Unpopular opinions

[Sergei Bure]

When Lindros was healthy, he was better than Jagr...

 

[JFedol]

The Red Wings from 95-2009 should've been the greatest dynasty to have ever existed. 7-9 cups was the true outcome, not 4.

Complete underachieving to the fullest even with injuries and hot goaltenders.

I've been the watching the games from the era and It's just laughable lol. Aside from the 50s and 70s Habs, I don't think there has ever been a team like this that was just so LOADED at almost every position. Elite 1-2 centre 2-way selke punch (Yzerman-Fedorov-->Datsyuk/Zetterberg), top 5 D-Man in Lidstrom, an elite d-core + the infinite amount of depth and generally just great elite compilmentary players (Shanahan, Hull).

A puck possession demon esque team. Once they got rolling, it was practically over LOL

Only weakness they have is the goalie position. Vernon and Osgood were the Hall of Very Good. If they had the goalie to complete the puzzle. I'd be hard to find another team in the past 30 years that could go toe to toe with Detroit in a 7 game series.

 

[CokenoPepsi]

When Lindros was healthy, he was better than Jagr...

Is that a very unpopular opinion though?

 

[JFedol]

Eye Test with large sample sizes >>>>>>> analytics

I'm not sure about their advanced stats, but there's a solid collective of elite players who are HANDS down mediocre playoff performers at best, and you can just tell just from the eye test alone.

Panarin and Gaudreau for example. Very soft permieter esque players just allergic to contact.

Both players can produce, but it's entirely based off needing the right instinctive moments to go RIGHT 99% of the time in a tighter playoff game. Not the players who can will you to wins

 

[JFedol]

Marchand from 2019-2022 was a top 3 player.

 

[Sergei Bure]

Marchand from 2019-2022 was a top 3 player.

In 2019 certainly was, you can even make a case that he was the best that year...

 

[Staniowski]

Eye Test with large sample sizes >>>>>>> analytics

Yes, the eye test is better, but only if you have a great eye. I wouldn't trust most eyes.

Watching can tell you many things that are very difficult to measure.

 

[Staniowski]

Marchand from 2019-2022 was a top 3 player.

He was great in 2018 too. Real chance he wins the Hart if he plays all the games.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

This is probably unpopular in the States and just persona non grata in most of the hockey world, but you're not a real American hockey player if your dad is from Canada. The only reason you're likely playing is because your dad grew up with hockey in Canada. This is not US hockey growth, it's simply geographic migration and redistribution of hockey fans/playing talent. So the Hutson brothers aren't really American to me, their dad Rob is Canadian (Bowsman, Manitoba), the Hutsons aren't likely to be playing hockey growing up in North Barrington Illinois without their dad.

Auston Matthews is an example of hockey growth in the States, guys like the Hutsons, Jake Sanderson, Cutter Gauthier, Brendan Brisson, etc clearly aren't IMHO.

 

[Michael Farkas]

What if the Hutson brothers' kids play? Or Jake Sanderson's kid plays? Are those kids American?

 

[WarriorofTime]

So the Hutson brothers aren't really American to me, their dad Rob is Canadian (Bowsman, Manitoba), the Hutsons aren't likely to be playing hockey growing up in North Barrington Illinois without their dad.

Yeah you lost me with this one. One thing to talk about Brett Hull dual national kinda thing. Hutsons not being really American is just odd. What else would they be.

By that logic anyone with either party being a not native born can’t be considered American.

 

[JFedol]

Although a goalscorer, Ovi during his prime years wasted a lot of offensive opportunities especially in the playoffs just taking a vast volume of shots instead of passing. It is smart to get the puck on net obviously, but there a bunch of games where he could've just passed it to his teammate to maximize the opportunity which was 100% going to lead to a goal. His playmaking/passing wasn't even bad as well during those years, so it kind of is boneheading why he'd take the shot.

It was most likely his stick curves too I might add.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Uh oh, sound the alarm...haha

 

[JohanFranzenstein]

Instead of the "Big 4" (9/99/66/4) it should be the "Big 5" with Rocket Richard.

Maybe not as unpopular to folks on this board, but to the broader hockey world possibly.

 

[rfournier103]

Instead of the "Big 4" (9/99/66/4) it should be the "Big 5" with Rocket Richard.

Maybe not as unpopular to folks on this board, but to the broader hockey world possibly.

Like yourself, I think Maurice Richard is vastly underrated.

And I’m a Bruins fan.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Yeah you lost me with this one. One thing to talk about Brett Hull dual national kinda thing. Hutsons not being really American is just odd. What else would they be.

By that logic anyone with either party being a not native born can’t be considered American.

The point is in hockey, if you have Canadian family members, you're automatically more likely to play hockey than if all of your family isn't Canadian, as is the case with Auston Matthews and Clayton Keller. Matthews (Arizona), Keller (St Louis, Metro East Illinois) are true examples of hockey growth in the States. Guys with Canadian dads like Sanderson, Hutson, Gauthier, Brisson, Perreault are just geographic migration/redistribution of the hockey fan/player population

 

[WarriorofTime]

The point is in hockey, if you have Canadian family members, you're automatically more likely to play hockey than if all of your family isn't Canadian, as is the case with Auston Matthews and Clayton Keller. Matthews (Arizona), Keller (St Louis, Metro East Illinois) are true examples of hockey growth in the States. Guys with Canadian dads like Sanderson, Hutson, Gauthier, Brisson, Perreault are just geographic migration/redistribution of the hockey fan/player population

Think the broader point, over any point regarding nationalities, is how this generation of hockey players is heavily concentrated in what we'd call "hockey families"

 

[JackSlater]

Instead of the "Big 4" (9/99/66/4) it should be the "Big 5" with Rocket Richard.

Maybe not as unpopular to folks on this board, but to the broader hockey world possibly.

I think that there is still support for that opinion, but the people who hold it, the ones who are still alive at least, probably aren't online all that much.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Instead of the "Big 4" (9/99/66/4) it should be the "Big 5" with Rocket Richard.

Maybe not as unpopular to folks on this board, but to the broader hockey world possibly.

you're half right, but Hasek is the one making it a Big 5

 

[Michael Farkas]

No goalie is a top 20 player in history...

 

[Overrated]

No goalie is a top 20 player in history...

I would agree if no goalie truly stood out but Hasek did stand out to a point where he would snatch Pearsons and Harts from prime Jagr. He also seemed to be like a full standard deviation above every other goalie in history. What would a goalie have to be able to do to make it into your top10? Or is it purely based on the position itself that you might consider not as competitive or some other reason?

 

[WarriorofTime]

Goalies probably get treated too harshly although that largely goes into the position's high level of volatility to begin with as the equivalent of low level 1st line production is like a league size times x 0.5 number goaltender, which is considered "league average" starter and half the goalies on playoff teams at a given time sit on the bench not doing anything. Hasek's 1993-94 through 2001-02 are superb, just a shame his 28 and younger years bring nothing to the table as far as how it stacks up on like a top 10 or whatever overall player list. Mesh Dryden from the other side and Hasek together and yeah you got a top 5 player.

 

[Michael Farkas]

The position itself makes it difficult for me. I don't think it's that valuable in terms of the "plus" it offers, I do think it holds the biggest "minus", so I can't ignore it completely. I had this thought for a while, but doing a deep dive on the goalie project and really zeroing in on 100 years of goalies cemented it for me. There's just so much team-effect that goes into the "resume", as we term it here, portion of it.

Even the Hart and Pearson stuff...I get it, but also a part of me goes, "who cares?" Because even if a player who didn't really contribute to defense was on his team (let's say Kariya), Hasek probably doesn't win any Harts because there's a second player on the team that we've heard of and that player can score 100 points. Even if Hasek played the same, it probably sinks him enough or dilutes the vote enough to let someone else slide in. The whims of voters is getting further and further in the rear view mirror for me as time goes on, but that's another story.

It just comes down to where would I start to consider getting a goalie if I was starting from scratch. I know I can't win without an elite #1 center. I know I can't win without a #1 elite puck moving d-man. So I know I'm stocking up there from a list-making perspective.

I know that my goalie needs insulation to some degree or else it's not relevant (Carey Price is a good recent example I guess). So I can't start* in net because the goalie has to make sense for my roster. And as much as I'd like to think I'd get that right most of the time...................I still might not. So, now have to start thinking about other components - goal scoring wingers, for instance. Not a group that I hold a lot of reverence for, but goals are hard. So, right there, this tells me I'm in the late teens or 20's for these groups...

I also know that I CAN win multiple times without an elite goalie (Crawford, Osgood, Vernon, Worsley, etc.).

* - and by "start" I mean, putting a goalie at 5 or 7 or 10 or whatever. An IMPACT spot.

People don't like this, but it's my process, I look at things like a draft...I can't draft a resume. I can't take the goalie from junior with the best average or ratio stat and go, "that's my guy for the NHL." - where do goalies go in drafts YoY? Not high...

Now, there isn't a 1:1 relationship there in terms of amateur drafts and these kind of historical rankings, but my thought process is somewhat parallel. If I didn't have someone else telling me how to feel about it (i.e. Hart voting and the like), where would I start to consider these players (Hasek, Plante, Roy, whoever)? The answer is: "not top 20".

I don't want to ignore your question of "what would a goalie have to do?" - but I don't know how to answer that to be honest, especially not via text. I think it would be something along the lines of, "I could trust them..." or "I could see it working...in every reasonable situation." And then if I apply that filter, are the names the same? I don't know...it's a great question, and I don't know how well I can answer it.

 

[WarriorofTime]

So that's a bit interesting, as it differs from the real draft where Goalies take forever (take Oettinger a 1st round pick that delivered and never at any point was ever really "off track" for a best case outcome) and are subject to lots of volatility in part due to that much longer development track. If all the players in the NHL were unburdened by contracts, the league says, we're starting over and doing it entirely on a single season basis for 2025-26 (like a fantasy league but with real teams). Nobody is trying to tank or whatever. Everyone can build a team however they want, and at least on draft day teams will be more or less balanced with a snake style draft subject to normal volatility and some GMs being smarter/dumber.

Tough to say at what point the goalies start coming off the board. Figure there'd probably be a few little runs, at a few cluster points. The interesting thing would be to see how the higher drafted goaltenders due (meaning team 'sacrificed' something else). Going back to Fantasy example, just kinda depends on the year how much say "QB early" will end up working out (topsy turvy to real life, QB is generally a less valued position in non 2 QB or Superflex league because you can get a lot more decent value out of average fantasy startable QB).

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Goalies probably get treated too harshly although that largely goes into the position's high level of volatility to begin with as the equivalent of low level 1st line production is like a league size times x 0.5 number goaltender, which is considered "league average" starter and half the goalies on playoff teams at a given time sit on the bench not doing anything. Hasek's 1993-94 through 2001-02 are superb, just a shame his 28 and younger years bring nothing to the table as far as how it stacks up on like a top 10 or whatever overall player list. Mesh Dryden from the other side and Hasek together and yeah you got a top 5 player.

well his 28 and younger years arent exactly his fault now are they...