Did including Toews into Top 100 Players instead of Malkin age well?

[McVespa99]

Did including Toews into Top 100 All-time NHL Players instead of Malkin age well?

Malkin won same amount of cups as him also has much more production and individual trophies.

Another vote for it didnt even age well for 5 minutes...

 

[filinski77]

Thornton is also the only player in the top-30 ALL TIME list to have NOT played in the 80's or early 90's inflated scoring. His totals are insane from a player who started in the dead puck era. It's an amazing feat in it's own right, he'll be sitting alone in that regards until Sidney Crosby breaks in.

NHL & WHA Career Leaders and Records for Adjusted Points | Hockey-Reference.com

Adjust point totals bring him from 14-8th in points and 8-5th in assists all time.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

You say he’s a compiler, I’d say that he was remarkably consistent. Was he ever top 5? Not when his career ran parallel to Gretzky, Lemieux, Bourque, Messier, Yzerman, etc. I don’t think that should be held against him.

If generational guys like Lemieux and Gretzky were the only guys who were ahead of him each season, you'd have an argument. But there were a bunch of names you didn't list who were, from season to season, considered better than Gartner.

Look, he gets credit for consistency, just like a guy like Marleau or Andreychuk do. But to make a Top 100 list, IMO, a player needs to have been one of the best at various points during the era he played in. And even ignoring Gretzky and Lemieux, Gartner wasn't one of the best in his era.

 

[BackhandToeyJoey]

Toews has a great international resume also, though i don't remember if they brought that up.

 

[coo1beans]

Remember those "who would you rather have, crosby or toews?" threads? Lol

 

[Hatfield]

If generational guys like Lemieux and Gretzky were the only guys who were ahead of him each season, you'd have an argument. But there were a bunch of names you didn't list who were, from season to season, considered better than Gartner.

Look, he gets credit for consistency, just like a guy like Marleau or Andreychuk do. But to make a Top 100 list, IMO, a player needs to have been one of the best at various points during the era he played in. And even ignoring Gretzky and Lemieux, Gartner wasn't one of the best in his era.

They weren’t the only guys I listed, though. He played in an era laden with many other players who I’d also put in the top 100.

Maybe he just barely makes the top 100, or maybe he barely misses. I wouldn’t put him in over Iginla or Malkin, for example. But to the original point, I take exception to the idea that including him is some glaring mistake. It’s not.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

Meh. Who cares really. These things change from year to year.

Toews shouldnt be on there now, thats for sure.

Malkin should be but again, meh.

 

[Sentinel]

People here will never let it go. Every time either Toews or Malkin is mentioned, I can bet $5 there will be a "Top 100" reference within the next three posts. Sure, it was ridiculous on behalf of NHL, but can we please let it go already?

 

[Sentinel]

You say he’s a compiler, I’d say that he was remarkably consistent. Was he ever top 5? Not when his career ran parallel to Gretzky, Lemieux, Bourque, Messier, Yzerman, etc. I don’t think that should be held against him.

The tale of two Mikes. Bossy was "consistent" (nine straight 50 goal seasons, three straight 17 goal playoffs). Gartner was a compiler.

 

[Hatfield]

The tale of two Mikes. Bossy was "consistent" (nine straight 50 goal seasons, three straight 17 goal playoffs). Gartner was a compiler.

Bossy is considered the best pure goal scorer of his generation. He's probably a top 30 player, all-time. Gartner's not on the same level, but that doesn't mean he wasn't also a great player.

 

[Saskatoon]

Toews has a great international resume also, though i don't remember if they brought that up.

Toews has a lot of great team accomplishments and has played on some really good teams but I don't think that alone should make someone top 100

 

[Voight]

Toews has never been a top 10 forward let alone top 5 forward in the league. Malkin has been a top 5 player for much of his career.

I'd argue 2013 he was a top 5/10 forward.

Always feel the need to jump in these Toews discussions. Not because i hate him, i just still cant believe the contract that he gor from Chicago. Anway, its as much of a atrocity today as it was when the list came out. Not only did Malkin deserve to be there over Toews but probably 100’s more players should have been there over him. Does anyone remember where this Toews hype came from anyway? During which one of the 50-60 point seasons did the world start believing that he is one of the best ever?

He lead the the team to 3 championships, is one of the best two-way players in the league.... yea 10.5 was a lot but the team had no choice. Can't exactly let a guy like him leave in free agency. Lucky for us we had him & Kane at 6.5 million each for our 2010-2015 title runs. I am OK with his salary given the success he & the team have had.

Duncan Keith being on the list is more surprising to me tbh

.... he's one of the best defensemen of this era.... had one of the best playoff runs by a defensemen of all time.... 2 Norris trophies..

Toews has a great international resume also, though i don't remember if they brought that up.

This is true, but I believe the NHL strictly looked at league accomplishments. Since it was "Top 100 NHL players" and not "hockey players" otherwise you'd have some of the Soviets in there.

 

[Voight]

The History of Hockey forum did our Top 100 project about a year ago. We had 70 players in common with the NHL's Centennial list (and part of that was due to different eligibility criteria).

For the record, we had Malkin ranked 52nd. Toews never even came up for voting (he was 140th on the preliminary list). Other "modern" players that we included, but the NHL didn't, were Ed Belfour, Zdeno Chara, Joe Thornton, and Martin St. Louis.

For a detailed comparison about the differences between our lists - HOH Top 100 project - comparison to other lists

HOH list is best players of all time. NHL's was top 100 NHL players of all time. I still can't believe Belforu was excluded, best goalie of the 90s after Hasek. MSL as well is a big one... 2 scoring titles and a 10 year run as a top 5 RW.

Hart, Art Ross, multiple time All Star....”hasn’t won anything.” I mean sorry Thornton had to be the engine for the Sharks for many years, but to continue using his lack of cups to judge him as a player while being ok with Joe Nieuwendyk winning 3 as a complimentary player......I’m sure that logic fits somewhere in this universe....

Yea that engine has done what exactly? Made the finals once despite being one of the best teams in the league. But lets not derail the thread.

 

[Paperbagofglory]

Why do people take these lists seriously? Its basically just HFboard posters with journalism degrees who get to fan boy in a professional setting.

Would you take anyone here seriously with a list? A lot of these experts are former players that have taken way too many blows to the head, you had someone like Kypreos voting, let that sink in.

 

[Paxton Fettel]

That list isn't worth anything

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

They weren’t the only guys I listed, though. He played in an era laden with many other players who I’d also put in the top 100.

Maybe he just barely makes the top 100, or maybe he barely misses. I wouldn’t put him in over Iginla or Malkin, for example. But to the original point, I take exception to the idea that including him is some glaring mistake. It’s not.

Your second paragraph kind of contradicts itself, and also highlights why Gartner should NOT be included. His inclusion resulted in the omission of players who were more worthy. That's kind of the point. Not that Gartner sucked, but that he was never a dominant player and his inclusion bumped players off who WERE dominant during their prime years.

 

[GreatGonzo]

HOH list is best players of all time. NHL's was top 100 NHL players of all time. I still can't believe Belforu was excluded, best goalie of the 90s after Hasek. MSL as well is a big one... 2 scoring titles and a 10 year run as a top 5 RW.



Yea that engine has done what exactly? Made the finals once despite being one of the best teams in the league. But lets not derail the thread.

Well the first of many myths behind Thornton is that he’s been on “one of the best teams in the league”. Consistent? Absolutely, and we were contenders, but always fell short....and it’s hardly his fault.

Thornton carried the sharks for many years, the agenda against him is primarily based on him being the face and player of the sharks, and having them fail time and time again. It’s ridiculous how much he becomes the scapegoat when he’s the farthest reason why they haven’t won. The sharks have always lacked depth, the deepest team we had was the 2016, where They made the finals. We have always had problems defensively, which never complimented our goaltending. People who actually know about the sharks know these problems and don’t just be sheep and follow the Thornton hate bandwagon.

Thornton is hardly the problem. A lot of those sharks teams simply lost to better ones. The 2010 hawks, the 2011 Canucks, the 2013 and 2014 Kings, and yes as much as they collapsed in ‘14, the Kings still went on to beat the ducks AND hawks to a cup win. Yet it’s Thorntons fault we didn’t beat those CLEARLY superior teams?

It’s an old narrative that doesn’t seem to die because of ignorance, but to suggest Thornton “hasn’t won a thing” in the league is obnoxious. Plenty of less than stellar players have cups over Thornton, while most don’t have his resume or legacy as a player and playmaker. He drove SJ out of the gutter and is the reason why they were even contenders.

