Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread

[ted2019]

Hard to say if carbs was really the most valuable forward here.

I think it's really a moot point if the team didn't have Robinson, Chelios and some guy named Roy in net along with some other really good defensive forwards.

I love 2 way players but there is zero room on my list for guys like Carbs and Gainey.

They are clearly secondary players who look great on a perfect team setting but on a team like the LA Kings they don't make the list.

Yes that's a reference to Butch Goring and Bernie Nicholls (in another post I will expand upon with perfect line mate setting tomorrow as I'm drunk as a fish right now.)

I have Goring as a maybe. He was a strong 2 way center until he retired. He was also a very key cog in those Islander teams. Goring's VsX could be holding him back.

 

[ted2019]

One of these things is not like the other two.

Langway gets alot of mileage out his 2 Norris trophies but in reality his wins were a backlash at Coffey and other offensive Dmen.

Vasliev is a hard guy to rank and the system really helps him.

Personally although the recent top 100 players of all time aggregate list has him at 107th I think that is really too high wehn one stops to think about it.

That's what makes these projects so much fun. Different people value different things = diverse results.

 

[ted2019]

Incredible post. I think you covered this all really well and I don’t feel “shy” about considering Housley these past few days, now.

The only gap between Langway and Lowe that I would emphasize is the sacrifice that Langway made to become a different player, whereas I don’t think Lowe ever had a trajectory that could have been better than what it was.

Lowe isn’t getting in until I hear some more stories about how he impacted games. I’m probably biased since my parents lived in DC throughout the 80s before moving back to Buffalo when I was born in 88. They talk about Langway in high regard. I think that influences me, so I admit I’m biased.

The issues I have with Housley that if he was a forward, then I could overlook some of his major defensive flaws, but he wasn't a forward and playing defense should've been his main concern. I find this part interesting, he was a top 5 Norris contender 4 times ( 5th place in 83-84, 5th in 89-90, 91-92 3rd, 92-93 5th). The great +/- stat that no one really has time for , states that he was the following in those seasons (+1, +11, -5,-14) Out of the 4 seasons that he was a Norris contender, there were only 33 players that received Norris votes in those 4 seasons, Only 5 other players, Coffey, Iafrate, Leetch, Suter, K. Hatcher were ever a - player ( lead by Paul Coffey's -25 in 1989-90 season). Why did Housley do so well despite those stats? Also, he are his Post Season AS selections for those 4 years (5,5,2,6). I'm a bit baffled by Housley.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

.I don't think I'd put Vasilev over Housley, though, for instance...in a tie, it's just easier to destroy than it is to create. Defense isn't just the absence of offense. And it can be really tough to discern between those realms sometimes...I look at VV as more "the absence of offense", meanwhile, I look at, say, Victor Hedman and go, "he's kind of shutting things down in a similar manner, but he's also good for 50 and 60 points"
Like I said earlier, I know we're branching here...but at 200, 220, 240, we don't have to "settle" for anyone I don't think...I think we can avoid "flawed" players for a while still, and if a player is flawed, we'll take the overwhelming ability that he does have (Ovechkin, Hull, Kane, Leetch, etc.)...I'm not sold that a player like Vasiliev offers that...maybe he does, I'm just not sold...
For that matter, I'd like to know just how large the gap is between Rod Langway and Kevin Lowe...and if there is a gap, what does it represent...?

From what I saw, it was huge.

 

[ted2019]

That more than anything is holding me back from being terribly enthusiastic about making a list. We’ll be well out of the range of distinguishable talent and dipping into interchangeable parts on this one.

Knowing that if I don’t make one, you monsters are going to exclude Tuukka Rask to make room for Carl Brewer or something is the only thing that keeps me going.

How did you know I had both on my list???

 

[ted2019]

From what I saw, it was huge.

Langway>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lowe.

 

[Michael Farkas]

From what I saw, it was huge.

Care to share? I'd like to hear your (and others) thoughts...

 

[quoipourquoi]

Then there's borderline players like Alfredsson, Toews, the Sedins, Elias, Roenick, Fleury, Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Stamkos, Luongo, etc. That gets us back to around 290.

Unrelated to your larger point here, but is the temperature of the room that Roberto Luongo is only a borderline HOFer?

Like, I get that he came a single game short of joining the Triple Gold Club and the media kinda flipped out about that a decade ago, but... two Pearson nominations, ten top-10 placements in save percentage (something only five players have done since 1967 expansion), third-most Wins in history. I can’t see them even making him wait; he’s a different class of player than those guys.

 

[ted2019]

Unrelated to your larger point here, but is the temperature of the room that Roberto Luongo is only a borderline HOFer?

Like, I get that he came a single game short of joining the Triple Gold Club and the media kinda flipped out about that a decade ago, but... two Pearson nominations, ten top-10 placements in save percentage (something only five players have done since 1967 expansion), third-most Wins in history. I can’t see them even making him wait; he’s a different class of player than those guys.

