Round 2, Vote 2 (HFNYR Top Centers)

[Crease]

FWIW have been watching rangers since late 60s. Recall goyette - Nevin etc but the early 70s line was my early teen years (and we finally got cable!) so I knew every player, ever line.
Tkaczuk was a very underrated player, a fav of mine. Strong, not afraid to go to the dirty areas (you would never find ratelle there, although hadfield would drop em). Think Callahan and graves. He along with fairbairn (and eventually Vickers) were a great checking line, behind the GAG line (3rd line was stemkowski Irvine mcregor). Vivid recollections of fairbairn and Walt being amazing penalty killers, skating the puck back and forth rarely dumping it.

Loving this thread, thanks for letting me chime in.

Thanks for your contribution, AG! Since you have firsthand knowledge, how would you rate Tkaczuk, Espo, and Goyette as far as their contributions to the franchise? Espo had more explosive seasons offensively than Tkaczuk but I think Walt's leadership skills, two-way game, and longevity (14 seasons to 6) put him ahead of Espo on my list. What about Goyette? The more I read about him, I like him. Though I don't have him in my top 10 yet.

 

[Crease]

I dug up some articles of Walt Tkaczuk and Don Raleigh during the Preliminary Discussion phase of the project. I'll repost the transcripts here since the two are on this ballot. Here's the article on Tkaczuk:

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/830/scan0030h.jpg/

The numbers won't tell you very much: He was the Rangers' leading scorer in the 1969-70 and 1970-71 seasons, their leading scorer in last spring's Cup play with seven goals and nine points and a member of the most effective penalty-killing team in the NHL last season.

Those numbers don't add up to $150,000, but when you close the record books and look at the ice, you find the real explanation for the worth of Walter Tkaczuk. Watch him knock down the strongest man in the league with his shoulder to set up a goal. Watch Tkaczuk and tammate Bill Fairbairn stifle a power play, sliding the puck back and forth, eluding wingers in a Canadian version of keepaway. Watch Tkaczuk, a center, dive into the corners to pull the puck away from a defender, flinging it to the point or the slot to set up a goal. Watch this 25-year-old steady his team and deflate his rivals, and you realize you're watching a spectacularly unspectacular hockey player.

I would pick him as one of the premier centers in the league, the best hockey player the Rangers have without a doubt. If I was to pick a player to be injuried, it'd be him. He's probably one of the strongest skaters in the business; he's very good with the puck, a good shot, a tremendous forechecker. He's got all the tools, all the moves.

First of all, you're never gonna scare him. Second of all, you're never going to knock him down. So whats the sense hitting him? He hits morepeople when they're trying to him him than when he starts it himself. Walter waits for you to take a run at him, then he starts up quickly and hits first.

He's a great player. And like Esposito, his secret is his mobility. I tell you, there's no way I'd have gotten 30 goals without him."

He's so strong on his skates, you can't run a player like Tkaczuk out. He just bowls over you, boom! I played against him in juniors and he bowled me over a few times. I'd rather be playing with him.

He's an exceptionally strong individual. He's solid on his feet; you just can't knock him off the puck.

On his penalty-killing prowess:

Whether inspiration or accident, the Tkaczuk-Fairbairn unit clicked. In 1971-72, they killed almost 85 percent of the opposition's power plays; last season they killed off 34 power plays in a row and finished the year by snuffing 28 consecutive power plays. These are not simply numbers; championships are won and lost on a team's ability to score when they're a man up and hold off their opponents when they're a man down. In the 1972 New York-Boston finals, the Bruins scored game-winning goals in three of their four victories on power plays. In the 1973 playoffs, Boston went 1-for-16 on power plays and New York wiped them out.

 

[Crease]

And Don Raleigh...

Last summer, the club was ripped apart. Bill Cook, the 1952-53 coach, was fired and Frank Boucher, a firmer coach who yielded the active reins to Lynn Patrick so that he might concentrate on his duties as general manager in 1948, has returned to the bench in this year of decision for the Rangers. The club had a new goalie in Johnny Bower, who won the job from Gump Worsley despite the latter was the rookie of the year in the NHL last year, a couple of new defensemen, a flock of new forwards and, in the early going, new incentive and drive. Yet, ironically, the man the Rangers were conting on the most to reestablish them as one of hockey's solid teams was an old hand who has been around the Garden, off and on, since he broke in as a raw kid of 17 in the season of 1943-44.

