Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread (Revenge of Michael Myers)

[VanIslander]

Let's put Gordie's 20 consecutive seasons of top 5 scoring in perspective by looking at his contemporaries.

Richard only had 9 such seasons and 4 in a row max.

Beliveau had 8 such and 3 in a row.

Bathgate had 9 and all were in a row! Nothing noteworthy before or after.

 

[MXD]

i would be interested if there are any devil's advocates out there for revising the big 4 and other consensus top-10 players. (beliveau vs. howe? kelly vs. harvey? i think there are arguments to be made...) (not that i'm going to be the one making them...)

I don't think there's anything like a consensus Top-10, and has there really been a debate between Red Kelly vs. Doug Harvey?

 

[VanIslander]

As for playoffs...

Gordie led the league 6 times in playoff scoring;
Richard twice;
Beliveau once.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Did we settle on who we thought was the best player who would not be named on a single list?

Probably a Soviet (eg., Yakushev, Petrov)...

Won't be those guys.
My non-NHL-European "bubble boy" was Nedomanský.

208 unique names sounds like a lot at first- but keep in mind that there will be c. 60 male Hockey Hall of Fame players that won't be named on anyone's list. This means that before we've even taken the first vote, we've come pretty close to excising the bottom quarter of the Hockey Hall of Fame roster. Then, how many of those 208 are going to be named on so few lists that they will be bereft of any prospect of advancement? We'll find out before too long...

 

[Canadiens1958]

i would be interested if there are any devil's advocates out there for revising the big 4 and other consensus top-10 players. (beliveau vs. howe? kelly vs. harvey? i think there are arguments to be made...) (not that i'm going to be the one making them...)

There are arguments given archival statistical, newspaper and video findings.

Combined the new information and perspectives provided a clearer picture of the ebb and flow in eras, strengths and shortcomings influenced by on ice and off ice rule changes. Most recent example being the removal of the center Red Line as an offside determination starting in 2005-06. Also have close to a generation worth of data about the impact of the trapezoid, the impact on goalies and handedness for defencemen.

Issue is that we can question the opinions for #'s 5 to 1oo but not #'s 1 to 4, yet the rankings of the top
20 are greatly conjoined.

Examples chronologically Shore-Orr-Bourque, Maurice Richard vs Howe (WWII /post WWII discussion),etc.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Let's put Gordie's 20 consecutive seasons of top 5 scoring in perspective by looking at his contemporaries.

Richard only had 9 such seasons and 4 in a row max.

Beliveau had 8 such and 3 in a row.

Bathgate had 9 and all were in a row! Nothing noteworthy before or after.

Function of Howe staying healthy after his 1950 skull fracture.

Howe could have gone 7-8-7 with more injuries,yielding 22. Would this make Bathgate 9 different?

 

[Canadiens1958]

I don't think there's anything like a consensus Top-10, and has there really been a debate between Red Kelly vs. Doug Harvey?

Harvey and Kelly is not the debate.

The debate is the value of positional diversity which effectively gave the player's team greater roster flexibility.

Roughly 15-20%,of the players depending on the paricipant played at least two positions including RD and LD. Yet this attribute is rarely recognized nor is credit given.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

i would be interested if there are any devil's advocates out there for revising the big 4

Not saying I'm putting him there- nor am I even saying he's assured of my #5 slot... but I think the player who could make the best case for copping a breakthrough is... Patrick Roy. Unlike Lemieux, the consensus view is that he's the best ever at his position. Unlike Orr, he had a full career. He matches Howe in Cup-Counting... and you could argue that he had more to do with those Cups than Howe had to do with his.

Again, I'm not saying that I've made up my mind to put him ahead of Béliveau, Harvey, and Hull. It's just that for that peculiarly-shaped keyhole that locks the Big-4, his skeleton-key turns the most tumblers. Doesn't turn them all, though.

...and other consensus top-10 players.