People love to change the standards with him. Many have a negative opinion about him because he never single handily carried the Sharks to a cup with a Smythe win, even though guys like Crosby, Ovechkin, and even Toews never did that, Yet we hold Thornton to a different agenda. Thornton never had a Kane or Keith, a Malkin or Kessel, or a Kuzy or Backstrom. But context gets ignored and it’s back to hating on Thornton because it requires less logic and thinking and is simply easier for the “simple minded” fans, and by simple minded I mean stupid(not calling you stupid, but my point stands with your opinions).

He deserved to be on that list over guys like Nieuwendyk, who won 3 cups as a side piece, but the whole “3 cups with 3 teams” along with a Smythe was a juicy enough story. Sundin, who’s international resume and being a Toronto media darling got him votes, Gartner, who didn’t win ANYTHING at all and simply compiled goals in some of the highest scoring eras in hockey history. Whether he deserves to be on over Toews is debatable, I think so but my bias is clear....but bias aside Thornton is still among the best to ever play on many levels.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I'd argue 2013 he was a top 5/10 forward

That was definitely the one year you can argue him being a top 5 center for sure. Even top 5 player in some ways. The problem is he never maintained that level of play and was simply granted a grace period where his play in 2013 was extended through 2016. Didn’t help his defensive game remained near the top and that he won another cup, that’s all the evidence many needed to continue rewarding him as a top player in the league as if it was 2013 Toews all over again.

 

[KareemTrustfund]

Some of you [mod] need to actually break down what Toews does instead of sweeping all his defence skills into one neat pile and sweeping it under the sofa. His stick positioning was top 10 in the league for a decade. His body positioning in open ice and the boards was top 5 in the NHL since he started. His back checking is top of the league for years. I think he has a VERY low icing in high pressure situations per 60, if any of the stat nuts could look that number up I’d appreciate it. He doesn’t steal the puck much but that’s simply because he forces dump ins from excellent positioning. His offensive game is awesome and would rival Kane if he was selfish and worried about his numbers more than wins. He won 3 cups with the C. Malkin one nothing wearing the C. Is Malkin an all time great? Yes, but he doesn’t have the above categories over Jonathan, just goals, assists and ppg. I actually hate PPG, Toews DPPG (defensive plays per game) would be untouched by anyone in the NHL and especially not Evgeni Malkin. It’s close but the right choice was made in favour of Jon.

 

[MXD]

Some of you [mod] need to actually break down what Toews does instead of sweeping all his defence skills into one neat pile and sweeping it under the sofa. His stick positioning was top 10 in the league for a decade. His body positioning in open ice and the boards was top 5 in the NHL since he started. His back checking is top of the league for years. I think he has a VERY low icing in high pressure situations per 60, if any of the stat nuts could look that number up I’d appreciate it. He doesn’t steal the puck much but that’s simply because he forces dump ins from excellent positioning. His offensive game is awesome and would rival Kane if he was selfish and worried about his numbers more than wins. He won 3 cups with the C. Malkin one nothing wearing the C. Is Malkin an all time great? Yes, but he doesn’t have the above categories over Jonathan, just goals, assists and ppg. I actually hate PPG, Toews DPPG (defensive plays per game) would be untouched by anyone in the NHL and especially not Evgeni Malkin. It’s close but the right choice was made in favour of Jon.

Can't tell if serious.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

Hart and Art Ross the same year he got traded? It's literally a list about the top 100 individual players of all time, and a player in the top 10 for assists and top 15 for points isn't on it.

It's amazing how so many people here seem to not recognize the fact that there are a lot less names on the Hart and Art Ross compared to the Cup.

 

[Iceman]

Did the list come out before or after malkin led the playoffs in scoring on route to a championship for the second time?

Doesn’t matter. Malkin is still heads above anyway.

 

[Beville]

It was bad the moment it came out really.

Like you say, it was never a good decision...

But, like we all know - Intangibles.

 

[BigEezyE22]

Can't tell if serious.

C'mon dude, you never seen the stick position/ 60 min heat map? Man's got a point.

 

[Plural]

I still can't figure out how Geno was left out. I would love to see all the panelists lists. How can you include Toews and Sundin and not include Geno? I can't damn well understand it.