Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 3

[overg]

Sticks were lighter. Best pokechecker of his generation, no doubt, but he also came in at a time that pokechecking became much more viable.

Did the pace of the game also favor poke checks? My intuition would be that as the game became more systematic, hits became less frequent and/or less effective (the faster the play, the harder the hit?).

Possibly yet another example of the problems of trying to imagine players in a different era than which they played. What works best in one era may not work best in another. Follow that thought line through to Shore, and has he been taking too much of a hit for playing the way he did, given the era he played in?

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

I came in with Jagr as a coin flip above Bourque. I’ve made a lot of arguments over the years against his somewhat inflated numbers based on ES/PP TOI relative to other forwards in his generation, but I can’t see how he’d not be middle of the ballot or higher.

If you think Jagr's ES/PP TOI relativity can be used to count against Jagr, you should have checked out the reaction when I applied the Power-Play dependency metric to Crosby, who's an even more heavily-weighted example of that. As to your "Project Administrator" question as to the "State of the Union," here's how I read it:

The closest thing we have to an heir presumptive in this discussion is Bourque. He's like the affable Statesman with low-negatives. He won't necessarily be at the very top of most lists, but he'll be in-the-zone on the vast preponderance of them.

Crosby & Morenz divide opinion more. You're high on them, or you're not. I expect a big spread with these two.

Hašek has been the beneficiary of some sound arguments, and some fatuous ones, too. I'll try not to hold the poor ones against his very legitimate case.

Jagr has a great case, and I (among others) am (are) trying to make it. Ditto Lidström. Some of the previous shills made by drive-bys on behalf of Lidström should not be held against HIS memory, either.

Ovechkin and Shore appear to be the bubble-boys, here.

 

[The Macho King]

That's an interesting take on which stick to use. Try stick-checking a wooden stick with a composite... good luck. A wooden stick makes perfect sense for hacking and slashing at a loose puck three feet from the crease.

Not to sidetrack, but you're also probably going to get a shit ton of slashing calls/have a harder time drawing slashes. Refs respond to broken sticks, and the heavier wood stick will probably break the composite sticks more frequently.

 

[MXD]

... I mean, call the Penguins horrible if you want.

But if you're not calling at least 15 other teams horrible, and some of them definitely more horrible than the Penguins, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Other than loaded Detroit, who was NOT top-loaded? Colorado had Corbet and Ricci. NJ had Brylin and Pandolfo. Washington, Philadelphia, and Buffalo were not exactly known for their 3rd and 4th lines, yet they all reached the Finals. Pittsburgh actually had good rosters. That underperformed. How much of it can be pinned Jagr, I don't know.

Huh?

Philadelphia had guys like Otto, Klatt, Zubrus, Prospal in their bottom six...Washington had Dale Hunter, Zelepukin, Tikkanen, Bulis or Nikolishin, Zednik, etc. Buffalo had guys like Sanderson, Varada, Primeau, Rasmussen, Barnes...

The Penguins had Jan Hrdina and Kip Miller on the TOP line. The Pens have guys like the ghost of Rob Brown, Morozov, Barnaby, a defensive defenseman moved up to forward at times in Ian Moran, and then ass clowns like Tyler Wright, Martin Sonnenberg, Todd Hlushko, Joey Dziedzic, Alex Hicks, Sean Pronger...

People sit at home all day and wonder how the Pens lost in 1996 to Florida...it's because Florida was a deeper team. They didn't have a great top line...but they could beat our third and fourth lines...after Mario, it was Jagr (and Straka's hustle) vs. world.

Pittsburgh was top-six or bust...Philadelphia, Washington, New Jersey (ya know, the teams they play), were not like that...they had defenses, they had bottom six forwards, they had goaltending...

The Penguins were not a "horrible" team...they had a strong top six in terms of talent...the rest of the team was pretty empty...

 

[VanIslander]

...
Crosby & Morenz divide opinion more. You're high on them, or you're not. I expect a big spread with these two.

At least we've had some good discussions of Crosby.

