Players you think are better or worse than the evidence would suggest?

[Michael Farkas]

There's no reason to go down the road with that. There's a ton of ways it can go...McDavid has to deal with yesterday's equipment, medical science, etc. Or Gretzky gets to benefit from it.

The whole "why didn't George Washington just nuke the British?" argument is as silly as it sounds...

 

[Johnny Engine]

There's no reason to go down the road with that. There's a ton of ways it can go...McDavid has to deal with yesterday's equipment, medical science, etc. Or Gretzky gets to benefit from it.

The whole "why didn't George Washington just nuke the British?" argument is as silly as it sounds...

Mutually assured destruction, duh. If he had done that, the king just nukes him back and where's your revolution now, huh?

 

[Mike C]

There’s so much wrong with this I don’t even know where to begin…

Begin by ignoring such drivel. Then hope we don't get the pack of Skittles laced with the Fentanyl like some

 

[Mike C]

I believe I recently read that you were Islanders fan. I've always kind of lamented the loss of our 80's Islanders champion and not enough folks go to bat for them. There are plenty of Oilers, Penguins, Red Wings guys here...and one repetitive '94 Rangers fan that believes that all 23 men on that roster should go into the HOF haha - I hate the Islanders with a passion, but I'd be happy to know that there's Isles dynasty champion here...

Thanks for the support. There are a bunch of fans out there.

I'm a huge fan/student of 70s and 80s hockey. I have taken up for Bossy, Espo, Clarke, Orr, even Gretzky who was the hated nemesis

I covered games back in the day, and unlike most Isles fans I don't hate the Rangers of that era. They were mostly good guys and I always felt the the 2nd best team in the league during the dynasty years was the NYR. Those series should have been Cup final or semis except for the idiotic division/conference format

 

[Peat]

I always idly wonder what happens if Letang was a) fit b) not on a team overshadowed by two generational guys. I feel like he doesn't get his due.

I was going to say best dman of his generation not to get a Norris only to sheepishly remember Shea Weber in time, and there's a guy that in ten years time we'll be on a thread like this telling the kids about.

 

[Mike C]

I always idly wonder what happens if Letang was a) fit b) not on a team overshadowed by two generational guys. I feel like he doesn't get his due.

I was going to say best dman of his generation not to get a Norris only to sheepishly remember Shea Weber in time, and there's a guy that in ten years time we'll be on a thread like this telling the kids about.

Freaking guy had 2 strokes 8 years apart and persevered to come back and play. That in and of itself makes him an underrated hero in my eyes

 

[Hobnobs]

Live and let live

 

[MadLuke]

Older generational talents like Gretzky and Orr are incredibly overrated.

There is a reason why you did not include Lemieux-Jagr even too I am not sure Gretzky did leave much doubt when they were playing in the same league at the same time, because making the argument that 54goals-123 pts Jagr has a 33 years old in 2005-2006 could not compete for the Art Ross today at his peak would be really hard to make, the OV-Crosby he kept with still doing quite well has older shadow of their peak self now.

The idea that Gretzky was just having an high IQ and not one of the most skilled physically gifted athlete of all time (vo2max, reaction time, periphical vision), yes he apparently had the Longest loop reflexes (movement responses to sensory stimuli that involve complex loops of nerve cells in the brain) ever measured by one doctor measuring that apparently:

Wayne Gretzky: MindFreak

I was reading the book "Of Ice And Men" and came across the mention of a study done on long-loop neuron reflexes (motor responses to sensory stimuli) done by Dr. William Tatton at the University of British Columbia. It noted that of all the people Dr. Tatton tested, Wayne Gretzky had the...

forums.hfboards.com

He was also quite the skater, maybe the best slapshot in the history of the league, etc... Jean Perron had the chance to be an assistant coach on a Gretzky team in some international tourney context and he was in charge of the training days, he said he never saw anyone be as good at puck trick, playing with it-pure skilled display than Gretzky during off time, it was just more efficient to play like he did in real game time.

