Toggle sidebar

Who are your 5th -10th best players ever?

Shroud of Orrin said:
It makes me sick to my guts; 5 Art Ross, 2 Hart’s and 2 Cups and no one ever says his name.
Click to expand...
Probably because no sane person would have him in the top 10 players of all time?

His career is the best fantasy hockey guy before fantasy hockey was a thing.

In terms of actual impact on the ice his video game stats over represent his actual impact, much like Mario except to a much lesser and inconsistent degree.


Shroud of Orrin said:
First guy to break 100 in ‘68-‘69. Without Phil, Canada’s identity suffers a major set back in ‘72. Shattered Hull’s single season goal record. I can go on and on…
Click to expand...
I'm Cnadain and it always amazes me how the previous generation before mine was so insecure about the 72 series then amgnify it like a deeply religous expereince.

The series was only close because of guys like Phil not taking it seriously in the first place.


Shroud of Orrin said:
In his prime time Espo was an absolute unit. Fearless. He had a profound impact on the game and still today does colour on Tampa games. An absolute hockey legend.
Click to expand...
Sure he is a legend, just ask him and his growth is 100% Bobby Orr related and before with the black Hawks he had a playoff resume that makes Marcel Dionne look good playing alongside Bobby Hull.

No matter where one ranks him the other players around his ranking usually have a more consistent and independent career without the red flags present in Big Phil's.
 
daver said:
Pre-WWII - Morenz and Shore
O6 - Richard, Beliveau, Hull, Harvey
Post - '67 - Bourque, Roy, Jagr, Hasek
2000s - Lidstrom, Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid

It does seem like it's the Next 13 (or 14 if you want to add Morenz); players that clearly stand out in their era.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I think that was @tarheelhockey's point as well. People fixate on "the top ten", because that's the number of fingers we, as a species, have evolved with. But there's nothing magical about being ranked 10th. The difference between 9th place and 11th place is miniscule. Some people get offended if someone has Bourque or Ovechkin on the wrong side of that divide, but it's splitting hairs.

In some ways, it's better to think of it in tiers. You have the big four (Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux). Then you have the next 12-14 names (see above). After that you'd have players like Plante; Fetisov, Robinson, Potvin, Kelly; Makarov, Messier, Mikita, Lafleur, Nighbor, and Clarke. The line between one tier and the next can be blurry, but maybe this would avoid the "you should be banned from HFBoards because you don't have Player X in the top ten" comments.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Felidae, daver and tarheelhockey
Hockey Outsider said:
In some ways, it's better to think of it in tiers. You have the big four (Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux). Then you have the next 12-14 names (see above). After that you'd have players like Plante; Fetisov, Robinson, Potvin, Kelly; Makarov, Messier, Mikita, Lafleur, Nighbor, and Clarke. The line between one tier and the next can be blurry, but maybe this would avoid the "you should be banned from HFBoards because you don't have Player X in the top ten" comments.
Click to expand...

This gives you an idea of how hard it is to reach the Top 10ish plateau. Or even the Top 25/30.

MacKinnon/Draisatil and Kucherov are doing impressive things year in and year out but, at this point, none of them would be pacing to break into the Top 25/30.
 
5 to probably like 15 are interchangeable seeping on your own preference. With McDavid having a chance to make it that only 6-16 are interchangeable.

My 5-10 would be something like(alphabetical order)-

Beliveau
Bourque
Crosby
McDavid
Roy.

The other 5 being

Harvey
Hasek
Hull
Lidstrom
Ovi
 
Fantomas said:
People can't be serious with Morenz. Had a steep decline, borderline bad in his later years and always a poor playoff performer.
Click to expand...
1. The Canadian Press voted Morenz the greatest play in the NHL for the first half of the Twentieth Century. One might consider Newsy Lalonde in the same vein, but the game was perhaps not quite as developed at the very beginning. TheHockeyWriters.com claims "Howie Morenz was the first legitimate superstar in NHL history." Three Hart Trophies is nothing to sneeze at.
2. He had a remarkably highly rated season in terms of adjusted stats. I forget which year it was, but it's on Hockey Reference's top adjusted seasons list.
3. Per Wikipedia.org, "For seven straight seasons, Morenz led the Canadiens in both goals scored and points." They were an iconic team even back then.
4. He was considered an excellent skater in the context of the early league. Apparently he had outstanding acceleration. He might have been similar to early Ovechkin in this respect.
5. Looking at his stats, I don't think his drop-off was as drastic as you are suggesting. Even at the end of his career, he was said to have remarkable speed.
6. He was a very strong goal scorer. Not just an assist merchant.
7. Influence on the NHL is, in my estimation, a valuable and underrated criterion for these sorts of all-time lists.

I could probably go on and add to/expound upon this list, but I have to run at the moment.

You may have a point in regard to his playoffs being relatively poor, but playoffs may have been a different animal from regular season back then too. Wikipedia.org suggests as much in their Morenz article. Plus his team made the Stanley Cup Finals in consecutive years.
 
1) Gretzky
2) Mario
3) Orr
4) Crosby

5) Howe
6) Jagr
7) Richard
8) McDavid
9) Broduer
10) Lidstrom
 
Hippasus said:
1. The Canadian Press voted Morenz the greatest play in the NHL for the first half of the Twentieth Century. One might consider Newsy Lalonde in the same vein, but the game was perhaps not quite as developed at the very beginning. TheHockeyWriters.com claims "Howie Morenz was the first legitimate superstar in NHL history." Three Hart Trophies is nothing to sneeze at.
2. He had a remarkably highly rated season in terms of adjusted stats. I forget which year it was, but it's on Hockey Reference's top adjusted seasons list.
3. Per Wikipedia.org, "For seven straight seasons, Morenz led the Canadiens in both goals scored and points." They were an iconic team even back then.
4. He was considered an excellent skater in the context of the early league. Apparently he had outstanding acceleration. He might have been similar to early Ovechkin in this respect.
5. Looking at his stats, I don't think his drop-off was as drastic as you are suggesting. Even at the end of his career, he was said to have remarkable speed.
6. He was a very strong goal scorer. Not just an assist merchant.
7. Influence on the NHL is, in my estimation, a valuable and underrated criterion for these sorts of all-time lists.

I could probably go on and add to/expound upon this list, but I have to run at the moment.

You may have a point in regard to his playoffs being relatively poor, but playoffs may have been a different animal from regular season back then too. Wikipedia.org suggests as much in their Morenz article. Plus his team made the Stanley Cup Finals in consecutive years.
Click to expand...

Not really hating on Morenz. An all-time great. I just wouldn't have him top 20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hippasus
wetcoast said:
Probably because no sane person would have him in the top 10 players of all time?

His career is the best fantasy hockey guy before fantasy hockey was a thing.

In terms of actual impact on the ice his video game stats over represent his actual impact, much like Mario except to a much lesser and inconsistent degree.



I'm Cnadain and it always amazes me how the previous generation before mine was so insecure about the 72 series then amgnify it like a deeply religous expereince.

The series was only close because of guys like Phil not taking it seriously in the first place.



Sure he is a legend, just ask him and his growth is 100% Bobby Orr related and before with the black Hawks he had a playoff resume that makes Marcel Dionne look good playing alongside Bobby Hull.

No matter where one ranks him the other players around his ranking usually have a more consistent and independent career without the red flags present in Big Phil's.
Click to expand...
You're vastly underrating Esposito. As a Habs fan who watched him play, he was a genuine superstar who was also one of the games great leaders. The notion that he was a product of Orr is simply incorrect. If that was the case, why didn't Bucyk, Hodge, Sanderson, McKenzie, etc. come close to Espo's crazy high offensive production? That was a powerhouse Bruins roster full of stars, yet Orr and Esposito were head and shoulder above them. Orr couldn't have generated nearly as many assists without Esposito's unique ability to shoot/deflect/bang them home.

As for the Summit Series, it was taken VERY seriously by the team and the entire country. Everything about it was front page news – not just in the sports section, but on the actual front page of every newspaper. It's true Team Canada wasn't in top shape at first – unlike the Russians, they hadn't been training throughout the summer – but the players were fully aware of the enormous political and cultural stakes. On that team of superstars, with the whole country watching, Esposito not only was a force as a leader, he was probably the best player on the ice.

Is Phil Esposito an all-time top-10 player? No. But he's somewhere in the top-25 or 30.
 
  • Like
Reactions: daver and chaz4hockey
hamzarocks said:
Its your list but you got like 6 guys I dont think are viewed as top 25 players by most.

Bossy, Coffee, Keon, Robinson, Scott Stevens, Dionne

When people expand the all time list after the big 4 the names that you see often/frequently are

Crosby
Mcdavid
OV
Jagr
Lidstrom
Hasek
Bobby Hull
Bourque
Jean Beliveau
Harvey
Patrick Roy
Messier
Sakic
Yzermann
Shore
Mikita
Rocket Richard

Guys like Kucherov, Mackinnon, Draisaitl, Malkin, Brodeur, also get noted after that.

Lafleur and Bossy are in the top 30/40 but they get lost in the shuffle sometimes.
Click to expand...
Not a shot at you with this post.

