HoH Project: Pre-Consolidation

[rmartin65]

I know we’ve talked about doing a Pre-Consolidation project- based on the most recent project’s timeline, it looks like we should start the discussion threads shortly if we are indeed going to go through with this one this year. I can help admin this thing, but I’d really appreciate some help from someone (or multiple people).

Thoughts?

EDIT- Sign-Up List (17)

rmartin65
Professor What
Hockey Outsider
tarheelhockey
BenchBrawl
Michael Farkas
Black Gold Extractor
Dr. John Carlson
seventieslord
jigglysquishy
ResilientBeast
Kyle McMahon
Sanf
MXD
nabby12
Batis
Pominville Knows
VanIslander

Click to read more...

 

[Professor What]

I missed this before. My bad. I'll give it a bump to try to give it a second chance.

What do you say folks? We had some good conversation about it a while back.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I can commit to participating in HOH's next project. (The only topic that gives me pause would be ranking the greatest women hockey players - only because I know so little about that topic, but maybe it's a good reason to force myself to learn).

My work schedule is hit-or-miss. Generally speaking, I have very little free time from February to April (sometimes as late as June), but lots of time in the second half of the year. If this runs at the start of 2023, I can commit to reading and voting. I'll certainly try, but can't commit, to doing research and/or writing long posts.

From what I recall, when we were trying to decide on the project two years ago, it was a close split between the Top 200 project (which we ended up doing), and the top pre-consolidation players. I think the understanding was we'd do the pre-consolidation project after. That was two years ago and I'm not saying we have to be bound to that decision, but it seemed like there was a lot of interest at the time.

 

[Professor What]

I'm still personally very interested in the pre-consolidation project. It was in my final two last time, and I'd still like to see it happen.

 

[tarheelhockey]

A pre-consolidation project would be one of the more meaningful contributions we could make to further discussion. My availability will vary with time, but I’d like to be involved.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'll participate as a voter and to make drive-by posts about players I already researched. Can't commit to doing new research, but I may end-up doing some.

To be clear, I'm talking about a pre-consolidation project.

 

[BenchBrawl]

@TheDevilMadeMe
@seventieslord
@Sturminator

 

[Professor What]

Looks like there's some life here. Nice!

 

[rmartin65]

Alright, up to 7 (if 'likes' are also sign-ups)!

In addition to the posters BB tagged and those who have already signed up here, the following also expressed an interest in this project when we discussed it earlier*-

@ResilientBeast
@The Macho King
@ImporterExporter
@Habsfan18
@Michael Farkas
@Kyle McMahon
@sr edler
@JackSlater
@Black Gold Extractor
@Dr John Carlson
@Sanf
@JurassicPuck
@moropanov
@rnhaas

*I may have missed a name or two here or there.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Alright, up to 7 (if 'likes' are also sign-ups)!

In addition to the posters BB tagged and those who have already signed up here, the following also expressed an interest in this project when we discussed it earlier*-

@ResilientBeast
@The Macho King
@ImporterExporter
@Habsfan18
@Michael Farkas
@Kyle McMahon
@sr edler
@JackSlater
@Black Gold Extractor
@Dr John Carlson
@Sanf
@JurassicPuck
@moropanov
@rnhaas

*I may have missed a name or two here or there.

I think tagging more than 3 people in the same post doesn't work, but I'm not sure if the software still works like that.

 

[rmartin65]

I think tagging more than 3 people in the same post doesn't work, but I'm not sure if the software still works like that.

Ah, yeah, I think I read that somewhere. Good call- I’m just going to reach out via PM so I’m not spamming the thread.

 

[Michael Farkas]

A pre-consolidation project would be one of the more meaningful contributions we could make to further discussion. My availability will vary with time, but I’d like to be involved.

This is where I'm at too. I'm probably more likely to contribute articles and interpretation than anything. But I'll closely monitor this and participate as much as I can...

 

[rmartin65]

Alright, already at 8! I've sent out a bunch of PMs, so hopefully we'll get more people signing up over the next week or so.

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

Alright, already at 8! I've sent out a bunch of PMs, so hopefully we'll get more people signing up over the next week or so.

I'll participate when I'm able.

How hard of a line are we drawing as "pre-consolidation"? Let's look at the top of the list as an example. Frank Nighbor is primarily a pre-consolidation player, with him playing only his age 34-37 seasons post-consolidation. Howie Morenz is primarily a post-consolidation player, but he still managed to come in second in Hart voting in 1924-25, and he was 5th in NHL scoring over his first 3 seasons, so he still managed to put up at least one significant season pre-consolidation and was a strong scorer otherwise.

With a relaxed cutoff, off the top of my head, the list starts off:

#1 - Howie Morenz
#2 - Frank Nighbor
#3 - Bill Cook/Cyclone Taylor/Newsy Lalonde

etc.

Down the list, who knows how many "crossover" players will make the list as well.

 

[Professor What]

Based on what I've seen of the process that was used with the positional lists, wouldn't there be a preliminary discussion to determine who is and isn't eligible among questionable cases?

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Based on what I've seen of the process that was used with the positional lists, wouldn't there be a preliminary discussion to determine who is and isn't eligible among questionable cases?

Exactly. I think that has to be sorted out before the voting starts. It would be embarrassing if (for example) Howie Morenz finishes 4th because half of us think he's eligible and half of us don't.

 

[JackSlater]

I received the PM. I'm not going to participate in the project however I do think that a pre-consolidation project is quite worthwhile and long overdue. Last month I picked up and read a little book about the four Atlantic teams that challenged for the Stanley Cup, and it is refreshing to read about hockey history that was not NHL-centric or a desperate attempt to prop up European hockey.

Good luck, should it happen, and I hope that the project receives the attention that it deserves.

 

[rmartin65]

Provided we get enough people, I agree that a rules/discussion thread is the next step.

But, if I may get a little ahead of myself here- I like the idea of tying eligibility to when the player debuted in a "major" league- PCHA/WHL/NHL (NHA)/Big 4 /USAHA.

Of course, this is for players with eligibility questions. Obviously players who played their whole careers before these leagues should be eligible.

 

[Professor What]

Provided we get enough people, I agree that a rules/discussion thread is the next step.

But, if I may get a little ahead of myself here- I like the idea of tying eligibility to when the player debuted in a "major" league- PCHA/WHL/NHL (NHA)/Big 4 /USAHA.

Of course, this is for players with eligibility questions. Obviously players who played their whole careers before these leagues should be eligible.

So, as an example, Morenz would be eligible despite playing most of his career post-consolidation? (Not asking to criticize, just trying to clarify in my mind.)

 

[rmartin65]

So, as an example, Morenz would be eligible despite playing most of his career post-consolidation? (Not asking to criticize, just trying to clarify in my mind.)

It depends on when we draw the line. @ResilientBeast once suggested 1920 as the debut cutoff, and I think it works really well.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

Interested, and am hopeful I'd be able to allocate more time for it than past projects.

 

[BenchBrawl]

It depends on when we draw the line. @ResilientBeast once suggested 1920 as the debut cutoff, and I think it works really well.

Except for George Hay ...

For a project I think we have no choice but to go one by one before starting.

Btw, we do a Top 60-50-40?

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'd aim for far less...one, let's be real, pre-1926 hockey wasn't anything amazing. But we need to try to understand what the level was to the best of our ability. But we should prioritize learning, and promoting useful information over a ranking. This is the probably the most friendly 100+ year old hockey group in the world...maybe ever (including guys that were around it and in it haha)...even so, almost no one knows who the 38th vs 42nd best player born in 1887 was...

I'd keep it fairly limited in terms of ranking (top 25 tops, top 10 at the least), and push towards understanding the evolution of the game and the elite players. At top 60, even across 30 years of pro hockey, how far down into the well are you digging? Pretty far, I suspect...

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'd aim for far less...one, let's be real, pre-1926 hockey wasn't anything amazing. But we need to try to understand what the level was to the best of our ability. But we should prioritize learning, and promoting useful information over a ranking. This is the probably the most friendly 100+ year old hockey group in the world...maybe ever (including guys that were around it and in it haha)...even so, almost no one knows who the 38th vs 42nd best player born in 1887 was...

I'd keep it fairly limited in terms of ranking (top 25 tops, top 10 at the least), and push towards understanding the evolution of the game and the elite players. At top 60, even across 30 years of pro hockey, how far down into the well are you digging? Pretty far, I suspect...

I hear you, but I think we already know a lot about every player that would hypothetically fill a Top 40 list.

Just throwing an approximate list at the wall:


Nighbor
Cook x
Taylor
Cleghorn
Lalonde
Denneny
Gerard
Vézina,G
G.Boucher
Malone
-------------------------(10)
Benedict,G
Moose Johnson
Hod Stuart
Tommy Phillips
Harry Cameron
Foyston
Walker
Pitre
H.Gardiner
Noble
-------------------------(20)
Mackay
Fredrickson
Dye
A.Smith
L.Patrick
Hay
Gordon Roberts
S.Harris
A.Ross
Broadbent
-------------------------(30)
Harvey Pulford
Bowie
J.Hall
J.Simpson
Keats
M.Grant
Duncan
Lehman,G
Oatman
R.Crawford
-------------------------(40)
F.Patrick
T.Smith
Morris
L.Cook
McGee
H.Holmes,G
P.Lesueur,G
Griffis
Darragh
Randall
-------------------------(50)


I'm sure I missed some names, and some on that list may not be eligible, but overall we're talking almost strictly about players with an ATD bio already done (and many of them with a lot of information), and many players on that list were already ranked in the project of their respective position.

I think we can go up to Top 30-40 without stretching ourselves too thin, but maybe I'm overconfident. Wonder what others think

I agree with you that the priority is to learn over the rankings. For example, comparing defensemen Joe Hall vs. Art Duncan vs. Joe Simpson would be an interesting exercise, regardless where the dominoes fall in the final ranking. But this comparison is most likely to happen between 25th and 40th.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

I was just scratching together a list based on the top 100 & 200 projects as this ^ was posted... unless I missed somebody, there were 24 pre-consolidation players who came up for discussion in voting rounds for those projects. So I think a top 40 would be pretty doable.