 

[Overrated]

Older generational talents like Gretzky and Orr are incredibly overrated. Today's game is bigger, faster, stronger, and more skilled than ever before. Gretzky may have been the most dominant player ever to play, but McDavid and Crosby are the 2 best hockey players of all time considering their speed, skill, and IQ. If you put McDavid in a time machine and send him to Gretzky's era, he would probably go coast to coast 8 times a game despite the clutching and grabbing that use to take place. Towards the end of Gretzky's era is when the fundamentals of goaltending really even became established. That's why most of his highlights consist of goaltenders 5 feet out of their net, biting on his terrible fake shots, and way out of position when he scores. That would never work on any goaltender today. And nowadays, you can't get away with just having a high IQ like Gretzky. You need the skating and skill (stick handling, shooting, etc) to go along with it.

Zoomers are actually a weaker generation. The best players today wouldn't stand out as much 30 years ago. There is a reason why all of the yesteday's NHL greats are still great today in their late 30s and no it's not because they don't smoke - most of the best athletes didn't smoke even in the 60s. There is a reason why old ass LeBron is still one of the best ballers in the world, why old Messi despite being among the slowest 5 players in the whole world scores or assists every game. Wake up bro, zoomers are borderline disabled. The league is getting weaker every year.

 

[psycat]

Sundin better, at the very least I think he could have been an Art Ross contender if everything wen't right, being placed on a better team etc.

St Louis worse, did really like him as a player and he was obviously very good but got placed on a line that clicked(even if he was arguably the driving force) and got one of his Ross's in a shortened season etc. The list of 2 times Art Ross winners is really rare territory and I just don't think he was THAT good.

Zoomers are actually a weaker generation. The best players today wouldn't stand out as much 30 years ago. There is a reason why all of the yesteday's NHL greats are still great today in their late 30s and no it's not because they don't smoke - most of the best athletes didn't smoke even in the 60s. There is a reason why old ass LeBron is still one of the best ballers in the world, why old Messi despite being among the slowest 5 players in the whole world scores or assists every game. Wake up bro, zoomers are borderline disabled. The league is getting weaker every year.

Don't forget that zoomers are weak mentally aswell, busy discussing things like pronouns and feelings all day.

Also players today are more co-workers than rivals, respect in handshake line above winning.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don't know what a "zoomer" is...is that like the sneakers that become roller skates?

Mats Sundin is a good call in this thread. His stats/awards definitely underrate him. He's one of the guys that when I saw him live, it was way different than TV or, worse, the paper...

 

[jigglysquishy]

People that unironically use terms like Boomer and Zoomer and Millenial are poorly read.

The literature around generational theory is widely mocked in sociology and history circles.

 

[Overrated]

People that unironically use terms like Boomer and Zoomer and Millenial are poorly read.

The literature around generational theory is widely mocked in sociology and history circles.

Only if you take it too literally which I don't think any of us does. There clearly are tangible differences between people who were let's say born in 2004 as opposed to people born in 1964 in upbringing, culture, values etc.

 

[MadLuke]

I will go with Sundin as well specially the top 10 end of year finish, that someone greatly hurt by us not looking at Top-20 or 3-5 years windows points finish instead.

As for the player of todays X-y-z affair, would they have born in 1960 they would have played street hockey like the kids of those days and been has though, outside some rapid change in genetics.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Only if you take it too literally. There clearly are tangible differences between people who were let's say born in 2004 as opposed to people born in 1964 in upbringing, culture, values etc.

There are.

But grouping people into cultural groups based on random 25 year segments because Strauss and Howe felt masturbatory is plain dumb.

The naming conventions are meaningless. The timeframes are illogical. The sharp division between supposed generations (a 1984 born will have more in common with a 1980 born than a 1995 born even if the theory doesn't agree) doesn't pass any smell test.

I encourage people to read the literature. You'll feel dumb and won't use the terms anymore.

 

[norrisnick]

Only if you take it too literally which I don't think any of us does. There clearly are tangible differences between people who were let's say born in 2004 as opposed to people born in 1964 in upbringing, culture, values etc.

And people born in the 40s rag on those born in the 60s and those born in the 20s rag on those in the 40s. Old folks have shit on the younger generations for being weak and soft and whatever for millennia.

 

[Nick Hansen]

I don't know what a "zoomer" is...is that like the sneakers that become roller skates?

Mats Sundin is a good call in this thread. His stats/awards definitely underrate him. He's one of the guys that when I saw him live, it was way different than TV or, worse, the paper...

