m not sure every team played each other 3 times a year

They did.

Fact only 2 Americans have more points
Fact only 3 dmen have more points.
That’s a big deal. And one hell of an accomplishment.

Continuing to push raw stats as if the scoring rate hasn’t changed since 1985 isn’t fooling anybody.

Oh and your ridiculous ovechkin point...what? Who did I say he is better than, nice made up point on a made up argument what are you even talking about?

The point is obvious. 73 goals in 1993 does not have the same value as 73 goals in 2019. Housley’s points totals are not comparable to points scored 2000-2019. And for that matter the same goes for Anderson.

Competing against those other couple guys who are known to be among the best of all time does not mean you don’t deserve what you earn.
You do understand they need more than six guys in an entire building dedicated to the history of hockey right?
His name has been written on a NHL scoresheet how many times?
Oh so anyone not as good or coffey and Bourque need not apply cool.
He earned his spot, deal with it

Name a worse defenseman in the HOF since 1960.

 

[supsens]

3 full games is more than most people see of any non-conference opponent with the current schedule.

And 1990 was not 1950. There were national broadcasts and highlight shows covering only 21 teams. Realistically a full time hockey journalist was seeing more of Housley in 1990 Buffalo than he would have seen Yandle in 2010 Arizona.



They did.



Continuing to push raw stats as if the scoring rate hasn’t changed since 1985 isn’t fooling anybody.



Name a worse defenseman in the HOF since 1960.

Hockey is about raw stats, he is a top producer of all time. That is why he is in the NHL HOF
People that know a lot more about hockey and the hall of fame agree with me, that’s why he is there and you are wrong.
Your argument’s have been proven wrong before you even spoke.
Sooo ya
And lol at being able to see more hockey in the 90’s. That’s just silly, I can see more on YouTube right now than all the 90’s combined.