How come the Russians are so low ranked in the all time lists?

[MrOT]

Looking through the "official" (North American that is) all time lists of "top 20 players of all time" for example they look very different from the European ones and all the legendary Soviet players find themselves ridiculously low in the ranking. Thinking about that the Soviet beat Canada 8-1 in the 1981 Canada Cup final and that the Russian Canada Cup teams through the 80's played at the level of Team Canada including Gretzky and Lemieux, even though they had to adapt ot smaller rink, different rules etc. in no time to do that. All the external circumstances was NA biased, yet the Russians played at the same level. Are the "Greatest players of all time" lists too NA biased?

Click to read more...

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

Most likely.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Looking through the "official" (North American that is) all time lists of "top 20 players of all time" for example they look very different from the European ones and all the legendary Soviet players find themselves ridiculously low in the ranking. Thinking about that the Soviet beat Canada 8-1 in the 1981 Canada Cup final and that the Russian Canada Cup teams through the 80's played at the level of Team Canada including Gretzky and Lemieux, even though they had to adapt ot smaller rink, different rules etc. in no time to do that. All the external circumstances was NA biased, yet the Russians played at the same level. Are the "Greatest players of all time" lists too NA biased?

Probably they are too biased. I think that some of those 1972 Soviet players for example were amazing. Tretiak, Fetisov, Kharlamov etc.
Tretiak for example played the best goaltending I’ve ever seen. He was just dominating.

 

[Stephen]

Whether you're ranking them correctly or not, it's difficult to slot players you see on limited viewings during their prime and then if they came over eventually like the KLM Line or Fetisov, but were no longer playing at a superstar level, vs players you see all the time throughout their careers, especially in a pre-internet, pre-Youtube era where footage is so accessible.

For example, if William Nylander didn't play in the NHL, but was somewhere in Europe ripping up the domestic leagues and we only saw him once a year vs NHL competition at the WC's, and you saw him take home the 2019 MVP, and this happened over and over again, you'd probably see some mythology grow around him - and at the same time, you wouldn't have a great reading of where he ranks vs others of his peer group in the NHL.

 

[Dominance]

They didn’t play - either enough or at all - in the best league in the world, where they could have proven themselves in a large sample size with statistics and accolades. It’s just that simple. If Gretzky only played in international tournaments and otherwise played in a relatively obscure league, he wouldn’t be remotely close to being considered the best player of all time - probably not even top-10.

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

They didn’t play - either enough or at all - in the best league in the world, where they could have proven themselves in a large sample size with statistics and accolades. It’s just that simple. If Gretzky only played in international tournaments and otherwise played in a relatively obscure league, he wouldn’t be remotely close to being considered the best player of all time - probably not even top-10.

Gretzky is shown in the Russian HHOF. They have photos of him too in the arena for Moscow Dynamo

 

[JackSlater]

I would probably have to see the lists to have a good idea if they were underrated. It's easy to imagine that they would be underrated in general given that the people making these lists would have rarely seen them, though it's also easy to romanticize a player that you've only heard of or seen a handful of times. In hockey history however the period where the Soviets were among the best in the world but not able to compete in the NHL is pretty short. A little over 20 years or so in the history of a sport that is around 150 years old. There were some great players there but you wouldn't expect to see all time lists littered with Soviet greats either.

 

[Go Wings]

In Soviet Russia car drives you

 

[newfy]

I would probably have to see the lists to have a good idea if they were underrated. It's easy to imagine that they would be underrated in general given that the people making these lists would have rarely seen them, though it's also easy to romanticize a player that you've only heard of or seen a handful of times. In hockey history however the period where the Soviets were among the best in the world but not able to compete in the NHL is pretty short. A little over 20 years or so in the history of a sport that is around 150 years old. There were some great players there but you wouldn't expect to see all time lists littered with Soviet greats either.

Not to mention those teams played together all the time and had chemistry. Its a lot easier to play together and train together and go look good against international teams with no experience together. If the 72 Canadian team for example always played together and trained together they would've looked a lot different than when they showed up and lost some games to the USSR off the bat.

