Top NHL player in the 21st Century so far? #6(Inspired by ESPN ranking)

[Video Nasty]

Where'd I use the word fluke? My point was very clear, Brodeur benefited a lot from playing on a very strong and trap-centric NJ team where he was able to rack up a lot of wins due to team quality and workhorse minutes. That very obviously played a role in his Vezina voting if you look at his 03 and 04 seasons (as I said, would take a lot of Lundqvist's non-vezina seasons over those two). 2003 in particular is a very serious head-scratcher unless team success is the most valuable metric when evaluating goaltenders. Statistically, there's nothing that implies his body of work was superior to Lundqvist's during this time period. How many of Brodeur's seasons would you actually take over Lundqvist's best years? And do you think Brodeur would fare any better on NY than Lundqvist did?

You're getting hung up on the system Brodeur played in and I think you're missing a key point. Yeah, the trap limited shots, but the shots that came through were often high-quality. He wasn’t just racking up easy saves like others…fewer shots but tougher ones naturally affect save percentage.

And man, don’t overlook his puck-handling. Don’t do it. Brodeur was like a third defenseman, cutting off plays and clearing pucks before shots could even be taken. He prevented shots from ever reaching him, which simply isn’t reflected in something like save percentage.

I think voters actually understood this back in the day, thank god. That’s why he was a 7 time Vezina finalist and 5 time top 5 Hart nominee, from 2000 onwards.

 

[Acallabeth]

I still insist that Kucherov has already accomplished more than Malkin and is a no-brainer at this point.

 

[wetcoast]

I'm really puzzled by the 5 votes for Jagr here, it's for 2000-2001 onwards not his entire career.

 

[bobholly39]

Not even close?!?

Isn’t that a little much?

I mean - close is a relative term. Their primes are somewhat comparable yes - yet Kucherov is still very clearly ahead.

Better in both regular season and playoffs. If you want to use the word close - go ahead, but it's still clearly Kucherov.

I think you’re overstating things here. Both have 7 years as an elite player since Kucherov missed all of ‘21 and MacKinnon has the better Hart record and Kucherov the better Art Ross record.

Hart top 10

MacKinnon: 1, 2, 2, 3, 5, 6
Kucherov: 1, 2, 6, 8

Art Ross top 10

MacKinnon: 2, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8
Kucherov: 1, 1, 3, 3, 5, 7

Both have a Lindsay but MacKinnon has 2 other Lindsay finalists while Kucherov has 1.

Kucherov has been an elite player since 16-17. Since then he has 724 points in 514 games. MacKinnon has been one since 17-18. But considering Kucherov’s missed time, MacKinnon has played nearly as many games at that level. In MacKinnon’s last 514 regular season games he has 704 points. That’s a difference of only 3 points per 82 games.

Considering MacKinnon is generally better at driving possession and has more points and games played overall as well, I don’t think there’s anything definitive about Kucherov having the better regular season resume.

As for the playoffs, Kucherov has the two 30 point playoff runs, but in one of those he was also limited a bit in terms of his overall ES effectiveness after his injury. MacKinnon has a run of 25 points in 15 games. I’m not sure why Kucherov’s 32 in 23 and somewhat limited ES play is really much better other than the team going further.

And overall their recent playoff numbers are similar. Kucherov has 167 points in 147 for a pace of 93 per 82. MacKinnon has 114 in 88 for a pace of 106 per 82. But obviously Kucherov played more games before his playoff peaks. In his last 88 games he has 109 points, so basically the same as MacKinnon. Does 53 points in 59 extra games really swing things?

I think realistically these two are incredibly close and it’s really just preference.

It's definitely not just a preference between the 2. Kucherov most certainly ranks ahead of MacKinnon all-time, by a good margin.

I think Kucherov's 24 season is sl;ightly better than MacK's - but let's be nice and call it even, since they were both great.
Kucherov in 2018-2019 definitely has the second best season between the 2, where he lapped the field, including a prime/peak McDavid, and swept the awards.
I again prefered Kucherov's 2017-2018 season to MacK, and think he should have won the hart then.

But yes - their regular season resumes are somewhat close, even though Kucherov has the edge. Two art rosses to 0, and two of the most dominating Art Rosses this century (margin of victory aren't great in 2024, but the point totals for Kucherov are - two spectacular seasons).

Playoff resumes is where there's a much bigger gap. MacKinnon is strong there - but he's still lacking. 25 points in 15 games is terrific, but it was still only 2 rounds. Yes - you obviously give more significance to longer runs, and Kucherov has been instrumental in his team's playoff successes.

MacKinnon has only made it past round 2 of the playoffs once in his career - and the year he did (the cup year), he was good but not great, and Makar was definitely better.

 

[bobholly39]

I'm really puzzled by the 5 votes for Jagr here, it's for 2000-2001 onwards not his entire career.

I'm sure some people are just voting on name recognition, versus considering which years specifically.

But also - your OP doesn't state which season to start - could be 2000-2001, or 1999-2000. If it's 1999-2000, how far off is Jagr from being voted in? He'd have the years 2000, 2001 and 2006 as a super solid peak, and then a lot of other stuff around that. Probably still not time for him yet, but maybe not too far off.

 

[um]

I mean - close is a relative term. Their primes are somewhat comparable yes - yet Kucherov is still very clearly ahead.

Better in both regular season and playoffs. If you want to use the word close - go ahead, but it's still clearly Kucherov.

MacKinnon has double the Hart nominations.

It is close dude, anyone saying otherwise is being a homer.

 

[blundluntman]

You're getting hung up on the system Brodeur played in and I think you're missing a key point. Yeah, the trap limited shots, but the shots that came through were often high-quality. He wasn’t just racking up easy saves like others…fewer shots but tougher ones naturally affect save percentage.

And man, don’t overlook his puck-handling. Don’t do it. Brodeur was like a third defenseman, cutting off plays and clearing pucks before shots could even be taken. He prevented shots from ever reaching him, which simply isn’t reflected in something like save percentage.

I think voters actually understood this back in the day, thank god. That’s why he was a 7 time Vezina finalist and 5 time top 5 Hart nominee, from 2000 onwards.

I'm not saying Brodeur wasn't a great goaltender, he absolutely was (I'll also go on record by saying he had just as much of a claim to his 07 and 08 Vezinas as anyone else).

And you're right that his puck handling and defensive structure added context. But I'd say even with all those things considered, it moreso bridges the gap than pushes him over the edge when you look at the statistical discrepancy between him and Lundqvist. I just don't think his body of work from 01-onwards is decisively better than Lundqvist's when you take team success out of the equation. It'd be a very different conversation if half of his resume during this century wasn't littered with seasons where he was in his late 30s.

Lundqvist was simply more consistent Imo and had a higher peak during the 2000s while playing with far less talent around him. I've already accepted that Brodeur will be voted much further ahead of Lundqvist because a trophy case like his is hard to argue against, but the two guys are much more comparable during this time period than most are willing to admit (I still think Lundqvist is better during this time period but I'll admit they're in the same stratosphere).

 

[x Tame Impala]

I mean - close is a relative term. Their primes are somewhat comparable yes - yet Kucherov is still very clearly ahead.

Better in both regular season and playoffs. If you want to use the word close - go ahead, but it's still clearly Kucherov.



It's definitely not just a preference between the 2. Kucherov most certainly ranks ahead of MacKinnon all-time, by a good margin.

I think Kucherov's 24 season is sl;ightly better than MacK's - but let's be nice and call it even, since they were both great.
Kucherov in 2018-2019 definitely has the second best season between the 2, where he lapped the field, including a prime/peak McDavid, and swept the awards.
I again prefered Kucherov's 2017-2018 season to MacK, and think he should have won the hart then.

But yes - their regular season resumes are somewhat close, even though Kucherov has the edge. Two art rosses to 0, and two of the most dominating Art Rosses this century (margin of victory aren't great in 2024, but the point totals for Kucherov are - two spectacular seasons).

Playoff resumes is where there's a much bigger gap. MacKinnon is strong there - but he's still lacking. 25 points in 15 games is terrific, but it was still only 2 rounds. Yes - you obviously give more significance to longer runs, and Kucherov has been instrumental in his team's playoff successes.

MacKinnon has only made it past round 2 of the playoffs once in his career - and the year he did (the cup year), he was good but not great, and Makar was definitely better.

Kane is better than both regardless

 

[Regal]

I mean - close is a relative term. Their primes are somewhat comparable yes - yet Kucherov is still very clearly ahead.

Better in both regular season and playoffs. If you want to use the word close - go ahead, but it's still clearly Kucherov.



It's definitely not just a preference between the 2. Kucherov most certainly ranks ahead of MacKinnon all-time, by a good margin.

I think Kucherov's 24 season is sl;ightly better than MacK's - but let's be nice and call it even, since they were both great.
Kucherov in 2018-2019 definitely has the second best season between the 2, where he lapped the field, including a prime/peak McDavid, and swept the awards.
I again prefered Kucherov's 2017-2018 season to MacK, and think he should have won the hart then.

But yes - their regular season resumes are somewhat close, even though Kucherov has the edge. Two art rosses to 0, and two of the most dominating Art Rosses this century (margin of victory aren't great in 2024, but the point totals for Kucherov are - two spectacular seasons).

Playoff resumes is where there's a much bigger gap. MacKinnon is strong there - but he's still lacking. 25 points in 15 games is terrific, but it was still only 2 rounds. Yes - you obviously give more significance to longer runs, and Kucherov has been instrumental in his team's playoff successes.

MacKinnon has only made it past round 2 of the playoffs once in his career - and the year he did (the cup year), he was good but not great, and Makar was definitely better.

None of this is a good argument for why he’d be ranked ahead of a player who has the better Hart record and has basically scored at the same level through their primes, let alone “by a good margin” all time. The only thing Kucherov has that stands out in the regular season is the best 2nd best season. Which isn’t nearly as dominant as you’re suggesting (it was a Kane in ‘16 level season). And then you’re doubling down on this past season with how great an Art Ross win it was despite MacKinnon winning the Hart and Lindsay. This past year isn’t an argument for Kucherov being “clearly” ahead.

You’re also trying to suggest that “it’s not just preference” that Kucherov’s ahead then go on to say that you prefer Kucherov in ‘18 and think he should have won the Hart despite MacKinnon being the one who barely lost the Hart and was a Lindsay finalist. And even if Kucherov was slightly better in ‘18, MacKinnon has at least 3 other years at that level (‘18, ‘20 and ‘23).

Your playoff argument is essentially that better team makes the player better because of extra games, and suggesting that MacKinnon’s play in the cup run was “good, not great” despite scoring at a higher rate than Kucherov in that same run and leading the playoff in goals. I mean, even if you don’t want to give credit for the 25 in 15 over it, MacKinnon’s ‘22 was very clearly better than Kucherov that same year. If you want to put a lot of weight on playoff achievements rather than just playoff performance then Kucherov has a clear advantage here, but it’s not by enough to the point that people who don’t weight the playoffs beyond just whether or not his game translates well couldn’t put MacKinnon ahead.

 

[wetcoast]

I'm sure some people are just voting on name recognition, versus considering which years specifically.

But also - your OP doesn't state which season to start - could be 2000-2001, or 1999-2000. If it's 1999-2000, how far off is Jagr from being voted in? He'd have the years 2000, 2001 and 2006 as a super solid peak, and then a lot of other stuff around that. Probably still not time for him yet, but maybe not too far off.

Fair enough, I've been super busy but in past polls I did state 2000-2001 onwards and even if 99-00 is included Jagr is still an odd choice here.

 

[Acallabeth]

Your playoff argument is essentially that better team makes the player better because of extra games, and suggesting that MacKinnon’s play in the cup run was “good, not great” despite scoring at a higher rate than Kucherov in that same run and leading the playoff in goals. I mean, even if you don’t want to give credit for the 25 in 15 over it, MacKinnon’s ‘22 was very clearly better than Kucherov that same year. If you want to put a lot of weight on playoff achievements rather than just playoff performance then Kucherov has a clear advantage here, but it’s not by enough to the point that people who don’t weight the playoffs beyond just whether or not his game translates well couldn’t put MacKinnon ahead.

In his Cup run, MacKinnon co-led one series in scoring.
In his 2 Cup runs, Kucherov led or co-led all series but one in scoring (and he was 1 point behind Point in that series).
If that's not a better performance, what is?

 

[wetcoast]

In his Cup run, MacKinnon co-led one series in scoring.
In his 2 Cup runs, Kucherov led or co-led all series but one in scoring (and he was 1 point behind Point in that series).
If that's not a better performance, what is?

It's not only peaks but the lows for each player as well and that where Mack probably has an edge overall in the playoffs IMO but either way it's close.

 

[Wings4Life]

As a Wings fan, I have hated Brodeur since before I can remember.

That said, each of his four Vezina Trophies as well as his greatest playoff performances all came in the 2000s. He is a worthy pick for the #6 spot in this poll.

 

[wetcoast]

It's a tie right now 25-25 with Kane and Brodeur with Kuch in a solid second place with 23 votes.


Also we need suggestions of who to add.

 

[wetcoast]

Kucherov?

Hart voting results

Mack 1,2,2,3,5,6

Kane 1,6,,6,7,8,15,17

Kuch 1,2,6,8,12,13

Playoff scoring rate per 82

Mack 45-62-106

Kuch 30-64-93

Kane 28-47-75

That includes 15 points in 16 games past the age of 28.

 

[SEALBound]

I had to do a double take and rethink. 21st century. That's 2001 and beyond.

It's Jagr. 1000%

 

[Acallabeth]

Playoff scoring rate per 82
Mack 45-62-106
Kuch 30-64-93

It's an invalid comparison: MacKinnon's prime years are in a much higher scoring era, and he's only been out of 2nd round twice (while Kucherov has played in 4 Final series).

'Scoring rate' is also always less important than actual playoff performance. Kucherov has 3 highest-scoring seasons among the two, and he's led the playoff in scoring during Tampa's Cup runs (while MacKinnon isn't even his team's leading scorer the last 3 campaigns). The difference between their top seasons is pretty obvious, and it's the top seasons that allow us to choose the better player.

Hart voting regarding a #1 overall pick Canadian center vs a 2nd round Russian winger? Sure...))

 

[TruePowerSlave]

It's an invalid comparison: MacKinnon's prime years are in a much higher scoring era, and he's only been out of 2nd round twice (while Kucherov has played in 4 Final series).

Also the Avs have been involved in multiple 1st round blowouts. Nate definitely has done his part, but not advancing deep often makes it easier to have a higher PPG.

 

[wetcoast]

It's an invalid comparison: MacKinnon's prime years are in a much higher scoring era, and he's only been out of 2nd round twice (while Kucherov has played in 4 Final series).

'Scoring rate' is also always less important than actual playoff performance. Kucherov has 3 highest-scoring seasons among the two, and he's led the playoff in scoring during Tampa's Cup runs (while MacKinnon isn't even his team's leading scorer the last 3 campaigns). The difference between their top seasons is pretty obvious, and it's the top seasons that allow us to choose the better player.

Hart voting regarding a #1 overall pick Canadian center vs a 2nd round Russian winger? Sure...))

Their playoffs basically overlap and teams advance not players but even so if you stack up their best to worst individual playoff post seasons Kuch has the worse ones in total and Mack has been more consistent.ly excellent every post season.

And the Canadian center to Russian winger thing is just weak bullshit, Kuch brings offense much like Kane and not much else to the table.

If one wants to use that line then be consistently faulty and bring up goals matter more BS while you are at it eh?

 

[Caps8112]

unpopular opinion im sure but brodeur is overrated. Yes he was very good but he had a hall of fame defense in front of him for most of his career. Its not his fault he was on a great defensive team but if all things are equal on a team Im taking Lundquist over Brodeur without thinking twice. No one ever got to see what brodeur could do with a bad team.

side note to see Datsyuk get little attention in here when in most other polls where he is involved he is talked about like the greatest player of all time.

 

[wetcoast]

unpopular opinion im sure but brodeur is overrated. Yes he was very good but he had a hall of fame defense in front of him for most of his career. Its not his fault he was on a great defensive team but if all things are equal on a team Im taking Lundquist over Brodeur without thinking twice. No one ever got to see what brodeur could do with a bad team.

Agree with this but admittedly I have no idea on how to accurately evaluate goalies and position players are easier tos eprate in their performances from their teams.

side note to see Datsyuk get little attention in here when in most other polls where he is involved he is talked about like the greatest player of all time.

It's too early for Dats but around the 10th top player mark he should be getting more traction.

 

[TruePowerSlave]

unpopular opinion im sure but brodeur is overrated. Yes he was very good but he had a hall of fame defense in front of him for most of his career. Its not his fault he was on a great defensive team but if all things are equal on a team Im taking Lundquist over Brodeur without thinking twice. No one ever got to see what brodeur could do with a bad team.

side note to see Datsyuk get little attention in here when in most other polls where he is involved he is talked about like the greatest player of all time.

I don't think it should be that unpopular tbh.

I can't justify why Brodeur should be considered the better goaltender since the 2000's than Lundqvist. Overall career sure, but this is not what the poll is asking.

 

[Video Nasty]

unpopular opinion im sure but brodeur is overrated. Yes he was very good but he had a hall of fame defense in front of him for most of his career. Its not his fault he was on a great defensive team but if all things are equal on a team Im taking Lundquist over Brodeur without thinking twice. No one ever got to see what brodeur could do with a bad team.

Brodeur is the piece that made the whole engine work. Why is every other all-timer on what are actually stacked top to bottom squads not dinged in the same way Brodeur is hand-waved away?

I don't think it should be that unpopular tbh.

I can't justify why Brodeur should be considered the better goaltender since the 2000's than Lundqvist. Overall career sure, but this is not what the poll is asking.

Pretty simple. Despite starting the time frame in question at age 28, he had more Vezinas, more Vezina finalist nominations, more Hart finalists, more top 5 Hart nods, more Cups, more Conn Smythe worthy runs.

 

[CanadienShark]

Brodeur. Then likely Kucherov.

 

[wetcoast]

Kane and Brodeur tied at 30-30 so tiebreaker poll is here for the weekend.

Top NHL player in the 21st Century so far? #6(Inspired by ESPN ranking)Tiebreaker

Kane and Brodeur are tied for 6th spot poll right now 29-29, so let's do a tie breaker for the weekend and then do the 7th best player in a couple of days. Loser of the poll will go back and face Kucherov and company for 7th .

forums.hfboards.com