Top 10 Best NHL Players of All Time

[Sentinel]

Wow one whole year

Anyways this is about the 10 best, which Brett doesn’t make.

Yes, it's called "peak." High water mark. Although in reality it was three years.

But, definitely, Brett is not making anybody’s Top10 list. I think we'll all agree on that.

 

[Sentinel]

Lidstrom has 7 Norris, not 8. Bourque has 5.

Bourque also has 6x he finished in 2nd place, so 11 total top 2, to Lidstrom's 10 top 2. But again - if all we're doing is looking at finishes, and ignoring context and strength of season, it's useless.

Did Corey Perry in 2011 have a better season than Mario Lemieux 1989 for you? Because one won a hart, and another finished 2nd place...

If you really want to compare Bourque and Lidstrom accurately - what you should do is rank Bourque's top 10 seasons, #1 to 10. Then do the same for Lidstrom. Then - compare Bourque's #1 best season to Lidstrom's best, and decide which is better. Then do the same for 2nd best season, 3rd best, etc. You can even do the same for individual playoff runs.
If we did that - do you think Lidstorm still comes ahead? Because I don't.

Thanks, I meant 7.

I don't know how you can compare their seasons from the defensive standpoint. And I am not sure I would put Bourque over Lidstrom in playoffs. I remember the former underperforming in several of them.

 

[Sentinel]

I said "peak-wise." Peak only. Brett's peak came against prime Gretzky and Lemieux and he beat them both. I'd say he did just fine against his peers.

He won the Hart that year didn't he?

But I am talking from goalscoring perspective only, where peak Brett is quantifiable higher than his father.

Overall, Sr > Jr unquestionably.

 

[jigglysquishy]

But I am talking from goalscoring perspective only, where peak Brett is quantifiable higher than his father.

This isn't true.

You can argue that Jr 1991>Sr 1966, but it's far from an exact thing. I would absolutely take Bobby Hull's 1966 season over Brett Hull's 1991 season.

 

[daver]

He won the Hart that year didn't he?

But I am talking from goalscoring perspective only, where peak Brett is quantifiable higher than his father.

Hull sr. - 54 goals

32 (69% behind)
31
30
30


Hull Jr. - 86 goals

51 (68% behind)
51
51
49

Both years it can be argued that 2nd place was a bit lower than expected based on the years surrounding their peaks.

I.e. Yzerman had 62 in 89/90, Ullman had 42 in 64/65.


Hull sr. - 0.83 GPG

0.47 (77% behind)


Hull Jr. - 1.10 GPG

0.74 (48% behind)


This is where, IMO, Hull Sr. sets himself apart from Jr.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I would start here. He played in seven seasons and six games and the playoffs of the other season. Of those eight seasons he won six Stanley cups.
75% of the seasons he played he won the cup.
He also won 5 Vezinas, a Conn Smythe and a Calder.

He won the Jennings Trophy version of the Vezina, not the voted on version.

ninja edit: and his Cups came on teams with 9+ HOF'ers

 

[Sentinel]

This isn't true.

You can argue that Jr 1991>Sr 1966, but it's far from an exact thing. I would absolutely take Bobby Hull's 1966 season over Brett Hull's 1991 season.

Hull sr. - 54 goals

32 (69% behind)
31
30
30


Hull Jr. - 86 goals

51 (68% behind)
51
51
49

Both years it can be argued that 2nd place was a bit lower than expected based on the years surrounding their peaks.

I.e. Yzerman had 62 in 89/90, Ullman had 42 in 64/65.


Hull sr. - 0.83 GPG

0.47 (77% behind)


Hull Jr. - 1.10 GPG

0.74 (48% behind)


This is where, IMO, Hull Sr. sets himself apart from Jr.

In my world, 1.1 GPG > 0.83 GPG

 

[Michael Farkas]

Myopic.

 

[daver]

In my world, 1.1 GPG > 0.83 GPG

So Matthews > Ovechkin?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Everyone > Datsyuk?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Guy in my beer league regularly averages 3+ GPG, and this is over the course of full seasons. I think he deserves recognition.

 

[jigglysquishy]

It's Joe Malone's world and we're just living in it.

 

[Professor What]

I think my brain is bleeding. I've never seen people struggle with context on this board as much as in this thread, and that's really saying something.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Guy in my beer league regularly averages 3+ GPG, and this is over the course of full seasons. I think he deserves recognition.

Related, I wonder what Sentinel thinks of Tony Hand...

 

[Professor What]

Well, nobody's making lists anymore, but I will. Lol

1. Bobby Orr
2. Gordie Howe
3. Wayne Gretzky
4. Mario Lemiuex
5. Jean Beliveau
6. Doug Harvey
7. Bobby Hull
8. Dominik Hasek
9. Sidney Crosby
10. Ray Bourque

 

[MadLuke]

He won the Hart that year didn't he?

Well, everyone did beat Lemieux in the Hart race that year, he played 26 games and got 0 vote.

But I am talking from goalscoring perspective only, where peak Brett is quantifiable higher than his father.

This is such a giant distinction, but could see people calling it a bit close to call,either way, he has a good argument, but Bobby has well.

fullName	season	numGames	Tgames	TGoals	proRatedCanadianAvgTo82	AdjustedSeasonGoals	gpg	gpgAdjusted
Brett Hull	19901991​	80​	78​	86​	40.5​	101.1​	1.1​	1.26​
Bobby Hull	19661967​	70​	66​	52​	29.8​	94.9​	0.79​	1.23​
Brett Hull	19911992​	80​	73​	70​	38.6​	86.3​	0.96​	1.15​
Bobby Hull	19651966​	70​	65​	54​	34.3​	85.6​	0.83​	1.12​
Bobby Hull	19611962​	70​	70​	50​	33.6​	81​	0.71​	0.99​
Brett Hull	19891990​	80​	80​	72​	43.9​	78.1​	0.9​	0.95​

They dominated their canadian elite peers nhler in very similar fashion, during their respective 3 peak season (1.12 adjusted gpg average season for Brett, 1.11 for Bobby)

 

[Golden_Jet]

I had neither Hull nor Crosby in my top-10.

Previously (some years ago?), I likely would have had Hull in there somewhere, but over the years I've cooled on him a bit. This is not because I know a lot about his playing days -- I've never seen him play a single game in my life (well, I did watch most of one 1976 Canada Cup game on YouTube once -- Hull look good). But I've come to the opinion that Hull was not the kind of guy who tilted the ice for the whole team a great deal. That isn't to say he wasn't one of the all-time greats because he was... but his team had very little playoff success (basically none) when he was in his prime, and one of his own teammates has called him out on not being a team player.

At this point, I can't really see Hull being ranked above Ovechkin. And Ovechkin is bubbling outside my top-10 also, so Hull is definitely not in there.

As for Crosby, he's probably very close. I'm guessing if I tried to make a list of #'s 11--20 he's in there somewhere, but I don't know where. Maybe Crosby, Hull, and Ovechkin are all in that 11 to 15 range somewhere...

So you watched Hull at 37 on YouTube and didn’t think he tilted the ice.
From 57 -72 before he went to WHA, led the NHL in points by 93 and goals by a 140. He was just dominating.

 

[daver]

Well, everyone did beat Lemieux in the Hart race that year, he played 26 games and got 0 vote.


This is such a giant distinction, but could see people calling it a bit close to call,either way, he has a good argument, but Bobby has well.

fullName	season	numGames	Tgames	TGoals	proRatedCanadianAvgTo82	AdjustedSeasonGoals	gpg	gpgAdjusted
Brett Hull	19901991​	80​	78​	86​	40.5​	101.1​	1.1​	1.26​
Bobby Hull	19661967​	70​	66​	52​	29.8​	94.9​	0.79​	1.23​
Brett Hull	19911992​	80​	73​	70​	38.6​	86.3​	0.96​	1.15​
Bobby Hull	19651966​	70​	65​	54​	34.3​	85.6​	0.83​	1.12​
Bobby Hull	19611962​	70​	70​	50​	33.6​	81​	0.71​	0.99​
Brett Hull	19891990​	80​	80​	72​	43.9​	78.1​	0.9​	0.95​

They dominated their canadian elite peers nhler in very similar fashion, during their respective 3 peak season (1.12 adjusted gpg average season for Brett, 1.11 for Bobby)

You need to remove Brett. He was an American.

Now what do the numbers look like?

 

[MadLuke]

Now what do the numbers look like?

Brett was not in the numbers if he was American according to the nhl.com database normally. But single players do not shift things much regardless.

 

[10Ducky10]

He won the Jennings Trophy version of the Vezina, not the voted on version.

ninja edit: and his Cups came on teams with 9+ HOF'ers

Yes and he was one of those HOFers.
Say what you want, but he was the best money goalie of all time.
As I remember, he took a year off and the Habs didn't win the cup that year.

 

[bobholly39]

So Matthews > Ovechkin?

For goal-scoring peak? Possibly. Matthews is tremendous. We'll see if he bounces back this year or not from his slow start - but he's putting together an all-time great goal-scoring peak/prime so far. Like - top 5 worthy, and possibly much higher. We'll see if he can keep it up long-term like Ovechkin did, that's the much taller ask,

 

[Golden_Jet]

Gretzky
Orr
Howe
Lemieux
Harvey
Crosby
Dryden
Datsyuk
Rocket
Sawchuk

McD after his career is over if he keeps dominating and wins a cup.

No to Dryden, that’s just a bad pick, there are many better. ( goalies and players)

 

[jigglysquishy]

Yes and he was one of those HOFers.
Say what you want, but he was the best money goalie of all time.
As I remember, he took a year off and the Habs didn't win the cup that year.

I was going to post more about this next round, but it's reinforcing your point here so I'll add it now. I dropped Dryden out of my top 8 this time, and one of the big reasons is that I feel strongly that his team bailed him out a lot more than the other way around.

I made a similar observation to you when looking through the game logs, noting how frequently it seemed that the other team would score not just the first goal, but often the first two goals, but then the Habs would come roaring back and win 6-3 or something like that anyway.

I counted up the games where Dryden's opponent had what I'll call a "winning position", which I'll define as leading by 2 goals at any point in the game, or leading by 1 goal at any point in the third period.

Winning positions against Dryden's Habs:
Boston 1971: 4 of 7 games
Minnesota 1971: 2 of 6 games
Chicago 1971: 5 of 7 games
NY Rangers 1972: 4 of 6 games
Buffalo 1973: 3 of 6 games
Philadelphia 1973: 3 of 5 games
Chicago 1973: 4 of 6 games
Vancouver 1975: 2 of 5 games
Buffalo 1975: 4 of 6 games
Chicago 1976: 0 of 4 games
NY Islanders 1976: 3 of 5 games
Philadelphia 1976: 1 of 4 games
St. Louis 1977: 0 of 4 games
NY Islanders 1977: 2 of 6 games
Boston 1977: 0 of 4 games
Detroit 1978: 2 of 5 games
Toronto 1978: 0 of 4 games
Boston 1978: 2 of 6 games
Toronto 1979: 1 of 4 games
Boston 1979: 6 of 7 games
NY Rangers 1979: 3 of 5 games

It's honestly wild how much the 1971, 1973, 1975 and 1979 Canadiens repeatedly bailed out Ken Dryden from what would ordinarily be considered losing positions. They were trailing by 2 and/or losing in the third period in 37 out of 64 games in those 4 postseasons, 58% of the time, and yet still miraculously turned that into 3 Stanley Cups.

At least there is the 1976-78 stretch which is what a dynasty should look like, consistently closing teams out without much trouble. Over those 3 years the Habs were in a losing position in only 10 of 42 games (24%), and the Islanders were really the only team that gave them too much trouble. For reference, Plante's Habs during their 5 Cups in a row faced a losing position in (edit) 13 of 48 games (27% of the time).

Then there's also this:

Winning positions against the Habs without Dryden:
NY Rangers 1974: 3 of 6 games
Hartford 1980: 0 of 3 games
Minnesota 1980: 4 of 7 games

Those don't really look that different than most of the Dryden years but for whatever reason the team didn't score their way out of trouble. In short, I'm a lot less convinced by the "they won with him and not without him" argument than I was previously.

We dug into Dryden in the goalie project. That he had to be bailed out by a super team isn't a great look. I don't think he can have serious consideration as the top goalie of all time.

 

[10Ducky10]

We dug into Dryden in the goalie project. That he had to be bailed out by a super team isn't a great look. I don't think he can have serious consideration as the top goalie of all time.

Pass me some of what you're smoking.
He took a year off and wasn't there to bail them out and they didn't win the cup.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Pass me some of what you're smoking.
He took a year off and wasn't there to bail them out and they didn't win the cup.

Well you’d be the only one here that thinks Dryden was the best goalie ever.