I've heard about that as well, that Sundin was much more impressive live than on TV. Unfortunately I never saw him live. What in particular made an impression on you? I can imagine just the size of him could be a bit awe-inspiring. He must've had a tremendous reach.

 

[norrisnick]

Steve Yzerman/Fuhr are 2 other that maybe many put higher than many evidence would suggest, Yzerman on paper lost a single Ross to Lemieux and or Gretzky.

Remove them and Yzerman

1-2-3-5-6-10 does not look that legendary, a single all-star team in a very weak year, one time hart finalist, missed some spot on team Canada during his peak. How deep his era was, how unorthodox Mike Keenan was could get lost.

Selanne for example, look the same/arguably better:
1-2-4-5-6-8-8

During his peak 53 pts in 50 playoff games with very limited success despite the highest of scoring eras.

Not that good of a team, then such a stacked teams that rolled 4 lines with good focus on defence, leadership, the bad knee runs, the spectacle, etc...

Are Messier and Sakic evidence easier to make for where people think they should be ?

Howie Morenz with only 2 art Ross 7 goals in 35 playoff game run pre-TV is one that we have to rely on testimony more than evidence it seems.

The tricky thing with Yzerman is that it's easy (sort of) to simply erase Gretzky and Lemieux from the scoring table. Barring a couple linemates of theirs probably sliding a bit the rest should shake out about the same (unless we go full butterfly effect...). Voting awards are a different matter entirely. If Mario isn't the premier super scorer on a shitty team and it's now Yzerman, how many of those Mario votes go Yzerman's way?

Just cancelling votes Yzerman picks up a First team and two Second Team honors. If those votes were reassigned, how many go to Yzerman? Same with the Hart. Yzerman would be the Hart runner-up to Fuhr in '88 just by cancelling votes. There are two questions to ask here... how many Mario voters would have voted for Fuhr rather than Yzerman? and secondly... is Fuhr even in the picture in a world without Gretzky? Suddenly you're, hypothetically of course, looking at a 24yo back to back Hart winning Yzerman.

 

[MadLuke]

Voting awards are a different matter entirely.

This is true, voters can easily rank offensive forward between each other more easily that with what Glimour-Roy-Bourque did and one can go from 6th place to 1st in a different world.

a lot of stuff can age in a clear cut "binary" and loose its context, the best offensive center would have won the hart that year and would have been Yzerman, but if you are clearly not him you go down under the best goaltender.

A bit like being on the same team than the Hart winner, the if remove the Hart winner could affect that player much more than the average contender like Jagr in 96.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I've heard about that as well, that Sundin was much more impressive live than on TV. Unfortunately I never saw him live. What in particular made an impression on you? I can imagine just the size of him could be a bit awe-inspiring. He must've had a tremendous reach.

Not just reach, but puck control at reach. He's a presence, no doubt, but I was expecting that...I wasn't looking for him. I'm pretty indifferent to Sundin in general, but he stuck out with how skilled he was, what kind of angles he could win battles at, he covered a lot of ground...just a guy that's always pushing play in the right direction.

I guess it's not much surprise that he was able to overcome being strapped to guys like Alyn McCauley and Lonny Bohonos and still go on some deep runs...

 

[Mike C]

I don't know what a "zoomer" is...is that like the sneakers that become roller skates?

Mats Sundin is a good call in this thread. His stats/awards definitely underrate him. He's one of the guys that when I saw him live, it was way different than TV or, worse, the paper...

I think the Big Man with the sax is the zoomer. He did a great job in that Aretha Franklin video

 

[MadLuke]

Just saw on the nice thread:

Norris trophy (99.8% complete historical results, 1954-2023)

There's a potential issue with how I've been presenting the Norris trophy shares (see post #4). Recent defensemen seem to be ranked too high, and but I couldn't figure out why. For example, Chara is ranked between Chelios and Coffey. Karlsson ranks about Potvin, while Hedman and Doughty rank...

forums.hfboards.com

Duncan Keith was a Norris finalist only 2 time, his 2 wins and a Top 5 only one more time.

Top 5 in the Norris only 3 time his whole career, 3 time on the all-star team, PK Subban was a Norris finalist 3 times.... with 3 all star team spot, Rob Blake did it 5 time.

