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

[DannyGallivan]

Esposito was a better defensive player than Lafleur.

based on...?

 

[DannyGallivan]

The "problem" with Clarke in the postseason is that he never led his team in scoring in any of their 4 trips to the finals, despite being their leading regular season scorer by a wide margin for the years in the 1970s.

His postseason record is still pretty good, but it's not Nighbor or Lafleur (or Sakic).

Talk to Freddy Shero about it. He used Clarke the way he felt his team needed to in order to win. Clarke was a wonderful two-way centre who could shut down the best the opposition had to offer. It's pretty easy to understand.

 

[wetcoast]

1985 fatal car accident claimed his younger brother:

Viacheslav Fetisov - Wikipedia

Not the same player afterwards. Long term effects should be considered.

What do you mean that long term effects should be considered?

There wasn't any noticeable affect until 88-89 when his play in russia took a dip.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Brodeur's consistency as a goaltender is something that should be valued very highly I think. From 95/96 to 09/10, he's top five in Vezina voting every year except for one, to go along with a decent amount of support for the Hart over the years.

Who do you choose between him and Glenn Hall?

 

[MXD]

He had a few good years in between. As I mentioned in a Mikita post, he had more first place votes for the Hart than both Mikita (who came in second) and Howe (who won) in '63. Sawchuk had 37 while Howe won with 30 first place votes (he had a massive amount of second place votes). He won his last Vezina two years later. Plus, Sawchuk was crucial in the Leaf's last Stanley Cup win in '67 (.931 save percentage).

That seems like a case where the voting doesn't quite match up with reality, as Sawchuk :

- Didn't play many minutes (5th in the league; more than 1000 less than Glenn Hall)
- Didn't have great numbers (not that he was bad -- it was arguably his best post-dynasty year!), but his numbers depict a middle-of-the-road starter

Sorry, but if you play 20 full-games less than the guy who has better numbers than you, I won't care about your voting support.

... Not to mention that Sawchuk followed up with another mediocre playoff performance.

 

[MXD]

Speaking of Terry Sawchuk : Do we have reasons to believe that his SV% numbers do not depict an accurate picture of his skillset and his impact, like we can very reasonably surmise with Martin Brodeur?

 

[DannyGallivan]

1974

Clarke looks pretty ordinary against the Rangers in the semi final, (4 points, -1), but absolutely buried Jean Ratelle, who went -6 without any ES points. Clear win for Clarke here.

Phil Esposito fares little better in the famous upset in the SC Final. His -3 is directly opposite to Clarke's +3, and Espo only had two ES points in the series, which is one of the worst in his career.

1975

The Flyers washed Toronto in the quarter-final, Darryl Sittler with 0 ES points, -4.

Not sure about the semi-final. Clarke and Denis Potvin both had a good series. The Islanders didn't have any elite centers on their roster at this time.

Neither Clarke nor Perreault gave up much at ES. Clarke did his scoring on the PP, Perreault did little at either ES or PP, but did finish +1 despite the lack of scoring. Both players were better at home than on the road in this series.

1976

Sittler gets his points (5 at ES), but it seems they must have come at somebody else's expense. Clarke scored well too, and was a +6, while Sittler had an ugly -5.

Clarke seems to have dominated Jean Ratelle again, now a Boston Bruin. Just two ES points and a -3 for Ratelle as Philly beat the Bruins easily.

The Final against Montreal (127 point season) might be Clarke's first match-up loss since those same Habs in 1973. Clarke and Lemaire were both -1, while Peter Mahovlich ended up +4 with 3 ES points. Depending who mainly went against Clarke, it's either a saw-off or a loss.

Pretty good evidence of effective shut-down play by Clarke during three consecutive Cup final appearances. And while doing all that, he was still a point-a-game player (16 points in all three playoffs, while playing 17, 17 and 16 games). Plus, he was still as effective a playmaker as he was in the regular season, leading the playoffs in assists twice.

Two other two-way forwards won Conn Smythes with similar or less points per game (Gainey in '79 and Goring in '80). And, a lot of posters are huge Henri Richard appreciators because of his two-way play, yet he was occasionally a point per game in the playoffs (usually less). My point... there is a reason that Clarke focused more on defense in the playoffs... it was to win hockey games during his three consecutive Cup appearances. And by his fourth Cup appearance, the diabetic Clarke was already 30 years old and on the downslope of his career (30 was generally very old for a hockey player in the late '70's).

 

[MXD]

Brodeur's consistency as a goaltender is something that should be valued very highly I think. From 95/96 to 09/10, he's top five in Vezina voting every year except for one, to go along with a decent amount of support for the Hart over the years.

Who do you choose between him and Glenn Hall?

It's mostly comes down to the following metaphysical question : How much importance do you give to playoffs?

 

[wetcoast]

what makes larionov’s nhl career better than fetisov’s? other than longevity that is? (larionov was two years younger)

fwiw it was pretty universally agreed at the time that fetisov had the much better nhl year one than larionov.

Well for starters defensemen usually age better than forwards and yes Fetisov had the better 1st year.

Part of that might be that Fetisov played with his partner who also fared well and Larinov played with Krutov who absolutely bombed outside of system play.

Perhaps it might have been different if Makarov had played with Igor, which was the case later in San Jose where Larinov had pretty lofty numbers.

Fetisov kind of floundered until he got to Detroit and got to play in a favorable system again.

The age factor also doesn't was as plenty of Dmen 30 plus were better the following season in 90-91

Player Season Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

I would expect a defenseman to be ranked this high to have aged better, his play in his prime wasn't Orr like.

 

[MXD]

Is there, at this juncture and relative to Bobby Clarke, an argument to make with the fact that the Flyers seems to have allowed A LOT of shots on their Cup-winning years?
I don't quite have the time to average the shot numbers, but in 1975, they allowed over 100 shots more than the Sabres did (and both teams played 17 games), and they also allowed the most shots in 1974 as well.

 

[DannyGallivan]

That seems like a case where the voting doesn't quite match up with reality, as Sawchuk :

- Didn't play many minutes (5th in the league; more than 1000 less than Glenn Hall)
- Didn't have great numbers (not that he was bad -- it was arguably his best post-dynasty year!), but his numbers depict a middle-of-the-road starter

Sorry, but if you play 20 full-games less than the guy who has better numbers than you, I won't care about your voting support.

... Not to mention that Sawchuk followed up with another mediocre playoff performance.

Remember what we said during the top 120 discussions... goaltender numbers are almost always team numbers, and so much more than mere statistics need to be reviewed when discussing goalies. I noticed the odd numbers for Sawchuk compared to Hall, I can only surmise that you had to watch the goalies and the season to see why Sawchuk received more first place Hart votes than anybody (including a 37-30 advantage over Hart winner Gordie Howe).

 

[wetcoast]

In the last 10+ years a lot more NHL, newspaper and archival data has become available. Plus you have 10+ years of research collective time.

Still I think the pendulum might have swung too far from 95th to somewhere in the 20, these are top players of all time that he somehow leapfrogged without playing a single game, it's not like we had that little information on him in 2008 is it?

95th might have been low but top 25 is swinging the pendulum to high IMO.

There is still a really good argument for a good half dozen to dozen centers (I can think of 5 guys off the top of my head who aren't up yet.) who have a very strong argument against Nighbor.

 

[Sentinel]

I can't, for the love of it, see why is Makarov inferior to Lafleur.

Esposito should be in already. "The Orr effect" is getting very overstated, and Esposito beat Orr a few times for the Hart.

 

[MXD]

Remember what we said during the top 120 discussions... goaltender numbers are almost always team numbers, and so much more than mere statistics need to be reviewed when discussing goalies. I noticed the odd numbers for Sawchuk compared to Hall, I can only surmise that you had to watch the goalies and the season to see why Sawchuk received more first place Hart votes than anybody (including a 37-30 advantage over Hart winner Gordie Howe).

The "Minutes Played" number is absolutely not a Team Stat.
Of course, if there's no reason to doubt voting, trust voting.

That... seems like a very egregious case of "let's not bother with these", because I'm seriously doubting anyone fails to see how a netminder can accrue lots of "Worth" in 20 games. The Wings were better with Sawchuk in the lineup than when Hank Bassen played, but not THAT much, and is that really a relevant threshold?

 

[MXD]

I can't, for the love of it, see why is Makarov inferior to Lafleur.

Sadly, I can't either. Hell, we have a non-negligible chance of voting in Ovechkin this round, and that would still feel a bit wrong.

For greater clarity, what would feel a bit wrong is ranking AO over Makarov.

 

[MXD]

Still I think the pendulum might have swung too far from 95th to somewhere in the 20, these are top players of all time that he somehow leapfrogged without playing a single game, it's not like we had that little information on him in 2008 is it?

95th might have been low but top 25 is swinging the pendulum to high IMO.

There is still a really good argument for a good half dozen to dozen centers (I can think of 5 guys off the top of my head who aren't up yet.) who have a very strong argument against Nighbor.

We did have that little information on him 10 years ago.
I mean, the information existed, it just wasn't as easily accessible.

 

[DannyGallivan]

The "Minutes Played" number is absolutely not a Team Stat.
Of course, if there's no reason to doubt voting, trust voting.

That... seems like a very egregious case of "let's not bother with these", because I'm seriously doubting anyone fails to see how a netminder can accrue lots of "Worth" in 20 games. The Wings were better with Sawchuk in the lineup than when Hank Bassen played, but not THAT much, and is that really a relevant threshold?

Minutes played... a stat for showing up. Cool.
I'm open to hearing any explanation why Sawchuk received 37 first place votes for the Hart while Hall received 21 votes and the winner, Howe, received only 30.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Sadly, I can't either. Hell, we have a non-negligible chance of voting in Ovechkin this round, and that would still feel a bit wrong.

Sadly, I can't either. Hell, we have a non-negligible chance of voting in Ovechkin this round, and that would still feel a bit wrong.

Maybe Lafleur would have the most dominant force on the Red Army if he played for them. Seemed to be his kind of style. It's about as logical as suggesting that Makarov would have done as good or better. Maybe he would have, maybe he wouldn't.

 

[BM67]

Remember what we said during the top 120 discussions... goaltender numbers are almost always team numbers, and so much more than mere statistics need to be reviewed when discussing goalies. I noticed the odd numbers for Sawchuk compared to Hall, I can only surmise that you had to watch the goalies and the season to see why Sawchuk received more first place Hart votes than anybody (including a 37-30 advantage over Hart winner Gordie Howe).

It isn't 1st place and 2nd place votes. It's 1st half and 2nd half votes. The voting was done at the halfway point of the season and at the end of the season, then combined for an overall winner. Sawchuk started off the season hot, then injuries derailed his second half.

Terry Sawchuk Stats and News

 

[MXD]

Minutes played... a stat for showing up. Cool.
I'm open to hearing any explanation why Sawchuk received 37 first place votes for the Hart while Hall received 21 votes and the winner, Howe, received only 30.

Please explain how Glenn Hall was simply "just showing up". Be specific.

 

[DannyGallivan]

It isn't 1st place and 2nd place votes. It's 1st half and 2nd half votes. The voting was done at the halfway point of the season and at the end of the season, then combined for an overall winner. Sawchuk started off the season hot, then injuries derailed his second half.

Terry Sawchuk Stats and News

Ohhhhhhhhkay. That's weird, wild stuff. I did not know that.

 

[MXD]

It isn't 1st place and 2nd place votes. It's 1st half and 2nd half votes. The voting was done at the halfway point of the season and at the end of the season, then combined for an overall winner. Sawchuk started off the season hot, then injuries derailed his second half.

Terry Sawchuk Stats and News

Those half-season rankings are just about the most stupidly confusing thing since the square Wheel.

EDIT : That would also go a long way towards some other point of criticism often formulated towards Sawchuk : Stamina, or lack thereof.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Please explain how Glenn Hall was simply "just showing up". Be specific.

Isn't that what minutes played tracks?

 

[MXD]

Isn't that what minutes played tracks?

It is what minutes played track, indeed. Better showing up than... you know... not showing up?
I mean, we're talking about Glenn Hall, the 2nd or 3rd best RS goalie of all-time. Who had a good season... for his own standards, who are very high.

How the hell can this be described as "Just Showing Up"?

 

[DannyGallivan]

It is what minutes played track, indeed. Better showing up than... you know... not showing up?
I mean, we're talking about Glenn Hall, the 2nd or 3rd best RS goalie of all-time. Who had a good season... for his own standards, who are very high.

How the hell can this be described as "Just Showing Up"?

Easy - when you use it out of context. It is literally a stat for playing. In the 60's. When the one goalie system apparently was still working well.

Look, I am a huge fan of Mr. Goalie. I just challenge a lot of the goalie stats. Goalie stats NEED much more context than virtually any other individual stat.

Maybe you wanted to say - "... he played in 502 consecutive games." Now that's interesting for so many reasons. Mainly, for the stamina and toughness involved. Of course, how many Stanley Cups did the talented Blackhawks win during his reign?