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

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I don't know what to make with the home Sutter stuff...I really only bother dive deep into the numbers like that when I have to explain a big gap between talent and stats. If a goalie is not talented and has good stats, then I check this kind of stuff. Seeing Kipper, it never crossed my mind because the numbers matched the talent. I'm assuming you're bringing this forward because there's a significant difference between what Kipper's off/on stuff is vs other goalies of the era in similar situations...?

Kiprusoff has one of the larger home/road splits, and by far the most extreme home/single coach combination I've ever seen. As to the importance of that YMMV, but it's pretty significant for me personally.

One of the interesting things about this project will be how rankings diverge based on what people value. I always look at home/road splits and like to see guys perform well on the road, because I think teams are less able to dictate the game away from home, and as such it shows versatility and neutralizes some of the usage patterns which can inflate or depress a guy's production depending on whether their coach puts them in offensive or defensive roles when he controls the deployment. Elite road performances were also more valuable throughout much of NHL history when teams had strong home ice advantages and playoff series could swing on a single road win.

For goalies it eliminates the problem of variable shot counting, most likely gives more team-independent numbers, and is generally a positive sign when you can do well facing a higher rate of scoring chances against in a hostile environment.

Ryan Miller need not apply...not even close for me either. Miller is more like a better Cam Ward than someone that can compete with Miikka Kiprusoff...

I guess it's not super relevant since nobody is going to list him anyway, but as it happens Miller is someone who was under-the-radar elite on the road, which is why I rate him higher than most:

Career Adjusted Goals Saved Above Average on the Road:
Roberto Luongo 128.2
Henrik Lundqvist 112.8
Ryan Miller 79.5
Carey Price 47.3
Miikka Kiprusoff -9.8
(Cam Ward -13.2)

Now of course that doesn't mean we should ignore the home sample entirely (where Kipper leads Miller 68-18), but these types of splits give us reason to believe that the post-lockout Sabres played more run-and-gun at home (this is also supported by their offensive stats), while a team like the Flames were a lot better defensively with last change.

Don't get me wrong, I really like your scouting breakdowns, I think it's beneficial for people to have different perspectives in this project and I generally rate players with rare talent and strong peak/primes ahead of more solid career performers (plus I also think adaptability is an important factor). But at the same time some guys might be unspectacular yet still manage to put together an impressive track record, and that's worth something too.

 

[ted2019]

Sorry for delayed responses, but I have Luongo in. We talked about Tim Thomas already and if we are going to talk about Thomas, we need to recognize that besides from one playoff series, Luongo was head and shoulders above him. I have Luongo right around 180 and I can make room for a jump, to be honest.

The Triple Gold Club, while having some merit, does nothing for me unless it is a Toews-esque player. Luongo was a revolutionary goalie and he did it with some very good teams. He's making my list.

I'm the opposite as I have Luongo around 115-130 and Toews might not make my list. I feel that Toews is extremely overrated ( US/big market media) because he was the Captain of the Blackhawks cups.

 

[buffalowing88]

I'm the opposite as I have Luongo around 115-130 and Toews might not make my list. I feel that Toews is extremely overrated ( US/big market media) because he was the Captain of the Blackhawks cups.

I am so interested in what your list is going to look like. Keeping Towes off is interesting...I can't in my heart of hearts keep him off. He's actually gotten better again in recent years. His playoff performance is pretty hard to argue with. But I'm here for it.

 

[VMBM]

Igor Larionov is the next Soviet in line. He did not reach nearly the same heights as his two Green Unit linemates but he was very talented on his own. Definitely one of the best players outside NHL specifically in the 2nd half of 1980s. Larionov, I think, rightfully won the Soviet Player of the Year award in 1988 as he scored at pretty much the same pace as Makarov & Krutov on domestic and international level along with diligent fulfilling of defensive duties typically assigned more to centers in the Soviet system. I am saying that to make a point that Larionov is not just a player with extreme durability as an effective member of a team. Having said that, Larionov's long career is what impresses me a lot about him. It is incredible that after going through Tikhonov's military regime, the "Professor" was still able to contribute to Stanley Cups for Detroit (even with some timely goals such as 3rd OT goal vs. Carolina in '02 Finals). Even 41 y/o Larionov helped out the Russian team to win Olympic bronze medal at '02 Salt Lake City, where he led the team as a captain. A top 150 player.

That's the thing that impresses me about him by far the most.

It's no secret that I'm not a huge fan of Larionov; his lack of domestic and international recognition especially compared to his linemates is even more startling than in Petrov's case; Larionov's 1987-88 season was kind of one-off in the Soviet Union/internationally, he had no great sustained peak. At least Petrov has those impressive statistics...

Speaking of whom...

Vladimir Petrov is a biggest mystery among the Soviets. He has incredible scoring numbers - on the same level as Kharlamov, Mikhailov, Maltsev internationally - and better than all of them domestically. He was a big and strong center able to go and measure head-to-head with anybody. I think he was also solid defensively for a majority of his career. In spite of this, Petrov has a mediocre Soviet Player of the Year record. He was only 4 times declared a top 5 player within his own country. I'm eagerly waiting for someone to explain why Petrov was so lowly regarded in the Soviet Union. But until that happens, I am going to put my trust to those observers who watched him on a regular basis and rank him accordingly. I must also say that Czech hockey experts of the 1970s also held Petrov's linemates or teammates (Kharlamov, Mikhailov, Maltsev) in a higher respect as well. A top 150-160 player.

Yeah, me too (no pun whatsoever intended). I'm not holding my breath, though.

I'd very much like to say that Petrov is underrated, but then again, when I watch the available old games, Petrov just looks a somewhat lesser player than Mikhailov and especially Kharlamov. A very good passer, responsible defensively, good stickhandler, but somehow unspectacular and less capable of making great individual efforts than his linemates (Kharlamov was in a class of his own in that regard of course). Maybe more mistake-prone too. And despite his size and strength, Petrov's style of play wasn't necessarily overly physical; the clearly smaller Mikhailov was more persistent in that way. I think his performances in the big international tournaments were also clearly more inconsistent than his linemates'; Petrov was excellent in the 1973, 1975, 1977 and 1979 WHCs (and the 1976 Olympics?), but I'm not so sure about the other tournaments; both Kharlamov and Mikhailov had a few more good ones overall...

I'd still rank him above Larionov, though.

 

[VanIslander]

I sure hope Maltsev is on everyone's mind.

 

[ted2019]

I sure hope Maltsev is on everyone's mind.

He is for sure.

 

[Theokritos]

I question his spatial awareness though. He gets pushed into the margins on plays that he shouldn't...if he didn't drift into useless ice, he'd be better because there's a skill+shot combo there. (...) There's that Zimin again @Theokritos haha...maybe I'm not that good at this after all, that's the second time this month he's stood out to me and I had never heard of him before you pointed me in the right direction...

Yeah, that's exactly what Tarasov wrote about him: "Instead of going to the opponent and trying to beat him, Zimin wastes time in an empty space. He skates around instead of heading towards the goal right away."

SOV 11 - Has some real nice hands on him. Needs to be a little better with coordination and finishing his plays. He was just a little off on some real nice opportunities. He'll make a nice move or a nice skating play, and then just kind of heel the pass or the shot. Just misses being a super impactful player.

Hmph...well...I, uh...*clears throat*...I was clearly using adjusted age. Many of the Soviet players kind of fell apart around 30 or 32, so 28 is basically...is that my phone? I gotta take this...

I haven't read through yet to see if anyone else caught this, but Firsov was just 28 at the time of this game.

Firsov was still in his prime, but he had a subpar game by his standards. He had more impact in the second game against Czechoslovakia and in the games against Sweden and Canada.

 

[MXD]

Who has four amazing years and almost nothing else...? I guess exclude goalies because that's gonna be a lot probably...

If you're super liberal on "Nothing Else", Markus Naslund.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Hmm, that's an interesting one...why didn't Naslund balloon up in scoring so much on the other side of the big sleep...? Was he just not that affected by having more power play time I guess...? More of rush offense creator maybe...

 

[MXD]

Who has four amazing years and almost nothing else...? I guess exclude goalies because that's gonna be a lot probably...

I like to quote people, so I just won't edit my post.

Frank McGee

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I sure hope Maltsev is on everyone's mind.

And list.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

McDavid's resume looks good but two things:

1) He has proven nothing in the playoffs yet.

2) He was bested by a teammate.

IMO McDavid shouldn't make the list yet. Too much is lacking in his story for his ranking to have any meaning. See you in 10 years for the next edition of the Top 100, Connor.

Sometimes the eye test is very revealing.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I have thought about putting Kucherov on my list. It's starting to get interesting.

He's safely on my list.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Is it really that clear cut? Schriner has a better 7Y VsX for example.

Anyway, I'd have at least five non-top 100 centers with overlapping careers ahead of him (Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Toews, Bergeron, Kopitar). He may still make it but not inside the top 160 or so for me.

