Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 5

[Captain Bowie]

Couple that with his postseason record and it's why I have him a touch higher than Hall.

Yeah I'm right there with you. Will have him much higher than I did initially, and certainly the highest newcomer this round, bypassing a few of carryovers as well.

 

[Nick Hansen]

I’ll try to throw something together regarding Terry Sawchuk tonight - who I might have top-3 with Messier and Nighbor, subject to the inevitable counter-arguments.

Will be interesting what you have to come up with, with regards to Sawchuk. On the surface you're kind of left wondering why he is coming up this early.

I'll add that he was 9th all time on the famous top 100 list that the Hockey News released in '99 (Plante 13th and Hall 16th).

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

There has been a good case made for Brodeur over Glenn Hall.

The case for Hall hasn't really been made yet, and it's simple - if he's a close 2nd behind Jacques Plante for the best goalie before 1980, shouldn't that rank higher than the clear cut 3rd best goalie after 1980?

Anyway, I'm going to try to make room for both of them in my top 5, though I'm not quite sure they'll fit.

 

[Captain Bowie]

There has been a good case made for Brodeur over Glenn Hall.

The case for Hall hasn't really been made yet, and it's simple - if he's a close 2nd behind Jacques Plante for the best goalie before 1980, shouldn't that rank higher than the clear cut 3rd best goalie after 1980?

Anyway, I'm going to try to make room for both of them in my top 5, though I'm not quite sure they'll fit.

Eh... that feels a little too close to an argument based on "quotas" to me to be seen as a real solid argument.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Eh... that feels a little too close to an argument based on "quotas" to me to be seen as a real solid argument.

Why is it that the word "quotas" is only ever used in these projects to dismiss older players?

I mean, I have no particular problem with Marty being the 4th ranked goalie here (I might have even done it myself during the HOH goalies project), but it does feel pretty modern-heavy.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Why is it that the word "quotas" is only ever used in these projects to dismiss older players?

Not sure if you are accusing me of something, but it works both (all) ways. I don't think it would be right to look at it that way regardless of the era or position.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Observations on Brodeur:

Best puck handling goalie I've ever seen. Great durability.

Average puck stopper who gave up a surprising amount of soft goals.

Played on the best defensive team I've ever seen. His puck handling skills a very big part of that. How good defensively? In 2000, Game 6 playoff game with Maple Leafs, Brodeur has a 6 save shutout.


Career backup goalie Corey Schwab:

In his 2 stints with the Devils (over 3 different seasons): 24 games, .929 SP, 1.54 GA
Career: 147 games, .896 SP, 2.89 GA (That's counting the 24 Devils' games)

 

[The Macho King]

One quick point on Hall - he gets knocked a lot on playoffs, but A) he deserves credit for ending the Habs run, and B) he did win a Smythe very late in his career.

I just want to make sure Hall and Ovechkin are properly compared, because their resumes are kind of similar (regular season dominance, playoff disappointment). I would contend that Hall has a more impressive resume in the playoffs than Ovi simply because he has two signature runs to Ovis one.

Edit: Not trying to pick on Ovi here, but I just noticed that they are the only players up in this round that have "playoff knocks" as opposed to neutral or positive playoff resumes.

 

[MXD]

One quick point on Hall - he gets knocked a lot on playoffs, but A) he deserves credit for ending the Habs run, and B) he did win a Smythe very late in his career.

I just want to make sure Hall and Ovechkin are properly compared, because their resumes are kind of similar (regular season dominance, playoff disappointment). I would contend that Hall has a more impressive resume in the playoffs than Ovi simply because he has two signature runs to Ovis one.

I don't exactly know why I didn't think of this before...

 

[ted2019]

IMO Mikita was ranked just right from the start and should definitely be a top 5 this round. There are about 3 vocal naysayers that are obviously influencing people like yourself

Don't speak for me. I'm a big boy and can make my own decisions.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Observations on Brodeur:

Best puck handling goalie I've ever seen. Great durability.

Average puck stopper who gave up a surprising amount of soft goals.

Played on the best defensive team I've ever seen. His puck handling skills a very big part of that. How good defensively? In 2000, Game 6 playoff game with Maple Leafs, Brodeur has a 6 save shutout.


Career backup goalie Corey Schwab:

In his 2 stints with the Devils (over 3 different seasons): 24 games, .929 SP, 1.54 GA
Career: 147 games, .896 SP, 2.89 GA (That's counting the 24 Devils' games)

Bold one... what??? I'd like to see any data you have that lead you to that conclusion.

Bold two... that can't be right. BRB....WTF? Holy crap how have I never heard this before? However as interesting and odd as that is, it doesn't really prove a whole lot. One game out of over 1000 certainly doesn't mean much.

Bold three... Not only is 24 games an incredibly small sample size, his total minutes in a Devils uniform don't even add up to 19 full NHL games.

 

[Sentinel]

You really seem to be glossing over Mikita's peak which was 9 seasons.

He takes a hit in the playoffs as his best seasons weren't consecutive but part of that is team function.

There is no such thing as a "9 season peak."

 

[wetcoast]

There is no such thing as a "9 season peak."

Okay let's say that you are right then, Mikita has a 6 year peak with scoring finishes of

Mikita 1,1,2,1,1,4
Lafleur 4,1,1,1,3,3


He also has 3 more 3rd place finishes in scoring as well as a 13th and 14th overall point finishes outside of his peak.

Lafleur outside of his 6 year peak has a 10,19 and 24 in PPG to counter that.

Even if one thinks that Lafleur has the better peak the advantage is miniscule.

It's certainly alot less than the 3 more 3rd place finishes that Mikita had to go along with a 3rd in PPG season and a 13 and 15th place finish right?

If Mikita sucked defensively and Lafleur excelled at it it would be one thing but Mikita has a huge advantage here that's clear as day.

It's also not like Mikita was bad in the playoffs and taking their entire careers into account in the playoffs even if Lafleur has an edge it's not huge either.

If people want to put Lafleur ahead of mikita this round that's their right but the argument really favours Mikita and it's not even really close here.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

[Fetisov] is the greatest Soviet/Russian d-man of all time. Does not mean that he's the greatest Soviet hockey player of all time. His value may have been so apparent because, in the library of hockey "Great Soviet Defensemen" is a very thin book.

Been meaning to add some pages to that book. How about-

Top Defenseman whose résumé was substantively based on non-NHL-activity (ahead of Suchý, Vasiliev, Pospíšil). All right- that doesn't move the needle much. Let's try:

Top Defenseman of the '80s (ahead of Coffey, Mark Howe, Langway). Still not a lot- maybe we could go for:

Top non-NHL European ever. [Yeah, I understand that an un-nominated individual is viewed more highly in many quarters. However, the fact that he came up tops on the HoH project for that distinction, plus was nominated before that guy- goes to indicate that there is- if not a consensus, at least a healthy plurality on that matter.] If still insufficient, maybe there's:

Top 1980s Hockey-player not named Gretzky. Well- it's either him or Messier. There are surely enough contemporary accounts on both major Hockey continents testifying in support of precisely that conclusion.

 

[The Macho King]

Been meaning to add some pages to that book. How about-

Top Defenseman whose résumé was substantively based on non-NHL-activity (ahead of Suchý, Vasiliev, Pospíšil). All right- that doesn't move the needle much. Let's try:

Top Defenseman of the '80s (ahead of Coffey, Mark Howe, Langway). Still not a lot- maybe we could go for:

Top non-NHL European ever. [Yeah, I understand that an un-nominated individual is viewed more highly in many quarters. However, the fact that he came up tops on the HoH project for that distinction, plus was nominated before that guy- goes to indicate that there is- if not a consensus, at least a healthy plurality on that matter.] If still insufficient, maybe there's:

Top 1980s Hockey-player not named Gretzky. Well- it's either him or Messier. There are surely enough contemporary accounts on both major Hockey continents testifying in support of precisely that conclusion.

So we're going to pretend that Bourque and Lemieux don't exist for purposes of this discussion I guess?

 

[seventieslord]

Wish I could have contributed more, but I have read every word.

 

[blogofmike]

If you explained why you blame Mikita so much for the Black Hawks playoff failures, I must have missed it. His stats are generally fine, and I've seen more written about Bobby Hull's lack of defensive commitment in the playoffs than Mikita's.

The only thing specific I've seen thats bad about Mikita in the playoffs is that the much larger Beliveau owned him head to head, but that's at least partly management's fault for never acquiring support players who could play against Beliveau (like Toronto did with Kelly).

Skimmed pre-60s-dynasty matchups and it doesn't look like Mikita was owned by Beliveau. At least not yet. Beliveau had a big year in 65 but was scoring more on the PP. Mikita was an occasional PK player with 5 PGA over the whole playoffs, but it seems that 6'3 Bill Hay was out there for many more.

Also while Mikita lacks consistency of some others, he did hit some high notes early 'A couple of hi-hos and here we go'

21 points in 2 rounds was an NHL record. 21 is a lot. It would have tied Lafleur and Robinson for a playoff points lead they earned in a three round era about 15 years later. Hell it would have won the playoff points race in 1986.

 

[Canadiens1958]

1965 SC Finals:

1965 NHL Stanley Cup Stanley Cup Final: CBH vs. MTL | Hockey-Reference.com

Canadiens outscoredChicago 10 to 5 in PPG.

Basic reason being Stan Mikita picking up 35 PIMs served in games so for almost the equivalent of two games Chicago centers, notably Bill Hay were playing without usual linemates,filling PK and PP roles usually filled by Mikita.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

[Fetisov]...
Top 1980s Hockey-player not named Gretzky. Well- it's either him or Messier. There are surely enough contemporary accounts on both major Hockey continents testifying in support of precisely that conclusion.

So we're going to pretend that Bourque and Lemieux don't exist for purposes of this discussion I guess?

1) For the purposes of my "by decade" classification, I tagged Lemieux as a '90s player. I don't think that assignation should prove too controversial. 2) Somewhat more controversially- I'd say that (if limiting it to the '80s), '80s Fetisov is right there with '80s Bourque.

...while Mikita lacks consistency of some others, he did hit some high notes early

Yeah- but I think they're more than offset by the brown notes later on. Mikita's an easy career minus player in the playoffs. Carve out either of those two strong runs early on, and he'd be a career double-digit minus player postseason. Good thing for him that he achieved one Stanley Cup- for if he hadn't, many of us could be talking about him in the same breath as that freakishly high-scoring Center that I have sitting on my list in the low-60s. Speaking of which, try this "home-test."

1) Take out your Preliminary List.
2) Start at the top, and move down until you get to your entry for Eddie Shore, OR your entry for your highest-ranked player not yet Voted on- whichever comes first.
3) Scroll down until you find your entry for Dionne, Marcel.
4) See if you can find anyone between (2) and (3) whom you would rather NOT have in a Playoff series than Stan Mikita.
5) If you find anyone there, for G_d's sake warn us about him (!), so that we can re-assess our evaluations, if need be.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

Been meaning to add some pages to that book. How about-

Top Defenseman whose résumé was substantively based on non-NHL-activity (ahead of Suchý, Vasiliev, Pospíšil). All right- that doesn't move the needle much. Let's try:

Top Defenseman of the '80s (ahead of Coffey, Mark Howe, Langway). Still not a lot- maybe we could go for:

Top non-NHL European ever. [Yeah, I understand that an un-nominated individual is viewed more highly in many quarters. However, the fact that he came up tops on the HoH project for that distinction, plus was nominated before that guy- goes to indicate that there is- if not a consensus, at least a healthy plurality on that matter.] If still insufficient, maybe there's:

Top 1980s Hockey-player not named Gretzky. Well- it's either him or Messier. There are surely enough contemporary accounts on both major Hockey continents testifying in support of precisely that conclusion.

LOL I'm sure there was that defenseman named Raymond Bourque, you know the second greatest defenseman of all time.

By the way Mario Lemieux > Fetisov too even if the former was "more dominant" in the 90's, he was still Mario Lemieux in the 80's.

 

[MXD]

I’ll try to throw something together regarding Terry Sawchuk tonight - who I might have top-3 with Messier and Nighbor, subject to the inevitable counter-arguments.

Think of how many FaceTime requests you could actually accept instead of doing something that's would end up being extremely not productive at this point.

 

[quoipourquoi]

It took just two years into the NHL for Terry Sawchuk to already start being praised as the greatest goaltender ever by people like Frank Boucher, and it’s a reputation that he seemingly held by a plurality up until the late-1990s.

HOH has obviously had some push-back to this, and obviously anyone being replaced at 25-years-old should probably be a red flag, but take into consideration that with only 6 available starting jobs at a time when complete or near-complete seasons were the expectation, there were probably itchier trigger fingers to look towards the next Original 6 Goaltender than what we will find for any other positional player in any other era.

