SeanMoneyHands
Registered User
- Apr 18, 2019
- 15,679
- 15,141
Where does Patrick Kane rank all time when he retires?
- Thread starter SeanMoneyHands
- Start date
-
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
I am not exposed
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2005
- 36,046
- 35,831
jigglysquishy
Registered User
I had him at 78th at the end of last season and third all time for Americans. He will likely be pushed back to fifth all time for Americans in the coming years.
I am not exposed
Registered User
Kane > Malkin (note this a ranking where the lower the ranking the better the player)
Malkin > 100
Ergo ipso fatso
Kane > 100
QVC
Malkin > 100
Ergo ipso fatso
Kane > 100
QVC
- Aug 24, 2011
- 29,118
- 14,343
It really depends on when he retires and how many points he has when he does. If he plays like this for another 2 years or so after this season he's probably retiring top 20 all time in points. He's probably in the top 50 range and in my humble opinion the greatest american born player ever. Chelios himself admitted it 
Which Americans from the 1940's do you have as better than Kane? I'm assuming the two new players who are pushing him down to fifth are Matthews and Q. Hughes? Big LOL to both
jigglysquishy
Registered User
Chelios and Brimsek are both clearly better than Kane was. Brimsek gets underrated because people don't like the date on his birth certificate, but he was a goaltending phenom. He was widely considered, at worst, the third best goaltender of all time at retirement, which many considering him the best ever.It really depends on when he retires and how many points he has when he does. If he plays like this for another 2 years or so after this season he's probably retiring top 20 all time in points. He's probably in the top 50 range and in my humble opinion the greatest american born player ever. Chelios himself admitted it
Which Americans from the 1940's do you have as better than Kane? I'm assuming the two new players who are pushing him down to fifth are Matthews and Q. Hughes? Big LOL to both
Chelios was a Norris finalist 6 times and a playoff warrior for the better part of 20 years. He played in a stacked era for defenseman.
Kane has the big Hart trophy season, but he was only top 5 in points 4 times.
Matthews is already close to Kane and will overtake him soon. Peak on peak they are close and Matthews continues to put up elite goal scoring seasons. Obviously there's an appreciable playoff gap.
Hellebucyk could overtake him as soon as this year. Three Vezinas is histroic territory.
Hughes is further down the line, but it's plausible he'll overtake Kane too. He's too young to tell at this point.
Hippasus
1,9,45,165,495,1287,
I think he's had a better career than LaFontaine, Leetch, Chelios, and Modano, but I think they are his main competition. Matthews and Jack Hughes might be coming.
EDIT: Should have said Quinn Hughes in the last sentence too.
Last edited:
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,612
- 11,668
Malkin is absolutely in my top 50.
Notable players missing from NHL's Top 100 of all time
The NHL 100 was selected by a large panel of league executives, former players and media members.
www.usatoday.com
There have been way too many great players in the past. This league has been going for over 100 years.
So many players whose efforts I'm oblivious of.
Comparing Kane to players I have watched, I take Kane over Ronick, Chelios and Molgilny for all time great, but not Federov, Sakic, Modano or Niedermayer.
I feel top 100 choice is most deserving.
Just think of how many great players who played before the 50's that we don't know enough about to include in our top 100 lists.
Top 100 is very generous.
So many players whose efforts I'm oblivious of.
Comparing Kane to players I have watched, I take Kane over Ronick, Chelios and Molgilny for all time great, but not Federov, Sakic, Modano or Niedermayer.
I feel top 100 choice is most deserving.
Just think of how many great players who played before the 50's that we don't know enough about to include in our top 100 lists.
Top 100 is very generous.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,612
- 11,668
The 1950s are consistently overrated and overrepresented in these types of lists.
It's not uncommon to see a list with 15 or more players from the 1950s (players born from 1924-1932 and raised during the Great Depression/WWII) but 7 or fewer players born in any 11 year span between 1974 and 1988. (Aside from those 7, there aren't any that are on the verge of breaking into that list by virtue of late career heroics).
And the talent pool was likely 4x smaller. Or at least that's the most credible estimate I've seen.
So half as much talent with 4x the talent pool? So Canada during the Great Depression was pumping out 8x per Capita the amount of high end players we are today? That seems unlikely.
The fact remains that there were people playing hockey back then and very few of us take players from that era into account when we make our top 10 top 50 top 100 lists. And I'm not saying that that era deserves a large demographic of the top 100 today but they still deserve a presence nonetheless.
eviohh26
Registered User
Kane was a really good player. He also played on a really good team. He also played when scoring was down a bit.
For me he is top 100 but im not sure where. Maybe closer to 50 than 100? I don't know. I really started watching hockey around 2000. I'm not the right guy to rank all time greats.
For me he is top 100 but im not sure where. Maybe closer to 50 than 100? I don't know. I really started watching hockey around 2000. I'm not the right guy to rank all time greats.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 29,118
- 14,343
This is directed at @jigglysquishy as well...
Because the game has expanded so much and has become so much more talented. This is a 32 team league with players from all over the world. This should be an obvious distinction to all. That's not to say players in these far gone eras were crappy hockey players, merely that the skill level and game intensity has lapped their era many times over. They were in all likelihood fantastic athletes and the best of their time.
The game has just changed so drastically from then until now, in a way it hasn't really changed from the 90's until now, in a way it's not likely to change in the 2050's from now. Not to mention virtually no one alive has really watched these guys play. For argument's sake, let's say you should be a teenager as the cutoff to accurately remember and appreciate the impact a certain player had on the game at the time. 14 years old. That means you'd likely have to be born in the 1950's to appreciate players in the 06 era and you'd be 70+ years old.
Kane has more talent and faced tougher competition than Brimsek did. There's no chance in hell he's a worse hockey player than a goalie in the 1940's who didn't have to face 90+mph shots with composite sticks. That's a silly argument to make and you know it.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 29,118
- 14,343
I don't know where I'd rank Kane all time. I haven't seen enough of these guys play as I haven't been a hockey fan until Kane himself was drafted to the Hawks. For whatever it's worth, Kane was voted as 8th best player of this century here on HF. Take that for what you will.
looking at the history of hockey board's list, made in 2018-19 (where he ranked 93), i think he's now in the 60-80 range. everybody above 60 or so is clearly better (e.g. malkin at 52). but compare kane to bathgate or selanne or moore or mahovlich and it's an interesting conversation. ultimately it depends how much you value regular season vs playoffs. kane really has two primes. 2010-15, he's clearly the top playoff performer in the league while his regular seasons are a little underwhelming. you sort of got the sense in those years that he wasn't pushing very hard in the RS. (he's at 1 p/g in both RS and playoffs over that time.) then 2016-21ish he's a top 5-10 offensive player in the RS while his playoff contributions are mediocre to nonexistent on a declining blackhawks team. compare that to selanne for instance. selanne clearly has the edge in peak RS play (with some bad seasons in the mix too), but he was pretty mediocre in the playoffs. so i could see ranking kane near selanne. in that range anyway.
I agree with what you're saying here but without the past generation. Who can the current generation learn from?
Without those people who are lucky enough to play in a league with very few teams with a much smaller draft pool in a totally different North America, regardless, it would have taken a lot longer for us to see this version of Patrick Kane.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 29,118
- 14,343
Absolutely true. I just think the game has intensified and changed so much since even the 1980's that to compare someone from the 1940's to players today isn't possible. It's a misplaced sense of equal footing.
Maybe that's wrong, I definitely didn't watch any of these people play. Maybe @jigglysquishy has had a lot of hockey hipster nights watching old games from 80 years ago while he listens to vinyls and drinks port wine
, but I'd bet most here haven't spent any real time watching them to have a fortified opinion. Granted, there's a great chance that when I'm in my 70's I'll be grumpily arguing with young fans on HF's Virtual Reality Lounge that Patrick Kane has become completely unappreciated and is getting lost in history too. It's a normal part of life I suppose.
Ace Card Bedard
Back in Black, Red, and White
- Feb 11, 2012
- 9,164
- 4,200
Top 50
he led the entire decade of the 2010's in scoring.
3xCups
Conn Smythe
Hart
Ross
Calder
3rd all-time in playoff OT goals.
etc.
he led the entire decade of the 2010's in scoring.
3xCups
Conn Smythe
Hart
Ross
Calder
3rd all-time in playoff OT goals.
etc.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Bob McKenzie's mid-season draft rankings: Schaefer the unanimous #1- Latest: Pavel Buchnevich
