Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread
- Thread starter quoipourquoi
- Start date
- Status
sr edler
gold is not reality
- Mar 20, 2010
- 12,130
- 6,610
Hobey Baker was much like Sebastian Flyte (minus the alcoholism of course) in that everyone loved him, but there wasn't much of actual substance done (although there was some). He also retired before he died, I don't think he planned to play any longer.
He was a very clean player, and detested the professional game. Hypothetically, I don't think he would have worked out in the NHA. Too many overt dirty players like Joe Hall, Sprague Cleghorn, Art Ross, et cetera. I think he could have worked out in the PCHA though, which by most accounts was a cleaner league. The Patrick brothers looked after their on-ice product more than the NHA, from a P.T. Barnum/ticket selling perspective, and Lester Patrick was obsessed with charisma. Outside of Cully Wilson, who was a legitimately dirty player (and who was kicked out of the league in 1919), their most notorious rough house player was Tommy Dunderdale who wasn't even particularly dirty but just a guy who liked to rough it up and take penalties.
Here below is a review by spectators Odie Cleghorn & Harry Hyland on Baker after the St. Nicks beat St. Michael's College of Toronto in March 1915.
(Brooklyn Daily Eagle, March 17, 1915)
"Baker is also a great player. However, he is not as good a forward as (Gouverneur) Carnochan is a goal keeper"
He was a very clean player, and detested the professional game. Hypothetically, I don't think he would have worked out in the NHA. Too many overt dirty players like Joe Hall, Sprague Cleghorn, Art Ross, et cetera. I think he could have worked out in the PCHA though, which by most accounts was a cleaner league. The Patrick brothers looked after their on-ice product more than the NHA, from a P.T. Barnum/ticket selling perspective, and Lester Patrick was obsessed with charisma. Outside of Cully Wilson, who was a legitimately dirty player (and who was kicked out of the league in 1919), their most notorious rough house player was Tommy Dunderdale who wasn't even particularly dirty but just a guy who liked to rough it up and take penalties.
Here below is a review by spectators Odie Cleghorn & Harry Hyland on Baker after the St. Nicks beat St. Michael's College of Toronto in March 1915.
(Brooklyn Daily Eagle, March 17, 1915)
"Baker is also a great player. However, he is not as good a forward as (Gouverneur) Carnochan is a goal keeper"
DitchMarner
TheGlitchintheSwitch
I'd have Modano first and Nieuwendyk last. The other three are very close and in the same tier.
ted2019
History of Hockey
I have a spot for Modano and maybe Backstrom towards the end of the list. The other 3, I just don't see making it.
This isn't a hot take but over the history of hockey which spans 120+ years, there are some really good players that won't make the top 200 list.
buffalowing88
Registered User
Haha! Thank you and thank you @quoiporquoi! I have had a long weekend with a funeral and didn't get a chance to check back on this but this has been a real pleasant surprise to see
I'll start contributing tonight!
buffalowing88
Registered User
Thanks for this list! I have been trying to go in-depth on the non-NHL guys, particularly the Europeans from the 1950s-1970s. Maltsev, Holecek, Martinec, and Vasilev have to be there. Petrov as well and Larionov has been back and forth for me. Would love to know more about Nedomansky. I know a bit about Suchy but any input is welcome!
buffalowing88
Registered User
I considered all of these guys. I think that I agree with a lot. Personally:
Bergeron- Yes
Marchand- No
Toews- Yes
Getzlaf- No
Doughty- Yes
Lundqvist- Yest
Price- No
Karlsson- He has to be but I feel like he's been overrated in the past 3 years
Hedman- Just not sure...
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Professor What
Registered User
Krutov in particular, but also Popisil and Kasatonov look like very strong candidates to me, and I suspect there will be at least one or two of your "definites" that crack my top 100.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Comparing a few Norris records:
Hedman: 1, 3, 3, 3, 7, 9
Doughty: 1, 2, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9
Blake: 1, 3, 3, 4, 5, 8
Niedermayer: 1, 2, 2, 5, 9, 10, 12
Add in playoffs, etc, my preliminary rank of them:
1. Doughty
2. Niedermayer
3. Hedman
4. Blake
But all reasonably close.
edinson
Registered User
- May 11, 2012
- 165
- 13
I have these in the same order. Adding Karlsson and Weber for a complete list of recent defensemen I'd consider for the list:
Karlsson: 1, 1, 2, 2, 7, 12
Weber: 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
How I'd rank them:
1. Karlsson
2. Doughty
3. Niedermayer
4. Weber
5. Hedman
6. Blake
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
I didn't include Karlsson because he's a different "type" - he peaked a lot higher than these guys, but didn't maintain that peak level really. Also more skewed towards offense, rather than two-way play. But yes, I have Karlsson 1st or 2nd of this group.
Weber is tough because while he is the same "type," his playoff record isn't anywhere near the rest of these guys, even as beats them in 4th-10th place Norris finishes.
Professor What
Registered User
I said once before about Karlsson that he's either all-world or just good. Very few have ever had the kind of peak he's shown. I make no apologies for saying that he should absolutely have at least three Norris Trophies, and I'd argue for four. He doesn't have the level of consistency that some of the other d-men being discussed have, but I think he's far enough ahead in peak play to put him at the top of that list.