That is to say, it’s not enough to be coming off of five League Championships with Terry Sawchuk with 130-139 GA in 70 GP seasons; you have to prepare for the next five and the five after that. While much is made about how Sawchuk in Boston wasn’t replicating Detroit’s success, Detroit’s GA also shot up by 15 in 1956 despite a marginal decline in league averages, and they didn’t have a problem flipping back to post-Mono Sawchuk after two seasons and a disappointing 1957 playoff from Hall, so there was certainly some volatility in the era.

Sawchuk’s style, of course, did him no favors without proper protective equipment. The courage in playing with his face at low elevation to better scan puck movement resulted in a substantial number of injuries that needed to be ignored because of the constant fear of the 7th best goaltender in the world coming into the league in his place.

To me, I see him largely the same way I do any other temperamental star - the more confidence placed in him, the better the results - but at the disadvantage of having the strongest need to remain healthy (so few jobs that anything else than 3rd best is technically below average) while playing a way that virtually guaranteed getting hit in less-than-shielded areas (which would be a non-issue in any era that gave adequate protection to its goaltenders).

So taking all of this into consideration, I find there to be middle ground between his media reputation and his previous HOH project assessments.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Been meaning to add some pages to that book. How about-

Top Defenseman whose résumé was substantively based on non-NHL-activity (ahead of Suchý, Vasiliev, Pospíšil). All right- that doesn't move the needle much. Let's try:

Top Defenseman of the '80s (ahead of Coffey, Mark Howe, Langway). Still not a lot- maybe we could go for:

Top non-NHL European ever. [Yeah, I understand that an un-nominated individual is viewed more highly in many quarters. However, the fact that he came up tops on the HoH project for that distinction, plus was nominated before that guy- goes to indicate that there is- if not a consensus, at least a healthy plurality on that matter.] If still insufficient, maybe there's:

Top 1980s Hockey-player not named Gretzky. Well- it's either him or Messier. There are surely enough contemporary accounts on both major Hockey continents testifying in support of precisely that conclusion.

Lotsa conjecture. Still need to see more concrete evidence other than..."since he was the best Soviet defenseman ever, it's logical to assume that he should be in the top 10 of all-time defensemen", or "He looked good playing with the "Big 5" in the very few games we ever saw them play against top Canadian talent". His awards while playing against purely Soviet or European teams is taken with a grain of salt by me. I mean, are we all that confident that he was the best Soviet player ever... better than Makarov or Kharlamov?

As it is, I've tried to place him in a spot I deem "fair" in this round. While he's not among the bottom couple, he won't make my top 5 either.

 

[wetcoast]

Not sure if you are accusing me of something, but it works both (all) ways. I don't think it would be right to look at it that way regardless of the era or position.

I tend to agree but that being said it's hard to seperate the feelings some might have about 2 players being really close to each other then separated by a gap of say 10 which seems large in a round but might not in the big picture of things.

 

[wetcoast]

1) For the purposes of my "by decade" classification, I tagged Lemieux as a '90s player. I don't think that assignation should prove too controversial. 2) Somewhat more controversially- I'd say that (if limiting it to the '80s), '80s Fetisov is right there with '80s Bourque.Yeah- but I think they're more than offset by the brown notes later on. Mikita's an easy career minus player in the playoffs. Carve out either of those two strong runs early on, and he'd be a career double-digit minus player postseason. Good thing for him that he achieved one Stanley Cup- for if he hadn't, many of us could be talking about him in the same breath as that freakishly high-scoring Center that I have sitting on my list in the low-60s. Speaking of which, try this "home-test."

1) Take out your Preliminary List.
2) Start at the top, and move down until you get to your entry for Eddie Shore, OR your entry for your highest-ranked player not yet Voted on- whichever comes first.
3) Scroll down until you find your entry for Dionne, Marcel.
4) See if you can find anyone between (2) and (3) whom you would rather NOT have in a Playoff series than Stan Mikita.
5) If you find anyone there, for G_d's sake warn us about him (!), so that we can re-assess our evaluations, if need be.

Just wondering if you applied this home test to Kelly who was a minus center in the Leafs payoff dynasty.

Mikita's supporting cast comes into play here a bit right?

Did I read that right, that you have Mikita in your low 60"s?

Or better yet Esposito, also up this round, a player vastly inferior to Mikita defensively and has his plus/minus masked by a guy named Orr.