That, of course, would be James Donald (Bones) Raleigh, a lean and cadaverous-looking young man who is sometimes known around the NHL rinks as the "Loveable Screwball". To be sure, there is nothing screwy about him on the ice. Despite a few odd mannerisms such as his continual shifting and feinting even when there is nobody near him, Raleigh is a thoroughly sound center, one of the most brilliant puck-carriers and playmakers in the business, and a fine shot.

What you like best about him, though, is that he is a tireless worker. He keeps going all the time. He never lets up, which is something you can't say for a lot of the guys in this bruising business that requires such a constant perfection of physical condition. He has as much will to win as any player I've ever seen. Any coach would just sit back and relax if he had just a dozen Raleighs going for him.

He's a ballet dancer on the ice with that weaving, rhythmic style. I just wish I had a lot more like him.

It is significant that he wears No. 7 on his Ranger jersey. Only two Rangers have won the numeral - Frank Boucher and Phil Watson. They were two of the greatest centers the league has had and they wore that number with distinction for 22 years between them - Boucher for 13 seasons and Watson for nine. When Watson quit at the end of the 1947-48 season to become a farm team manager for the Blue Shirts, both he and Boucher naturally wanted to make sure that a player of real stature wore it after them.

 

[adam graves]

Thanks for your contribution, AG! Since you have firsthand knowledge, how would you rate Tkaczuk, Espo, and Goyette as far as their contributions to the franchise? Espo had more explosive seasons offensively than Tkaczuk but I think Walt's leadership skills, two-way game, and longevity (14 seasons to 6) put him ahead of Espo on my list. What about Goyette? The more I read about him, I like him. Though I don't have him in my top 10 yet.

Goyette was after his peak IIRC, and I was not a huge fan of soft players, and he was soft (my avatar explains that). My late dad (who played college hockey in czechoslovakia) called Goyette a choke artist cause he sucked in playoffs. Obviously these are subjective opinions.

Espo was Espo…best described by the bumper sticker on the back of my Plymouth fury…"jesus saves, espo puts in the rebound!".

That said… I will again emphasize we don’t go to the finals without Walt, and that was huge back then. One of the all time 2 way players, feared no one. You love Calli, you love Walt. Plus, ive never seen SINCE a penalty kill combo like him and Fairbairn.

 

[adam graves]

I dug up some articles of Walt Tkaczuk and Don Raleigh during the Preliminary Discussion phase of the project. I'll repost the transcripts here since the two are on this ballot. Here's the article on Tkaczuk:

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/830/scan0030h.jpg/











On his penalty-killing prowess:

Awesome. Glad there is an objective source to back up my bromance with Walt.

 

[bernmeister]

FWIW have been watching rangers since late 60s. Recall goyette - Nevin etc but the early 70s line was my early teen years (and we finally got cable!) so I knew every player, ever line.
Tkaczuk was a very underrated player, a fav of mine. Strong, not afraid to go to the dirty areas (you would never find ratelle there, although hadfield would drop em). Think Callahan and graves. He along with fairbairn (and eventually Vickers) were a great checking line, behind the GAG line (3rd line was stemkowski Irvine mcregor). Vivid recollections of fairbairn and Walt being amazing penalty killers, skating the puck back and forth rarely dumping it.

Loving this thread, thanks for letting me chime in.

Spot on, I affirm nearly everything you say, except as to Ratelle --- he was such a slick passer and fluid skater, he did not need to go into the boards, usually. (Besides, as you add, Hadfield/Vickers did most of that heavy lifting, and also a some contribution by Rod Gilbert.)

 

[mike14]

It really is mind boggling. Final three seasons of his career and two 2nd AST and twice leads the league in assists. The guy was just silly.

In his 3 seasons here he out pointed Leetch by 69 pts, the closest fwd to him was Graves, 100 pts behind.

I'm still having a lot of trouble deciding who should be higher between Laprade and O'Connor

 

[adam graves]

Spot on, I affirm nearly everything you say, except as to Ratelle --- he was such a slick passer and fluid skater, he did not need to go into the boards, usually. (Besides, as you add, Hadfield/Vickers did most of that heavy lifting, and also a some contribution by Rod Gilbert.)

No argument there at all.

 

[mike14]

Couple of random titbits while I waste time at work:

Tkaczuk is credited as the reason why Espo went goalless in the SCF, he was then invited to the training ca mp for the '72 Summit series but turned it down.

As well as being the first to win the Hart and Byng in the same season, O'Connor was named the 1948 Canadian Athlete of the Year

Raleigh was the first ranger to score 4g in a game, the first player to score bavk to back OT winners in the SCF, and he hit the post in game 7 OT before the Wings won the cup in 2OT

 

[Crease]

I'm still having a lot of trouble deciding who should be higher between Laprade and O'Connor

Same.

I have the following 6 guys duking it out for the last 5 spots.

Tkaczuk
Esposito
O'Connor
Raleigh
Laprade
Smith

Tkaczuk and Esposito are definitely in. I'm having trouble ordering the rest at this point. Happy to receive input from anyone.

 

[Greg02]

Laprade and Raleigh had significant overlap and I think Laprade was regarded as better. O'Connor vs Laprade vs Esposito can all be fairly placed in any order, in my opinion. It just really depends on how you decide to weigh peak/prime/career.

 

[bernmeister]

Same.

I have the following 6 guys duking it out for the last 5 spots.

Tkaczuk
Esposito
O'Connor
Raleigh
Laprade
Smith

Tkaczuk and Esposito are definitely in. I'm having trouble ordering the rest at this point. Happy to receive input from anyone.

If I understand correctly you asked for "7 of 9", so it is still 7 names need to be submitted, yes? Which is to generate the second five finalists, 6-10 inclusive...

You nominated
Tkaczuk Agree.
This is definite for me.
Laprade On the convincing argument made how close he was to Tkaczuk
This is all but final for me..

O'Connor
Raleigh
This looks the next 2
Are we agreed this is the order?

Smith the floor is open...
Duguay ditto
Esposito Am dropping him down, haven't decided how far yet

And that would be 7...
I get the feeling I'm forgetting someone/missing something.


Duguay was a solid 2 way player.
Espo got a lot of tallies, with a lot of help, was not a great 2 way player, IMO is largely overrated, and has to be higher if we were required to do the whole body of his work. But as strictly a Ranger, my immediate impression is it's borderline if he cracks the top 10 at all.

Comments welcome.

 

[Crease]

Bern, the two other eligibles are Gretz and Goyette. I think it was Mike or Greg who mentioned they had Goyette in their top 10 but I haven't heard any substantial arguments in his favor yet.

I'm surprised you have Espo so low. He was here for 5.5 years and placed in the 95th percentile of the entire league for 4 of them. Conversely, O'Connor was here for 4 seasons and was exceptional in only 1. A Hart season. No Cup. How much do we want to weigh that Hart here when there's nothing else noteworthy on his Rangers resume?

 

[Cake or Death]

Bern, the two other eligibles are Gretz and Goyette. I think it was Mike or Greg who mentioned they had Goyette in their top 10 but I haven't heard any substantial arguments in his favor yet.

I'm surprised you have Espo so low. He was here for 5.5 years and placed in the 95th percentile of the entire league for 4 of them. Conversely, O'Connor was here for 4 seasons and was exceptional in only 1. A Hart season. No Cup. How much do we want to weigh that Hart here when there's nothing else noteworthy on his Rangers resume?

Regarding O'Connor, he did have two top 10 playoff scoring finishes in his 4 seasons here. And it seems worth noting that all three of him, Raleigh, and Laprade were top 10 point guys in the 1950 playoffs and lost the Cup in a game 7 double OT. When you have the craptastic Cup history we do, losing a game 7 in double OT seems worth mentioning. And scoring-wise at least, O'Connor's held his own playing his last four seasons here against prime Raleigh and Laprade, playing more games and scoring more points than the latter two:

Player | GP | Gls | Asst | Pts | PPG | PO GP | Gls | Asst | Pts
O’Connor|238|62|102|164|0.69|18|5|6|11
Raleigh|227|52|82|135|0.59|18|6|5|11
Laprade|217|63|81|144|0.66|18|4|9|13

Not earth shattering, but also not often that we can look at three guys we're comparing when they were all playing at the same time.

 

[mike14]

It was me that had Goyette top 10 originally, although as I learn more I'm probably going to drop him a few spots.

7th all time in scoring for Rangers centres, 2nd in during for the rangers during his time here, 14th in the nhl and 7th for nhl centers.

If you look at the adjusted stats for the 9 on page 1 he's above average for average stats and bang on average for peak. At worst IMO he competes with Smith.

As noted his playoffs are terrible, but the teams he was on were too. They only made the post seasin three times, getting swept twice. Yes, the true greats will get their teams into the playoffs but I wouldn't deduct too many points because no ranger was really getting it done at the time.

At the moment my 9 is:

Tkaczuk
O'Connor
Raleigh
Laprade
Espo
Goyette
Smith

Gretz
Dugauy

 

[bernmeister]

...

Bern, the two other eligibles are Gretz and Goyette. I think it was Mike or Greg who mentioned they had Goyette in their top 10 but I haven't heard any substantial arguments in his favor yet.

Thanks Crease.
What I meant to emphasize is you wanted 7 names submitted to establish the final 5 slots.
I have not finalized, and am open to those making the case they wish, including Goyette, but I am leaning as indicated.

I'm surprised you have Espo so low. He was here for 5.5 years and placed in the 95th percentile of the entire league for 4 of them. Conversely, O'Connor was here for 4 seasons and was exceptional in only 1. A Hart season. No Cup. How much do we want to weigh that Hart here when there's nothing else noteworthy on his Rangers resume?

I anticipate I will be properly harsh on Espo, who I considered good but overrated as indicated, and clearly 1 dimensional for which he needed help to get set up (as opposed to great shootists of every decade since late 60s I remember, many who needed no help to amass their many tallies); however, under no circumstance do I want to be unfair, and you are making a case that Espo deserves more props than I have given him thus far. Still gotta put this in perspective of the other candidates...

 

[bernmeister]

Regarding O'Connor, he did have two top 10 playoff scoring finishes in his 4 seasons here. And it seems worth noting that all three of him, Raleigh, and Laprade were top 10 point guys in the 1950 playoffs and lost the Cup in a game 7 double OT. When you have the craptastic Cup history we do, losing a game 7 in double OT seems worth mentioning. And scoring-wise at least, O'Connor's held his own playing his last four seasons here against prime Raleigh and Laprade, playing more games and scoring more points than the latter two:

Player | GP | Gls | Asst | Pts | PPG | PO GP | Gls | Asst | Pts
O’Connor|238|62|102|164|0.69|18|5|6|11
Raleigh|227|52|82|135|0.59|18|6|5|11
Laprade|217|63|81|144|0.66|18|4|9|13

Not earth shattering, but also not often that we can look at three guys we're comparing when they were all playing at the same time.

Cake or Death, you are dropping the proverbial other shoe!
No sooner did Crease remind there is a more balanced ranking for Espo, and you have generated great stuff -- thanks also --- on O'Connor.

Much to consider....

 

[Crease]

Regarding O'Connor, he did have two top 10 playoff scoring finishes in his 4 seasons here. And it seems worth noting that all three of him, Raleigh, and Laprade were top 10 point guys in the 1950 playoffs and lost the Cup in a game 7 double OT. When you have the craptastic Cup history we do, losing a game 7 in double OT seems worth mentioning. And scoring-wise at least, O'Connor's held his own playing his last four seasons here against prime Raleigh and Laprade, playing more games and scoring more points than the latter two:

Player | GP | Gls | Asst | Pts | PPG | PO GP | Gls | Asst | Pts
O’Connor|238|62|102|164|0.69|18|5|6|11
Raleigh|227|52|82|135|0.59|18|6|5|11
Laprade|217|63|81|144|0.66|18|4|9|13

Not earth shattering, but also not often that we can look at three guys we're comparing when they were all playing at the same time.

Interesting. We should be careful of using "Top 10" finishes here, because in the Original Six era, only four teams qualified for the playoffs. Less competition. Easier to be a top-10 point-getter then, say, Gretzky, who competed against players from 16 teams in 1997 playoffs. I started to see a lot of parallels between the Ranger versions of Gretzky and O'Connor: Guys in the twilight of their career. One big playoff run. So I looked closer.

This table summarizes regular season performance, by year. Included is where the player ranked on the Rangers in points, where the player ranked in the NHL in points, and the percentile ranking in the league (which adjusts for league size).

Year | Player | Age | Adj G | Adj A | Adj P | Team Rank | League Rank | Percentile
1947-48 | Buddy O'Connor | 31 | 31 | 56 | 87 | 1 | 2 | 98th
1948-49 | Buddy O'Connor | 32 | 15 | 40 | 55 | 1 | 23 | 82nd
1949-50 | Buddy O'Connor | 33 | 13 | 31 | 44 | 6 | 37 | 75th
1950-51 | Buddy O'Connor | 34 | 20 | 29 | 49 | 3 | 26 | 83rd
1996-97 | Wayne Gretzky | 36 | 26 | 75 | 101 | 1 | 5 | 99th
1997-98 | Wayne Gretzky | 37 | 26 | 77 | 103 | 1 | 4 | 99th
1998-99 | Wayne Gretzky | 38 | 10 | 60 | 70 | 1 | 36 | 96th

O'Conner led the Rangers in points in two of four seasons. In 1947-48, he outscored the second best Ranger by 28%. In 1948-49, he outscored the second best Ranger by 13%.

Gretzky led the Rangers in points in three of three seasons. By 15%, 45%, and 13% respectively.

O'Connor finished 2nd overall in points in 1947-48. Gretzky finished 4th and 5th in seasons with 5x more players. How important do we want to make league size here? 37th in points in 1949-50 meant you were just about better than 75% of the league. 36th in points in 1998-99 meant you were just about better than 96% of the league.

Let's get back to the playoffs, because that appears to be the strongest aspect of O'Connor's Rangers resume. O'Connor had two runs: 1948 and 1950. Gretzky had one run: 1997. The table below summarizes the three runs, using real points because Hockey Reference doesn't provide adjusted points for the playoffs. Included is where the player ranked on the Rangers in points and where the player ranked in the NHL in points.

Year | Player | GP | G | A | P | Team Rank | League Rank
1948 | Buddy O'Connor | 6 | 1 | 4 | 5 | T-1 | T-10
1950 | Buddy O'Connor | 12 | 4 | 2 | 6 | T-6 | T-10
1997 | Wayne Gretzky | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 1 | T-7

O'Connor was tied for 1st on the Rangers in playoff points in 1948. Tied for 10th for all players involved in the playoffs. A couple of things to note: Four teams make the playoffs, so less competition than Gretzky to get into the top 10. However, he did finish top 10 despite not reaching the finals, which 8 of 9 guys in front of him did.

Gretzky was far and away the Rangers best player in the 1997 playoffs. He outscored the second best Ranger by 67%. He finished tied for 7th in scoring in the playoffs despite not reaching the finals. This is a snapshot of the point leaderboard (including Gretzky) at the end of the 3rd round when the Rangers were eliminated:

Player | Age | GP | G | A | P
Sakic | 27 | 17 | 8 | 17 | 25
Lindros | 23 | 15 | 11 | 12 | 23
Lemieux | 31 | 17 | 13 | 10 | 23
Kamensky | 30 | 17 | 8 | 14 | 22
Gretzky | 36 | 15 | 10 | 10 | 20
Leclair | 27 | 15 | 7 | 11 | 18
Brind'Amour | 26 | 15 | 10 | 7 | 17
Fedorov | 27 | 16 | 5 | 9 | 14

Leclair and Brind'Amour leapfrogged Gretzky during the finals. Fedorov finished tied with him.

O'Connor was pretty much a given for the top 10 when this project started. Gretzky not. So do we have O'Connor too high? Or Gretzky too low?

 

[bernmeister]

Interesting. We should be careful of using "Top 10" finishes here, because in the Original Six era, only four teams qualified for the playoffs. Less competition. Easier to be a top-10 point-getter then, say, Gretzky, who competed against players from 16 teams in 1997 playoffs. I started to see a lot of parallels between the Ranger versions of Gretzky and O'Connor: Guys in the twilight of their career. One big playoff run. So I looked closer.

This table summarizes regular season performance, by year. Included is where the player ranked on the Rangers in points, where the player ranked in the NHL in points, and the percentile ranking in the league (which adjusts for league size).

Year | Player | Age | Adj G | Adj A | Adj P | Team Rank | League Rank | Percentile
1947-48 | Buddy O'Connor | 31 | 31 | 56 | 87 | 1 | 2 | 98th
1948-49 | Buddy O'Connor | 32 | 15 | 40 | 55 | 1 | 23 | 82nd
1949-50 | Buddy O'Connor | 33 | 13 | 31 | 44 | 6 | 37 | 75th
1950-51 | Buddy O'Connor | 34 | 20 | 29 | 49 | 3 | 26 | 83rd
1996-97 | Wayne Gretzky | 36 | 26 | 75 | 101 | 1 | 5 | 99th
1997-98 | Wayne Gretzky | 37 | 26 | 77 | 103 | 1 | 4 | 99th
1998-99 | Wayne Gretzky | 38 | 10 | 60 | 70 | 1 | 36 | 96th

O'Conner led the Rangers in points in two of four seasons. In 1947-48, he outscored the second best Ranger by 28%. In 1948-49, he outscored the second best Ranger by 13%.

Gretzky led the Rangers in points in three of three seasons. By 15%, 45%, and 13% respectively.

O'Connor finished 2nd overall in points in 1947-48. Gretzky finished 4th and 5th in seasons with 5x more players. How important do we want to make league size here? 37th in points in 1949-50 meant you were just about better than 75% of the league. 36th in points in 1998-99 meant you were just about better than 96% of the league.

Let's get back to the playoffs, because that appears to be the strongest aspect of O'Connor's Rangers resume. O'Connor had two runs: 1948 and 1950. Gretzky had one run: 1997. The table below summarizes the three runs, using real points because Hockey Reference doesn't provide adjusted points for the playoffs. Included is where the player ranked on the Rangers in points and where the player ranked in the NHL in points.

Year | Player | GP | G | A | P | Team Rank | League Rank
1948 | Buddy O'Connor | 6 | 1 | 4 | 5 | T-1 | T-10
1950 | Buddy O'Connor | 12 | 4 | 2 | 6 | T-6 | T-10
1997 | Wayne Gretzky | 20 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 1 | T-7

O'Connor was tied for 1st on the Rangers in playoff points in 1948. Tied for 10th for all players involved in the playoffs. A couple of things to note: Four teams make the playoffs, so less competition than Gretzky to get into the top 10. However, he did finish top 10 despite not reaching the finals, which 8 of 9 guys in front of him did.

Gretzky was far and away the Rangers best player in the 1997 playoffs. He outscored the second best Ranger by 67%. He finished tied for 7th in scoring in the playoffs despite not reaching the finals. This is a snapshot of the point leaderboard (including Gretzky) at the end of the 3rd round when the Rangers were eliminated:

Player | Age | GP | G | A | P
Sakic | 27 | 17 | 8 | 17 | 25
Lindros | 23 | 15 | 11 | 12 | 23
Lemieux | 31 | 17 | 13 | 10 | 23
Kamensky | 30 | 17 | 8 | 14 | 22
Gretzky | 36 | 15 | 10 | 10 | 20
Leclair | 27 | 15 | 7 | 11 | 18
Brind'Amour | 26 | 15 | 10 | 7 | 17
Fedorov | 27 | 16 | 5 | 9 | 14

Leclair and Brind'Amour leapfrogged Gretzky during the finals. Fedorov finished tied with him.

O'Connor was pretty much a given for the top 10 when this project started. Gretzky not. So do we have O'Connor too high? Or Gretzky too low?

Crease, while others here have shown they are not slouches either, your level of due diligence demonstrates high proficiency in research, among other skills! Kudos

 

[mike14]

Crease, I had a very similar thought last night but you've articulated it far better than I would have. Outside of the Hart it's tough to make a big case for O'Connor over Gretz. The three reasons I think I have him down so low are:

1. he wasn't on the original list. Due to the "4 season" rule, we made a special case for Gretz to be added, which, subconsciously said to me that he shouldn't be here (silly, but a reason no less).

2. He wasn't "Gretzky" in NY. Outside of injury these were the only seasons he didn't hit the 100pt mark, and I think that people (me included) compare him against himself, look at the difference in point totals and conclude that he wasn't that good here. Gretzky was an Oiler and King to people, he came to NY to retire. It's a testement to just how incredible he was that his 3 worst statistical seasons see him in contention for a franchise's top 10.

3. His last 2 years were the start of the "dark era" which has left a large scar on the fanbase. No good came from the years 1998-2004. Yeah, this franchise has been through some horrid patches, but most of us don't go back that far so the most recent one holds a special place of horror.

 

[Cake or Death]

O'Connor was pretty much a given for the top 10 when this project started. Gretzky not. So do we have O'Connor too high? Or Gretzky too low?

I may have been a bit against the norm then. On the initial top 20 vote I submitted to you, I had Gretzky in the top 10 already (O'Connor 7th and Gretzky 8th). Still have Gretz top 10. Currently I have Gretzky and O'Connor sitting respectively at 8 and 9. Bottom line, to me, is there are a lot of guys behind them who do not have the greatest career span. If a guy had a good 6 or 7 years, but Gretz and O'Connor did much more in 3 and 4 seasons, the 6 season span simply isn't enough to give it to a guy on longevity. But for me I've had Gretzky and O'Connor top 10 since the get go and still do.

 

[Crease]

I may have been a bit against the norm then. On the initial top 20 vote I submitted to you, I had Gretzky in the top 10 already (O'Connor 7th and Gretzky 8th). Still have Gretz top 10. Currently I have Gretzky and O'Connor sitting respectively at 8 and 9. Bottom line, to me, is there are a lot of guys behind them who do not have the greatest career span. If a guy had a good 6 or 7 years, but Gretz and O'Connor did much more in 3 and 4 seasons, the 6 season span simply isn't enough to give it to a guy on longevity. But for me I've had Gretzky and O'Connor top 10 since the get go and still do.

As I reflect on my preliminary vote, I'm starting to think I valued longevity too much. I'm going to have to do some re-evaluating over the next couple of days before I submit my ballot.

 

[Cake or Death]

As I reflect on my preliminary vote, I'm starting to think I valued longevity too much. I'm going to have to do some re-evaluating over the next couple of days before I submit my ballot.

I would totally be right there with you on longevity if more of our guys had it. So few of them played over 10 seasons here. So many guys were in that 4-8 year range. Seems like we were we always a trade factory

 

[Greg02]

Great, you guys are right. Definitely have Gretzky too low.

Considering how much I've valued playoff performance and AST selections, I definitely need Gretzky above Clint Smith and Phil Goyette. I think I really don't want him in our top 10, though, because it's kind of pathetic.

I need to carefully make decisions between Gretzky/O'Connor/Esposito to decide how to rank them. I have all three behind Laprade and Tkaczuk, still.

 

[Cake or Death]

I really want to take a second to make a bit of a case for both Tkaczuk and Laprade as I put immense value on defensive play, and also look a bit at some lost war time seasons for a couple of guys. Tkaczuk and Laprade are both considered excellent defensive players. Their long tenures in NY, coupled with top end defensive games and solid offensive production, has me placing them in the 6 and 7 spots.

I think many of us are quite familiar with Tkaczuk's excellent defensive game and long career in NY. But in reading up on Laprade from people who actually watched him play, I consistently see that he was considered one of the top defensive forwards in the league. Tens years back or so, I used to chat with a guy on another hockey board named Joe Pelletier, who is a hockey history fanatic and has published books on the game's history. In Joe's History of Hockey blog he had this to say about Laprade:

Laprade was known as a aggressive but very clean player. Twice he went the entire season without recording a single penalty minute, and only had 42 PIM in in his 500 NHL game career. He was also known as a play making center with great speed and athleticism. He was a tremendous defensive player as well, making him one of the greatest two way centers in NHL history. A strong back checker and prolific penalty killer.

That is very consistent with feedback on Laprade's defensive game from people who have actually seen him play. It's also noteworthy that not taking penalties at that time was a huge thing because a minor penalty did not end when a goal was scored. So guys who could play excellent defense, without taking penalties, were an obvious big bonus.

In the case of both Raleigh and Laprade, both career NY Rangers, I feel it is also important to consider that both guys did lose a portion of their prime careers to WWII war time military service. Raleigh entered the league at age 17, then served military and lost three seasons to that. Laprade, who had an excellent junior career, served military as well and did not enter the league till he was 26.

Take Laprade's excellent defense and lost prime seasons into account and you seem to have a strong case for him falling in the 7 spot behind Tkaczuk, if you have Walt at number 6 as I do. And if Raleigh doesn't lose those three seasons, he plays 13 seasons with us and probably has a very strong case for ranking above Gretz or O'Connor, who had excellent peaks but very short time in NY.