Edit: Forgot to make part of my argument before posting. Karlsson has also displayed that he has better defensive ability than he's given credit for. When he lost the Norris to Doughty, very unjustly in my opinion, it was argued that he "didn't play defense." The next season, under a new coach and a new system, he was asked to play more defensively, and while not elite there, he was good, and barely sacrificed any offense. Yet, he lost the Norris to Burns based on offense, while I've never heard anyone argue that Burns was anywhere near the same level defensively. People talk about Karlsson and Coffey being a "fourth forward," but Burns skews further in that direction.
Edit: Forgot to make part of my argument before posting. Karlsson has also displayed that he has better defensive ability than he's given credit for. When he lost the Norris to Doughty, very unjustly in my opinion, it was argued that he "didn't play defense." The next season, under a new coach and a new system, he was asked to play more defensively, and while not elite there, he was good, and barely sacrificed any offense. Yet, he lost the Norris to Burns based on offense, while I've never heard anyone argue that Burns was anywhere near the same level defensively. People talk about Karlsson and Coffey being a "fourth forward," but Burns skews further in that direction.
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
Weber would be an easy last for playoffs ranking, even with international/best on best play included.
Karlsson, if you include international and best on best tourneys, seems like he's definitely below Doughty and Niedermayer and above Weber, not sure about the other 2. My gut says below Hedman and above Blake.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Re: Karlsson. It's easier to destroy than create. The more hockey I watch, the more I put a premium on creation. That doesn't mean I want Housley at 26th overall on the list, but Karlsson wasn't Housley...better said, Housley wasn't Karlsson...
Not saying put him, just saying, he's worth consideration...that was a special, special peak for me...
Not saying put him, just saying, he's worth consideration...that was a special, special peak for me...
Professor What
Registered User
I'm going to put a lot more stock in NHL play than international play for NHL players. It's a much, much larger, and I'd argue more important sample. To me, the only time I'm going to give heavy weight to best on best international play is Eastern Bloc players and other early Europeans, simply because it's the only way we can truly compare them to North Americans. Even then, I'm still going to give heavier weight to league play when comparing them to one another among countrymen.
Yozhik v tumane
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2019
- 2,020
- 2,170
One may very well argue Karlsson below Doughty due to the latter being a contributing factor on two Olympic gold medalists, but I don’t think that Karlsson has been qualitatively worse than Doughty in international tournaments. Karlsson led the 2014 Olympics (his only Olympic tournament) in scoring and was named the best defenseman of the tournament: he was definitely the most important player on that Swedish team.
Unfortunately for Karlsson, Doughty developed earlier and has one more successful Olympic tournament under his belt, thus I may also argue Doughty ahead on that specific parameter.
A friendly reminder just in case you or anyone else has thought of using gold medal count against Karlsson. Anze Kopitar has less Olympic medals than Matt Duchene, but I wouldn’t say his international career is less impressive with some context.
Professor What
Registered User
I don't really understand the emphasis being placed on international play. Yeah, I know that you get best on best in some tournaments, but you maybe get the Olympics once every four years, and you maybe get a World Cup at the same interval. World Championships are yearly, but it's only guys that aren't in the playoffs. When you do get a chance to see NHLers in international play, it's a small handful of games. I simply don't see enough reason to give it much weight at all. I'm far, far more interested in what they can do in an 82-game season every single year.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
I don't fawn over it like some do (except when necessary, Iron Curtain years)...it's another playoffs for me. One thing I use it for a lot is adaptability...what happened when Joe Thornton was on the 4th line...what happened when d-man whoever was only playing 16 minutes...what happened when so and so played on wide ice...adaptability is a big, big trait for me that you don't readily find in the newspaper, so I look to these varied situations...players that have never been in any other situation too...like Team Canada Dryden vs Montreal juggernaut Dryden...it's a Monet painting in Montreal, but with Team Canada in the mix, it's a Monet with a "Paid - Thank you!" sticker right on the woman's parasol...and you wonder if you can get it off without leaving that sticker residue...
edinson
Registered User
- May 11, 2012
- 165
- 13
I agree with your view on international play for NHL players. However, I think there's good reason to consider international play as more, or at least equally, important for non-NHL Europeans.
From what I've read the Soviets considered the international tournaments more important than their domestic league, sort of a regular season to playoffs relation in NHL terms, maybe. With the international tournaments being the playoffs, of course. I'm not sure if this was different for the CSSR where the domestic league seems to have been more competitive than the Soviet's most of the time, but I'm sure someone else here can give some insight on this. Also, most Iron Curtain era players who will be considered here will have played more than 100 games of international hockey over 7+ years so the sample size issue isn't an issue in the same way as for NHL players who rarely have more than 20GP in international best-on-bests.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Well, yeah, the same SuperLeague or whatever team won like 15 years in a row until the country imploded (some of those details are fuzzy, but the point stands)...the league was mostly a glorified practice league for them to sharpen up for international tournaments...the same two teams finished right behind them all the time too...everyone else was the Washington Generals...
Professor What
Registered User
I absolutely agree that it's important for players like the Soviets and Czechoslovakians. We have no way to compare them to North Americans without it. I'm still very interested in their league results though. Seeing how they perform over an entire season is quite useful. I think that still weighs a little heavier for me because of sample size, but it's much closer of a balance.
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
The main reason I had Doughty over Karlsson on that list was NHL playoffs not international/best on best
EDIT: Just to be clear in the post you replied to, I was saying where I'd put Weber and Karlsson on TDMM's list of playoffs ranking
ted2019
History of Hockey
Karlsson's peak was grand, but when he's not at the top of his game, he's between average and above average to me (injury or no injury) . Defensively, he leaves a lot to be desired.
- Status
