Your Mt.Rushmore of OVERRATED and Mt.Rushmore of UNDERRATED ... all time

[Matsun]

Mt Overrated:
Howe
Lemieux
Orr
Morenz

Unlike Gretzky I can actually see Orr, Mario and Howe be surpassed so they are not actually in the same tier as Gretzky as players for me. Orr and Mario had massive injuries and not that much playoff success and you could argue that some of Howes peak seasons were nearly matched by other players in his era so he can be surpassed on peak value.

Based on his stats we can see that Morenz lead the league in points 2 times and was top 3 5 times. Over his prime from 24-32 he won 3 Stanley Cups but is only 6th in playoff PPG, well behind Frank Boucher. I feel Morenz is rated in a different way than basically any other player. Journalists and players liked him and voted him highly so therefor we have to because we don't have any footage.

Mt Underrated
Kucherov
Jagr
Geoffrion
Coffey

Kucherov might not apply here anymore, but for a time people felt like Point was the better player even though Point has literally been outscored by Kucherov in every single season and playoff they've been in, even when Kucherov only played half the season in 2022. I also feel like Kucherovs 2019 season was kind of forgotten. Will be interesting to see where he ranks on the next project, I have him very high.

Jagr is underrated because he has so incredible durability and longevity that people miss that he had some bad injury luck that robbed him of some huge seasons and MVPs. I feel like Jagr has been rising thanks to McDavid though so Jagr will probably rise on the next historical ranking.

Geoffrion in 1961: 64-50-45-95, Bobby Hull in his legendary 1966: 65-54-43-97. also a playoff god.

Coffey is not appreciated enough because of Orr.

 

[Midnight Judges]

And team offense has well, are we going to talk about some novel idea than scoring more goals than the other teams is a good way to win ?

Everyone cites offensive stats constantly. Those are well known. Most of the people in this forum could tell you who scored how many points and how many goals among the top players in a given year - if not (roughly) for decades on end.

Who among us memorizes how many goals against the best defensive players were on the ice for? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess zero.

So again, total team defense is underrated.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I could see Esposito being a common entry on both lists to be honest. If you're enamored by numbers, you're going to find him underrated. If you're caught up on him being a defensive black hole, you're going to see him as overrated.

If Espo was a black hole on defense, what were Gretzky and Lemieux?

If you got to see Espo play live for Boston, he is underrated.

Or if you remember seeing the Summit Series.

Patrice Bergeron, Pavel Datsyuk, Shea Weber, Carey Price for the overrated.

Marian Gaborik, Dale Hawerchuk, Kris Letang, Tomas Vokoun for the underrated.

This one should be in the unpopular opinion thread.

 

[Gurglesons]

Am floored.

Why?

 

[DitchMarner]

Patrice Bergeron, Pavel Datsyuk, Shea Weber, Carey Price for the overrated.

Marian Gaborik, Dale Hawerchuk, Kris Letang, Tomas Vokoun for the underrated.

I think Hawerchuk is generally considered comparable to guys like Savard and Stastny. I think that's fair. I don't think he was as good as Dionne, let alone 66 or 99.

In my honest opinion, Gilbert Perreault is overrated. I think he belongs in that Stastny/Hawerchuk tier I referenced. But people seem to see him as more of a Dionne or Yzerman level player. The stats don't justify that at all. Don't get me wrong: I like Perreault. I'm generally a fan of players who have puck skills and an artistic element to their games. Although I consider him a great player, I feel he's considered a tier better than he was.


I have The Hockey News' Top 100 Players of All Time publication. I received it as a present decades ago. It's actually sitting on my computer desk right now. I still browse it on occasion. It came out in '98 or so and has Perreault in the top 50 (!).

 

[DitchMarner]

I don't think Gretzky is overrated even though he's basically treated as if he is untouchable. People rave about how talented Lemieux was, and despite all that talent and how much he actually did and achieved, his career isn't nearly as good. Think of all unbelievable talents that have come along since Gretzky entered the NHL: Lindros, Jagr, Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid. Not one of them has come close to matching his career. Forget about the numbers; just focus on the MVPs and times leading the League in scoring. The fact that Ovechkin will probably break his goal record is remarkable. But he's still nowhere near his career. Maybe if he had played at his peak level for pretty much his entire career, he'd be close in MVP awards. But that's the thing: It seems physically impossible for a player to play at a high enough level to threaten equaling or surpassing him. He stepped into a game of guys bullying others and slashing ankles to gain an advantage and transformed it into a kind of chess match (for himself and certain teammates). People can downplay him by referencing Kurri or Semenko, but you can find good two-way players and generic goons to insulate star players if you need to. It's hard to imagine the transcendent genius of Gretzky will be surpassed in professional ice hockey, at least any time soon.

 

[VanIslander]

A ten minute highlight video of Gretzky's career could easily include zero goals.

He proved that an assist and a goal are each worth one point.

PASSING should be on Mount Rushmore.
Have a Gretzky trophy awarded yearly.
Have the top-3 assist getters automatically nominated, but have a panel decide the winner.

 

[Boreal01]

Overrated: Scott Niedermayer, Jari Kurri, Ken Dryden, Justin Williams

Underrated: Brad Park, Mike Gartner, George Hainsworth, Jason Allison

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

A ten minute highlight video of Gretzky's career could easily include zero goals.

He proved that an assist and a goal are each worth one point.

PASSING should be on Mount Rushmore.
Have a Gretzky trophy awarded yearly.
Have the top-3 assist getters automatically nominated, but have a panel decide the winner.

Sure, most of his assists were.

Probably not the case for most assists, though.

 

[Professor What]

If Espo was a black hole on defense, what were Gretzky and Lemieux?

If you got to see Espo play live for Boston, he is underrated.

Or if you remember seeing the Summit Series.

Well, I don't think Gretzky and Lemieux have ever been accused of playing defense, and I think it would have been foolish to ask them to put their focus there. Actually, I think that asking Esposito to focus on defense would have been a mistake too, but I was just citing reasons why I could see him making both lists for different people. I think the board has him ranked about right personally.

And I have seen him play. Not "live" as he was before my time, but I've seen games on YouTube. I do agree that the Summit Series performance was special. He certainly gave his 150%. Had he played like that all the time and was ranked where he is now, he'd definitely be underrated.

But, yeah, I wasn't trying to bash on Esposito. That wasn't my intent at all. More of one of those "in before" types of things.

 

[MadLuke]

So again, total team defense is underrated.

I feel like we are in the Kevin Wildes, I just invented the defense wins championships expression, hope it catches on.

in the 2000s it was if anything overrated vs total team offense (which was a little bit of a better predictor when anyone thought it was and by far the other way around), a bit like being the NHL top teams in the regular season (president trophy winners) chance of winnings the cup was underrated.

 

[MadLuke]

Underrated:

Impacts of coaching
Impacts of team chemistry and composition
Player durability
Total team defense


Overrated:

Fighting
Advanced stats
Per-game stats
Total team offense

In that general regard,

Underrated:
- Everything we do not have a stats for

Overrated
- Everything we have a stats for

we saw that when any of the Faceoff percentage, blocked shots, turnover, +/-, hits got popular, when number of Shutouts was talked about for goaltender (why not the amount of 1 goals of less games they won, if that had a cool name and a number it would have been more valued).

After a while hits-blocked shots got correlated with loosing hockey game, so those stats calmed down and puck possession stats got in and so on....

If there were a popular stats for the net amount of powerplay a player create and the net goal differential his team had among them, that would have been valued.

If players were not rewarded an assists for being the second last player to touch the puck before the scorer, that act would not be rated like it is now, not even close. If secondary and primary assists would have been split and never combined by anyone since the beginning it would also be different, if goaltender save percentage would have always been shown for even strength play vs special situation, it would change how players would be viewed and so on.

Would we have a stats about, ability of game after game in a series of tiring and wearing down your opposition defenceman and third period impact of it, some player would go up, some would go down.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

The deified players considered untouchable have to be considered overrated because they are seen as untouchable. When a GOAT type player does something first they become the measuring stick and I can’t think of an example of a measuring stick label being discarded in like the last 40 years. No disrespect to players like Gretzky and Michael Jordan and they are GOAT’s but I have to wonder if players like McDavid, Crosby, etc and Lebron James flipped places with Gretzky and Jordan respectively, would they be seen as the untouchables. Like McDavid/Crosby on the stacked 80’s Oilers, Gretzky on the 2010’s-2020’s Oilers, James on the stacked 90’s Bulls, Jordan mainly being on the Cavaliers, are those players suddenly seen in a different light?

 

[tabness]

Good comparison with Jordan. For Gretzky, it's also a bit like Jordan where part of his greatness is captured in the "greatness vs best" thing as well, as both guys somewhat defined and popularized their sports/or served as the face for the various aspects popularizing them during the time of great increase of cultural clout in non baseball professional sports. A big part of their greatness is their popular acclaim and the popular acclaim they bought to their leagues/sports.

I frequently tell the story of growing up, if you asked me who the greatest hockey player was, it would be an immediate and obvious answer of "Gretzky" even though when watching he wasn't close to the best by that time and it would be Lindros and some others. It was all based on popular sentiment (and stats).

Don't get me started on Jordan overratedness himself though lol, as well as him being a big reason why the NBA wussified even worse than the NHL (and to be clear for me this even ain't an old school/new school Jordan vs Lebron thing, I personally don't give Lebron or whoever now the time of day, and in any case don't think there is any real efficacy in comparing players from different eras).

 

[Staniowski]

Here's an inflammatory one:

Mt. Rushmore overrated (for HF) are Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Orr

This board uses the parlance "big four" like it's inconceivable that anyone could be better (I'm not even talking about like McDavid or upcoming players being better), which in itself, sure I can get around.

