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

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Oh, I don’t either; I just tried to grab every name I remember being mentioned.

I agree with the idea that someone expressed earlier that Gartner wasn't necessarily better than Marleau. That doesn't mean Marleau has a shot at my list though.

 

[ted2019]

I think there was a discussion a few pages back. Pretty sure this is a comprehensive list of the contenders:

Anze Kopitar
Carey Price
Connor McDavid
Drew Doughty
Henrik Lundqvist
Ilya Kovalchuk
Jonathan Toews
Marc-Andre Fleury
Nikita Kucherov
Patrice Bergeron
Patrick Marleau
Pekka Rinne
Ryan Getzlaf
Steven Stamkos
Tuukka Rask
Victor Hedman

Kopitar-yes
Price-maybe
McDavid-somewhere
Doughty-somewhere
Lundqvist-yes
Kovalchuk-nyet
Toews-somewhere behind Bergeron & Kopitar
MAF- no
Kucherov-somewhere
Marleau-no
Rinne-no
Getzlaf-no
Stamkos-yes
Rask-maybe
Hedman-maybe

 

[ted2019]

I'm coming into the final stretch of having an actual list now, and I'm really beginning to understand what makes this so difficult. Having two players just a couple of ranks different on a positional chart could well represent 10 to 15 ranks on an overall list, which means that very slight, very understandable disagreements by two project members on where two guys fall among those that play(ed) their position can translate into big differences on a list of all players. I think we all agree that the farther down the list we go, the less there is to separate players. So, when we start having bigger differences in where we rank players among their positions, those differences get even bigger on a full list. Eight to ten positions on a positional list could make a difference of 50 to sixty positions on a full list, which could easily be the difference in an absolutely and a no way. I can't help but wonder if there's really going to be any significant difference between #150 and #200 when we reach the end of this.

I'll be starting my 3rd copy soon.

 

[ted2019]

I was talk about your contention that LeClair was a better player than Neely.

Got it, but I'd still say that LeClair was the better player.

 

[ted2019]

For my money, pyramid ranking is the way to go. I put one together in 2013 or so, and it fanned out from 1 to 3 to 5 to 10 to 20 names (39 total players). Assuming a more conservative spread down the line...

1 player
3 players (2-4)
5 players (5-9)
7 players (10-16)
9 players (17-25)
11 players (26-36)
13 players (37-49)
15 players (50-64)
17 players (65-81)
19 players (82-100)
21 players (101-121)
23 players (122-144)
25 players (145-169)
27 players (170-196)
29 players (197-225)

So this project would be like looking at 5 tiers while the last was looking at twice as many.

Interesting way of doing it. Never thought of that.

 

[Professor What]

I'll be starting my 3rd copy soon.

In a sense, I am too. This is either the third or fourth time that I've done the positions. I'm trying to turn those lists into a full list now. We'll see how many times that gets redone.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I think there was a discussion a few pages back. Pretty sure this is a comprehensive list of the contenders:

Anze Kopitar
Carey Price
Connor McDavid
Drew Doughty
Henrik Lundqvist
Ilya Kovalchuk
Jonathan Toews
Marc-Andre Fleury
Nikita Kucherov
Patrice Bergeron
Patrick Marleau
Pekka Rinne
Ryan Getzlaf
Steven Stamkos
Tuukka Rask
Victor Hedman

Isn't this list a bit light on defenceman (only 2 out of 16)? I know Keith and Chara just snuck onto the top 100 list, so that could partially explain it, but at the very least you're missing Erik Karlsson.

And while I'm not necessarily convinced the next level of active D-men in the Weber/Burns/Suter/Pietrangelo class are strong contenders for the final list, it might be reasonable depending on how you break things down by position and era. I personally don't really see any way I'd rank guys like Marleau, Kovalchuk or Fleury ahead of longtime #1 D-men with both multiple ASTs and multiple top-6 selections for Team Canada.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Isn't this list a bit light on defenceman (only 2 out of 16?). I know Keith and Chara just snuck onto the top 100 list, so that could partially explain it, but at the very least you're missing Erik Karlsson.

And while I'm not necessarily convinced the next level of active D-men in the Weber/Burns/Suter/Pietrangelo class are strong contenders for the final list, it might be reasonable depending on how you break things down by position and era. I personally don't really see any way I'd rank guys like Marleau, Kovalchuk or Fleury ahead of longtime #1 D-men with both multiple ASTs and multiple top-6 selections for Team Canada.

Oh, for sure, Erik Karlsson was an oversight on my part. I think he’s already well within the top-100.

Did we talk about Brent Burns in this thread yet? I know we’re kind of going over Weber in another one, but Burns is a multi-position player with a high peak and a decently long resume. Did he play himself off the list last year like Holtby, or do we still like that toolset?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Oh, for sure, Erik Karlsson was an oversight on my part. I think he’s already well within the top-100.

Did we talk about Brent Burns in this thread yet? I know we’re kind of going over Weber in another one, but Burns is a multi-position player with a high peak and a decently long resume. Did he play himself off the list last year like Holtby, or do we still like that toolset?

I'm just not entirely convinced that Burns has done more to warrant being on the list than someone like Sergei Gonchar. Am I wrong in thinking Burns = Gonchar?

Slightly higher peak for Burns, but less staying power.

 

[Professor What]

I'm just not entirely convinced that Burns has done more to warrant being on the list than someone like Sergei Gonchar. Am I wrong in thinking Burns = Gonchar?

Slightly higher peak for Burns, but less staying power.

I don't think you're wrong, and they both look like they're close to the end of the list, either just making it or just missing it.

 

[Professor What]

As of this moment, I've got ten players in my top 100 that didn't make the "official" top 100 list. Three are Eastern Bloc players and two are active.

 

[buffalowing88]

Kopitar-yes
Price-maybe
McDavid-somewhere
Doughty-somewhere
Lundqvist-yes
Kovalchuk-nyet
Toews-somewhere behind Bergeron & Kopitar
MAF- no
Kucherov-somewhere
Marleau-no
Rinne-no
Getzlaf-no
Stamkos-yes
Rask-maybe
Hedman-maybe

I love these lists. I think it makes it easier to either draw a fringe player in, or knock them out.

I agree with the majority of this. I would only argue that is Kucherov is a yes, then Hedman has to be, too, and that you seem to fall in line with much of this board in thinking that Kopitar is a lock and I just don't see it. Toews trumps Kopitar to me. Bergeron absolutely is head and shoulders above either, but Kopitar is getting a lot of love and not much scrutiny these days.

Also, I'm totally into leaving Rinne and Rask out, I think we need to go ahead and make that a non-starter if we really want to narrow this down. Rinne was a tough omission, but Rask isn't even a maybe for me. He belongs with Miller and I've learned enough from this thread to know where those goalies belong.

 

[buffalowing88]

I'm just not entirely convinced that Burns has done more to warrant being on the list than someone like Sergei Gonchar. Am I wrong in thinking Burns = Gonchar?

Slightly higher peak for Burns, but less staying power.

As with many posts in this thread, I initially was upset that you were essentially discounting Burns...but I was a fan when Gonchar was good and I guess I just forgot how good he was. Going back and looking at it...I hate to say it but I will absolutely have a spot reserved for Gonchar and Burns is more fringe than I thought.

Also, I'm going to be lambasted here, but I'm going to discount the past two seasons and ask, honestly, if Karlsson is not becoming overrated here. He doesn't tip the scales for me as an excellent playoff performer and the more that I read into these players up for contention, the more I see a common thread where the best ones came to play in the postseason year after year. We can blame expansion and Melnyk all we want, but if I'm being honest, he's not a sure-thing for me. I think it's good that we all offer different perspectives, though. I'm sure mine will be wiped out, but Karlsson is not top-three in my favorite defensemen from his era.

 

[buffalowing88]

For those who might be considering Cam Neely, LeClair was a better player. There are some that say that Lindros had some of his success due to the presence of LeClair.

LeClair will make my list, and Neely probably won't, but that is based on longevity and playoff success. I would take Neely over LeClair in a heartbeat if it was for one, isolated seven game series in a vacuum. LeClair was absolutely talented and I wouldn't call him a passenger, but he was an opportunistic player who even has a playoff-defining goal in which he sent the puck in through the back of the net, literally through the meshing. I watched all of the matchups between a good Sabres squad and the Legion of Doom in the mid-90s and Lindros scared me, Desjardins scared me, and Renberg scared me. LeClair was less talented than those guys, but he made the most out of what he could do. I guess he deserves credit for that and I will include him. But he was never a force of nature on the ice like Neely. That's a silly comparison.

 

[Professor What]

@buffalowing88 I'd counter the point about Karlsson and the playoffs by first pointing to his last two appearances. I'm not about to argue that his play hasn't significantly fallen off in San Jose, but his numbers looked much more like the old Karlsson in the 2019 playoffs. But, more important than that, he led a Senators team that had no business being real contenders to being one double overtime goal away from a Finals appearance. Second, I'll grant that his playoff performance in 2012 was disappointing, but otherwise, he's been solid at worst when he's made it to the playoffs. The problem in Ottawa always was that he was expected to drag along a lot of dead weight on those teams, and that's not going to give consistent chances to make the playoffs. I'm not saying he's a historic playoff performer like he has been a regular season performer, but he hasn't exactly been bad. I'd dare say there's enough there to believe things would look a lot different had he been given the benefit of a strong team built around him.

 

[buffalowing88]

@buffalowing88 I'd counter the point about Karlsson and the playoffs by first pointing to his last two appearances. I'm not about to argue that his play hasn't significantly fallen off in San Jose, but his numbers looked much more like the old Karlsson in the 2019 playoffs. But, more important than that, he led a Senators team that had no business being real contenders to being one double overtime goal away from a Finals appearance. Second, I'll grant that his playoff performance in 2012 was disappointing, but otherwise, he's been solid at worst when he's made it to the playoffs. The problem in Ottawa always was that he was expected to drag along a lot of dead weight on those teams, and that's not going to give consistent chances to make the playoffs. I'm not saying he's a historic playoff performer like he has been a regular season performer, but he hasn't exactly been bad. I'd dare say there's enough there to believe things would look a lot different had he been given the benefit of a strong team built around him.

Hell yes. I want to taste a bit of blood on this Karlsson argument and I think you make like 3 great points in that post alone. I just get weary about giving him the benefit of the doubt for carrying a shitty Ottawa team because some guys simply thrive in those environments. He's not yet cracking my top-3 from 2010 to present but these are the things I need to think about and I am not going to discount a solid argument like you put forward. He absolutely controlled the tempo for those Senators teams and I shouldn't just write that off either...

 

[buffalowing88]

Also, just to clarify, my top three defensemen from 2010 to present are:
Keith
Doughty
Hedman

I have Karlsson right after that crowd. I can be persuaded in him over Hedman, but Doughty and Keith defined the 2010's, to me. They're set in place.

 

[VanIslander]

No Chara?

And Shea Weber continues to be underappreciated: the greatest defenseman to not win a Norris or Stanley Cup since Brad Park.

At least Weber was an Olympic all-star selection for the 2010 gold-medal tourney, and he tied Doughty for the team blueline scoring lead (but Shea had a better +/-) in the 2014 Olympic gold.



Hope you guys are considering major best-on-best tourneys like Canada Cups, World Cups and several of the Olympics.

 

[DN28]

I would like to know your opinions on 3 very good wingers not yet mentioned.

1) Jamie Benn. Is Benn another active player who deserves a spot somewhere at the bottom of the list? His 3-year peak (2014-16) is impressive. 1st all-star in 14, Art Ross in 15, 1st all-star in 16. Also 3rd in Hart in 2016. Solid playoffs, especially compared to his Dallas teammate T. Seguin. Unfortunately almost no international exposure... Is Benn more worthy for the list than Markus Naslund?

2) Woody Dumart. A defensive consciousness of the famous Kraut line. Big and skilled LWer. Bruins won the SC in 1939 and 1941 and Dumart was 2nd all-star in 40 and 41. He was then drafted and missed most of '42 and three other seasons due to war. Dumart was also 2nd all-star in 1947, 3rd all-star in 48, 4th all-star in 39, 46 and in 1950. Basically an elite two-way forward for more than a decade.

Why was Dumart not included in the HOH Top-60 Wingers list from 5 years ago? Was it because of his only two top-10 scoring finishes? Dumart was a victim of era he played in; did voters refuse to adjust for his WW2 missing years back then?

3) George Hay. One of the best WCHL players. Hay was four times 1st all-star in the WCHL / WHL in between 1922-26. After that league folded, Hay played the '27 season through injuries, yet he ended up 1st NHL all-star LW here in that unofficial GMs' voting. In 1928, Hay was then again 1st NHL all-star LW according to GMs and he was also 4th in Hart voting. In 1929, Hay was 2nd NHL all-star LW - this time GMs picked A. Joliat ahead of him.

Great stickhandler who was at minimum competent defensively and perhaps a 2nd best LWer thoroughout the 1920s (after Denneny?)... So what am I missing? Seems like a sure thing for the Top-200, yet Hay did not make it as a top60 W on this forum 5 years ago.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

LeClair will make my list, and Neely probably won't, but that is based on longevity and playoff success. I would take Neely over LeClair in a heartbeat if it was for one, isolated seven game series in a vacuum. LeClair was absolutely talented and I wouldn't call him a passenger, but he was an opportunistic player who even has a playoff-defining goal in which he sent the puck in through the back of the net, literally through the meshing. I watched all of the matchups between a good Sabres squad and the Legion of Doom in the mid-90s and Lindros scared me, Desjardins scared me, and Renberg scared me. LeClair was less talented than those guys, but he made the most out of what he could do. I guess he deserves credit for that and I will include him. But he was never a force of nature on the ice like Neely. That's a silly comparison.

By playoff success I guess you mean team success.

LeClair:

154 games 42-47-89

Neely:

93 games 57-32-89

 

[buffalowing88]

By playoff success I guess you mean team success.

LeClair:

154 games 42-47-89

Neely:

93 games 57-32-89

I did but I will say that I didn't realize the contrast was that stark in terms of the production. Yeesh.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Jamie Benn. Is Benn another active player who deserves a spot somewhere at the bottom of the list? His 3-year peak (2014-16) is impressive. 1st all-star in 14, Art Ross in 15, 1st all-star in 16. Also 3rd in Hart in 2016. Solid playoffs, especially compared to his Dallas teammate T. Seguin. Unfortunately almost no international exposure... Is Benn more worthy for the list than Markus Naslund?

He couldn’t even be above teammate Corey Perry to this point, could he? Benn, while good, is maybe only of significant interest in this range of players because on one night with absolutely nothing on the line, the Dallas Stars wanted him to win one of the weaker Art Ross races in memory. It was awesome. But it’s not like Naslund had that sort of thing going for him - from 2002-2004 the Canucks were winning and losing divisions by a single point, or fighting off two reams to clinch the #8 spot. They each have just 3 or 4 great seasons, but I think the disparity in their Hart recognition in Naslund’s favor is well earned.

Maybe if Benn had like a good Final or something, but he just couldn’t finish anything, leaving Perry and Joe Pavelski to try to drag the Stars over the finish line. Come to think of it, that sounds like something Markus Naslund would do.

 

[quoipourquoi]

but Rask isn't even a maybe for me. He belongs with Miller and I've learned enough from this thread to know where those goalies belong.

Really? Two world-class Finals runs, four top-3 finishes in save percentage while playing the majority of his teams’ games (the only other goaltenders to do this post-expansion are Roy/Hasek with 7 each, Esposito with 6, and Parent with 5), and they named a wasp after him in 2015.

 

[overpass]

3) George Hay. One of the best WCHL players. Hay was four times 1st all-star in the WCHL / WHL in between 1922-26. After that league folded, Hay played the '27 season through injuries, yet he ended up 1st NHL all-star LW here in that unofficial GMs' voting. In 1928, Hay was then again 1st NHL all-star LW according to GMs and he was also 4th in Hart voting. In 1929, Hay was 2nd NHL all-star LW - this time GMs picked A. Joliat ahead of him.

Hay's first team selection in 1926-27 is an unusual pick. He was selected as first team LW by the managers in a close vote over Aurel Joliat of the Canadiens and his own teammate Dick Irvin. Hay finished with 14 goals and 24 points and Irvin finished with 18 goals and 36 points -- in fact Irvin was second in league scoring by only one point, and led the league in assists. I can't think of another case in all-star voting where a winger was voted a postseason all-star despite finishing so far behind a teammate in scoring.

Why was Hay voted ahead of Irvin? Did the managers recognize that Hay was just a player who did more to drive winning? I believe Irvin was known for not being a backchecker and maybe that carried more weight back then. Or maybe some voters just didn't look at the statistics as much back then and didn't realize how much Irvin had been scoring.

Maybe a comparable case of star wingers from more recently would be Dany Heatley and Daniel Alfredsson in 2006-07. Heatley outscored Alfredsson by quite a bit in the regular season (50-55-105 to 29-58-87) but you could certainly make the case Alfredsson was a better player. Heatley received 99 first team all star votes and Alfredsson received only 2. So maybe the voting standards have changed to be more stat-driven, or more focused on who had a better season rather than who was a better player.

In 1927-28, Hay was top 5 in goals and points, so it's not so surprising that he was voted a first-team all star at LW. But Aurele Joliat of the Canadiens led Hay in goals (28 to 22) and points (39 to 35) and still Hay was voted ahead of him.

1928-29 was a really poor year for LW scoring. The first team all-star Joliat's scoring line was 12-5-17, and Hay's scoring line was 11-8-19. He tied for the second team with Hec Kilrea, who's scoring line was 5-7-12 -- both received 2 votes from the 10 managers. So I don't know how valuable a 2nd team AS LW spot is from this season. Was it just an off year for LWs around the league? Or was everyone playing some sort of LW lock where LWs had lower scoring expectations and more defensive responsibilities?

Overall, Hay looks much better for those 3 seasons by the AS teams than he does by looking at scoring finishes. He was a 1st team AS for 1926-27 and 1927-28, and a 2nd team AS for 1928-29. Looking at scoring finishes (and I'm sure VsX would show something similar) he had t-10th, t-3rd, and t-14th for points, and t-18th, 5th, t-17th for goals. So what do these All-star teams mean? Was he really that much better than his scoring totals? Was he just competing against a weak group of LWers (but counterpoint: he was competing with top-100 player Aurele Joliat, who was the other top 2 LW in voting for each of these 3 seasons).

The comparison of Hay against Joliat is interesting. For the seasons 1926-27 through 1929-30, covering Hay's age 29-32 seasons and Joliat's age 25-28 seasons, Hay had a scoring line of 65-46-111 in 162 GP. Joliat scored 73-33-106 in 173 GP. Joliat had a much longer career in pro hockey, 16 seasons to Hay's 11 seasons, but is there a chance that Hay was Joliat's equal on the ice?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

2) Woody Dumart. A defensive consciousness of the famous Kraut line. Big and skilled LWer. Bruins won the SC in 1939 and 1941 and Dumart was 2nd all-star in 40 and 41. He was then drafted and missed most of '42 and three other seasons due to war. Dumart was also 2nd all-star in 1947, 3rd all-star in 48, 4th all-star in 39, 46 and in 1950. Basically an elite two-way forward for more than a decade. Why was Dumart not included in the HOH Top-60 Wingers list from 5 years ago? Was it because of his only two top-10 scoring finishes? Dumart was a victim of era he played in; did voters refuse to adjust for his WW2 missing years back then?

3) George Hay. One of the best WCHL players. Hay was four times 1st all-star in the WCHL / WHL in between 1922-26. After that league folded, Hay played the '27 season through injuries, yet he ended up 1st NHL all-star LW here in that unofficial GMs' voting. In 1928, Hay was then again 1st NHL all-star LW according to GMs and he was also 4th in Hart voting. In 1929, Hay was 2nd NHL all-star LW - this time GMs picked A. Joliat ahead of him.

Great stickhandler who was at minimum competent defensively and perhaps a 2nd best LWer thoroughout the 1920s (after Denneny?)... So what am I missing? Seems like a sure thing for the Top-200, yet Hay did not make it as a top60 W on this forum 5 years ago.

Maybe because his linemates were both better players.