Unpopular opinions

[JackSlater]

Fair points on the different styles of play between Kariya, Kane and St. Louis. One counter would be the success of Bure in both the early '90s and late '90s; he seemingly was not affected by the DPE.

As much as Kariya was obstructed in the DPE, one can argue he also thrived against slower, less mobile d-men than he would face today.

I guess I see it as, if anything, players like Jagr and Lindros overperformed in the DPE due to their size moreso than smaller and/or speedier players underperformed.

But I would not argue that Jagr is any less dominant if his prime was today. That would be too unpopular.

I did consider Bure as well, and you may be right. He was a tank physically unlike the others mentioned but he surely gets hurt less now. I consider Bure an underrated talent/player. It's very possible regarding Jagr and Lindros as well, though in Lindros' case you may trade off some game to game domination for a (very likely) much healthier career.

 

[Professor What]

Not sure how unpopular this is, but I'm going against the general wisdom of the forum to an extent, but Vernon is overrated even on the HOH board.

 

[blundluntman]

Brodeur wasn't even a better goalie than Ed Belfour and the only reason he's not ranked below him is because he played for the Devils his whole career.

 

[MadLuke]

That one can become a bit philosophical, how much value there is for a franchise to have that high of a volume goaltender, making zero wave, on good contract, year after year, no need to draft, to spend asset on a solid number 2, etc...

Is part of Brodeur greatness (and winning so much and the Devils being seen as the Devils his whole career) is what he give a GM in franchise building, that become a bit in easy mode ?

Since Brodeur left, playing for the Devils does not seem to mean much. There obviously something to play for the Devils for part of is career, but we have to watch out: Player make a franchise great, type of leaders that make playing the whole career at the same place a la Modano-Yzerman-Sakic-Lidstrom and hurt him for playing for a good team all that time.

Brodeur last 2 Vezina were not on a that special of a team. Martin-RAflaski-White-Madden, Claude Julien is not bad, but nothing special on Belfour Leafs, Stars or Hawks.

When he won in 2008, Devils D were

Martin
Mottau
White
Greene
Rachunek
Oduva

 

[blundluntman]

That one can become a bit philosophical, how much value there is for a franchise to have that high of a volume goaltender, making zero wave, on good contract, year after year, no need to draft, to spend asset on a solid number 2, etc...

Is part of Brodeur greatness (and winning so much and the Devils being seen as the Devils his whole career) is what he give a GM in franchise building, that become a bit in easy mode ?

Since Brodeur left, playing for the Devils does not seem to mean much. There obviously something to play for the Devils for part of is career, but we have to watch out: Player make a franchise great, type of leaders that make playing the whole career at the same place a la Modano-Yzerman-Sakic-Lidstrom and hurt him for playing for a good team all that time.

Brodeur last 2 Vezina were not on a that special of a team. Martin-RAflaski-White-Madden, Claude Julien is not bad, but nothing special on Belfour Leafs, Stars or Hawks.

When he won in 2008, Devils D were

Martin
Mottau
White
Greene
Rachunek
Oduva

I do think workload plays a big role in things tbf but either way they still have to sign/dress 2 goalies even if he plays every game. With the Devils' defensive structure at that time, I don't think it'd really matter what kind of goalie you signed as long as they were somewhat servicable. This also isn't to say Brodeur didn't deserve any of his Vezinas or have his flashes of brilliance, but I'm not convinced he was any better than Belfour peak-wise or longevity-wise.

 

[Sentinel]

My Top 5-30 of all time is an unpopular opinion

 

[JackSlater]

Brodeur wasn't even a better goalie than Ed Belfour and the only reason he's not ranked below him is because he played for the Devils his whole career.

We pretty much saw Belfour play on what the Devils, in terms of what that shorthand generally means, with the Hitchcock Stars. Even Chicago was an elite defensive team in the early to mid 90s, so several of Belfour's seasons there. I wouldn't say he was clearly better, more up and down though. I don't know if many people would argue that they are very similar on their best day or in their best season, but Brodeur was a reliable, consistent goaltender just short of forever, even when the Devils around him changed significantly.

 

[Professor What]

My Top 5-30 of all time is an unpopular opinion

Post so we can throw things? Lol

 

[blundluntman]

We pretty much saw Belfour play on what the Devils, in terms of what that shorthand generally means, with the Hitchcock Stars. Even Chicago was an elite defensive team in the early to mid 90s, so several of Belfour's seasons there. I wouldn't say he was clearly better, more up and down though. I don't know if many people would argue that they are very similar on their best day or in their best season, but Brodeur was a reliable, consistent goaltender just short of forever, even when the Devils around him changed significantly.

Yeah those Dallas and Chicago teams were pretty strong defensively to be fair (not quite as structurally dominant as New Jersey's, but close), even factoring that in tho, I'd take Belfour's peak years over Brodeur's (91 in particular). I think at worst, they were at least equals. Brodeur was a bit lukewarm during the late 90s and early 00s regular season wise (maybe a side effect of playing so many games) but their playoff resumes are pretty close (I'd still prefer Belfour as I think his numbers would look even better playing within New Jersey's defensive structure, something I think flourished especially during the post-season).

Brodeur's reliability/consistency is definitely a plus, but I think people attribute too much of his all time placement to his win totals instead of focusing on his individual play. Either way he's still an all-time great, but If we go off the latter, he's definitely a tier below the other big 5 guys.

 

[MadLuke]

I do not think that Belfour at his best was at least Brodeur equal would be unpopular, Belfour at his best looked good against prime Roy, excellent against Brodeur in the lost, the guy won vezina against excellent competition after all.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Maybe Dallas was a more defensive team than New Jersey...

 

[Davenport]

John Ferguson picked his spots (and his battles).

Before Expansion, teams played each other 14 times. Anybody who wanted to get even with someone had plenty of opportunity to do so. On November 27, 1965, Gordie Howe injured J.C. Tremblay with a dirty hit in Montreal. The Canadiens faced off against the Wings many times the remainder of the 1965-66 season, and 14 times in 1966-67. John Ferguson never avenged the assault on his teammate. Neither did Ted Harris.

 

[The Panther]

Lindros, at his best (c. 1994 to 2000) was better than Crosby, at his best.

 

[K Fleur]

Martin Brodeur was a better hockey player than Nicklas Lidstrom.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Martin Brodeur was a better hockey player than Nicklas Lidstrom.

This shouldn't be particularly controversial.

Everyone wants to be the goalie growing up, and it's only when players can't handle it that they fall back to their second-best option. It only stands to reason that goalies are the better hockey players.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

This shouldn't be particularly controversial.

Everyone wants to be the goalie growing up, and it's only when players can't handle it that they fall back to their second-best option. It only stands to reason that goalies are the better hockey players.

I think Mike Farkas said it best, and I’m paraphrasing by memory but, a lot of youth teams are built with the most talented players up front and the lesser talented ones in the back, when really it should be the other way around: your best skater should play in net.

I think. Iirc.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I think Mike Farkas said it best, and I’m paraphrasing by memory but, a lot of youth teams are built with the most talented players up front and the lesser talented ones in the back, when really it should be the other way around: your best skater should play in net.

I think. Iirc.

Mike's spot on. I was lucky when I was a goaltender; my coaches had me do every single skating drill that the skaters did (and I took it as a point of pride to beat at least one skater in the ladder drill each time. If a damn goalie could beat you in the ladder drill, you were slacking).

I was still mediocre overall, of course, but that was more because I was 5-foot-9 and slow. (Counterpoint - if you're never a mediocre athlete, you didn't play at the highest level you could, NHL stars excluded.)

 

[VanIslander]

The greatest defenseman defensively is Larry Robinson.

