Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time

[TheDevilMadeMe]

People have been doing it on Friday. I guess it's mostly academic - although some people seem to think you get extra points for getting your ballot in early.

I'm probably confused. To me, 12AM on Friday sounds like tonight, but technically, it was last night/this morning.

 

[bobholly39]

I am assuming you have given every other candidate the "how would they have done on NJ from 95 to 01" test?

What conclusions did you draw?

That's the biggest issue I have with this whole Jagr dialogue.

I don't even like Jagr that much per se - but if all you're going to do is criticize absolutely every single element of a player's resume - you're being purposefully biased. Unless you're doing the same for all other players - which clearly isn't happening.

 

[VanIslander]

Doesn't voting not open until tonight?

I have voted tbe same time every week: just after midnight, on Friday.

I guess you could interpret 12:00 Friday to mean the beginning of Saturday (Friday night colliqually rather than Friday technically).

Anyways, I've heard no objections to date and some others have voted on Friday as well.

The op can be changed to 12:01 am Saturday and I'll stop voting on Fridays. Though I am not alone in having spoken about the benefit of having voted on a Friday (it's actually 3:50 am Saturday here now but I used the op Eastern time zone for my voting time).

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, leaving 30% of the meat on the bone seems wasteful...

 

[MXD]

Yeah, leaving 30% of the meat on the bone seems wasteful...

You should really start writing instead of coaching.

 

[DannyGallivan]

People have been doing it on Friday. I guess it's mostly academic - although some people seem to think you get extra points for getting your ballot in early.

I vote on Fridays because I am often without wi-fi on weekends.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah, it's good to have a voting day on a weekday. I just confused myself for no good reason.

 

[The Macho King]

I vote on Fridays because I am often without wi-fi on weekends.

I get that. Totally defensible.

I don't know - I get the feeling that some people aren't interested in being convinced/arguments, but are more interested in being "right".

 

[DannyGallivan]

I get that. Totally defensible.

I don't know - I get the feeling that some people aren't interested in being convinced/arguments, but are more interested in being "right".

You know my ex?

I'm usually pretty active between Monday and Friday and usually make tons of changes in the order. By Thursday/Friday, my list goes through some tinkering but that's about it. I often have a chance for a quick review late Sunday, so I do leave myself one more window to make changes.

 

[Troubadour]

And in NY he got swept in round 1 (06) was awful with 1 damn point after dominating the regular season (super trend for him). And that NJ team had exactly 1 more point in the regular season than NY. NY was a better offensive and defensive team and got swept. Jagr was nowhere to be found.

Dislocated shoulder in Game 1. Surgery right after the series ended.

Jaromir Jagr tugged his shirt and rubbed his dislocated left shoulder as he spoke of what it might take to fix it.

About 48 hours after the New York Rangers were swept out of the NHL playoffs, Jagr and his teammates cleaned out their lockers, had exit interviews and underwent physicals Monday.

Jagr had an added activity, taking an MRI of the shoulder that basically limited him to two of the four postseason losses the Rangers endured against the New Jersey Devils. The decision of whether the NHL's second-leader scorer would require surgery was expected quickly.

"I saw a lot of pictures but I don't understand it," said the 34-year-old Jagr, who broke team records with 53 goals and 123 points this season.

Jagr was injured late in Game 1 _ the Rangers' first playoff game since 1997 _ when he took a swipe with his left arm in an attempt to hit New Jersey forward Scott Gomez late in the 6-1 loss.

He was in so much pain that even simple tasks became impossible. Yet, he only missed one game, New York's 4-1 loss that put the Rangers down 2-0 in the series. It was the first contest Jagr sat out all season.

Jagr made a surprise return for Game 3 and got through another defeat but showed none of the ability he displayed all season. He was back on the ice three days later but was gone in 53 seconds.

He took a clean hit from defenseman Brad Lukowich, one that typically wouldn't knock the 6-foot-3, 245-pound right winger off his skates. But the pain in Jagr's shoulder weakened him overall and he went into the boards with his left shoulder taking the impact.