And youre right, in that twenty year period do we really think the USSR produced several top 10ish players all time? Or is it more likely that their playing together made them appear a bit better than teams like Canada in international tournaments leading to them being romanticised a bit? I would also have to see a list and look on a more individual basis to answer the question but I doubt in that 20ish years they had multiple top 10-15 players all at once when they were somehwat new to hockey

 

[Ben White]

Not to mention those teams played together all the time and had chemistry. Its a lot easier to play together and train together and go look good against international teams with no experience together. If the 72 Canadian team for example always played together and trained together they would've looked a lot different than when they showed up and lost some games to the USSR off the bat.

And youre right, in that twenty year period do we really think the USSR produced several top 10ish players all time? Or is it more likely that their playing together made them appear a bit better than teams like Canada in international tournaments leading to them being romanticised a bit? I would also have to see a list and look on a more individual basis to answer the question but I doubt in that 20ish years they had multiple top 10-15 players all at once when they were somehwat new to hockey

yeah but we also have to factor in that these best on best games back in the days were always played on nhl ice with nhl referees, rules and so on. A more physical game was allowed that the Russians weren’t likely used to. At least that shouldve taken away a lot of the chemistry advantage

 

[johan f]

Many of the greats were product of a system, part of a collective. I for one can not for sure take for granted that those players would perform the same outside the machinery. So it is difficult to compare, to put them in same context as western players.

 

[BlueBaron]

It is what it is, there is no way to objectively compare anyone who did not play in the NHL. If you go on International tournaments then Paul Henderson is one of the GOAT.

 

[mouser]

Looking through the "official" (North American that is) all time lists of "top 20 players of all time" for example they look very different from the European ones and all the legendary Soviet players find themselves ridiculously low in the ranking. Thinking about that the Soviet beat Canada 8-1 in the 1981 Canada Cup final and that the Russian Canada Cup teams through the 80's played at the level of Team Canada including Gretzky and Lemieux, even though they had to adapt ot smaller rink, different rules etc. in no time to do that. All the external circumstances was NA biased, yet the Russians played at the same level. Are the "Greatest players of all time" lists too NA biased?

Which "official" lists are you looking at?

 

[GrkFlyersFan]

The simple fact is, Russians have only been playing in the NHL really in the last 30 years. A lot of the league's history just doesn't involve them.

 

[Kshahdoo]

Not to mention those teams played together all the time and had chemistry. Its a lot easier to play together and train together and go look good against international teams with no experience together. If the 72 Canadian team for example always played together and trained together they would've looked a lot different than when they showed up and lost some games to the USSR off the bat.

And youre right, in that twenty year period do we really think the USSR produced several top 10ish players all time? Or is it more likely that their playing together made them appear a bit better than teams like Canada in international tournaments leading to them being romanticised a bit? I would also have to see a list and look on a more individual basis to answer the question but I doubt in that 20ish years they had multiple top 10-15 players all at once when they were somehwat new to hockey

Yeah, actually Soviet teams did much better vs NHL teams, than vs Team Canada, and you hardly could blame NHL teams in "lack of chemistry".

 

[Fantomas]

Are the "Greatest players of all time" lists too NA biased?

Of course. You're not looking at any of the Russian lists, are you?

 

[alko]

Weak Propaganda.

 

[Halla]

Looking through the "official" (North American that is) all time lists of "top 20 players of all time" for example they look very different from the European ones and all the legendary Soviet players find themselves ridiculously low in the ranking. Thinking about that the Soviet beat Canada 8-1 in the 1981 Canada Cup final and that the Russian Canada Cup teams through the 80's played at the level of Team Canada including Gretzky and Lemieux, even though they had to adapt ot smaller rink, different rules etc. in no time to do that. All the external circumstances was NA biased, yet the Russians played at the same level. Are the "Greatest players of all time" lists too NA biased?