Ah, we'll find out soon enough that there isn't a consensus top-10. Some will have Maurice Richard in this zone- many won't. A significant number of us will have Hašek over Roy. Even Bobby Hull will run into some "not enough Cups" criticism. It's possible that only Béliveau and Harvey are guaranteed watertight for vote 2.

The Vote 2 thread will be interesting.

The Vote 3 thread might yield a reading on the Geiger Counter.

But I think it will be the Vote 4 thread that will really put our containment structure to the test. Here's where some of the shuffled-back stars will meet the cool new re-assessments, examples of which have been argued passionately- and zealously (if a little bit prematurely) already.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I hope there's going to be a lot of old material re-posted, to make this project some sort of "consolidation" of all the debating points and information we've seen and made along the years.

Also something we should discuss: The last migration destroyed a lot of work, I think we should find the most convenient way to save all the discussions somewhere outside hfboards in case we need to re-post them, even if it's in multiple notepad documents or something.

Not to unnecessarily promote my own research, but here's a summary with all the of the key research I've done over the years (VsX, Hart & Norris shares, all-star teams, playoff stats, Selke voting, etc):

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/thre...esearch-thread-updated-november-2017.2408683/

I lost one semi-interesting thread during the data migration, but everything else has been restored. I now have copies of everything in Excel and notepad, backed up on multiple hard drives.

I'm hoping to post a summary of key data in each voting thread (time permitting) but I figured it might be useful to share this before the first round starts next week.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I've heard Adam Oates given virtually all the credit in this thread for both Brett Hull and Cam Neely's success, so he would be a good choice (assuming he didn't makes someone's list already).

Tom Johnson of the Montreal Canadiens' late 50's dynasty could be another one.

Oates made my list (somewhere between 110 and 120). I'd be surprised if I'm the only person to have him listed.

Johnson didn't (nor was he close). He's a good guess - part of the challenge is you need to find a player who isn't very polarizing (because one who is might have a few supporters who can vault him into the top 120 on at least one or two lists).

 

[Hockey Outsider]

My guesses (for "best player to not receive a single vote") -

Centres - I think you'd have to go pretty far down the list from the top centres project. Maybe Jean Ratelle (#45)? If not, I could see just about every centre after that having at least 1-2 strong advocates - maybe Duke Keats (#58)?

Wingers - is it possible nobody picked Sweeney Schriner (#33) - a very good player, but one who might be anonymous enough to slip by? If not, maybe Michel Goulet (#41)?

Defensemen - maybe Ching Johnson (#37 on the top defensemen project) might be quiet enough to fly under the radar? I don't know if there's a huge range in how people percieve him. I could see the next several blueliners after that all having some strong supporters. If not him, we might need to head down to #43 - Ebbie Goodfellow?

Goalies - I could see just about every goalie from the top goalies project getting at least one vote. Maybe John Vanbiesbrouck (#34) and Mike Liut (#40) are least likely?

Also - I feel less confident about this post than any of the 4,663 previous posts I've made.

 

[BenchBrawl]

My guesses (for "best player to not receive a single vote") -

Centres - I think you'd have to go pretty far down the list from the top centres project. Maybe Jean Ratelle (#45)? If not, I could see just about every centre after that having at least 1-2 strong advocates - maybe Duke Keats (#58)?

Wingers - is it possible nobody picked Sweeney Schriner (#33) - a very good player, but one who might be anonymous enough to slip by? If not, maybe Michel Goulet (#41)?

Defensemen - maybe Ching Johnson (#37 on the top defensemen project) might be quiet enough to fly under the radar? I don't know if there's a huge range in how people percieve him. I could see the next several blueliners after that all having some strong supporters. If not him, we might need to head down to #43 - Ebbie Goodfellow?

Goalies - I could see just about every goalie from the top goalies project getting at least one vote. Maybe John Vanbiesbrouck (#34) and Mike Liut (#40) are least likely?

Also - I feel less confident about this post than any of the 4,663 previous posts I've made.

Good picks.

I don't think I ranked Ching Johnson, but I should have.A big fan of his.I'm confident at least one of the ATDers ranked him.

