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

[The Macho King]

My issue with Kane is that he's sheltered, and isn't asked to play any kind of defense whatsoever (...or was, things might I have changed, I don't know), and it's actually tough seeing him defend competently, which is a bit different than, say, Malkin (not saying Malkin would be great).

But it creates a problem : information on difficulty of deployment is somewhat recent. We can compare Kane to, say, Crosby or Malkin or Thornton.

I really don't know what I'm supposed to do when comparing Kane to, say... Andy Bathgate or, probably more relevant to this example, somone like Busher Jackson.

Yes and no. Statistics on deployment are recent, sure. But I can't think of many instances where the impression of how a player is deployed runs counter to the stats, and there are plenty of reports that can give you an idea of how players were deployed.

The thing with Kane v. Malkin (defensively), is I've seen Malkin play good D. He's just uninterested 90% of the time, but when he does it, he does it just fine. Kane seems physically incapable of playing anything approaching defense.

 

[DannyGallivan]

but having Kane higher than say 90 just seems like either homerism or weighing too heavily for modern players.

don't like Kane, so not homerism.
I have 10 players with prime years from 2006 to present day, so I don't think they are over represented.

 

[The Macho King]

don't like Kane, so not homerism.
I have 10 players with prime years from 2006 to present day, so I don't think they are over represented.

You've already replied saying it wasn't homerism.

I don't believe you.

It's okay, we all have our faults.

 

[MXD]

Yes and no. Statistics on deployment are recent, sure. But I can't think of many instances where the impression of how a player is deployed runs counter to the stats, and there are plenty of reports that can give you an idea of how players were deployed.

The thing with Kane v. Malkin (defensively), is I've seen Malkin play good D. He's just uninterested 90% of the time, but when he does it, he does it just fine. Kane seems physically incapable of playing anything approaching defense.

It's probably easy to figure out for the D-Men : I can't think of a possible D-Men not getting prime + tough minutes. In their prime at least.

And we can also guess that the forwards played lots of minutes in their prime too, possibly before and after it as well.

But the sheltering?

 

[DannyGallivan]

I don't believe you

A Jet fan would be a Patrick Kane fan. Okay.

...and no, I don't have any faults. None.

 

[K Fleur]

Lack of interest is always Malkin’s largest defensive shortcoming. That and maybe a lack of emphasis on that side(for Malkin)from his coaches. FWIW I remember thinking Malkin was at his best defensively when Michel Therrien was his coach.

I can’t remember who it was but their was an analyst at the 2004 draft who said Malkin’s game is like “Ron Francis on steroids”. Ended up a wrong observation.

 

[DannyGallivan]

A Jet fan would be a Patrick Kane fan. Okay.

...and no, I don't have any faults. None.

When you see my list, let me know who behind Kane has more than one bourbon, one scotch and one bee---, I mean, one Hart, one Art Ross and one Conn Smythe. And that's just part of it.

...for the record, I don't think I'll spend a lot of energy defending second-half picks. I may need that energy earlier on!

Oops, I responded to my own post by accident. Okay, I guess i have one fault.

 

[The Macho King]

It's probably easy to figure out for the D-Men : I can't think of a possible D-Men not getting prime + tough minutes. In their prime at least.

And we can also guess that the forwards played lots of minutes in their prime too, possibly before and after it as well.

But the sheltering?

Well you have an issue with older generations a) not short-shifting as much, and b) not rolling four lines, so it was probably much harder to shelter (especially with a guy like Jackson that you mentioned earlier).

 

[MXD]

Well you have an issue with older generations a) not short-shifting as much, and b) not rolling four lines, so it was probably much harder to shelter (especially with a guy like Jackson that you mentioned earlier).

... I mostly tried to come up with a winger who didn't have a great reputation as a defensive player (and somewhat in Kane's range). Jackson is helped (or hampered, depending on the perspective) by the fact he spent his prime on what was, by then, the best line in the NHL. Of course, he was one very good reason why that line was very good.

Also, I'm pretty sure you'd have coaches avoiding to play their stars against very weak lines, because there was one or two stupid goons on that line.

In other words... I think we're a bit limited on the importance we can give to sheltering. It's totally worth considering, it's just that... if I'm somehow comparing Patrick Kane to someone like Joe Malone, I wouldn't even care about this, considering Malone mostly played in the 60 minute-shift era.