Luongo is between Tony Esposito & Johnny Bower on my list and they are in the upper tier of the back end of the project.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I think he's probably a decent or even slightly better than decent HOFer...it's a tough room for goalies usually, but - using contemporaries - he's above Fleury and below Lundqvist, right? That's the window I'd say we're working in to start with, no?


EDIT: ted responded while I was typing

 

[quoipourquoi]

Luongo is between Tony Esposito & Johnny Bower on my list and they are in the upper tier of the back end of the project.

Haha, me too (but they’re #65, 68, 70). I guess they did make Esposito wait a year - and Bower a few.

 

[ted2019]

I think he's probably a decent or even slightly better than decent HOFer...it's a tough room for goalies usually, but - using contemporaries - he's above Fleury and below Lundqvist, right? That's the window I'd say we're working in to start with, no?


EDIT: ted responded while I was typing

MAF isn't even a consideration for me. He's below Lundqvist on my list, but I also have 5 goalies in from #100-125.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think he's probably a decent or even slightly better than decent HOFer...it's a tough room for goalies usually, but - using contemporaries - he's above Fleury and below Lundqvist, right? That's the window I'd say we're working in to start with, no?


EDIT: ted responded while I was typing

I wouldn’t have him below Lundqvist, but I also don’t think Lundqvist would be too far off. Would we consider Miikka Kiprusoff to be a contemporary? He’s a little older, but I would have him next, and maybe even Rask and Rinne before Fleury (at least that’s my gut before I dive deeper).

I don’t want to play catch-up just because the previous project botched post-Brodeur goaltending, but I could see everyone through Fleury on my top-220 (and in the HOF).

 

[ted2019]

Haha, me too (but they’re #65, 68, 70). I guess they did make Esposito wait a year - and Bower a few.

Mine are #112/113/116, but Lundqvist is the difficult placement for me. I have Holecek as my first post #100 goalie.

 

[ted2019]

I wouldn’t have him below Lundqvist, but I also don’t think Lundqvist would be too far off. Would we consider Miikka Kiprusoff to be a contemporary? He’s a little older, but I would have him next, and maybe even Rask and Rinne before Fleury (at least that’s my gut before I dive deeper).

I don’t want to play catch-up just because the previous project botched post-Brodeur goaltending, but I could see everyone through Fleury on my top-220 (and in the HOF).

Miikka had a nice run, but it might be a bit short for me. His stats in HO's Adjusted save % project has him in the lower tier ( around MAF or below) . Rask's numbers in HO's project has him in the lower end of the upper tier of goalies.

 

[ted2019]

For those trying to decide on where to put goalies in this project, here are several great studies that Hockey Outsider did.
Adjusted-Save-Percentage-Regular-Season-1956-2020.
Goalies-Adjusted-Playoff-Save-Percentage-1984-2020
Career Adjusted-Save-Percentage
Special-Teams-Adjusted-Goaltending-Statistics
Goaltender-game-by-game-logs-1965-66-to-present
Goalie-analysis-2009-2012-wins-added
Strength-of-opposition-for-goaltenders
Historical-goalie-data 1927 to current

 

[quoipourquoi]

Miikka had a nice run, but it might be a bit short for me. His stats in HO's Adjusted save % project has him in the lower tier ( around MAF or below) . Rask's numbers in HO's project has him in the lower end of the upper tier of goalies.

I think I’m a little sympathetic because he lost a season right in the middle of being probably the second-best player on the planet. He definitely fell off a cliff well before the Vezina votes stopped trickling in. He’s more on the Thomas side of things - two very good seasons doing most of the talking.

Vokoun is one that is statistically quite strong (arena effects play something of a role, though he had better road numbers in three of his five-best seasons) and thankfully has a full sample-size (unlike, say, a Carey Price).

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Care to share? I'd like to hear your (and others) thoughts...

Langway was noticeable in a way not many other players were. Could dominate a game in the defensive zone. Like a Gretzky or Lemieux made players around them better, Langway seemed to do that at the other end of the ice.

I recall the Caps beating the Bruins in the Old Gahden, 2-1. Langway was picked as the first star, a rarity in those days for an opponent. More amazing was that he didn't have any points. More amazing still, Bruins broadcast team, the notorious homers Fred Cusick and Derek Sanderson, agreed. A friend of mine attended the game. The next day he said Langway was indeed the show. Bruins fans were saying how happy they were that Montreal had traded him.

Also got to see a Canada Cup game live in Montreal in 1984, Canada vs. U.S. Langway was the captain and clearly the leader of the upstart Americans. They tied the mighty Canadians 4-4. Langway scored the first goal of the game and played an extremely physical game. Very noticeable. The U.S. made it to the semis, but got blown out by Sweden when young Tom Barrasso's bubble burst in goal. Langway was named to the tournament All-Sar team.

Also, often being the only guy on the ice without a helmet perhaps helped that noticeability.

 

[VanIslander]

Luongo is between Tony Esposito & Johnny Bower on my list and they are in the upper tier of the back end of the project.

You have Luongo ranked HIGHER than Bower?

Johnny started NHL hockey three months before his 30th birthday but then went on to SIX times lead the league in save percentage, four times win the Stanley Cup.

Roberto played a long 19-year NHL career but never led the league in save percentage and never won the cup. Heck, Luongo was never 1st or 2nd in save percentage; he wasn't even ever a 1st team all star!

There is a clear gap between Bower and Luongo on any sane non-homer list.

 

[MXD]

You have Luongo ranked HIGHER than Bower?

Johnny started NHL hockey three months before his 30th birthday but then went on to SIX times lead the league in save percentage, four times win the Stanley Cup.

Roberto played a long 19-year NHL career but never led the league in save percentage and never won the cup. Heck, Luongo was never 1st or 2nd in save percentage; he wasn't even ever a 1st team all star!

There is a clear gap between Bower and Luongo on any sane non-homer list.

It's not too late to delete or edit your post.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Luongo is between Tony Esposito & Johnny Bower on my list and they are in the upper tier of the back end of the project.

I have Luongo behind those two but safely on my list.

 

[Professor What]

Luongo: He's a bit Brodeur-like in my opinion. He played at a high level for a long time, while not having the peak level of his contemporaries. Of course, he didn't play quite as much as Brodeur did, he didn't have Hasek and Roy as contemporaries, and he didn't have the same peak level as Brodeur. In the end though, I see enough of a similarity to give Luongo a boost, and I suspect he'll make my list, and I certainly see him as a worthy Hall-of-Famer.

Kiprusoff: I'd like to read more opinions of Kipprusoff, because I find him incredibly hard to rank. If anyone has ever fit the definition of a supernova in net, it's him. Other than Thomas, I don't know that I've seen anyone hit as high of a peak as fast and then fall off as fast. I think figuring him out is even harder since we didn't see him play significant time in the NHL until his late 20s. I think he was pretty much "doomed" to a quick falloff.

Holocek: He's behind only Tretiak among Eastern European goalies, and while I'm not sure yet, he might make my top 100. I can't help but wonder if he's become a bit underrated through a combination of about half of his career being before the "breakthrough" of the Soviets in 1972, Tretiak's dominance once the Europeans did start getting more attention, and the appearance of Hasek later, who has very clearly established himself as the best Czech goalie in history. Even after I started studying hockey history a few years ago, Holocek remained little more than a name, and I do think that Tretiak and Hasek had a lot to do with that in my personal case.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Kiprusoff was awesome...I don't know what this two-season stuff is, he had a pretty meaty peak that also showed adaptability from the pre-lockout days to the post...where an emphasis was put on things like lateral movement like it never was before...look at the goalies who did really well on both sides: Brodeur, Kipper, Luongo...there's your podium candidates when you're talking about talent...

qpq: Did I read you right that you have Luongo ranked ahead of Lundqvist? In the sense that you find Lundqvist to be worse? That's an interesting one for me...I don't think it's insane, mind you, just a little unexpected I think...

 

[Michael Farkas]

Langway was noticeable in a way not many other players were. Could dominate a game in the defensive zone. Like a Gretzky or Lemieux made players around them better, Langway seemed to do that at the other end of the ice.

I recall the Caps beating the Bruins in the Old Gahden, 2-1. Langway was picked as the first star, a rarity in those days for an opponent. More amazing was that he didn't have any points. More amazing still, Bruins broadcast team, the notorious homers Fred Cusick and Derek Sanderson, agreed. A friend of mine attended the game. The next day he said Langway was indeed the show. Bruins fans were saying how happy they were that Montreal had traded him.

Also got to see a Canada Cup game live in Montreal in 1984, Canada vs. U.S. Langway was the captain and clearly the leader of the upstart Americans. They tied the mighty Canadians 4-4. Langway scored the first goal of the game and played an extremely physical game. Very noticeable. The U.S. made it to the semis, but got blown out by Sweden when young Tom Barrasso's bubble burst in goal. Langway was named to the tournament All-Sar team.

Also, often being the only guy on the ice without a helmet perhaps helped that noticeability.

I think it's this game: Washington Capitals at Boston Bruins Box Score — March 11, 1984 | Hockey-Reference.com

Maybe I'll cut up a Langway game and a Lowe game for our group here in the next couple weeks and we can compare...thanks for the input

 

[Professor What]

Kiprusoff was awesome...I don't know what this two-season stuff is, he had a pretty meaty peak that also showed adaptability from the pre-lockout days to the post.

I think the two season comments might be something of an overstatement, but I don't see it as being completely without merit, because his top two seasons were pretty far ahead of anything else he did. He definitely had more than two good years, but there was a gap in there. I don't think anyone would have quite as hard a time placing him if that weren't true.