Ebbie Goodfellow was on my list, near the end, which is a bit weird considering I didn't rank Ching and he's probably better, but my rational was that Goodfellow was some sort of pioneer as a PPQB.I don't know the extent to which this is true, but I made my list in a hurry.

 

[MXD]

Goodfellow is a good choice too.

 

[VanIslander]

I don't think I ranked Ching Johnson, but I should have.A big fan of his.I'm confident at least one of the ATDers ranked him.

I got him 97th.

 

[solidmotion]

Let's put Gordie's 20 consecutive seasons of top 5 scoring in perspective by looking at his contemporaries.

Richard only had 9 such seasons and 4 in a row max.

Beliveau had 8 such and 3 in a row.

Bathgate had 9 and all were in a row! Nothing noteworthy before or after.

As for playoffs...

Gordie led the league 6 times in playoff scoring;
Richard twice;
Beliveau once.

i'm certainly familiar with howe's accomplishments.

but i'd be interested, for instance, in context around some of those massive art ross wins early on. relative to his direct peers he's in another dimension, but could that partly be reflective of a league that hadn't recovered from wwii? his peak numbers aren't that different from beliveau's. (for example, compare howe's 57 with beliveau's 59.)

then there's the playoffs. led six times, yeah: four times (!) in losing efforts; three times tied with someone else.

(THIS IS A DEVIL'S ADVOCATE POST IF IT'S NOT CLEAR)

 

[VanIslander]

... could that partly be reflective of a league that hadn't recovered from wwii?

1950-51 was the first of Gordie's six Art Ross 1st in points seasons.

That's waay after the war ended. Rocket Richard had three Hart trophy finalist seasons and three goal leading seasons in the mid to late forties, so if you have any evidence of a post-WWII effect, it'll devastate Richard (and several Leafs) before it'll at all apply to Gordie!!

 

[steve141]

My guesses (for "best player to not receive a single vote") -

Centres - I think you'd have to go pretty far down the list from the top centres project. Maybe Jean Ratelle (#45)? If not, I could see just about every centre after that having at least 1-2 strong advocates - maybe Duke Keats (#58)?

Wingers - is it possible nobody picked Sweeney Schriner (#33) - a very good player, but one who might be anonymous enough to slip by? If not, maybe Michel Goulet (#41)?

Defensemen - maybe Ching Johnson (#37 on the top defensemen project) might be quiet enough to fly under the radar? I don't know if there's a huge range in how people percieve him. I could see the next several blueliners after that all having some strong supporters. If not him, we might need to head down to #43 - Ebbie Goodfellow?

Close, but I had Ratelle at #115 and Ching Johnson at #117.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I've got Ebbie Goodfellow!

 

[Iceman]

Controversial question because I can:

I have Crosby and Ovi back to back with Crosby ahead. If I genuinely think Ovi will end up the better player by my definition that shaped my list, would it be reasonable to vote in favour of Ovi once we get to that part? Sure, I wouldn’t base the voting because of something 5-6 years ahead, otherwise McDavid would make the list but I think Ovi can pass Crosby this year.

Where do you even wanna draw the line as far as foresight goes? Not even think about it? I guess it would be more reasonable to consider yourself convinced by whatever arguments others make to make a change from your original list.

 

[VanIslander]

No projecting past games already played.
Assume a player is seriously injured tonight.
This is a HISTORY exercise not a guessing game.
This not at all in the least about foresight, instead: hindsight!

This board is quite unlike many at HfBoards, always has been, hopefully always will be.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Controversial question because I can:

I have Crosby and Ovi back to back with Crosby ahead. If I genuinely think Ovi will end up the better player by my definition that shaped my list, would it be reasonable to vote in favour of Ovi once we get to that part? Sure, I wouldn’t base the voting because of something 5-6 years ahead, otherwise McDavid would make the list but I think Ovi can pass Crosby this year.

Where do you even wanna draw the line as far as foresight goes? Not even think about it? I guess it would be more reasonable to consider yourself convinced by whatever arguments others make to make a change from your original list.

Well, there are a lot of participants who consider it a matter of "settled law" that Crosby's superior to Ovechkin by a lot- and that they really aren't particularly close.

But I'm not one of those guys- and I'm glad you're not, either. But hey, we'll have plenty of time to don our Pb-shields and talk about that c. Round 2, Vote 3 or so.

I believe that the default instruction is that we are to consider careers of players as they present themselves right now, with absolutely no consideration of anticipated career arc going forward. Having said that, though-

If this project reaches its 100-player conclusion, we're going to have- what? 21 rounds? That's going to unfold over a fairly significant chunk of time. And in some cases, we're finding not much more than nanometers of difference between players within one or two slots of one another on our lists. So, it's entirely possible that there will be some active players who will affect how we might place them (in both a positive AND negative direction) in the midst of this project.

So... maybe some of our "projections" won't be projections anymore by the time we talk about them. That's particularly true of the active players who figure to be in the lower part of our discussion, like Karlsson, Kane, Doughty and the like.

 

[VanIslander]

Well, there are a lot of participants who consider it a matter of "settled law" that Crosby's superior to Ovechkin by a lot- and that they really aren't particularly close.

But I'm not one of those guys- and I'm glad you're not, either. But hey, we'll have plenty of time to don our Pb-shields and talk about that c. Round 2, Vote 3 or so.

I seriously discount Crosby's Conn Smythes and am a huge Caps and OV fan, but I think the gap is bigger than one or two slots between them. Anyways, if YOU could make the case for OV over Crosby based entirely on their career to date, then prepare it then. I'll be all ears.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Anyways, if YOU could make the case for OV over Crosby based entirely on their career to date, then prepare it then. I'll be all ears.

I'll get 'round to it-- but first, I've got a Super Mario that I'll try to get to hop over some barrels- and climb up a ladder or two.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I seriously discount Crosby's Conn Smythes and am a huge Caps and OV fan, but I think the gap is bigger than one or two slots between them. Anyways, if YOU could make the case for OV over Crosby based entirely on their career to date, then prepare it then. I'll be all ears.

Glad to see the overall sentiment. I agree with it.

I get why people would argue against Sid's 1st Smythe being a major selling point. It's one of the weaker ones in history. I just don't see the logic of discounting the 2nd one at all. He led the postseason in assists, was CLEARLY the best player in the Cup finals (I attended game 5 of the finals in Pittsburgh where Sid had one of his finest games as a pro) and finished 1 point behind Malkin for the league lead, despite playing 2 fewer games. He gets the toughest match ups against every team he faces. He takes more draws in the neutral and defensive zones than Malkin, especially in the postseason. In the past few years especially, Sullivan has gone with Sid, power on power against other top lines. Either way, while his 2nd Smythe is not elite, it is certainly a strong performance and should be valued as such IMO.

I've got zero issue with people putting Ovechkin ahead of Crosby based on regular season accolades. Some of that comes with the caveat that Sid absolutely lost 2 clear Hart and Art Rosses due to freak/deliberate attempts to injure (2010-11 and 2012-13) when he played half and 3/4 of a season at a much higher quality then anyone else in the league. But alas, those injuries happened and here we are. As much as I'd like to project another 40 and 15 games in those 2 seasons, I won't because it's not what we do here.

I have Ovechkin just ahead in regular season value (mainly because of his goal scoring dominance) but Sid is still well out in front of Ovechkin in the postseason and international departments, IMO. Even with the Cup and Smythe Ovechkin doesn't have a lot of meat on his bones when it comes to the playoffs. In fact the past 5 years prior to last he'd been quite underwhelming. Now a repeat of this past season and that gap shrinks considerbaly, but we'll cross that bridge if and when we come to it.

I think I'll end up moving Ovechkin up a bit when it's all said and done, but right now we agree that there is more than 1-2 spots between the two.

 

[DannyGallivan]

maybe Michel Goulet (#41)

I had Goulet for many of my drafts. In the end he slipped off the list.