Bossy was the best pure goal scorer ever who was derailed by a bad back and sadly retired at a young age. He was driving force on a team that won a record 19 straight playoff series and 4 straight cups.

HF boards have recency bias….I wonder what percent of HF members actually saw him play?

So for me, Top 30 or 40 is just wrong; 6-10 would be my selection (then again he’s my favorite player and I was an adult when he arrived in the NHL & I watched his entire career; thus, my slant)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nfumass
wetcoast said:
Probably because no sane person would have him in the top 10 players of all time?

His career is the best fantasy hockey guy before fantasy hockey was a thing.

In terms of actual impact on the ice his video game stats over represent his actual impact, much like Mario except to a much lesser and inconsistent degree.



I'm Cnadain and it always amazes me how the previous generation before mine was so insecure about the 72 series then amgnify it like a deeply religous expereince.

The series was only close because of guys like Phil not taking it seriously in the first place.



Sure he is a legend, just ask him and his growth is 100% Bobby Orr related and before with the black Hawks he had a playoff resume that makes Marcel Dionne look good playing alongside Bobby Hull.

No matter where one ranks him the other players around his ranking usually have a more consistent and independent career without the red flags present in Big Phil's.
Click to expand...

You lost me at “Probably”

Mr Nogatco said:
On TV or radio? Didn’t realize that, may have to check out the TBL broadcast next time I’m legally streaming a lightning game
Click to expand...

Radio. However, as @wetcoast so eloquently points out, there’s a lot of red flags in Phil’s broadcasting skills…
 
Lshap said:
You're vastly underrating Esposito. As a Habs fan who watched him play, he was a genuine superstar who was also one of the games great leaders. The notion that he was a product of Orr is simply incorrect. If that was the case, why didn't Bucyk, Hodge, Sanderson, McKenzie, etc. come close to Espo's crazy high offensive production? That was a powerhouse Bruins roster full of stars, yet Orr and Esposito were head and shoulder above them. Orr couldn't have generated nearly as many assists without Esposito's unique ability to shoot/deflect/bang them home.

As for the Summit Series, it was taken VERY seriously by the team and the entire country. Everything about it was front page news – not just in the sports section, but on the actual front page of every newspaper. It's true Team Canada wasn't in top shape at first – unlike the Russians, they hadn't been training throughout the summer – but the players were fully aware of the enormous political and cultural stakes. On that team of superstars, with the whole country watching, Esposito not only was a force as a leader, he was probably the best player on the ice.

Is Phil Esposito an all-time top-10 player? No. But he's somewhere in the top-25 or 30.
Click to expand...
Genuine question?

Was Esposito ever a better hockey player than Bobby Hull? There's enough vintage games I've seen where Bobby Hull was clearly better than Esposito on the Hawks. He was the driving force. Now Orr comes along and elevates Esposito's production, as does a watered down expansion NHL, with a competing WHA. Hull and Makita who were both better scorers on the Hawks than Esposito can not compete with him once Orr arrives, with Pat Stapleton being the Hawks main rearguard. Espo's 8 best seasons are Orr's 8 Norris years with the Bruins, and then his production drops, as the Guy Lafleur led Canadiens take over the back half of the 70s. Maybe it's the same effect Paul Coffey had on Gretzky and Mario. But Gretzky maintained a decent production rate post Coffey. Mario too.

During that 8 year run, the Bruins only pick up 2 Stanley Cups, compared to 4 for the Canadiens, and 2 for the Flyers, hardly dominating.

Esposito gets credit for his leadership in the Summit Series, but maybe Canada rolls over the Russians with Hull on that team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Golden_Jet
landy said:
They also played against 5 teams. But yes, so many people putting McDavid ahead of guys being key players winning 5+ Cups is wild. Shows how we only see todays players as relevant.
Click to expand...
Because winning cups is a silly metric when judging which players are the “best”. Most accomplished is an entirely different conversation. Nobody would seriously take Messier over McDavid for instance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crowfish
Tier 1
Gretzky
Lemieux

Tier 2
Orr
Howe
McDavid

Tier 3
Crosby
Esposito
Ovechkin
Jagr
Lidstrom

Tier 4
Beliveau
Messier
Bourque
Bobby Hull
Messier
Malkin
Lafleur

Some future projections:

McDavid will be Tier 1 with a Stanley Cup win or another season of sweeping Hart/Ross/Lindsay. Draisaitl, Makar, and Kucherov will be Tier 3 by the end of their careers. Matthews, MacKinnon will be somewhere in tier 4.

I don't have the intellectual capacity to rank goalies with the skaters, otherwise Hasek would be somewhere in the top 7. Even defence, I find very hard to rank with forwards (except for Orr, who makes it easy with how insane his hardware is).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom