Scotty Bowman's Top 100 Canadian Players

[overpass]

I have a theory that some Montreal Canadiens fans/media tend to rank players based on how they would have fit into the great Montreal dynasty teams. That point of view would explain many of Bowman's less conventional rankings. Phil Esposito, Red Kelly, Paul Coffey...good enough players, but do they really fit well on the greatest team of all time? Even Wayne Gretzky or Mario Lemieux would have to adjust their games (although it's not too hard to see Mario in Jean Beliveau's role, so he goes ahead of Gretzky.) On the other hand, Dave Keon would fit perfectly. And there's no need to ask that question about, say, Jacques Lemaire or Bob Gainey, because we know they were excellent players in an important role on the greatest team of all time.

 

[Reds4Life]

I have a theory that some Montreal Canadiens fans/media tend to rank players based on how they would have fit into the great Montreal dynasty teams. That point of view would explain many of Bowman's less conventional rankings. Phil Esposito, Red Kelly, Paul Coffey...good enough players, but do they really fit well on the greatest team of all time? Even Wayne Gretzky or Mario Lemieux would have to adjust their games (although it's not too hard to see Mario in Jean Beliveau's role, so he goes ahead of Gretzky.) On the other hand, Dave Keon would fit perfectly. And there's no need to ask that question about, say, Jacques Lemaire or Bob Gainey, because we know they were excellent players in an important role on the greatest team of all time.

That's a good point. However, what about Bryan Trottier? The ultimate two-way player, leader, team guy. Much better than Dave Keon by any objective metric. Yet Trottier occupies no. 62, while Keon is in the top15.

 

[overpass]

That's a good point. However, what about Bryan Trottier? The ultimate two-way player, leader, team guy. Much better than Dave Keon by any objective metric. Yet Trottier occupies no. 62, while Keon is in the top15.

Re: Trottier - maybe only Bowman can answer that one.

I'm not surprised you get my point though. I think some Detroit fans have evaluated players in a similar way in the past 10-15 years.

 

[Kyle Doobas*]

Who knew Scotty Bowman was a hipster?

 

[seventieslord]

That's a good point. However, what about Bryan Trottier? The ultimate two-way player, leader, team guy. Much better than Dave Keon by any objective metric. Yet Trottier occupies no. 62, while Keon is in the top15.

Not by any objective metric. Keon was elite defensively, top-3 for some. Trottier is just not in that class. So if there is a reason to put keon ahead, that is it. Not that I agree... obviously trottier's superior offense puts him in a whole other class, and it's not like he didn't win any cups himself.

Anyway...... Wendel Clark over Doug Gilmour, seriously?

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

Anyway...... Wendel Clark over Doug Gilmour, seriously?

Anderson ahead of Coffey is similar weird one... In the sense, that its two sets of teammates ranked in the reverse of how 99.99% of people see then.

 

[canucksfan]

Niedermeyer is quite high as well.

Trottier that low is very puzzling considering he his a great two way player

 

[tarheelhockey]

But in this case (as much as I'd love to hear Bowman's reasoning behind some of the choices), no explanation should be required because he's Scotty Bowman and he knows more about the game and the players in it than all of us combined.

I respect Scotty Bowman to high heaven, but come on. He's not above criticism.

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

This is just one man's opinion. I'm sure if we submitted our lists they would all be different.

 

[thom]

To the stats people on this site are there any stats to have Serge Savard ahead of Larry Robinson other than eye test?Bowman had both and had savard ahead I have a small problem can anyone give me a arguement in favour of savard?

 

[RabbinsDuck]

It just seems crazy to question it - Scotty Bowman knows more hockey in his little finger than my entire family of hockey playing/watching nuts. Who am I to question him!?

But I still have to question so much of it. I once sat down to submit a list for one of the projects here. I started with a list from heart, from personal observations and recollections of players before my time. I then started researching other lists, as well as the actual production of those I had listed along with their contemporaries and equivalents in other eras - turned out I had missed quite a bit. Over about 3 days I spent 10 hours on it, easily, and as the deadline approached i never ended up submitting it as i literally felt like I was still missing too much, and was unprepared to really make a strong case for why even #40 was ahead of #70. I'm curious how much time Bowman actually spent on his list. He has the history and first-hand knowledge to probably put that list together in under an hour... And that might be all the time he has for it. Still, I'd love to hear how he thinks Maurice Richard is better than Wayne Gretzky. It has to simply have more to do with his preference as a coach as to how they played the game.

