Putting A Number To Greatness

Stephen Cook
Dec 7, 2000

The Hockey Hall of Fame was created to embrace the very best athletes the sport has to offer. It was a shrine built in tribute to our heroes, built to forever capture the magnificence and celebrate the accomplishments of hockey's truly elite. Adorned in its hallowed hallways are testimonials dedicated to athletic, national and cultural icons like Maurice Richard, Jean Beliveau, Gordie Howe, Bobby Orr and Bobby Hull. However, a disturbing trend has surfaced in recent years, one that was exemplified on November 13, 2000 when Joe Mullen was designated for enshrinement.

Joe Mullen enjoyed a productive 16 year NHL career which was crowned with three Stanley Cup victories in 1989, 1991 and 1992 respectfully. A consistent threat in the offensive zone, Mullen realized the 500 goal and 1000 point plateaus and averaged a point for each game that he played. The pinnacle of Joe's career statistically was achieved in 1988-89 when he netted 51 goals and 110 points for the Calgary Flames. In both 1987 and 1989 Mullen was recognized for his gentlemanly play and awarded the Lady Byng Trophy. In retrospect, Joe Mullen had an admirable career. But an admirable career should not necessarily equate to a Hall of Fame caliber career.

Joe Mullen and many other players within the last 30 years have been inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame primarily based on their offensive accomplishments. Historically most players who have reached hockey's golden milestones of 500 goals and/or 1000 career points have been inducted into the Hall. In the days of the original six league, these plateaus truly stood for something. Only a select echelon of player was able to accomplish this feat. In the 30+ years since the great expansion of 1967, the 500 goal and 1000 point plateau has become an increasingly overrated statistic that needs to be reworked and should not automatically be considered the measuring stick for the Hall of Fame.

Between 1967 and 1979 the cozy fraternity of NHL clubs ballooned from 6 to 21. The emergence of the WHA in the early 70s contributed an additional 10 to 15 teams to the professional hockey arena. In the relatively short interval of 12 years, professional hockey expanded by an astronomical 400%. This was an unprecedented rate of expansion for such a short time span in comparison with the other three major North American sports. It doesn't seem reasonable to judge players who played in a six team NHL by the same offensive standards as players who played in a diluted 21 team league.

In order to maintain the integrity of Hockey's Hall of Fame, its traditional standards of excellence need to be heightened. Players who have competed in the more watered down post expansion era of hockey need to be held to loftier expectations. Where career totals of 500 goals and 1000 career points would have sufficed thirty years ago, 575 goals and 1300 career points ought to be the benchmark for induction today.

Under this new statistical criteria, many current Hall of Famers such Joe Mullen would be excluded from induction. More specifically, of the 22 post expansion era forwards who have been enshrined in the HOF, only 10 would be accepted under the new formula. This is not to say that these qualifications should be carved into stone. Obviously discretion should be exercised in the balloting process. Certain select players who did not quite topple the 575 goal and 1300 point obstacle may still warrant induction and should be considered. These new plateaus would serve to keep marginal stars out, while welcoming the truly elite in with open arms.

The founding fathers of Hockey's Hall of Fame had a vision when they elected its first members in 1945. Their aim was to create a sanctum where only the true jewels of hockey would be celebrated. Sadly, in recent years the overall credibility of the HOF has been tarnished with the enshrinement of less than great players like Joe Mullen. Membership to this prestigious institution should be exclusive and discerning. Embracing more formidable statistical standards would be a step in the right direction.

Your own opinions can be expressed in the message forums.

Editorials are opinions of the author, not this website, the owner of this website or any of its members.