Will it spot on the Top 100 greatest player of all time of 2018 over Joe Thornton-Iginla-Chara-Pilote-Malkin-Erik Karlsson will be perceived a bit Toews-ish an over reaction to the Hawks success from the people of the future.

He his one of those that gained a lot to be seen and had the chance to be seen a lot, when you look good on those team Canada d-core you are really good.

 

[seventieslord]

Not just reach, but puck control at reach. He's a presence, no doubt, but I was expecting that...I wasn't looking for him. I'm pretty indifferent to Sundin in general, but he stuck out with how skilled he was, what kind of angles he could win battles at, he covered a lot of ground...just a guy that's always pushing play in the right direction.

I guess it's not much surprise that he was able to overcome being strapped to guys like Alyn McCauley and Lonny Bohonos and still go on some deep runs...

Alyn McCauley replaced Sundin in 2002, he wasn't strapped to him. (both centers)

You're referring to guys like Hoglund, Antropov, Ponikarovsky, Derek King, Modin...

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Older generational talents like Gretzky and Orr are incredibly overrated. Today's game is bigger, faster, stronger, and more skilled than ever before. Gretzky may have been the most dominant player ever to play, but McDavid and Crosby are the 2 best hockey players of all time considering their speed, skill, and IQ. If you put McDavid in a time machine and send him to Gretzky's era, he would probably go coast to coast 8 times a game despite the clutching and grabbing that use to take place. Towards the end of Gretzky's era is when the fundamentals of goaltending really even became established. That's why most of his highlights consist of goaltenders 5 feet out of their net, biting on his terrible fake shots, and way out of position when he scores. That would never work on any goaltender today. And nowadays, you can't get away with just having a high IQ like Gretzky. You need the skating and skill (stick handling, shooting, etc) to go along with it.

Opinions like this are tough to take seriously.

Oh, near the end of Gretzky's career the fundamentals of goaltending changed, think there's any correlation?

There's a theory that every few generations a person (politician, general, player, etc) come along to push the human civilization forward in great leaps.

Julius Caesar was one of these, musically Mozart was one of these.

The game literally had to change to catch up to Bobby Orr and then Wayne Gretzky.

Pointing to the fact that the game did indeed evolve as a response to their greatness is a testament to their greatness, not a diminishment.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

There is a reason why you did not include Lemieux-Jagr even too I am not sure Gretzky did leave much doubt when they were playing in the same league at the same time, because making the argument that 54goals-123 pts Jagr has a 33 years old in 2005-2006 could not compete for the Art Ross today at his peak would be really hard to make, the OV-Crosby he kept with still doing quite well has older shadow of their peak self now.

The idea that Gretzky was just having an high IQ and not one of the most skilled physically gifted athlete of all time (vo2max, reaction time, periphical vision), yes he apparently had the Longest loop reflexes (movement responses to sensory stimuli that involve complex loops of nerve cells in the brain) ever measured by one doctor measuring that apparently:

Wayne Gretzky: MindFreak

I was reading the book "Of Ice And Men" and came across the mention of a study done on long-loop neuron reflexes (motor responses to sensory stimuli) done by Dr. William Tatton at the University of British Columbia. It noted that of all the people Dr. Tatton tested, Wayne Gretzky had the...

forums.hfboards.com

He was also quite the skater, maybe the best slapshot in the history of the league, etc... Jean Perron had the chance to be an assistant coach on a Gretzky team in some international tourney context and he was in charge of the training days, he said he never saw anyone be as good at puck trick, playing with it-pure skilled display than Gretzky during off time, it was just more efficient to play like he did in real game time.

The book Of Ice and Men that was cited in your linked thread was edited by a relative of mine. It's a great book too. Cool to see it here.

Not just reach, but puck control at reach. He's a presence, no doubt, but I was expecting that...I wasn't looking for him. I'm pretty indifferent to Sundin in general, but he stuck out with how skilled he was, what kind of angles he could win battles at, he covered a lot of ground...just a guy that's always pushing play in the right direction.

I guess it's not much surprise that he was able to overcome being strapped to guys like Alyn McCauley and Lonny Bohonos and still go on some deep runs...

To me, the best contemporary comparison for Sundin (it's not perfect, and they shoot the opposite way) is Anze Kopitar.

Big, owns the puck down low, great vision, and just an absolute authority when they have the puck.