Morenz should get more attention. His offense isn't as good as some others here. There are reasons to think he's been overrated and overhyped and 'star power' puff, relative to other marginal top-10 players ever.

Someone even said the votes for him were a reason to just vote him in! Just push him across the line and move on. Lol.

 

[Sentinel]

Huh?

Philadelphia had guys like Otto, Klatt, Zubrus, Prospal in their bottom six...Washington had Dale Hunter, Zelepukin, Tikkanen, Bulis or Nikolishin, Zednik, etc. Buffalo had guys like Sanderson, Varada, Primeau, Rasmussen, Barnes...

The Penguins had Jan Hrdina and Kip Miller on the TOP line. The Pens have guys like the ghost of Rob Brown, Morozov, Barnaby, a defensive defenseman moved up to forward at times in Ian Moran, and then ass clowns like Tyler Wright, Martin Sonnenberg, Todd Hlushko, Joey Dziedzic, Alex Hicks, Sean Pronger...

People sit at home all day and wonder how the Pens lost in 1996 to Florida...it's because Florida was a deeper team. They didn't have a great top line...but they could beat our third and fourth lines...after Mario, it was Jagr (and Straka's hustle) vs. world.

Pittsburgh was top-six or bust...Philadelphia, Washington, New Jersey (ya know, the teams they play), were not like that...they had defenses, they had bottom six forwards, they had goaltending...

The Penguins were not a "horrible" team...they had a strong top six in terms of talent...the rest of the team was pretty empty...

You are listing Zelepukin, Zubrus, and Zednik as some kind of offensive threat? Give me a break. Florida was a deeper team?? Whatever. Mario and Jagr should've obliterated them ten times out of ten!

"Top six or bust"? Pittsburgh's top six should've been enough all day, any day against anybody not named "Red Wings," "Stars," or "Avalanche."

 

[sr edler]

The Penguins were never really horrible with Jagr. It's a fantasy to suggest otherwise. I'm a Pens diehard. Watched them often during this time.

96-97 they still had Mario, Francis, Nedved, Hatcher, Kasper, Barrasso, and finished 2nd in the division

97-98 they lost Mario but still had Francis and most of the other guys listed while adding Straka and Robert Lang and finished 1st in their division

98-99, lost Francis but added Kovalelv, still had Straka, Lang, Hatcher, Barrasso, and made the 2nd round. Still nowhere near horrible.

99-99, still had all the forwards, but their defense was finally looking a bit bleak relative to the better teams in the league at the time. But again, this wasn't a team that was void of talent beyond Jagr.

00-01, Mario returns, forward group is very solid, D looks porous, but they still win 42 games because again, this wasn't a poor team. Behind the top tier franchises? Absolutely but nowhere near a bottom dweller.

Jagr is traded....Lemeiux more or less done after the 03 season.

There is really no reason to suggest Jagr was playing on absolute **** teams in Pittsburgh during the late 90's. It wasn't until 2001-02 that the Pens really started tanking, which is not surprising given their financial troubles and having no real talent outside Straka and Kovalev.

To me, Jagr was an amazing, self serving offensive talent who never really lifted the Penguins in the absence of Mario. He flashed those abilities a few times in the postseason but people talk about Bourque being average or worse than as a postseason performer and at least he led Boston to multiple Cup final berths. The only proponents of Jagr point to about a 5 year offensive peak, but beyond that, there isn't a ton of big moments going on with JJ.

I have no ill will towards him as a Pens fan, I simply think he was a guy who was all about himself, was certainly a brilliant offensive mind, but beyond that, there isn't much that excites me. The postseason is a big black mark on Jagr's career. Players with his talents should have done more. Period.

The point is that those Penguins teams were bad on D, not that they didn't have some players who could put up (some slightly pointless) points. Jagr not playing defense certainly didn't help in that aspect though, and that's on him.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

At least we've had some good discussions of Crosby.

Morenz should get more attention. His offense isn't as good as some others here. There are reasons to think he's been overrated and overhyped and 'star power' puff, relative to other marginal top-10 players ever.

