Toggle sidebar

Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
A minor thing but just noticed Yakushev's birth year is 1974 - it should be 1947. Can a mod change it?
 
TheDevilMadeMe said:
He definitely did.

At some point, I'm going to compare where guys finished on the Top Players by Position projects VS this project. I suspect Savard and Sittler will be among the biggest fallers
Click to expand...

It’s funny, I actually thought Savard had a pretty smooth ride during the discussion round. Maybe I’m misremembering, but I don’t remember any harsh negatives that would have caused a tumble.

Perhaps he slipped on the preliminary lists? If that’s the case, it might say something about how we’ve generally come to view the 80s NHL outside of a few top talents. And if that’s the case I’d point to a possible root cause being an increased respect for the Soviet players of that era.

edit: lots of “ifs” in this post. Just a theory that might or might not bear out when we see the preliminary list.
 
tarheelhockey said:
It’s funny, I actually thought Savard had a pretty smooth ride during the discussion round. Maybe I’m misremembering, but I don’t remember any harsh negatives that would have caused a tumble.

Perhaps he slipped on the preliminary lists? If that’s the case, it might say something about how we’ve generally come to view the 80s NHL outside of a few top talents. And if that’s the case I’d point to a possible root cause being an increased respect for the Soviet players of that era.

edit: lots of “ifs” in this post. Just a theory that might or might not bear out when we see the preliminary list.
Click to expand...
TheDevilMadeMe said:
He definitely did.

At some point, I'm going to compare where guys finished on the Top Players by Position projects VS this project. I suspect Savard and Sittler will be among the biggest fallers
Click to expand...

Definitely interested to see how Savard fell. I personally think the injuries later on he had hurt him imo.
 
Melrose Munch said:
Definitely interested to see how Savard fell. I personally think the injuries later on he had hurt him imo.
Click to expand...

Right or wrong I think the fact that he was a complete non factor in his only SC at age 31 probably has something to do with it albeit at an unconscious level.

That and the already high number of excellent centres post expansion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch
jigglysquishy said:
Has it been decided what the next list will be? I'd be interested to take part if the topic is right.
Click to expand...

ted2019 said:
I would say it would be at least another year or so.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the pace has usually been to take at least a few months off and then very gradually start up with the "hey, what should the next project be?" conversation. Then another month or two of deciding what to do, and then arranging the logistics. My guess is we see that conversation start up again sometime early next hockey season, say December.

The good news is that the next project is more likely to be a top-30 of some niche subject, rather than another 100 names added to the Big List. A smaller project should run a little more briskly. Top-100s are a big, big lift.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yozhik v tumane
tarheelhockey said:
Yeah, the pace has usually been to take at least a few months off and then very gradually start up with the "hey, what should the next project be?" conversation. Then another month or two of deciding what to do, and then arranging the logistics. My guess is we see that conversation start up again sometime early next hockey season, say December.

The good news is that the next project is more likely to be a top-30 of some niche subject, rather than another 100 names added to the Big List. A smaller project should run a little more briskly. Top-100s are a big, big lift.
Click to expand...

In the past, we generally liked to start these things around the start of the new NHL season.

That feels a little too soon to me this year, just because this massive project just ended. But maybe it won't feel that way in a few months.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Yozhik v tumane and tarheelhockey
TheDevilMadeMe said:
FWIW, in the 40 team ATD 2020, Hejduk was drafted 494th. Ogrodnick 953rd.
Click to expand...
This offers some support for the first two gut reactions I had to Tarheel's joke, which were:
- Wouldn't Hejduk's career be miles and miles better than Ogrodnick's? (without double checking on any of their bullet points)
- Hejduk seems like he'd be reasonably close to in the conversation for #300 once you correct for all the team-building aspects of the ATD (the desire for checking forwards, positional needs, blah blah)
 
Johnny Engine said:
This offers some support for the first two gut reactions I had to Tarheel's joke, which were:
- Wouldn't Hejduk's career be miles and miles better than Ogrodnick's? (without double checking on any of their bullet points)
- Hejduk seems like he'd be reasonably close to in the conversation for #300 once you correct for all the team-building aspects of the ATD (the desire for checking forwards, positional needs, blah blah)
Click to expand...

I just picked two random players, guys :laugh:
 
Shanny at 195. I was looking over the NHL 100 greatest on NHL.com again today, and had forgotten Shanny is in there, which seems like maybe the most glaring mistake in the list.
 
Kranix said:
Shanny at 195. I was looking over the NHL 100 greatest on NHL.com again today, and had forgotten Shanny is in there, which seems like maybe the most glaring mistake in the list.
Click to expand...

This was not just a most popular player type of list, nor just an NHL only list. He was listed where we thought he should be as there are a lot of things that are looked into besides goals, assists and points. If so, Mike Gartner would've been in the top 50.
 
ted2019 said:
This was not just a most popular player type of list, nor just an NHL only list. He was listed where we thought he should be as there are a lot of things that are looked into besides goals, assists and points. If so, Mike Gartner would've been in the top 50.
Click to expand...
I understand the differences between the list. I meant him being in the top 100 NHL.com list was a mistake by them, not a mistake in the list here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom