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

[86Habs]

I'm sorry but Jagr does not have fantastic postseason numbers. His raw point total looks "great" at 5th all time but his points per game there doesn't add up....and yes I realize he played until he was like 545 years old haha. Still, he's well behind others this round as far as postseason careers go. And he DID have ample opportunities to rise up. Never truly did.

Jagr has an elite offensive regular season resume but beyond that I'm not impressed with him this round. He was never the difference for his team(s) and that matters when we're talking about spots 9-15.

I think the bolded part is certainly a fair statement, and that's how I would sum up Jagr's post-season career. He was, on the whole, good in the post-season but I couldn't point to a season where he elevated his play and took charge of his team. 1992 was a very good run for him, playing behind Lemieux with Francis. He was disappointing in the 1993 upset by the Islanders. 1996 was a year where you would have expected more, with Pittsburgh having a nice path to the finals. Disappointing again in 2001. A bunch of ~PPG efforts in other post-seasons and a few reasonably good runs with New York. No defining post-season run (personally, I wouldn't count 1992).

 

[Batis]

After comparing the numbers of Crosby, Jagr and Ovechkin at the knockout stage of best-on-best international tournaments earlier in this thread I decided to also take a look at the numbers of the other available players here. The ones who played in an era with best-on-best tournaments available to them that is. Now the sample sizes are obviously small but I still think that it is interesting and worthwhile to do since I personally consider the knockout stage at best-on-best international tournaments to have been the highest level of competition available to players over the last 40 or so years. With this said it is not as if I base my rankings in this project that much on how the players did in the knockout stage of best-on-best tournaments but if the overall resume of two players are close to each other it is something that I could look at as deciding factor along with the overall "clutch" play of the player.

Potvin
Canada Cup 1976: 2 gp, 1 g, 3 a, 4 pts
Canada Cup 1981: 2 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 4 gp, 1 g, 4 a, 5 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 14 gp, 3 g, 13 a, 16 pts

Bourque
Canada Cup 1981: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Canada Cup 1984: 3 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Canada Cup 1987: 4 gp, 1 g, 2 a, 3 pts
Olympics 1998: 3 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 12 gp, 1 g, 4 a, 5 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 30 gp, 4 g, 16 a, 20 pts

Messier
Canada Cup 1984: 3 gp, 1 g, 1 a, 2 pts
Canada Cup 1987: 4 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Canada Cup 1991: 3 gp, 2 g, 3 a, 5 pts
World Cup 1996: 3 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 13 gp, 3 g, 7 a, 10 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 32 gp, 6 g, 20 a, 26 pts

Lidström
Canada Cup 1991: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
World Cup 1996: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 1998: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2002: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
World Cup 2004: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2006: 3 gp, 1 g, 3 a, 4 pts
Olympics 2010: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 9 gp, 1 g, 4 a, 5 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 34 gp, 8 g, 12 a, 20 pts

Hasek
Canada Cup 1987: 1 gp, 32 saves on 37 shots, 0.865
Olympics 1998: 3 gp, 82 saves on 84 shots, 0.976
Olympics 2002: 1 gp, 26 saves on 27 shots, 0.963
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 5 gp, 140 saves on 148 shots, 0.946
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 26 gp, 606 saves on 668 shots, 0.907

And here are the numbers of Crosby, Ovechkin and Jagr again. This time with their overall stats included as well.

Jagr
Olympics 1998: 3 gp, 1 g, 1 a, 2 pts
Olympics 2002: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
World Cup 2004: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2006: 3 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Olympics 2010: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2014: 2 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 13 gp, 1 g, 4 a, 5 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 41 gp, 12 g, 15 a, 27 pts

Ovechkin
World Cup 2004: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2006: 3 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
Olympics 2010: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2014: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
World Cup 2016: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 8 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 23 gp, 10 g, 5 a, 15 pts

Crosby
Olympics 2010: 4 gp, 2 g, 0 a, 2 pts
Olympics 2014: 3 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
World Cup 2016: 3 gp, 1 g, 5 a, 6 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 10 gp, 4 g, 5 a, 9 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 19 gp, 8 g, 12 a, 20 pts

When it comes to their performances at the knockout stage of best-on-best international tournaments the player I would rank first among the available players is Dominik Hasek. His Nagano performance in 1998 when he pretty much turned into a wall during the knockout stage is one the more impressive performances that I have ever seen. Saving 82 out of 84 shots against USA, Canada and Russia is very impressive. Not to mention his shootout performance against Canada.

Next I would probably have Crosby and Potvin. Crosby may not have been overly impressive at the knockout stage in 2010 and 2014 even if he did step up and scored the golden goal in 2010. He really stepped up in 2016 though with a truly remarkable performance where he produced at a very high level all throughout the tournament. Potvin had a very impressive tournament in 1976 and kept producing against a strong Czechoslovakian team in the finals. In 1981 Potvin also had a strong tournament even if he really struggled with the speed of the top Soviet forwards in the final. But that is really the only knock on his best-on-best tournament resume.

Then I would rank the best-on-best resume of Mark Messier. He really had a impressive knockout stage in 1991 and generally put up relatively strong offensive numbers combined with everything else that he brough to the table.

Next up Lidström and Bourque. I had expected Bourque to have stronger numbers during the knockout stage. In fact Bourque was one of the players that regressed the most offensively from the group stage (15 pts in 18 gp) to the knockout stage (5 pts in 12 gp). So somewhat surprisingly to me Lidström was more productive offensively on a per game basis. On the other hand most of Lidströms offensive production came during his very strong 2006 Olympic tournament and outside of that tournament Lidström and Tre Kronor experienced many heartbreaking losses. Still overall the best-on-best resumes of these two are probably on a pretty similar level.

Next I have Jagr whose best-on-best resume is rather average for a player of his quality. Both at the knockout stage and overall. Like I mentioned earlier I think that Jagr having by far the least support offensively on the national team (out of the players in this round) can help explain his somewhat average numbers to some degree. When including the group stage Jagr actually does have the most points scored in best-on-best tournaments out of the players in this round with 27 but that is rather a testiment to his longevity than anything else.

As I mentioned in my previous post I find Ovechkins numbers to be very underwhelming. Especially his regression from the group stage (14 pts in 15 gp) to the knockout stage (1 pts in 8 gp). His weak knockout stage numbers is also what in my opinion makes Ovechkins best-on-best resume the clearly weakest out of the players in this round.

Even if they already are on the list here are Gretzkys and Lemieuxs best-on-best numbers at the knockout stage. Just for fun.

Gretzky
Canada Cup 1981: 2 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Canada Cup 1984: 3 gp, 2 g, 3 a, 5 pts
Canada Cup 1987: 4 gp, 1 g, 10 a, 11 pts
Canada Cup 1991: 2 gp, 1 g, 1 a, 2 pts
World Cup 1996: 4 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Olympics 1998: 3 gp, 0 g, 3 a, 3 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 18 gp, 4 g, 20 a, 24 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 45 gp, 20 g, 48 a, 68 pts

Lemieux
Canada Cup 1987: 4 gp, 6 g, 4 a, 10 pts
Olympics 2002: 3 gp, 0 g, 4 a, 4 pts
World Cup 2004: 3 gp, 1 g, 3 a, 4 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 10 gp, 7 g, 11 a, 18 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 20 gp, 14 g, 15 a, 29 pts

 

[VanIslander]

HASEK HAS LONGEVITY.

He was an all-star at the 1983 World junior championships.

He represented Czechoslovakia as a 19 year old (youngest national team member ever) in the 1984 Canada Cup.

He won the 1986 Golden Stick as best Czechoslovakian (four times 1986-90).

Then 1990-1993 he had a three-year period of ADJUSTMENT going from behind the Iron Curtain of communism to a radically different life, and facing coach criticism for his 'lack of basics' (his highly unorthodox style) and limited ice time and limited challenging big game pressure (Hasek thrives on pressure - imagine how a race car driver would feel working in a library) stuck behind HHOF Ed Belfour.

Then Hasek played a 40+ game season in Buffalo and thrived from 1983-2002.

So, from 1983 to 2002, ... or even if start at great Czechoslovakian of year award in 1986 to 2002...

THAT IS GREAT LONGEVITY OF HIGH LEVEL PLAY.

Roy was 1986-03
Hasek was 1986-02

The 3-year adjustment is equivalent to injury issues. And please don't penalize a player for what they did as a 40+ year old in Ottawa (after 2002).

The fact is Hasek had 18 minus 3 equals 15 great years... that's longevity.

Plante only has 1955 to 1964.. then a 3-year gap himself!!! (he did not play) then two significant years in St. Louis and Toronto. No one knocks Plante for lack of longevity - no one should knock Hasek either.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Fewer Norris than only Lidstrom.

As mentioned before, when Bourque was traded that "stacked team" was 4 games over .500.

when bettman handed that stacked team its cup, its second line was hinote, drury, nieminen

 

[The Macho King]

Agree with @VanIslander - Hasek's longevity issues are a bit overstated. I think one of the things that make them so easy to suggest is because his peak - over what, an 8 year span? was so high above his competition, that when a) the competition caught up, and b) he declined from legendary to merely very good, he begins to be discounted.

But on the other end, if you take out his absolute peak, he doesn't sniff this list (of course that's to an extent a stupid thing to say, because outside of a handful of players with extended primes that applies to 90+% of this list). But his peak is *so high*, and the rest of his resume seems orders of magnitude lower - the longevity argument kind of takes hold.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

HASEK HAS LONGEVITY.

He was an all-star at the 1983 World junior championships.

He represented Czechoslovakia as a 19 year old (youngest national team member ever) in the 1984 Canada Cup.

He won the 1986 Golden Stick as best Czechoslovakian (four times 1986-90).

Then 1990-1993 he had a three-year period of ADJUSTMENT going from behind the Iron Curtain of communism to a radically different life, and facing coach criticism for his 'lack of basics' (his highly unorthodox style) and limited ice time and limited challenging big game pressure (Hasek thrives on pressure - imagine how a race car driver would feel working in a library) stuck behind HHOF Ed Belfour.

Then Hasek played 40+ game season in Buffalo and thrived from 1983-2002.

So, from 1983 to 2002, ... or even if start at great Czechoslovakian of year award in 1986 to 2002...

THAT IS GREAT LONGEVITY OF HIGH LEVEL PLAY.

Roy was 1986-03
Hasek was 1986-02

The 3-year adjustment is equivalent to injury issues. And please don't penalize a player for what they did as a 40+ year old in Ottawa (after 2002).

The fact is Hasek had 18 minus 3 equals 15 great years... that's longevity.

Plante only has 1955 to 1964.. then a 3-year gap himself!!! (he did not play) then two significant years in St. Louis and Toronto. No one knocks Plante for lack of longevity - no one should knock Hasek either.

all the other stuff is useful info but all star at the wjc? seriously?

 

[The Macho King]

when bettman handed that stacked team its cup, its second line was hinote, drury, nieminen

Drury was good back then?

I mean, that is a good team. Sakic obviously. Hejduk was a good player at the time, as was Tanguay. You had anchors on D of Blake, Foote, and Bourque. And while Forsberg wasn't around for the Finals, he was on the team up until what - the second or third round?

And of course, you have Roy in net. When you look at the roster in the Finals, it looks less impressive, but if you look at the regular season roster, that team looks mighty stacked. But yeah - obviously they weren't as good when Forsberg went out.

 

[VanIslander]

all the other stuff is useful info but all star at the wjc? seriously?

Cheap shot at me... or: did you read all the post?

I go on to consider only from the 1986 accomplishments onward (not all star 83 wjc or 84 Canada Cup... i simply mentioned his earliest star moments because this is about longevity and some people myopically just look at his nhl years and think he suddenly became great in 1993... he was always great (minus 3year adjustment gap and later when over 40 years old in Ottawa) and, from 1986, significantly so for this project.

 

[VanIslander]

Drury was good back then?

Drury won the Hobey Baker then won the NHL's Calder trophy.

More importantly, Drury was incredibly clutch as a goal scorer. Like Tikkanen and Stu Barnes on other teams, Drury had the ability to turn on the goal scoring when it mattered most. Drury and Tanguay were young stars, Alex more of a passer.

Drury had 29 game-winning goals over his first 4 NHL years, including 13 playoff winners. In addition, I remember he had key goals to tie games.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Who's the best defensively out of each category (D, C, F) would you say?

 

[Michael Farkas]

It's not a cheap shot, it's just not something you put on a resume in the stage that we're at right now...

Hasek's longevity issues might be overstated in years spanned, sure...but there's also gaps, like where he's not the starter because Jimmy Dead Waite is...or when he quits because his coach was gassing up his wife...etc.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Who's the best defensively out of each category (D, C, F) would you say?

Best defensively (D): Lidstrom
Best defensively (C): Messier
Best defensively (W): Uhhh...LW Messier? If I can't use it twice, then later career Mikita or playoff Crosby deserve a crack at it...

Best goalie defensively was Plante...with his ability to play the puck out of the net, better skater than Hasek...

 

[The Macho King]

Who's the best defensively out of each category (D, C, F) would you say?

Defenseman - Tie between Lidstrom/Bourque
Centers - Messier, although frankly this is kind of by default. None of the other players are noted for their D (Crosby is most notable at being "not bad" at D). I'm hoping next vote we get some legit two-way forwards in here because they've been underrepresented to date (Clarke, Nighbor, and Trottier are hopefully close). Mikita got better in his later years by accounts, but since I'm mainly judging him by what he did in the 60s that doesn't move the needle for me.
Wingers - Ummm... Ovechkin? I don't know - neither option is remotely good defensively, but Ovechkin at least backchecks at times.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Morenz is the best forward defensively this round.

 

[Sentinel]

One.

And he is on some top120 all time lists in this project (not mine) because of one great regular season, four great playoffs, worldclass wheels and a hounddog mentality. He did nothing great during his three seasons in Columbus as a 35+ year old.

If you don't have Fedorov on your list, you and I have literally nothing to talk about.

 

[The Macho King]

Morenz is the best forward defensively this round.

From what I've been reading, I have been thinking of him as Crosby-ish on D. As in he's pretty good in a "good for a #1C" sort of way, but not in a "I want this guy to match up against their top line to shut them down" type of way (although admittedly, no one in this vote really fits that description).

 

[VanIslander]

If you don't have Fedorov on your list, you and I have literally nothing to talk about.

Take away that one single exceptional season... and present his career as otherwise worthy of top120 consideration... then i'd buy it.

I appreciated Feds but so many players have one great season but arent in this project. Without that one season (one year is NOT long enough to be considered a peak at this level of competition) he has a 4-year playoff peak. That's it. Everything else seems insignificant from alltime great perspective.

Again... make a detailed case for him later... our votes can be won over by argument. We are open to learning more!!!!!

 

[VanIslander]

Morenz is the best forward defensively this round.

That is at most a secondary consideration. It moves him up marginally, one slot on my list, not used to consider basic area of the list.

He was no Peca or Carbonneau.
(Guys like Nighbor, Clarke, even a case for Forsberg or Henri Richard will involve significantly more credit for defensive play)

 

[Michael Farkas]

Morenz was better than Messier defensively...? Not that it's the highest bar in the world, but I'm not convinced Morenz clears it...

 

[MXD]

all the other stuff is useful info but all star at the wjc? seriously?

Even the Golden Sticks for the second half of the 80ies are practically irrelevant (in and of themselves) at this juncture.

It's not a cheap shot, it's just not something you put on a resume in the stage that we're at right now...

Hasek's longevity issues might be overstated in years spanned, sure...but there's also gaps, like where he's not the starter because Jimmy Dead Waite is...or when he quits because his coach was gassing up his wife...etc.

... What?

Who's the best defensively out of each category (D, C, F) would you say?

C - .... Morenz (but...)

From what I've been reading, I have been thinking of him as Crosby-ish on D. As in he's pretty good in a "good for a #1C" sort of way, but not in a "I want this guy to match up against their top line to shut them down" type of way (although admittedly, no one in this vote really fits that description).

This is where I have an issue. I'd probably declare a tie between Crosby and Morenz. Like, the actual version of Sidney Crosby would be on par with Morenz.

But Crosby wasn't always that good, and I can't quite ignore this.

The other thing I can't ignore is : I have absolutely no clue as to where was Morenz's defensive play at specific junctures in his career. I have a very general idea about what he was (the image that came to mind is Mike Modano), that's it. I don't know if he was that good in 24 or 1097 or 1931.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Morenz, from the plethora of things I've read on him was capable of being strong defensively but overall he used his elite speed to back check often more than anything. He was responsible and could cover up for slower linemates. But as far as actually being used in any type of shutdown role, there is very little there AFAIK.

I know we're not supposed to bring up people not on the list but there is far more on Nighbor's defense, both in game reports and historical/peer anecdotes. I'm sure myself and others can show that when the time comes. Frank Boucher has more written about his ability to shut players down as well and Morenz was one of those players he shut out, multiple times btw. He's not on Nighbor's level but very few are.

Given Messier's exploits as a PK'er and generally being solid to strong at ES, I'd give him the nod here. Mikita is underappreciated. I found good info/quotes right after his death as lots of peer reviews poured in. But overall we're talking small gaps with these guys and Morenz.

Crosby has generally long been a responsible defensive forward but it's only been in the last few seasons that he's started to take on a much more planned 2 way role. His career arc in that sense is very much like his boyhood idol, Steve Yzerman. I wouldn't be surprised to see him win a Selke as his career winds down or at least be in serious contention. But that remains to be seen.

 

[The Macho King]

Even the Golden Sticks for the second half of the 80ies are practically irrelevant (in and of themselves) at this juncture.




... What?



C - .... Morenz (but...)



This is where I have an issue. I'd probably declare a tie between Crosby and Morenz. Like, the actual version of Sidney Crosby would be on par with Morenz.

But Crosby wasn't always that good, and I can't quite ignore this.

The other thing I can't ignore is : I have absolutely no clue as to where was Morenz's defensive play at specific junctures in his career. I have a very general idea about what he was (the image that came to mind is Mike Modano), that's it. I don't know if he was that good in 24 or 1097 or 1931.

I'm starting to think we're underrating Morenz's longevity.

 

[seventieslord]

Ovechkin
World Cup 2004: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2006: 3 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
Olympics 2010: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2014: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
World Cup 2016: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 8 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts

My God.....

I mean really.

Drury won the Hobey Baker then won the NHL's Calder trophy.

More importantly, Drury was incredibly clutch as a goal scorer. Like Tikkanen and Stu Barnes on other teams, Drury had the ability to turn on the goal scoring when it mattered most. Drury and Tanguay were young stars, Alex more of a passer.

Drury had 29 game-winning goals over his first 4 NHL years, including 13 playoff winners. In addition, I remember he had key goals to tie games.

You're not wrong about Drury. Lots of clutch moments from 1997 to 2007.

 

[MXD]

Morenz, from the plethora of things I've read on him was capable of being strong defensively but overall he used his elite speed to back check often more than anything. He was responsible and could cover up for slower linemates. But as far as actually being used in any type of shutdown role, there is very little there AFAIK.

First liners in in that era were just not playing shutdown -- and if they were, then it's because there were other issues in their game.

 

[The Macho King]

My God.....

I mean really.



You're not wrong about Drury. Lots of clutch moments from 1997 to 2007.

Drury gets a ton of shit because of his contract with the Rangers. But shit - it's the Rangers. They're going to overpay for a FA.