Someone even said the votes for him were a reason to just vote him in! Just push him across the line and move on. Lol.

There are only a few players left who dominated the league offensively as thoroughly as Morenz did from 1924-25 to 1928-29, and I don't think any of them were as good defensively as Morenz. Yes, he didn't dominate the league every season, but if you add up the 5 seasons, his margins over everyone else are very large.

Also note that Montreal seemed to be fairly stingy at giving out assists during that time period. It's not a huge difference, but it does appear to be one.

 

[Michael Farkas]

You are listing Zelepukin, Zubrus, and Zednik as some kind of offensive threat? Give me a break. Florida was a deeper team?? Whatever. Mario and Jagr should've obliterated them ten times out of ten!

"Top six or bust"? Pittsburgh's top six should've been enough all day, any day against anybody not named "Red Wings," "Stars," or "Avalanche."

No, I'm not. I'm listing them as third-line capable or NHL capable players. Regular NHLers. The Penguins did not always feature them in the Jagr years.

It's noteworthy that you're ignoring our defense in this process as well.

"Top six or bust" teams that win in the last 30 years....here they are:



/end of list.


You're talking about us being able to compete with Detroit and Colorado...we lost to f'n Florida...with Mario. Because we had no defense or bottom six forwards...watch the series. 66 and 68 weren't the problem.

1997 we lost to Philadelphia...a deeper team...almost immediately. Same deal, all down the line. 1998 we lost to Montreal with a 50 year old Andy Moog...not because Jagr (9 pts in 6 games and a +5) playing with Francis and Stu Barnes...it's the rest of the team that was absolute mud...

8 goals and 21 points, +12 from Jagr, Barnes, Francis...7 goals, 20 points, -26 from the rest of the damn roster...

Yeah...check out that depth...put your shades on too, those guys are practically glowing...

We upset NJ in 1999 only and I mean only because Jagr was out there in his best series on one leg...getting massaged on the bench between shifts just to stay alive...

(sorry, I was on a roll...Straka was also a monster in the 1999 series...but still, it was Jagr's best).

 

[Nick Hansen]

Penguins defenseman with the highest avg TOI each season Jagr was the man in Pittsburgh:

97-98: Kevin Hatcher
98-99: Kevin Hatcher
99-00: Jiri Slegr
00-01: Darius Kasparitis

Also got to play with notable defenseman like Ian Moran, Brett Werenka, Hans Jonsson, even a little stretch with Canadiens all time great GM Marc Bergevin.

I see Hatcher a couple of lone Norris votes those years but I wonder how good he really was on his last legs and all...he primarily provided offense as well.

Buffalo Sabres:

98-99: Zhitnik
99-00: Zhitnik
00-01: Zhitnik

Washington Capitals:

98-99: Johansson (Gonchar a mere three seconds less)
99-00: Johansson
00-01: Johansson

Philadelphia Flyers:

98-99: Desjardins
99-00: Desjardins
00-01: Desjardins

 

[daver]

Depends on how you define "longevity."

This is how I see it:

Ovechkin has more elite seasons, so more longevity as an elite player.
Jagr has more seasons as a useful/productive player, so more longevity as a productive player.

I personally care a lot about longevity as an elite player, not as much about longevity as a productive player.

I'm also unconvinced that Jagr's best regular seasons are better than Ovechkin's, but I know others differ.

Best seasons by tier (*with reasonable consideration for missed games)

Tier 1

Jagr 95/96
Jagr 98/99
Jagr 99/00*
Ovechkin 07/08
Ovechkin 09/10*

Tier 2

Jagr 94/95
Jagr 97/98
Jagr 96/97*
Jagr 00/01
Jagr 05/06
Ovechkin 08/09
Ovechkin 12/13

Debatable - Ovechkin 14/15

I see a clear edge to Jagr in elite seasons (8 to 4).

 

[Michael Farkas]

Kevin Hatcher was a big dumb idiot...

 

[86Habs]

I could dig up a good description of the much-admired skill Bourque had of physically checking his man off of the puck and simultaneously taking away the puck and heading the other way. Some great dmen poke check the puck away with finesse (Lidstrom); others bodycheck opposing players out of the play and away from the puck (Chelios); Bourque combined both skills into one incredible combination. His eye-hand coordination was legendary and his commitment to hard work and physical play where needed was unyielding. There's a lot of ink on him.

He was as boring as Toews in interviews. He didn't have "star power" off the ice. But he was heralded for what he could do on the ice.

Bourque was also the best player I've ever seen at keeping pucks in at the blue line, either coming up the boards or mid-ice. His hand-eye coordination was certainly unreal.

 

[K Fleur]

I see Hatcher a couple of lone Norris votes those years but I wonder how good he really was on his last legs and all...he primarily provided offense as well.

Buffalo Sabres:

98-99: Zhitnik
99-00: Zhitnik
00-01: Zhitnik

Washington Capitals:

98-99: Johansson (Gonchar a mere three seconds less)
99-00: Johansson
00-01: Johansson

Philadelphia Flyers:

98-99: Desjardins
99-00: Desjardins
00-01: Desjardins

Not good.

And the pens gave away a much, much better defenseman to get him. Probably the last legit #1 defenseman they had until signing Gonchar like a decade later.

 

[Sentinel]

No, I'm not. I'm listing them as third-line capable or NHL capable players. Regular NHLers. The Penguins did not always feature them in the Jagr years.

It's noteworthy that you're ignoring our defense in this process as well.

"Top six or bust" teams that win in the last 30 years....here they are:



/end of list.


You're talking about us being able to compete with Detroit and Colorado...we lost to f'n Florida...with Mario. Because we had no defense or bottom six forwards...watch the series. 66 and 68 weren't the problem.

1997 we lost to Philadelphia...a deeper team...almost immediately. Same deal, all down the line. 1998 we lost to Montreal with a 50 year old Andy Moog...not because Jagr (9 pts in 6 games and a +5) playing with Francis and Stu Barnes...it's the rest of the team that was absolute mud...

8 goals and 21 points, +12 from Jagr, Barnes, Francis...7 goals, 20 points, -26 from the rest of the damn roster...

Yeah...check out that depth...put your shades on too, those guys are practically glowing...

We upset NJ in 1999 only and I mean only because Jagr was out there in his best series on one leg...getting massaged on the bench between shifts just to stay alive...

(sorry, I was on a roll...Straka was also a monster in the 1999 series...but still, it was Jagr's best).

You are delusional. Who were the 3rd and 4th liners on 99 Stars (other than aging Carbonneau)? 04 Lightning (other than the suddenly competent Ukrainian All-Star)? 06 Canes? Nobody remembers.

Pittsburgh's 3rd and 4th liners had the same exact credentials and the same name recognition. They sucked and Penguins lost. All those teams had a few 3rd liners chip in (or not), but it still was the Modanos, the MSLs, and the Staals that drove the boat.

Pittsburgh had no defense in the 90s. Boo-ef-hoo. You only get four generational players in the last thirty years. We weep for you.

 

[The Macho King]

You are delusional. Who were the 3rd and 4th liners on 99 Stars (other than aging Carbonneau)? 04 Lightning (other than the suddenly competent Ukrainian All-Star)? 06 Canes? Nobody remembers.

Pittsburgh's 3rd and 4th liners had the same exact credentials and the same name recognition. They sucked and Penguins lost. All those teams had a few 3rd liners chip in (or not), but it still was the Modanos, the MSLs, and the Staals that drove the boat.

Pittsburgh had no defense in the 90s. Boo-ef-hoo. You only get four generational players in the last thirty years. We weep for you.

i remember

 

[bobholly39]

Best seasons by tier (*with reasonable consideration for missed games)

Tier 1

Jagr 95/96
Jagr 98/99
Jagr 99/00*
Ovechkin 07/08
Ovechkin 09/10*

Tier 2

Jagr 94/95
Jagr 97/98
Jagr 96/97*
Jagr 00/01
Jagr 05/06
Ovechkin 08/09
Ovechkin 12/13

Debatable - Ovechkin 14/15

I see a clear edge to Jagr in elite seasons (8 to 4).

You're being unjustly harsh against Ovechkin. There's no way a Rocket winning season shouldn't be considered elite. If I had to count "elite" seasons I'd go:

Jagr:

94-95
95-96
97-98
98-99
99-00
2000-2001
2005-2006

That's 7

Ovechkin:

2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2012-2013
2013-2014 (-35 looks bad - but 51 goal + rocket is still elite)
2014-2015
2017-2018

Also 7.

You can probably add 96-97 to Jagr if you want too. I didn't split it into tiers because it's not that easy to do so tbh - but if you want to give it a try go for it. I just think those are the seasons worthy of consideration. At first glance I tend to agree that Jagr comes out ahead.

 

[MXD]

Fedotenko, Taylor, André Roy, Perrin, Afanasenkov...

 

[Sentinel]

Hasek is a clear #1 here and is way overdue.
Followed, in rapid succession, by Crosby, Shore, Ovechkin, Jagr, and Lidstrom. Morenz further down, Bourque is further yet, and I can't even see Potvin.

Makarov should be here.

 

[The Macho King]

Hasek is a clear #1 here and is way overdue.
Followed, in rapid succession, by Crosby, Shore, Ovechkin, Jagr, and Lidstrom. Morenz further down, Bourque is further yet, and I can't even see Potvin.

Makarov should be here.

There is zero good arguments for Lidstrom over Bourque. Zero. Peak = Bourque. Prime = Bourque. Longevity = Bourque. Playoffs = Lidstrom but not by a ton (and considering quality of teams that makes up the gap for me). Offense = Bourque by a mile. Defense = Tie. Impact = Bourque.

Lidstrom is a tier below Bourque. Definitely shouldn't be top 5 in this vote.

 

[The Macho King]

Fedotenko, Taylor, André Roy, Perrin, Afanasenkov...

And a certain Hall of Famer...

(seriously Andreychuk being in the HHOF is a sin).

 

[Michael Farkas]

You are delusional.

Pittsburgh had no defense in the 90s. Boo-ef-hoo. You only get four generational players in the last thirty years. We weep for you.

Do you have any idea where you are or what we're talking about right now? This isn't a fan forum. We're not on sports talk radio. We're trying to talk about the best players in the history of hockey...you're not helping nor are you making sense. In fact, you're not helping because you're not making sense. And that's not limited to this exchange. Figure it out.

 

[ImporterExporter]

At least we've had some good discussions of Crosby.

Morenz should get more attention. His offense isn't as good as some others here. There are reasons to think he's been overrated and overhyped and 'star power' puff, relative to other marginal top-10 players ever.

Someone even said the votes for him were a reason to just vote him in! Just push him across the line and move on. Lol.

I absolutely think if Morenz hadn't played in Montreal he wouldn't have near the folk lore surrounding him. Fact of the matter he never really dominated the league at a level commensurate with the kind of outlandish things you see written about him, mainly from Montreal papers. One HAS to consider the bias of that time period and the fact that the hockey world was generally centered around Montreal and most of the most fanatical opinions came from that epicenter and are far to often treated as gospel by the average onlooker.

I'm very high on other Habitants across hockey history. But Morenz doesn't add up when you look at the numbers relative to the league and other superstars across the eras, IMHO. He was the best offensive player in the league a handful of times (his peak was pre consolidation hockey which isn't quite the same league as post), but there were absolutely better 2 way F's (Boucher and Nighbor come to mind immediately), defensive F's, and certainly a few that were clearly superior as postseason players go and his postseason career was uneven at best with really only 1 signature run, pre-consolidation btw. I can't put him above players like Bourque, Crosby, Hasek for starters. Not a chance. He's not in the back end this round but he's not a top 3-4 player for me either.

 

[Nick Hansen]

And a certain Hall of Famer...

(seriously Andreychuk being in the HHOF is a sin).

Time to come to peace with the idea that Patrick Marleau's being inducted as well sooner or later...