"It hurts a lot more than it did after the first game," Jagr said. "I can not really lift my arm or do anything."

Same with 2001:

Injured in Game 1 against the Sabres and played the rest of the post-season with a shoulder injury (the Pens tried to disguise as Charley horse or some other nonsense).

It's noteworthy it never even crossed your mind he may have played badly hurt in some of those less spectacular playoffs. Even though as a Pens fan, you should know what was going on in spring 1999 and you should know that Jagr was not as healthy as his GP totals suggest (groin, groin).

He also played his only playoff series for the Caps with a broken wrist. (Although I've already seen people trying to downplay that.)

Basically, Jagr usually had not time to rest. No big regular season on his part would have meant no post-season for the Pens. Playing his butt off meant yesyes playoff yes, but way too often playing as a wreck, yes yes.

EDIT: I just realized you're the same person who in some other thread vehemently stated that Jagr did absolutely nothing during those first two Pens' cup runs. I believe it was @BraveCanadian who naively corrected you by listing everything Jagr had done during those two runs. And I remember you replied nothing, absolutely nothing. Instead, you disappeared for a couple of pages and then just resumed elsewhere. Not saying that in itself necessarily disqualifies you from talking about JJ and being taken seriously, but you can't blame people for having you pegged down an ordinary hater. Because while you may not be a 14-year-old crazy fan of Sid's, you still sound like a very youthful spirit.

 

[Michael Farkas]

1999 he was getting massaged on the bench to keep his groin moving, playing like 25 minutes a night and almost singlehandedly willing us past Cup contender New Jersey too...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

1999 was bascially the one time Jagr carried his team farther than it should have gone, right?

 

[Troubadour]

1999 was bascially the one time Jagr carried his team farther than it should have gone, right?

It was basically the one time Jagr made his team stay exactly where it belonged.

 

[Troubadour]

Btw 2000 was another interesting PS failure on Jagr's part. Basically crushed the Caps with ten points in five games, two game-winning goals.

Round two, against the Flyers. Scored two game-winning goals in the first two games. Game 3, the Flyers catch up. Jagr still scores two goals (including a game-tying goal). Three games into the series, he had 6 points.

That means 16 points in 8 games. Not bad on any standard, early rounds or not.

Game 4 went into 5 overtimes. I guess you could blame him for not scoring there. Game 5, he takes five shifts, plays five minutes. Does anyone remember what happened there?

Either way, when Jagr stopped scoring, the Pens were done.

It all comes down to what critics wanna see. But this glass definitely seems almost full to me.

 

[Michael Farkas]

If the premise is that we don't allow it to be a "carry" if Lemieux is present...then, sure. But Jagr was a major, major factor in those same top-six-or-bust teams of 1996 and 2001 getting to the ECF...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If the premise is that we don't allow it to be a "carry" if Lemieux is present...then, sure. But Jagr was a major, major factor in those same top-six-or-bust teams of 1996 and 2001 getting to the ECF...

1996 sure, he was good, though not the best player on the team. He was pretty bad in 2001 (I realize injuries were an issue).

 

[Michael Farkas]

Huh? 2001 he was awesome, even not at 100%. Against Washington in the first round, we got almost nothing out of the second line of Lang-Straka-Kovalev (IIRC) until game 6. Jagr was terrific in both the Washington and Buffalo series, helping to setup the series winner in OT of game 7 on the road.

Then he was rewarded by being centered by Milan Kraft in the Conference Final vs. NJ

Milan Kraft Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[Troubadour]

1996 sure, he was good, though not the best player on the team. He was pretty bad in 2001 (I realize injuries were an issue).

He was probably also sulking by the ECF.

Anyway, I would agree Jagr and his teams were better off with him being a complementary piece rather than a cornerstone. He had zero grinder mentality. He tried to lead with a wink and smile, which does not work. Still a damn fine player who in my opinion is more underrated by his critics than overrated by his fans.

 

[ImporterExporter]

That's the biggest issue I have with this whole Jagr dialogue.

I don't even like Jagr that much per se - but if all you're going to do is criticize absolutely every single element of a player's resume - you're being purposefully biased. Unless you're doing the same for all other players - which clearly isn't happening.

I'm getting f***ing sick of you calling me that. I was done with this but here you are calling me biased again like a little petulant child because I don't agree with your position. But instead of being able to engage in a thoughtful dialogue, you pout and call me biased.

I'm the one breaking down each and every season in the playoffs, who the Pens had on the roster, who they were playing. You're the one trying to push charts on points per game that are literally cherry picked to make Jagr look better than he actually was. Like you leaving out 2001 for example. Using only a 6 year period on Jagr but 7 or more for other players and THEN failing to disclose that Jagr in that span never went to a Cup final and played far fewer games than others on your chart.

You have been the most disingenuous person in this project. The only thing you do is throw up stats. I've seen it done for years. There is no in depth or context driven narrative for you. It's only numbers, which is why you push somebody like Jagr in the first place. And those stats are usually goal post moving lame attempts to mask deficiencies.

I've been as active as just about anyone throughout this process. Criticized many players, including my boy Crosby (particularly against the notion he's a perfect 10 out of 10 in the playoffs). Made long, in depth posts about numerous players. You?

I've been plenty even keeled thus far but continuing to call me biased is getting on my last nerves.

 

[MXD]

IE, I don't even agree with your argument regarding Jagr (hell, I totally disagree with it!), but your post above was long overdue.

 

[sr edler]

you still sound like a very youthful spirit.

Talking about youthful spirits.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Jagr was not awesome in 2001. Not even close. I must have been watching a different team then....who the hell knows. As I've correctly pointed out 2000000 times, Jagr never got by round 2 without Mario while playing in Pittsburgh. Ever. Period. Why is that when Mario managed to get just enough strength to play the Pens managed to go further than usual? But when Jagr "led" the team, the Pens faltered over and over and over.

Going back to 2001. What did Jagr do in the 3rd round against NJ over 5 games? 0 points -2. I'm losing a lot of respect for people who are pushing more bullshit than Donald Trump. 2nd round that year he was outscored by Mario and Straka who each had a GWG. Jags didn't. Yay. He was awesome!!!!!!!!

But hey he did amazing round 1 against the Caps. So that makes the 3 round run "awesome". BTW, Mario was even better. 2001 Mario was better than 2001 Jagr. Let that sink in.

I post year by year breakdowns and there is nothing but excuses.

"He played on awful teams during his prime" (total bullshit). Nobody has countered this because you can't. Awful teams don't make the playoffs. Simple as that.

"his production didn't drop that much more than others" (even though his games played were far less than others and only played rounds 1 and 2 vs guys who went deeper in the postseason, more often....so more bullshit)

"he was injured" (yeah so was Mario pretty much every damn year from the early 90's onward and he still dominated. Dude couldn't walk his back was so messed up, couple of Smythes though.....more bullshit)

 

[ImporterExporter]

IE, I don't even agree with your argument regarding Jagr (hell, I totally disagree with it!), but your post above was long overdue.

And that's EXACTLY the thing.

I don't care if people support Jagr. I don't care if you love him like he's your long lost brother from another mother. We can all agree to disagree. But don't try and pass off bullshit narratives that I've absolutely shot down time and time again. I'm not going to stand for it and allow it to go unchecked in a project like that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I thought IE was beating a strawman because I couldn't believe anyone could have possibly thought Jagr was awesome in the 2001 playoffs, but then I scrolled up...

I mean, that's the year that even the biggest Jagr supporters usually roll out proof of his injuries to excuse his poor play.

I'm sick of discussing Jagr, but I can't seem to help myself.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Yeah, I'm officially done with it. Have the last word bholly, Mike, or whoever else wants a turn. My responses and analysis are there for others to see.

I'm going back to discussing the players who are up for vote.