 

[DyerMaker66*]

For everyone saying his list would be heckled here, I don't think (or at least I hope not) that would necessarily be the case. Everybody is going to have a minority opinion of some sort, and most of us are willing to consider it if they explain the reasons behind it.

But in this case (as much as I'd love to hear Bowman's reasoning behind some of the choices), no explanation should be required because he's Scotty Bowman and he knows more about the game and the players in it than all of us combined. Doesn't mean I agree with everything he listed, but I certainly respect it. If I see a player on there way higher than I would've expected, it would give me reason to think that perhaps the player was better than I thought, rather than just saying "this list sucks".

Several interesting points on the list. Maurice Richard ahead of both Gretzky and Lemieux is a fascinating choice, and maybe a reminder to us fans who never saw him of how widely respected he was at the time. I've noticed a lot that the two players who seem to be repeatedly named by their contemporaries as better than they ever got credit for are Henri Richard and Serge Savard. Their high ratings here concur with that. Paul Coffey seems way lower than expected, but Bowman coached him twice and obviously knows all about his good and bad qualities.

Highest non-Hall of Famers are J.C. Tremblay and Eric Lindros. I wonder if Bowman has advocated inductions for them at the board's meetings?

How I imagine the response to ranking Gretzky outside of the top 2 or 3 if the list wasn't made by Bowman:

Anyone ranking Gretzky outside of the top 2 or 3 is just being colourful or has never watched any of these players play.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Why does everyone around here laugh when Dickie Duff's names mentioned? I mean c'mon here. The guy won the Memorial Cup and then like what, 6 Stanley Cups, 2 with Toronto and 4 with Montreal? In his prime, Hell of a tenacious player. Left it all out there on the ice.

So did Stan Smyl and Trevor Linden just to name two Canucks that come to mind.

I'll take Linden over Duff any day.

 

[ManByng]

This is just one man's opinion. I'm sure if we submitted our lists they would all be different.

^yup...and my list would start something like this.....

1. Wayne Gretzky
2. Bobby Orr
3. Gordie Howe
4. Mario Lemieux
5. Maurice Richard

let the bashing begin....

 

[Pominville Knows]

But why did Bowman have Coffey so down the list considering his high record braking pts totals?

I dont think Coffey is number one to mention here. But before anything i think this list is great, maybe sowing some seeds in our minds how to value player roles on teams. Gretzky for one was'nt that great defensively and really was'nt the same offensive juggernaut when the league caught up with him, i mean his offense maybe was'nt enough to make him the best ever. Dave Keon would be the ultimate third line center, maybe that's why Scotty put him so high. Scotty knows how to build and coach a team. Wendel Clark at his best could be an important grinder on a third or forth line if we were to go up against a team of aliens.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I dont think Coffey is number one to mention here. But before anything i think this list is great, maybe sowing some seeds in our minds how to value player roles on teams. Gretzky for one was'nt that great defensively and really was'nt the same offensive juggernaut when the league caught up with him, i mean his offense maybe was'nt enough to make him the best ever. Dave Keon would be the ultimate third line center, maybe that's why Scotty put him so high. Scotty knows how to build and coach a team.

I agree with your point on how Bowman seems to evaluate players.
However, the league never "caught up" with Gretzky. A Gary Suter crosscheck and age dropped him down.

 

[Killion]

I'll take Linden over Duff any day.

Dunno Hv. In Pittsburgh they called him Rain Man.
Remembers all kinds of funny little things does Scotty.

 

[Pominville Knows]

I agree with your point on how Bowman seems to evaluate players.
However, the league never "caught up" with Gretzky. A Gary Suter crosscheck and age dropped him down.

Yeah i've actually started hearing about that since joining here and his play in the 87 Canada Cup was sure as speedy and in control as ever. On the other hand i never said anything about his offense later turning to non-elite, becouse it was still better than everyone except for Lemieux. Mario had of course gone better than him way before that Suter thing.
But what was actually broken never to heal again in that thing? He was back playing soon thereafter and never really missed any significant time except for in 1992-93. Did he complain much about something at all during the rest of his career? Does he live with chronic back pains or something?
I happen to think that Gretzky might have been cought by the same bug in the early nineties that many players such as Jimmy Carson was at that time. Something happened in the NHL at that time that made some former offensive stars not being able to just continue, some even falling out of the league. Probably becouse of better role players on teams and maybe the european invasion. Coaching under the circumstances of course was meant to become better and better with time.

 

[toob]

great find thx for posting

For the comment that if this was anonymous it would be horribly flamed i dont doubt that one bit and not only because of what a lot would say are weird rankings but also the combative nature of this board..

Definitely think Bowman is slanted towards O6 hockey and doesnt like run and gun 80s hockey by the pattern of highest/lowest rankings.

Maybe Trottier insanely low because of when Bowman coached him. He was a roleplayer when Bowman saw him closest. Might also explain why Yzerman is low as well as he was past his prime but also not exactly a roleplayer.

Roy pretty low surprised me i do think hes overrated by many and i expected/would put him higher but then again game 7 2002 was Bowman's last coaching memory

If Gretzky is at #5 because of his D wasnt Richard not super great defensively either especially for his era?

 

[Pominville Knows]

Definitely think Bowman is slanted towards O6 hockey and doesnt like run and gun 80s hockey by the pattern of highest/lowest rankings.

Yeah, that seems to be the case. Wonder how Richard and Howe would have fared offensively in a watered down league before teams could get hold of decent roleplayers en masse. And how Lemieux and Gretzky would have done in the O6.

 

[RandV]

Crosby at # 15 sticks out like a sore thumb.

There is no way he is ahead of the likes of Clarke, Sakic, Bourque, Yzerman, Roy, Plante, Brodeur, Bossy and Trottier.

At some point you have to look at what an active player is doing now and how that should project over the course of his career to slide him into a spot in the rankings.

 

[pavelbure604]

Toews at #63 hahahahahhh

 

[Jules Winnfield]

What's Bowman's explanation for ranking Maurice Richard over Lemieux and Gretzky? Also, what's his explanation for ranking Gretzky down in 5th?

This.

Also, Crosby over Yzerman? LMFAO. At least not this point in Sid's career.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yeah i've actually started hearing about that since joining here and his play in the 87 Canada Cup was sure as speedy and in control as ever. On the other hand i never said anything about his offense later turning to non-elite, becouse it was still better than everyone except for Lemieux. Mario had of course gone better than him way before that Suter thing.
But what was actually broken never to heal again in that thing? He was back playing soon thereafter and never really missed any significant time except for in 1992-93. Did he complain much about something at all during the rest of his career? Does he live with chronic back pains or something?
I happen to think that Gretzky might have been cought by the same bug in the early nineties that many players such as Jimmy Carson was at that time. Something happened in the NHL at that time that made some former offensive stars not being able to just continue, some even falling out of the league. Probably becouse of better role players on teams and maybe the european invasion.

Oh, Gretz was already on the downside of his peak, I'm not debating that but the Suter hit knocked him down sharply and sped up the process greatly.
He simply wasn't the same player after.

Year - Raw PpG - ADJ PpG
84/85 - 2.60 - 2.08
85/86 - 2.69 - 2.13
86/87 - 2.32 - 1.96
87/88 - 2.33 - 1.94
88/89 - 2.15 - 1.78
89/90 - 1.95 - 1.64
90/91 - 2.09 - 1.87
----Suter Hit------
91/92 - 1.64 - 1.46
92/93 - 1.44 - 1.16
93/94 - 1.60 - 1.47

 

[Pominville Knows]

Oh, Gretz was already on the downside of his peak, I'm not debating that but the Suter hit knocked him down sharply and sped up the process greatly.
He simply wasn't the same player after.

Year - Raw PpG - ADJ PpG
84/85 - 2.60 - 2.08
85/86 - 2.69 - 2.13
86/87 - 2.32 - 1.96
87/88 - 2.33 - 1.94
88/89 - 2.15 - 1.78
89/90 - 1.95 - 1.64
90/91 - 2.09 - 1.87
----Suter Hit------
91/92 - 1.64 - 1.46
92/93 - 1.44 - 1.16
93/94 - 1.60 - 1.47

Yeah i see those stats but hav'nt heard Gretzky complain about any lingering injury after that incident. But what i think i have noticed is that many soft offensive players got caught by something in the early nineties, some lesser ones even fell out of the league becouse of it. Rob Brown did'nt do as good even though playing with Lemieux. Jimmy Carson i have allready mentioned, Dan Quinn soon fully disappeared, Ed Olczyk, Andrew McBain, Mike Bullard, Daniel Marois, Craig Simpson, Gary Leeman, Tom Fergus, John Cullen and Pat Elynuik are all examples of offensive players that just did'nt make the cut in the early nineties. Something changed in the game, be it the europeans, better roleplayers, better coaching, or all of them. Gretzky was caught up too although he still became a dominant force, just not as earlier. Maybe he was injured too, i just have never heard him complain about anything.