They also played and trained together all year round and of course managed to spank a team of NHL all stars thrown together a week before


Yeah they had some great players but they had a great system. Not enough exposure in the top league in the world. Every sport does it. DOnt see many Japanense/Korean players not in the MLB in cooperstown. How many CFLers in the football hall of fame?
Any europeans not in the nba make it in?

 

[Regal]

Yeah, actually Soviet teams did much better vs NHL teams, than vs Team Canada, and you hardly could blame NHL teams in "lack of chemistry".

NHL teams have a lot less talent than Team Canada though. In general I would say the Soviet greats are ranked all time at a level where they should be beating NHL teams.

 

[JasonRoseEh]

We know why, we just don't want to admit it and I'm Canadian btw.

 

[Kranix]

The same reason Malkin didn't crack the NHL 100.

 

[newfy]

Yeah, actually Soviet teams did much better vs NHL teams, than vs Team Canada, and you hardly could blame NHL teams in "lack of chemistry".

Well ya but NHL teams arent a collection of a single country's best players like the soviet teams were. The soviets had a collection of great players and obviously were a collection of guys that could take on any country but that chemistry aspect and training they did together obviously played a big role. Do you think if those Canada teams played together year round that they wouldnt be a lot better than they were in international tournament?

The odds of a country new to hockey having multiple top 10-20 players all time in a ~20 year period seems much more unlikely than chemistry and team dynamics making them look better on the world stage than teams that dont get to play together at all

 

[snipes]

Probably they are too biased. I think that some of those 1972 Soviet players for example were amazing. Tretiak, Fetisov, Kharlamov etc.
Tretiak for example played the best goaltending I’ve ever seen. He was just dominating.

Don’t forget Yakushev, Petrov, and Mikhailov too.

The hatred between Esposito and Mikhailov is legendary. I asked Esposito on an AMA on the Athletic about Yakushev and Esposito still maintains he’d take him a fight “no doubt” lol

 

[JackSlater]

Not to mention those teams played together all the time and had chemistry. Its a lot easier to play together and train together and go look good against international teams with no experience together. If the 72 Canadian team for example always played together and trained together they would've looked a lot different than when they showed up and lost some games to the USSR off the bat.

And youre right, in that twenty year period do we really think the USSR produced several top 10ish players all time? Or is it more likely that their playing together made them appear a bit better than teams like Canada in international tournaments leading to them being romanticised a bit? I would also have to see a list and look on a more individual basis to answer the question but I doubt in that 20ish years they had multiple top 10-15 players all at once when they were somehwat new to hockey

At this point we've had Russians in the NHL for 30 years. Ovechkin is a top 20 player ever, but none of the others are really close. In the top 100 you'd see Malkin, Fedorov, and maybe Bure. The Soviets in the mid 60s to earlier had trouble with Canadian amateur teams so it seems unlikely that anyone before say Firsov peaked was really competitive with the world's best. The Soviets started coming over to the NHL at the end of the 80s, so it's a 20 year span where the Soviets have world class players who couldn't come to the NHL. I can buy that USSR produced players better than Russia has, but how much better could USSR have done in 20 years than Russia has done in 30? Who are the top 20 level players? I could buy Makarov at that level - he stood out massively among the Soviet forwards and was quite possibly the best forward in the 1980s outside of Gretzky and Lemieux at the very end of the decade. Kharlamov has his legend, but his results don't match up with the legend and his prime was cut short. Even his most famous moment (in North American eyes anyway) saw him playing at the level of Esposito, and Esposito is not often found in the top 20. Fetisov was great and is a top 100 player, but I'd be hard pressed to find a place for him in the top 20. He stood out among Soviet defencemen, but Russia hasn't been all that strong at producing defencemen in the last 30 years and the strength of the Soviet teams was at forward. Somewhat similar story with Tretiak.

A top 100 list should have several top Soviets, but at the top 20 level I don't know how many Soviets someone could realistically expect. Beyond one or two and it would look pretty suspect.

 

[Doctor No]

We know why, we just don't want to admit it and I'm Canadian btw.

Admit what - that lists from North Americans are going to be biased towards North Americans? Many people have already said exactly that here.