Voting Record - quoipourquoi, Canadiens1958, steve141

[DannyGallivan]

Bobby Orr is your #1 - his era in the NHL is arguably weaker than Gretzky's era.
Also - Orr simply didn't play past age 26 (outside of 30 games). Hull played in the WHA as of age 33. Yet Gretzky declining past age 31 (his decline includes a Ross, and his 93 playoff performance which is arguably better than any of Hull's, and scoring more points than anyone else in the NHL in the decade, and 2nd overall in PPG after Lemieux) is somehow enough to penalize him and bump him down to #7.

I agree with you until this point. I think that Gretzky is a solid number two (he is for me, anyways), and perhaps number three IF you value the physicality of a Gordie Howe more than Gretzky's otherworldly offense. But I'm still totally convinced that Bobby Orr is the greatest player who ever lived and cannot be convinced otherwise. Anything less is... controversial.

 

[bobholly39]

I agree with you until this point. I think that Gretzky is a solid number two (he is for me, anyways), and perhaps number three IF you value the physicality of a Gordie Howe more than Gretzky's otherworldly offense. But I'm still totally convinced that Bobby Orr is the greatest player who ever lived and cannot be convinced otherwise. Anything less is... controversial.

I'm not taking issue with having Orr above Gretzky (even though I disagree with this) - as much as I am with the idea that Gretzky declined enough past a certain age (I assume 31?) to justify being bumped down a spot from 6 to 7, and behind Hull.

If Gretzky's 'decline' is such a huge deal - how can Orr not playing a single game - not be an even bigger deal and cause his rank to suffer too? Gretzky >>>>>>>> Orr past age 31.

So inconsistent in logic

 

[DannyGallivan]

I'm not taking issue with having Orr above Gretzky (even though I disagree with this) - as much as I am with the idea that Gretzky declined enough past a certain age (I assume 31?) to justify being bumped down a spot from 6 to 7, and behind Hull.

If Gretzky's 'decline' is such a huge deal - how can Orr not playing a single game - not be an even bigger deal and cause his rank to suffer too? Gretzky >>>>>>>> Orr past age 31.

So inconsistent in logic

I had Gretzky at number two... and there's no way I could effectively brow-beat anyone who put him at number one. I think that a good debater "may" even find reasons to put Mario ahead of him (I'd love to see an argument that effective), but there is no possible way I can see him any lower, no matter how drunk I got.

 

[dr robbie]

...wow

Just curious, how much does one person's very obscure ranking affect the overall list? Maybe a place or two for a handful of players? Glad there were decent numbers participating to help balance things out I hope.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

C1958, one thing that jumped out is having Sakic (28) a lot higher than Jagr (49). I'm guessing your answer is that Sakic is better defensively and in the playoffs - but anything else to add? Their careers coincided almost perfectly and I think very few of us would have Sakic ahead.

Another question - Ovechkin at 59 seems extremely low. Most of the forwards that you have ahead of them are better defensively and/or in the playoffs, so there's generally consistency in your position. (Not that I agree with, say, Jacques Lemaire ahead of him - but I understand where you're coming from). But one that really jumps out is Charlie Conacher ranking higher. His claim to fame is goal-scoring, but Ovechkin clearly has him beat there. Both were relatively one-dimensional goal-scorers (in the sense that they focused on that to the detriment of playmaking). Neither is really noted for defensive play. Both won one Cup, with solid but not great playoff resumes. The strike against Conacher is he had a short prime (basically five years) - Ovechkin has had some down years but has had a much longer prime, even taking seasons like 2012 and 2017 into account. Curious to hear your reasoning.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Gretzky at #6 or #7 makes no sense. Honestly i expected you to at least have listed Henri Richard or someone else above him - and argue how you favor certain aspects of hockey a lot more than others, and in that way Gretzky being lower should be justifiable.

But you have two other offense first forwards - Hull and Lemieux - both ahead of Gretzky. It's simply a bad vote, that can't be justified.

Maybe Gretzky played in a weaker era than Hull in his first 10 seasons but he dominated by such a HUUUGE amount (vs Hull - is he even the best overall player in the NHL his first 10 seasons?) that it offsets any weaker or stronger era talk. Gretzky first 10 seasons >> Hull's first 10 seasons. If you include playoffs - it's even bigger advantage for Gretzky.