 

[daver]

Isn't "sheltering" another way of saying a player was deployed to maximize their offensive impact?

 

[Michael Farkas]

That's too broad of a brushstroke for the canvas...

 

[The Macho King]

Isn't "sheltering" another way of saying a player was deployed to maximize their offensive impact?

No I think there's a difference. I think of sheltering as minimizing their defensive impact more than maximizing their offensive impact.

McDavid isn't sheltered, but he's deployed to maximize his offensive impact.

 

[K Fleur]

I don’t know if 74 is too high for him(probably is)but Patrick Kane is pretty easily the best RW of his era right? Unless you consider Martin St. Louis as a player from the same era then it’s obviously not as clear.

 

[daver]

No I think there's a difference. I think of sheltering as minimizing their defensive impact more than maximizing their offensive impact.

McDavid isn't sheltered, but he's deployed to maximize his offensive impact.

Fair enough, in Kane's case, wouldn't his ability to carry a line with players lower on his team's depth charts cancel this out somewhat? I.E. sure Toews carried the defensive load but he also generally got the better linemates as the #1C.

 

[The Macho King]

I don’t know if 74 is too high for him(probably is)but Patrick Kane is pretty easily the best RW of his era right? Unless you consider Martin St. Louis as a player from the same obviously.

I think Kane has a brief period where he was the clear best RW in the league (although RW isn't a super-deep position). After MSL kind of fell off a bit (so his NYR years), and before Kucherov completely took off. That gives you like... two-three seasons where Kane was definitely the best RW in the game? Is being the best player at a weak position for a couple of seasons top 100 worthy? I don't think so.

Also I don't think it's homer-ish to say Kucherov is better than Kane and has been for at least the past two seasons.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Also I don't think it's homer-ish to say Kucherov is better than Kane and has been for at least the past two seasons.

One season. Last year only.

 

[The Macho King]

One season. Last year only.

Season before as well. Kucherov had 85 points in 74 games (while Kane had like 89 in 82), and he did that on a team that was ravaged by injuries with a rookie Brayden Point as our top line center, all while being worlds better defensively.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Season before as well. Kucherov had 85 points in 74 games (while Kane had like 89 in 82), and he did that on a team that was ravaged by injuries with a rookie Brayden Point as our top line center, all while being worlds better defensively.

okay... pretty close then. Kane plays in a far tougher division.

 

[The Macho King]

okay... pretty close then. Kane plays in a far tougher division.

Divisions have little effect on production in the modern era. You play teams in your division one time more than others.

Also the Central wasn't that good that season:

2016-2017 NHL Hockey Standings

 

[ImporterExporter]

Well, we can always argue, errr... I mean discuss about whether we should go with an "inflexible 10" per round, or adopt something more like the "natural breaks" method. It seems that ted, c1958, Dennis & Van like the inflexible 10, but me, TDMM, MXD, and The Art Currently Known as Sedinery favor the latter. I'm not THAT invested in either outcome... and I'm willing to listen to the other side. (That's why I asked those in the former group if they had any difficulties with flexibility as used in other HoH projects.)

I think this project is going to be a lot more enjoyable for people who go into it with an open mind. Not being flexible or moving off pre conceived notions and placements is just going to end up making grouchy people more so IMO. And i expect some serious movement on a handful of players. If there's anything I learned from years of being involved with the ATD it's that there is always more to learn, which organically should move players up or down.

Looking forward to having new insight on many players and history in general.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

I can’t remember who it was but their was an analyst at the 2004 draft who said Malkin’s game is like “Ron Francis on steroids”. Ended up a wrong observation.

From the same draft, Ovechkin was described by Pierre McGuire and Brian Burke as being a 200 foot player and having a complete game.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Also the Central wasn't that good that season

yeah, that's the season I give Kucherov over Kane.

 

[The Macho King]

yeah, that's the season I give Kucherov over Kane.

So... you don't think Kucherov was better than Kane last season?

 

[BenchBrawl]

Kane has his warts but he's been consistently money when it's time to score the big goals or make the big plays.I don't think any player of his era was as clutch as him.The guy psychologically loves it when it's 3-3 with 5 minutes to go.

We can compare his playoff productivity with his peers, but the clutchness factor is hard to quantify.

 

[DannyGallivan]

So... you don't think Kucherov was better than Kane last season?

I thought you said "LAST season"... and I wasn't going to go into debate. I give Kucherov last season, and the season before that is a toss up.