Players on Whom Public Opinion Has Changed Drastically Since Retirement...

[10YearsHaveGone]

I’d say Phil Esposito

He was the first over the top elite scoring champion in the NHL

HE’s rated between 20-30 greatest all time now

Phil Esposito's was way ahead of my time, but on paper he has one of the best offensive peaks of all time. Comparable to Howe's and Jagr's. I get that he was second fiddle to Orr. Its that the only reason he isn't ranked higher?

This is the top offensive seasons in the league up to the point Esposito's prime ended:

Esposito had 6 of the top 10 all time. This is of course right before the offensive explosion of the 80's rewrote everything.

To those in the know, how was Esposito ranked at this period of time?

 

[Gerulaitis]

I think Selanne had a better year in 1993. Hull was easily the world's best winger prior to that. Mogilny was the 2nd best winger in the NHL in 1993. He was a 2nd team all-star in 1996 as well, but miles behind Jagr. Kariya and Selanne would have been better wingers than him for sure in 1996. He had two great seasons and a lot of seasons that left tons to be desired. I remember how great he was when he certainly tried to be. But it wasn't often enough.



He would have been the best player all-time in 1960 for sure. And rightly so. Howe was still playing, and out of the remaining "Big 4" only Orr was born at that time, and he was 12. To be honest, even to this day it is hard to have Richard out of the top 10. I have Beliveau ahead of him and Hull too. You could say, Harvey, Jagr, Crosby. But honestly, who else with great certainty? To this day he is 8th all-time in playoff goals. And unless Ovechkin, Crosby or Malkin have a big postseason he's going to hang onto that place. And really, those are the three names that have a chance to catch the 82 goals. Richard did this in a low scoring era with two playoff rounds. Not to mention, he has 14 either 1st or 2nd all-star selections. Gordie Howe has 21. Bourque has 19. Gretzky has 15. Richard has 14. I don't think anyone else is close. Even Ovechkin who you figure would have as many only has 11. So I mean, 14 straight years and this is what happened. Only his injury-plagued rookie year and his final three seasons does he not do this. Yeah, that's epic. Bobby Hull as well has 12. Beliveau 10. The story checks out - even in 2025 - with Richard being an all-time great. His playoff resume is probably only better than perhaps Gretzky.

I must disagree:
Mogilny was a more mature and complete player than Selanne in 92-93.
He netted 76 in 77 games. I think Selanne hasn't missed a single game in the regular season.

In the 1993 post-season Mogilny scored 7 goals in 7 games and added 3 assists. Wow, just wow

 

[The Panther]

I can see future fans having no clue that he wasn't on Roy or Hasek's level at his peak.

He wasn't?

I mean, I'd rank Hasek higher, a bit.

 

[GMR]

He wasn't?

I mean, I'd rank Hasek higher, a bit.

Roy had more memorable playoff runs and Hasek had the absurd peak seasons in the mid to late 90s. Brodeur had the longevity but at his best I’m ranking him in a class below those two.

I never saw Plante/Sawchuk so it’s harder for me to compare them to Brodeur.

 

[overpass]

If this forum existed in 1980, I don't think Esposito would be considered a top 10 player of all time.

Going through contemporary reports, he's clearly behind Orr and Hull. And Howe and Beliveau and Richard and Harvey if you extend back a bit.

This forum is harsher on him than contemporary reports are. But he's also not as loved as stats would indicate.

A lot of hockey writers and fans around 1980 were trashing the quality of the NHL. There were still some pretty subpar players and teams that wouldn't have sniffed the pre-expansion league. And the arrival of the great Soviet teams and players had cast a shadow over even the superstars of the NHL. Even Gretzky had trouble getting respect as an all-timer in that environment.

I would agree that Esposito had not reached the great Original Six players in the public imagination. Everyone knew he ranked below Orr. There just wasn't a path for the second best player on a team that won only two Cups in a weak era to become a hockey legend of the first rank.

 

[MadArcand]

He wasn't?

I mean, I'd rank Hasek higher, a bit.

He's been closer to Belfour than Hasek & Roy

 

[quietbruinfan]

We have an interesting and good topic here. The OP is sort of asking for a stock up stock down list. Here goes mine.

Down: Cheevers. He is a nice guy and a very good goalie, but not a HHOFER. I have seen lots of highlights of the first half of his career and saw the second half. Watching highlights you will notice that Johnston got the greater share of big games......Has a somewhat deserved reputation as clutch but could be erratic.

Down/the same Housely. He was a defensive liability when he played and somehow got in the hall on offensive skill. He was also less effective as his career progressed and the league became more defensively oriented.

UP: Gartner. he played on several teams, many with different styles, and was absurdly consistent on all of them. He was unfairly discriminated against and traded around because he was a. not a physical player despite having good size and b. is a born again Christian....See A.

I liked Brodeur more than most because he had the most regular/standard technique. Roy had higher peaks but some slight dips/difficulties as well. I am not as much a Hasek supporter as most. He was a very talented and a technically innovative goalie, but presented mild problems off the ice. He also gets too much of a pass for playing on mediocre Sabre teams.

 

[The Panther]

Down: Cheevers. He is a nice guy and a very good goalie, but not a HHOFER. I have seen lots of highlights of the first half of his career and saw the second half. Watching highlights you will notice that Johnston got the greater share of big games......Has a somewhat deserved reputation as clutch but could be erratic.

I agree, but this seems to be the way for most of the 1970s' guys. Their reputations seem to be somewhat in the hockey toilet nowadays.

Down/the same Housely. He was a defensive liability when he played and somehow got in the hall on offensive skill. He was also less effective as his career progressed and the league became more defensively oriented.

I'm not a Housley fan, but I will defend him in the sense that I think he could be a fine two-way player. (I wouldn't say this about every offensive Dman.) In 1998-99, Housley played for a very low-powered Flames' team that was a net negative in goals, yet he scored 54 points and went +14. Even got Norris votes from 7 writers....

I liked Brodeur more than most because he had the most regular/standard technique. Roy had higher peaks but some slight dips/difficulties as well. I am not as much a Hasek supporter as most. He was a very talented and a technically innovative goalie, but presented mild problems off the ice. He also gets too much of a pass for playing on mediocre Sabre teams.

I think I have to go with Hasek over Brodeur, but between Brodeur and Roy, I would call it even. Roy has the sharper peak seasons, but he also has highs and lows, and when he wasn't on the Canadiens his statistical results are just 'good', not amazing. Brodeur gave what I like most in goalies --- a long, consistent prime of consistency.