Also - Hull post age 33 is in the WHA. That's weaker than anything Gretzky had in the 80s in the NHL. And although there was definitely a lot of scoring and some weak teams in the 80s - there was also a ton of powerhouse teams against whom Gretzky always looked great, playoffs or regular season.

Bobby Orr is your #1 - his era in the NHL is arguably weaker than Gretzky's era.
Also - Orr simply didn't play past age 26 (outside of 30 games). Hull played in the WHA as of age 33. Yet Gretzky declining past age 31 (his decline includes a Ross, and his 93 playoff performance which is arguably better than any of Hull's, and scoring more points than anyone else in the NHL in the decade, and 2nd overall in PPG after Lemieux) is somehow enough to penalize him and bump him down to #7.

Gretzky dominated the only era where US high school players went directly to the NHL claiming regular spots in October after playing mid level high school competition the previous winter. Never happened before or after.

1980 to 1984, only one future HHOF level goalie entered the NHL - Gretzky's teammate Grant Fuhr. Weakest era of all time for rookie goalies.

Players like Gilles Thibaudeau, who failed to make Junior A or Major Junior teams, playing Junior B, made the NHL.

Gilles Thibaudeau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Never before or after.

Do not conflate offensive first with offensive only which describes Gretzky.

 

[bobholly39]

...wow

Just curious, how much does one person's very obscure ranking affect the overall list? Maybe a place or two for a handful of players? Glad there were decent numbers participating to help balance things out I hope.

It actually has very little effect most of the time. For the most part there was a lot of participation - enough so to offset any votes that could be deemed "obscure". And if an "obscure" vote actually lead to a player bumping up a rank or losing a rank - well it means he was already super close enough to the next guy that it's justifiable.

 

[MXD]

... Totally agree with @Hockey Outsider regarding Ovechkin and Conacher, but I'd wish to add a little something.

Coming from you (@Canadiens1958 , not HO), I wouldn't have been any surprised whatsoever to see Ovechkin ranked about where you did about 3 years ago. However, AO not only found playoff success (and realized that, maybe, being the most threatening player on his team didn't necessarily means he has to be the one taking charge), but also a bit tweaked his play since to accomodate this. I wouldn'T call him "well rounded" by any stretch, but he did show signs of such in 2018.

That's why I'm a bit surprised with the extremely low ranking, even in your own framework. 2 or 3 years ago? Fine. Now? I just don't quite get it. ... Especially with the proto-Ovie Charlie Conacher ranked ahead (you're pretty much a median voter for Conacher)

(And I know you're not one to come up with such replies, but if there's one thing I haven't been doing, it's "Not Giving Charlie Conacher his dues")

 

[Canadiens1958]

C1958, one thing that jumped out is having Sakic (28) a lot higher than Jagr (49). I'm guessing your answer is that Sakic is better defensively and in the playoffs - but anything else to add? Their careers coincided almost perfectly and I think very few of us would have Sakic ahead.

Another question - Ovechkin at 59 seems extremely low. Most of the forwards that you have ahead of them are better defensively and/or in the playoffs, so there's generally consistency in your position. (Not that I agree with, say, Jacques Lemaire ahead of him - but I understand where you're coming from). But one that really jumps out is Charlie Conacher ranking higher. His claim to fame is goal-scoring, but Ovechkin clearly has him beat there. Both were relatively one-dimensional goal-scorers (in the sense that they focused on that to the detriment of playmaking). Neither is really noted for defensive play. Both won one Cup, with solid but not great playoff resumes. The strike against Conacher is he had a short prime (basically five years) - Ovechkin has had some down years but has had a much longer prime, even taking seasons like 2012 and 2017 into account. Curious to hear your reasoning.

Sakic was a team foundation and cornerstone player. Jagr was a nomad.

Conacher was a better ES goal scorer as a forward based on available info. Last two years Charlie Conacher played defence for the Americans.

Charlie Conacher Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[bobholly39]

Gretzky dominated the only era where US high school players went directly to the NHL claiming regular spots in October after playing mid level high school competition the previous winter. Never happened before or after.

1980 to 1984, only one future HHOF level goalie entered the NHL - Gretzky's teammate Grant Fuhr. Weakest era of all time for rookie goalies.

Players like Gilles Thibaudeau, who failed to make Junior A or Major Junior teams, playing Junior B, made the NHL.

Gilles Thibaudeau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Never before or after.

Do not conflate offensive first with offensive only which describes Gretzky.

Wayne Gretzky has more shorthanded goals than any player in history. In another post you were arguing Mike Gartner being a good defensive player due to shorthanded goals. But Gretzky is offense only - and Mario Lemieux is not.

So you're saying there were weak players in Gretzky's era. You're probably right. What years were US high school players allowed to go to the NHL? How many players is that overall, and how big a part of teams were they? I highly doubt that the actual impact on NHL talent was greater than the expansion during Orr's era was. Some of the weakest teams in NHL history played in those years. Or even than Lemieux's best years - in 93 where there were some really bad teams.

Also - Wayne Gretzky outscored everyone in the league in 1994. He also outscored everyone in the league in the 1990s (how many hhof goalies played in the league in that decade?). Goalie were weak in the early 80s - but that's why Gretzky scored 92 goals and 215 points. He wasn't just scoring 50-60 goals, and ~120-130 points in those years.

Wayne Gretzky was also the best player in every international competition he played in in those years. You know - the ones where he only played against really great players, no US high school players.

Wayne Gretzky also played against some great playoff teams, and dominated. I don't think many US high school players had prominent roles in many of those playoffs.

 

[MXD]

Sakic was a team foundation and cornerstone player. Jagr was a nomad.

Conacher was a better ES goal scorer as a forward based on available info. Last two years Charlie Conacher played defence for the Americans.

Charlie Conacher Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

... Conacher also appears to have been not really successful at switching to D compared to his contemporaries...

 

[Canadiens1958]

Wayne Gretzky has more shorthanded goals than any player in history. In another post you were arguing Mike Gartner being a good defensive player due to shorthanded goals. But Gretzky is offense only - and Mario Lemieux is not.

So you're saying there were weak players in Gretzky's era. You're probably right. What years were US high school players allowed to go to the NHL? How many players is that overall, and how big a part of teams were they? I highly doubt that the actual impact on NHL talent was greater than the expansion during Orr's era was. Some of the weakest teams in NHL history played in those years. Or even than Lemieux's best years - in 93 where there were some really bad teams.

Also - Wayne Gretzky outscored everyone in the league in 1994. He also outscored everyone in the league in the 1990s (how many hhof goalies played in the league in that decade?). Goalie were weak in the early 80s - but that's why Gretzky scored 92 goals and 215 points. He wasn't just scoring 50-60 goals, and ~120-130 points in those years.

Wayne Gretzky was also the best player in every international competition he played in in those years. You know - the ones where he only played against really great players, no US high school players.

Wayne Gretzky also played against some great playoff teams, and dominated. I don't think many US high school players had prominent roles in many of those playoffs.

US high school players were always allowed into the NHL once draft or sponsorship eligible.

Interesting that your questions clearly indicate that you did not follow the debate and contributions by MF on the subject of US High School players. The names were provided. Not in the habit of repeating myself.

1994 -year Mario Lemieus only played 22 RS games.

 

[Canadiens1958]

... Conacher also appears to have been not really successful at switching to D compared to his contemporaries...

Statement of fact not comparison.

 

[bobholly39]

US high school players were always allowed into the NHL once draft or sponsorship eligible.

Interesting that your questions clearly indicate that you did not follow the debate and contributions by MF on the subject of US High School players. The names were provided. Not in the habit of repeating myself.

1994 -year Mario Lemieus only played 22 RS games.

Of course. But he still outscored everyone else. Against all those HHOF level goalies. On the heels of one of the best playoff performances ever (in 93). He obviously didn't decline that much in the 90s - and he also was capable of scoring points on HHOF goalies too, even if only 1 entered the league from 1980 to 1984. A whole lot more of them entered in the coming years, the majority of Gretzky's career.

 

[VMBM]

Wayne Gretzky was also the best player in every international competition he played in in those years. You know - the ones where he only played against really great players, no US high school players.

He was the top scorer in those tournaments, but hardly the best player in all of them; namely, in the 1981 and 1984 Canada Cups he was not the MVP (not even an all-star in 1981), and he was not named as the best forward in the 1982 World Championship either.

 

[Canadiens1958]

... Totally agree with @Hockey Outsider regarding Ovechkin and Conacher, but I'd wish to add a little something.