Ugh, I totally glossed over Schriner when I was skimming over who was left. Don't worry; I'll be more careful when I actually put my list together.

For reference, the 10 best 7-year VsX scores of players still available (this time I'm checking my work):

Sweeney Schriner: 91.3
Steven Stamkos: 90.2
Adam Oates: 90.0
Jean Ratelle: 89. 6
Marty Barry: 89.6
Norm Ullman: 89.5
Busher Jackson: 89.5
John Bucyk: 88.7
Peter Stastny: 88.4
Mark Recchi: 88.4

And the 10 best 10-year VsX scores of all players still available. Remember 10-year VsX is biased towards post-expansion players for reasons that I can go into if anyone wants.

Adam Oates: 86.2
Jean Ratelle: 85.3
Norm Ullman 84.7
Mark Recchi: 84.3
Ron Francis: 84. 2
John Bucyk: 83.9
Alex Delvecchio: 82.9
Marty Barry: 81.8
Steven Stamkos: 81.8
Dale Hawerchuk: 81.7

Full list here: Reference - VsX comprehensive summary (1927 to 2020)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Re: McDavid and Kucherov: They sure make an argument for having a "minimum age limit" for active players on this list, don't they? No possible way we can fairly rank the two of them. No matter what we do with the two of them, it will look weird in 10 years.

For what it's worth, McDavid's 7 year VsX is 67.5, basically Scott Gomez/Craig Janney territory. Of course, McDavid did it in a totally different way than they did.

Kucherov actually has a respectable 7 year VsX of 80.1. Basically Palffy/D Sedin/Zetterberg territory. Playing a few more seasons will do that.

Reference - VsX comprehensive summary (1927 to 2020)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I sure hope Maltsev is on everyone's mind.

Maltsev competes with Martinec and Ullman for #1 on my list (or #101 or whatever). Iginla probably next in line after those 3.

Edit: But boy does Marty Barry look good on those VsX lists, considering his playoff record is also so good.

 

[ted2019]

Re: McDavid and Kucherov: They sure make an argument for having a "minimum age limit" for active players on this list, don't they? No possible way we can possibly fairly rank the two of them. No matter what we do with the two of them, it will look weird in 10 years.

For what it's worth, McDavid's 7 year VsX is 67.5, basically Scott Gomez/Craig Janney territory. Of course, McDavid did it in a totally different way than they did.

Kucherov actually has a respectable 7 year VsX of 80.1. Basically Palffy/D Sedin/Zetterberg territory. Playing a few more seasons will do that.

Reference - VsX comprehensive summary (1927 to 2020)

I noticed last night that McDavid was a bit on the low side of things. When I searched Connor on the VsX page, sometimes the 1st name that came up was Buddy O' Connor. I'm starting to think that both McDavid & Kucherov will be near the 190-200 section of my list.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I noticed last night that McDavid was a bit on the low side of things. When I searched Connor on the VsX page, sometimes the 1st name that came up was Buddy O' Connor. I'm starting to think that both McDavid & Kucherov will be near the 190-200 section of my list.

Personally, I don’t have that much affinity for a metric that demands 7 perfectly healthy seasons from both players being compared to eliminate per-game influence. Even playing 75/82 in a great season is enough to knock a player down ~1.0 - which for the range of players we’ll be looking at is ~10 spots.

It already punishes players by looking at raw numbers and either disqualifying seasons or significantly depressing them - all I’m saying is it shouldn’t be considered without the context of the player’s GP in the corresponding seasons.

Kucherov missing 47 games in 7 years isn’t that big of a deal, especially since the bulk of it was from his rookie season, but it’ll be catastrophic when compared in a stat like VsX to players who didn’t miss 47 games in their 7-season sample. McDavid, too, will have to wait for an 8th year to erase the rookie season injury from the sample. Crosby didn’t play his 7th healthy season until 2016.

I think not having people like Eric Lindros next to Adam Oates on our top-100 list showed some positive growth for HOH from the positional projects.

 

[wetcoast]

Re: McDavid I have no problem with the rule that says we do our work based only on what's been accomplished already and no assumptions about the future. In fact, I wholeheartedly agree with it.
But at the same time, it leaves me feeling a bit handcuffed here. Yeah, I agree that ranking him 147 seems pointless, but if he ended up 101, that seems equally pointless, just as leaving him unranked right now could be semi-understandable even if it would still be dead wrong.

I was one of the ones that expressed the most concern about him before we decided up take on this particular project, but I've changed my tune and relaxed a bit on it. I'm still going to struggle to decide where to put him, but at the heart of it, we simply can't get him right at this point of his career, and that's no one's fault. We just happened to fall into this when one of the most elite talents ever is just hitting his stride. I suspect that we could be talking top 10 with him one day, but he could suffer a freak career-ending injury tomorrow, for all I know. I'm not saying that anyone shouldn't do their best at placing him, but I've decided to do my best not to let him be the elephant in the room.

I don't think that we need to over think this here.

We have 5 professional seasons to rank him on as well as 2 playoffs and some international competition as well.

I'm just going to rank him on what he has done as I'll do with any other player.

 

[Professor What]

I don't think that we need to over think this here.

We have 5 professional seasons to rank him on as well as 2 playoffs and some international competition as well.

I'm just going to rank him on what he has done as I'll do with any other player.

That's pretty much what I was trying to say. I was guilty of it in the original thread, but there's been an "oh no, what do we do with McDavid" vibe at times, and I was saying that I don't think there's any point of going through that.

 

[Michael Farkas]

What was discussed in the 2009 Top 70 players thing for Crosby...? Was he considered? He had four seasons of being the best player in the world, three if you're not charitable towards his 100 point season as an 18 year old...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Personally, I don’t have that much affinity for a metric that demands 7 perfectly healthy seasons from both players being compared to eliminate per-game influence. Even playing 75/82 in a great season is enough to knock a player down ~1.0 - which for the range of players we’ll be looking at is ~10 spots.

It already punishes players by looking at raw numbers and either disqualifying seasons or significantly depressing them - all I’m saying is it shouldn’t be considered without the context of the player’s GP in the corresponding seasons.

Kucherov missing 47 games in 7 years isn’t that big of a deal, especially since the bulk of it was from his rookie season, but it’ll be catastrophic when compared in a stat like VsX to players who didn’t miss 47 games in their 7-season sample. McDavid, too, will have to wait for an 8th year to erase the rookie season injury from the sample. Crosby didn’t play his 7th healthy season until 2016.

I think not having people like Eric Lindros next to Adam Oates on our top-100 list showed some positive growth for HOH from the positional projects.

Yes, it's a per-season metric, not a per-game metric. I don't think anyone thinks that VsX should be the only thing we look at, even when just talking about regular season offense.

The assumptions behind 7-year and 10-year VsX scores are that the average length of a pre-expansion player and a post-expansion player's primes are estimated at about 7 and 10 years, respectively. So the 7 and 10 year metrics intentionally "punish" players with less than average durability/longevity.

Re: Kucherov and McDavid, its only use is to show that the length of Kucherov's prime is approaching the bare minimum for a historical norm, while McDavid's isn't yet. How every voter chooses to use that information is up to them.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

What was discussed in the 2009 Top 70 players thing for Crosby...? Was he considered? He had four seasons of being the best player in the world, three if you're not charitable towards his 100 point season as an 18 year old...

Good comparison.

Unfortunately, the project was aborted prematurely after the top 70 was posted, and nobody ever saw the aggregate list, so we don't know if anyone had Crosby on their lists.

I know I didn't have him, and I think there was a general sense of dismissal towards him in the preliminary thread. Though there is the caveat that this forum was much more conservative when it came to considering active players back then.

 

[Michael Farkas]

That's too bad...

Doesn't mean much, but the late season 2010 ATD had Crosby go 143, 2011 ATD had Crosby go 101.

So, in 2010 (it appears he might have been picked in, what, April? March?) he was wrapping up a 5th season of being the best player in the world. And he would have been strongly considered for the top 100 list if we made one in 2011 one could reason...

 

[quoipourquoi]

That's too bad...

Doesn't mean much, but the late season 2010 ATD had Crosby go 143, 2011 ATD had Crosby go 101.

So, in 2010 (it appears he might have been picked in, what, April? March?) he was wrapping up a 5th season of being the best player in the world. And he would have been strongly considered for the top 100 list if we made one in 2011 one could reason...

Feels like the effect of hitting the ketchup bottle one more time and having it all come out at once. On my 2009 list, I didn’t have Crosby or Ovechkin, to my recollection. If I made a list in 2010, they likely would be on it.

HOH does tend to be more conservative in its approach. Let’s say something happens to McDavid and this really is it. He’ll almost certainly do better in 2030 than he’ll do in 2020. But even though he only had a 4-game playoff, I’m pretty sure this was the ketchup moment for me.