 

[MadLuke]

Mike's spot on. I was lucky when I was a goaltender; my coaches had me do every single skating drill that the skaters did (and I took it as a point of pride to beat at least one skater in the ladder drill each time. If a damn goalie could beat you in the ladder drill, you were slacking).

And you teams was wrong to not follow the advise and have you that was not beating your teammate at skating in net ?

I feel that something people say and repeat because it sound good (or the exaggeration is in service of a truth, like you lose most of the heat via the head or the most important meal is breakfast, etc... knowing very well people will put clothes on and will have no problem eating diner and have skating drills for skaters) but the idea that Orr, Coffey, McDavid are wasted as skater and should have been goaltender for the good of their teams instead because they were the best skater growing up.... feel far fetch.

 

[JackSlater]

And you teams was wrong to not follow the advise and have you that was not beating your teammate at skating in net ?

I feel that something people say and repeat because it sound good (or the exaggeration is in service of a truth, like you lose most of the heat via the head or the most important meal is breakfast, etc... knowing very well people will put clothes on and will have no problem eating diner and have skating drills for skaters) but the idea that Orr, Coffey, McDavid are wasted as skater and should have been goaltender for the good of their teams instead because they were the best skater growing up.... feel far fetch.

It's defencemen that people say should be the best skaters. I believe that one person made a mistake and another is joking. McDavid could probably be an incredible defenceman if that's how he'd been brought up.

The greatest defenseman defensively is Larry Robinson.

He wasn't even the best defensive player on his own pairing when he played with Savard. Suits the thread though.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Absolutely not joking about goaltenders needing to be the best skaters on the team - noting that there's a distinction between "best" and "fastest", but if I'm beating a skater in the ladder drill while wearing full goalie gear, they needed to work harder and get better.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

It's defencemen that people say should be the best skaters. I believe that one person made a mistake and another is joking. McDavid could probably be an incredible defenceman if that's how he'd been brought up.

I was also joking. My goalies don’t need to be able to skate as long as they’re small-ish, Finnish, mean and can shoot to score.

 

[VanIslander]

Trying to agree on an "unpopular opinions" thread?!
( Wow.... A generational gap or two.)

Let me have a go at my thoughts:

Lidstrom wasn't as good as Pronger, Chara, Soviet Fetisov.

That emperor had less clothes than his net equivalent:
Brodeur.

I have always, everywhere held this opinion. This is the place it lands welcomed.

Anyone who takes
Lidstrom, Brodeur ... ...

over Bourque, Hasek

... hockey isn't the thang!

(I dunno Shore, Vezina, Harvey, ... only some of Plante)

Heck,
over Kelly, Hall...

 

[HabzSauce]

Not sure if unpopular opinion but players are much weaker & fragile today than they were during the 90's.

Was watching Don cherry highlights yesterday night and players would get SMOKED and get up as if nothing happened. They were bigger, tougher, meaner and their bodies were far more durable than hockey players today. Now a days it seems like everyone is always injured

Could also be a testosterone thing. I've seen some studies how men in their 60's from 20-30 years ago had more testosterone than young men in their 20's today. Absolutely wild to think about.....

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Trying to agree on an "unpopular opinions" thread?!
( Wow.... A generational gap or two.)

Let me have a go at my thoughts:

Lidstrom wasn't as good as Pronger, Chara, Soviet Fetisov.

That emperor had less clothes than his net equivalent:
Brodeur.

I have always, everywhere held this opinion. This is the place it lands welcomed.

Agree with you about Brodeur.

Not about Lidstrom.

It's defencemen that people say should be the best skaters. I believe that one person made a mistake and another is joking. McDavid could probably be an incredible defenceman if that's how he'd been brought up.



He wasn't even the best defensive player on his own pairing when he played with Savard. Suits the thread though.

Serge Savard was overrated.

Brad McCrimmon was underrated.