Coming from you (@Canadiens1958 , not HO), I wouldn't have been any surprised whatsoever to see Ovechkin ranked about where you did about 3 years ago. However, AO not only found playoff success (and realized that, maybe, being the most threatening player on his team didn't necessarily means he has to be the one taking charge), but also a bit tweaked his play since to accomodate this. I wouldn'T call him "well rounded" by any stretch, but he did show signs of such in 2018.

That's why I'm a bit surprised with the extremely low ranking, even in your own framework. 2 or 3 years ago? Fine. Now? I just don't quite get it. ... Especially with the proto-Ovie Charlie Conacher ranked ahead (you're pretty much a median voter for Conacher)

(And I know you're not one to come up with such replies, but if there's one thing I haven't been doing, it's "Not Giving Charlie Conacher his dues")

Last 2-3 RS seasons Ovechkin's defensive play is actually weaker. Without the early extremes but weaker just the same.

Alex Ovechkin Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[MXD]

Last 2-3 RS seasons Ovechkin's defensive play is actually weaker. Without the early extremes but weaker just the same.

Alex Ovechkin Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

My point was mostly about the playoffs.

 

[sr edler]

Players like Gilles Thibaudeau, who failed to make Junior A or Major Junior teams, playing Junior B, made the NHL.

Gilles Thibaudeau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Never before or after.

This guy averaged 24 games per season through his five year long NHL career, that's not a regular player but a replacement type of player. He also appears to have been quite short and light (5'10/165) and could have been a victim of size bias in juniors.

 

[TheEye]

1980 to 1984, only one future HHOF level goalie entered the NHL - Gretzky's teammate Grant Fuhr. Weakest era of all time for rookie goalies.

And how many entered from 1970-1974? I believe that would be two and the difference is statistically irrelevant. If the gameplay was more defensively oriented through the 1970s and 80s, we would have more HHOF goaltenders. The wide-open play of the era certainly reflects in the bias against netminders throughout that period.

Players like Gilles Thibaudeau, who failed to make Junior A or Major Junior teams, playing Junior B, made the NHL.

Gilles Thibaudeau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Never before or after.

A number of players failed to make Junior 'A' teams and then went on to play in the NHL throughout its history. This is simply grasping at straws. Garry Monahan was drafted first overall at the age of 16 by the Montreal Canadiens in 1963. He went on playing Junior 'B' the following season. That sure doesn't speak well for the depth of that era either.

Some earlier thoughts of yours from 2012:

Junior B Players In The NHL

In Quebec it is/was also a function of population and region. Remote regions would operate Junior B teams to compete at the provincial level. These teams would include some elite level midget players not willing to play far away from home before finishing high school.

Your quote regarding the US high school players:

Gretzky dominated the only era where US high school players went directly to the NHL claiming regular spots in October after playing mid level high school competition the previous winter. Never happened before or after.

Another earlier quote of yours from 2012:

Junior B Players In The NHL

Midget AAA, a mid 1970s phenomena that bridged the transition from Bantam/Juvenile/Junior to Bantam/Midget/Junior?Major Junior, took a number of years to implement.

There were a number of issues - private school teams - Saskatchewan with Notre Dame, Quebec with high school ending at grade 11 = 17 year olds, not all provinces have the minor/major distinction for the categories, etc.

Junior B was an option to maintain NCAA eligibility.

Conceivably, you should equally apply this line of reasoning to the burgeoning US junior program during the 1970s-80s? Some of those high school teams were more akin to existing Tier II Junior 'A' and 'B' teams during that time, as The USHL was just commencing its junior operations in 1979-80. Most assuredly, if the US hockey program was further along during the 1970s, 18 year old American high school kids would have played in the NHL if they were eligible. There were certainly enough roster spots available for those 18 year olds during the 1970s but they simply weren't eligible to be drafted.

On that note, perhaps you find it a bit disingenuous to leave out the fact that 20 was the minimum draft age until 1979? I undoubtedly do. I find it equally duplicitous to insinuate they were 'mid-level' high school players as that is just patently false. Perhaps next, you'll declare they were searching cities during the 1980s and grabbing players from Midget House League?

 

[MXD]

And how many entered from 1970-1974? I believe that would be two and the difference is statistically irrelevant. If the gameplay was more defensively oriented through the 1970s and 80s, we would have more HHOF goaltenders. The wide-open play of the era certainly reflects in the bias against netminders throughout that period.



A number of players failed to make Junior 'A' teams and then went on to play in the NHL throughout its history. This is simply grasping at straws. Garry Monahan was drafted first overall at the age of 16 by the Montreal Canadiens in 1963. He went on playing Junior 'B' the following season. That sure doesn't speak well for the depth of that era either.

Some earlier thoughts of yours from 2012:

Junior B Players In The NHL



Your quote regarding the US high school players:



Another earlier quote of yours from 2012:

Junior B Players In The NHL



Conceivably, you should equally apply this line of reasoning to the burgeoning US junior program during the 1970s-80s? Some of those high school teams were more akin to existing Tier II Junior 'A' and 'B' teams during that time, as The USHL was just commencing its junior operations in 1979-80. Most assuredly, if the US hockey program was further along during the 1970s, 18 year old American high school kids would have played in the NHL if they were eligible. There were certainly enough roster spots available for those 18 year olds during the 1970s but they simply weren't eligible to be drafted.

On that note, perhaps you find it a bit disingenuous to leave out the fact that 20 was the minimum draft age until 1979? I undoubtedly do. I find it equally duplicitous to insinuate they were 'mid-level' high school players as that is just patently false. Perhaps next, you'll declare they were searching cities during the 1980s and grabbing players from Midget House League?

Where's your list?

 

[TheEye]

Where's your list?

I can assure you that if I supplied a list, it wouldn't have Wayne Gretzky at number 7 and Sidney Crosby at number 32.

 

[MXD]

I can assure you that if I supplied a list, it wouldn't have Wayne Gretzky at number 7 and Sidney Crosby at number 32.

It's not what you say you would do that matters.
It's what you actually do.

Maybe when your body of work will contain something else than criticism of a specific user (and, also, of a specific group/people that I, mind you, am a part of), I'll bother.

But until then, expect to see a lot of "Where's your list?"

 

[Canadiens1958]

Factual contribution. 16-19 year olds were draft eligible prior to 1979. Garry Monahan was 16 when drafted in 1963.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I myself have said "let's see your list" on more than one occasion, but I don't feel providing one should be a steadfast requirement for constructive criticism. If somebody is diplomatic in their criticism versus being an imbecile (as we saw the other night in a different thread), it makes a big difference, at least to me.

Significant outlier opinions are going to face more scrutiny. Gretzky at #7 is probably the most outlier opinion in the entire project, so this isn't surprising. I can buy Gretzky being lower than Original Six all-timers based on higher league quality and the requirement of being elite at many different aspects of the game in that era. I do find it hard to fathom that Gretzky could rank below Lemieux under this criteria, though. Any criticism I can think of that applies to Gretzky applies to Lemieux to an equal or greater extent IMO. Based on C1958's opinion of Ovechkin (Lemieux-like in a lot of ways), I would have expected Lemieux to be a better candidate for an "outlier low" ranking than Gretzky.

 

[TheEye]

Factual contribution. 16-19 year olds were draft eligible prior to 1979. Garry Monahan was 16 when drafted in 1963.

Factual contribution from NHL.com:

History of the NHL Draft

The first NHL Amateur Draft was held at the Queen Elizabeth Hotel in Montreal on June 5, 1963. All amateur players, 17 years of age and older who were not already sponsored by an NHL club, were eligible to be drafted. Garry Monahan, a center from the St. Michael's Juveniles of Toronto, was selected first overall by the Montreal Canadiens.

The 1969 Draft marked the first year that the effects of NHL amateur sponsorship would not be seen, as every junior of qualifying age (20-years) was available for selection. Eighty-four players were selected that year, more than four times the average number of players chosen in each of the first six years of the Draft.

Entry Draft Replaces the Amateur Draft
In 1979, the name of the Draft was changed from "Amateur" to "Entry" to reflect the inclusion of young players eligible for selection who had played professionally in the now-defunct World Hockey Association.

Draft Eligibility
Beginning with the 1980 Entry Draft and continuing today, all 18, 19 and 20-year old North American and non-North American born players have been eligible to be drafted. In addition, non-North American players aged 21-years or older are eligible for claim. From 1987 to 1991, the selection of 18 and 19-year-old players was restricted to the first three rounds of the draft, unless the player met qualifying criteria that dealt with hockey experience in major junior, U.S. college and high school or European hockey. Starting with the 1992 Draft, those players were available in all rounds.

You are applying intellectual dishonesty as it relates to the 1970s-80s time frame previously discussed. You know exactly what I'm scrutinizing and, once again, you are shifting the goalposts to ignore it.