Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 2

[bobholly39]

My #1 and #10 are etched in stone and I can't see anybody coming up with something that will make me change my mind. Hull was my #5 guy the first 2 times we did this and that was how the ratings came out both times, I see no reason to change this. Crosby will be #10. He didn't even sniff my top 14. I realize this will be an unpopular view but I don't care. And yes, I have heard all the injury excuses.

Now 6-10 I am quite flexible on. I keep shifting on Richard, Harvey, and Beliveau and could be convinced of any order for these guys. There seems to be a lot of cup counting for these guys but when you look at playoff performance Hull is right up with them.I am quite high on Morenz and could see him as high as 6. For Hasek & Roy right now I have Hasek ahead but will listen to the arguments. Shore & Bourque I am not sure where to place.

To the bolded - can you explain why?

 

[daver]

My list contained six players currently active. Maybe, by the standards of this project, that's a little low. I don't think it's too low. If we go by the "chalk" of the current list, he's on the outside this round. I think that placement is entirely justified on the merits.

I'm certainly not saying that Crosby's not good. That would be silly. But he's [insert name of old-time PCHA-Superstar here] good, not Morenz good. A teammate like [insert name of teammate who seems to raise his game every time this guy's injured] helps make him look better. If [insert name of current player who's a countryman of aforementioned teammate] had [aforementioned teammate] on his own team, we could well be talking about [said countryman] now, instead of this guy.

Wanna sell me on moving Crosby up? Make the "shed-denizen" case against Shore and M. Richard... and I might move him past those two guys.

What else does Crosby have to do to shake this narrative that his teammate has made him look better?

Lead said teammate in scoring and playoff scoring, and PPG and playoff PPG during their time together?

Lead said teammate in scoring and/or PPG in 11 out of the 13 seasons they have played together?

Outperform said teammate in three of four Cups runs and three out of four SCFs.

 

[VanIslander]

One question to consider: How dominant was a player relative to his peers?

This early in the top 100 (top 10 greatest!) that query also contains this: How much claim the player has to being the best of his era, "the best player in the world" for a stretch of time.

Crosby
.
.
.
Hull, Shore, Morenz
.
Richard, Beliveau, Hasek
.
.
.
Roy, Bourque, Harvey

 

[daver]

Crosby has as many Top 3 Art Ross finishes and Hart nominations as Hull and Belliveau, the only players with more are the Big Four.

Longevity should be the only inarguable reason to keep Crosby out of the Top Ten.

 

[The Macho King]

Anyway - I don't think you can justify having Richard at #5, and frankly I think he's hard to justify in the top #10 the more I look at it.

A few things to back that up -
First - I'm sorry but zero Art Ross trophies despite playing his peak years in a shallow league is a huge mark against him for me. Yeahyeah Richard Riots but the fact is he was never #1 in points. He also only has one Hart (again despite diluted talent in the early league). While trophy counting is far from #1 to me, we're talking rarified air here so you should at least have some scoring records to your credit.

Second - Five retro-Rockets doesn't put him in top goalscorer territory for me (to make up for his lack of Ross trophies). Good numbers, but clearly behind Bobby Hull and Alex Ovechkin as goal scorers, not to mention Gretzky and Mario. He's more in the Bossy-tier of goalscorers to me. So I don't think we get that "rarified air" feel from him like you do when looking at others.

Third - Key player on a dynasty, yes, but most of those Cups come when Richard is by far in the twilight of his career. JB, Harvey, and Plante were probably bigger factors in most of these seasons (and 59 and 60 he was barely a contributor), and he's probably behind his brother in part of that dynasty as well.

The mark in his favor is his playoff performances. He has a few that stand out. 12 goals in 9 games, 11 goals in 10 games, 9 goals in 11 games. All great runs. 82 goals in 132 games is impressive, and he was roughly a point per game which I think is pretty damn good for that era. But where does that put him against the other guys on this list?

I think we can agree that Roy is above him in the playoffs. It's probably a better total resume than Hull (although Hull has a couple of worthy runs). JB? I think JB gets the nod here generally for being a key part of 2 dynasties (with numerous remarkable performances on each end of his career). For playoffs I'd put him clearly above Hasek, Shore, Morenz, and Bourque, but clearly behind Roy, JB, and probably around equal to Sid and Harvey (without having looked more closely at DH's playoffs).

So we have *probably* the worst regular season player of this group of ten (if nothing else bottom two with Bourque), and *maybe* top 3 - top 5 in playoffs of this group.

Without starpower, I don't see how you can say Richard is a top 9 player in hockey history.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Anyone more knowledgeable than myself willing to take a crack at Beliveau vs. Hull vs. Richard vs. Morenz vs. Crosby in terms of defensive play? How would you rank them?

 

[The Macho King]

One question to consider: How dominant was a player relative to his peers?

This early in the top 100 (top 10 greatest!) that query also contains this: How much claim the player has to being the best of his era, "the best player in the world" for a stretch of time.

Crosby

Hull, Shore, Morenz

Richard, Beliveau, Hasek

Roy, Bourque, Harvey

My only issue with that is I do think there are relative dead spots in league history where it's easier to be the best in the world than others. DPE? Shit-tier hockey, and being the best in the world during that timeframe doesn't mean as much as other times. You could make the same argument about post-expansion to the WHA merger (or at least the beginning of the Habs dynasty) except Orr was *so* good that he makes up for the relative weakness of the era. I think parts of the late O6 era also "feel" kind of weak to me? Your biggest stars were aging and you were kind of left with Bobby Hull and a 36 year old Howe. WW2 and parts of the pre-war era feel similarly shallow.

And - no disrespect to Crosby - I feel like a big chunk of the time where he was the undisputed best in the world (say '10-'16) was shallow. Ovi had fallen off, and your best competition was a 38 year old midget undrafted winger and his center, a year of Jamie Benn and a year of Corey Perry.

 

[pappyline]

To the bolded - can you explain why?

Simple answer is that I have several players rated higher than Crosby. Why do you even question this?

 

[Nick Hansen]

Anyone more knowledgeable than myself willing to take a crack at Beliveau vs. Hull vs. Richard vs. Morenz vs. Crosby in terms of defensive play? How would you rank them?

Not much worth to this but from what I've read...

Beliveau, Morenz, Crosby, Hull and then Richard.

I don't think you can quite overstate how much Beliveau was the quintessential center...he shaped the image of what a true #1 center should be.

 

[Sentinel]

First thoughts:

Star Power

So high up the list I still put a lot of value on star power.I separate the list in three tiers (not a list!) for star power:

Maurice Richard
Jean Béliveau
Eddie Shore
Sidney Crosby
Bobby Hull
Howie Morenz

Doug Harvey
Patrick Roy

Dominik Hasek
Ray Bourque

Clearly the first group had way more star power than the rest.IMO it's not even close.

How in living hell does Hasek not have "star power" above them all, except maybe Richard and Hull? Unless I am misunderstanding the term.

 

[The Macho King]

Not much worth to this but from what I've read...

Beliveau, Morenz, Crosby, Hull and then Richard.

I don't think you can quite overstate how much Beliveau was the quintessential center...he shaped the image of what a true #1 center should be.

The impression I get is that H.Richard took the tough assignments for the Habs.

Crosby - I want to hear him v. Morenz because my gut instinct would be to put Crosby ahead. Crosby is a solid defender nowadays (admittedly not as much in his first few years in the league). Maybe this is a result of reading too many Nighbor v. Morenz debates, so it may be overstated, but the image of Morenz I have puts his defense if not at the Mario Lemieux level, not much higher.

So yeah - I want a deep dive on Morenz's two-way play.

 

[Sentinel]

I don't think you can quite overstate how much Beliveau was the quintessential center...he shaped the image of what a true #1 center should be.

Why? What did he do that Nighbor, Morenz, and Abel didn't do before him?

 

[BenchBrawl]

Maurice Richard had great longevity - AST for 14 consecutive seasons

Richard's longevity is often overshadowed by the longevity of his nemesis Gordie Howe.But the Rocket finished 1st or 2nd AST for 14 consecutive seasons in the golden age of RWers.Ignoring his first season at AST, only Gordie Howe ever beat him.

All-star teams (Right Wing)

	43-44
1st	Lorne Carr
2nd	Maurice Richard
	44-45
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Bill Mosienko
	45-46
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Bill Mosienko
	46-47
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Bobby Bauer
	47-48
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Bud Poile
	48-49
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Gordie Howe
	49-50
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Gordie Howe
	50-51
1st	Gordie Howe
2nd	Maurice Richard
	51-52
1st	Gordie Howe
2nd	Maurice Richard
	52-53
1st	Gordie Howe
2nd	Maurice Richard
	53-54
1st	Gordie Howe
2nd	Maurice Richard
	54-55
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Bernard Geoffrion
	55-56
1st	Maurice Richard
2nd	Gordie Howe
	56-57
1st	Gordie Howe
2nd	Maurice Richard

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Nick Hansen]

Why? What did he do that Nighbor, Morenz, and Abel didn't do before him?

Shaping the image is not necessarily about being the best one, it is also about there in the right place, at the right time. Beliveau was so very much. Nighbor's greatness is contrived...not very much talked about unless you spend your time on here. 'Star power' low...

 

[Nick Hansen]

The impression I get is that H.Richard took the tough assignments for the Habs.

Crosby - I want to hear him v. Morenz because my gut instinct would be to put Crosby ahead. Crosby is a solid defender nowadays (admittedly not as much in his first few years in the league). Maybe this is a result of reading too many Nighbor v. Morenz debates, so it may be overstated, but the image of Morenz I have puts his defense if not at the Mario Lemieux level, not much higher.

So yeah - I want a deep dive on Morenz's two-way play.

You may be correct. As I said, most of my impression of these players are from what I've read on here or on varying sites trying to summarize players legacy or career. I also like Crosby, his puck possession play is insanely strong...don't know how Morenz fared there.