Should all time rankings adjust for the difficulty of non-american players in the NHL?

[flipp]

When ranking the greatest hockey players of all time, we may overlook the unique challenges faced by those not from North America. A possibility is that these players deserve higher rankings due to the additional obstacles they've overcome.

Historically, non-North American players had to adapt to a different style of play on smaller rinks with more physical contact. They also grapple with language barriers, have to leave behind their families and support systems at a young age, They must also prove themselves in unfamiliar systems with less margin for error, often having fewer opportunities to showcase their skills compared to their North American counterparts.

These factors would of course not affect rankings of NHL performance but could potentially affect rankings of the best hockey players of all time. In the latter all-time rankings, NHL performance acts as a crucial input, but other factors should also be considered. I am not sure how much it should affect rankings, but at least to some extent. For instance, in a group of players with roughly equal performance in the NHL, the non-American would be ranked higher. A concrete example would be Forsberg and Malkin ranking higher than Sakic and Yzerman.

Do you agree?

Click to read more...

 

[Albatros]

Meh, there was a lot of discrimination back in the day, but Forsberg and Malkin didn't really suffer of it anymore. Not decisively anyway.

 

[VanIslander]

Extra obstacles overcome?

How about just performance on the ice regardless where one came from and whatever happened prior to game time.

 

[Plural]

No,

We don't do the same for other sports either. Impossible to account for. Also, Forsberg came from Sweden in the mid-90's. How is that a disadvantage? Probably spoke better English than some of his North-American counterparts.

 

[MadLuke]

There the obvious pre/early Berlin wall fall cannot hurt a player to take some time to arrive to the nhl (or get a regular spot like Hasek), but otherwise it can be hard and they will be surrounded by the Stastny-Lidstrom-Forsberg-alfredsson-Fedorov-Pavel Bure-Selanne that exploded as a rookie with no problems, let alone the post 2000 (Nabokov-Ovechkin-Malki-Landeskog-Kaprizov).

I think pre-1990 at least I think we all do in some way, for the soviet lived-trained transfering at a certain age that had issue in North America (personnal, ice or both)

 

[MXD]

My first reaction was : "No, absolutely not, at last for modern players". There's litterally no reason to give extra credit to someone like Gabriel Landeskog just because he's born in Sweden, when his game was pretty much genetically tailor-made for NA hockey.

My second reaction was : "... Yeah, if an European players has issues adjusting at first but adapts really well afterward, the first season can be disregarded, and I won't considering that player inconsistent or something". Yeah, he didn't adapt as quick as another one, but he did adapt in the end.

I think we can figure out whom to credit for what. Also, if credit is to be given for language barriers, let's go all the way.

 

[MadLuke]

Post 1990, a player from Sept-Îles that did his junior in Baie-Comeau, with little English being drafted to go play in Los Angeles/NewYork, would it be significant lesser change to adapt than a Swede-Finnish player ?

And the plane travel home could easily be more expensive-complicated. They get nice team trying to prepare them, but we often talk about people with a challenging really quick transition from kids-to millionaires professional step function without any natural ramp even if they are americans, in a way it is even more common for high level euro prospect to have played professional adult sport before the nhl at least.

I think in general we are gracious to player that took time to adapt regardless of where they come from if they figure it out and work throught it, yes Lafleur not taking 3 years to become a big impact player would be more highly ranked, but that not something we tend to pile on when talking about them. And if he would have been great from 73 to 78 instead his legacy would have been pretty much the same.

If anything we value more people with a great 26-32 prime than the 19-25 that flamed away quickly, finding more normal early struggle than early retirement.

 

[MXD]

Post 1990, a player from Sept-iles that did his junior in Baie-Comean, with little English being drafted to go play in Los Angeles/NewYork, would it be significant lesser change to adapt than a Swede-Finnish player ?

.

Well, rink size would still remain.