The thing is, the legend of these players certainly seems to have grown since they played. Certainly seems to be the case for Gretzky and Lemieux, and also I'm familiar enough with the Original Six Wings to know what Howe was thought of then vs now (not as familiar/interested regarding Orr though when I looked up some stuff on Espo from back then and yeah same inflation seems to be happening for Orr).

You'd think with the way people talk about these guys here, they'd be winning the cup singlehandedly every year... just not the case lol

Yeah, I agree with you to an extent. I don't think I would really call any of them overrated, necessarily, but I agree that a lot is taken for granted, and most people now don't even remember any of them when they were at their bests, so there is a lot that never gets discussed.

I remember the entire careers of both Gretzky and Lemieux, and neither of them were anywhere close to being as perfect, or even as dominant, as is commonly believed today.

 

[Michael Farkas]

If players were not rewarded an assists for being the second last player to touch the puck before the scorer, that act would not be rated like it is now, not even close.

I can't find it, but at some point here, I said something along the lines of: If we only had tabulated goals all this time, and some blogger or some private firm started tracking who the players were that setup/created the play on each goal and compiled it, it'd be considered the greatest achievement in human history.

But because we had it the whole time, it's like "pssh, assists...who cares?"

 

[Midnight Judges]

I feel like we are in the Kevin Wildes, I just invented the defense wins championships expression, hope it catches on.

in the 2000s it was if anything overrated vs total team offense (which was a little bit of a better predictor when anyone thought it was and by far the other way around), a bit like being the NHL top teams in the regular season (president trophy winners) chance of winnings the cup was underrated.

I'm not claiming to have invented something. I'm saying it's underrated. And I think the correlation between cup winners and the team that recently led the NHL in the least goals allowed may actually have a stronger correlation than recent President's trophy winners.

Same goes for per game stats, for the folks who prefer demagoguery over substance: I said per game stats were overrated, not completely useless.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Good comparison with Jordan. For Gretzky, it's also a bit like Jordan where part of his greatness is captured in the "greatness vs best" thing as well, as both guys somewhat defined and popularized their sports/or served as the face for the various aspects popularizing them during the time of great increase of cultural clout in non baseball professional sports. A big part of their greatness is their popular acclaim and the popular acclaim they bought to their leagues/sports.

I frequently tell the story of growing up, if you asked me who the greatest hockey player was, it would be an immediate and obvious answer of "Gretzky" even though when watching he wasn't close to the best by that time and it would be Lindros and some others. It was all based on popular sentiment (and stats).

Don't get me started on Jordan overratedness himself though lol, as well as him being a big reason why the NBA wussified even worse than the NHL (and to be clear for me this even ain't an old school/new school Jordan vs Lebron thing, I personally don't give Lebron or whoever now the time of day, and in any case don't think there is any real efficacy in comparing players from different eras).

When someone or something has such an immense and overawing reputation or legacy it becomes hard to divorce the reputation. It happens even outside of sports. There is a whole industry based on Shakespeare criticism and for a reader or playgoer to develop an opinion on him it’s impossible to forget the towering legacy and reputation he has. Same thing with bands like The Beatles to a lesser extent. Not that Gretzky, Jordan, Shakespeare, and The Beatles aren’t great, it’s just that they’ve become untouchable and intimidating to criticize. I guess my opinion is that overrated/underrated will always be related to the perception by the public.

 

[tabness]

When someone or something has such an immense and overawing reputation or legacy it becomes hard to divorce the reputation. It happens even outside of sports. There is a whole industry based on Shakespeare criticism and for a reader or playgoer to develop an opinion on him it’s impossible to forget the towering legacy and reputation he has. Same thing with bands like The Beatles to a lesser extent. Not that Gretzky, Jordan, Shakespeare, and The Beatles aren’t great, it’s just that they’ve become untouchable and intimidating to criticize. I guess my opinion is that overrated/underrated will always be related to the perception by the public.

Absolutely, I think the most interesting thing is that criticism of these players or different opinions become less common/more resisted as time goes on and the 'canon' is formed, and you are absolutely correct that there is some self censorship/restraint that happens (I mean I say whatever on HF and even I gave a heads up on picking the "big four" here, I guess I sort of did it unconsciously lol).

It even happens within the "big four" as I sort of remember the Gretzky vs Lemieux arguments which flared up on Gretzky's retirement/Lemieux's return, and I have certainly dug into the record of arguments during the late eighties/early nineties. You look at it now, and there is a vocal group of people who simply don't even think it's an argument, and dismiss even the question out of hand (I would contend that in that case Lemieux is not really part of the "big four" for those people if it is unacceptable to even compare him to Gretzky but that's another topic).

Every year, there's a topic of discussion of who should win what award and all that. After it's been won though, it almost always becomes like a firm 'canonization' and entrenches the reputation, and much of the context goes away.

 

[MadLuke]

And I think the correlation between cup winners and the team that recently led the NHL in the least goals allowed may actually have a stronger correlation than recent President's trophy winners.

Yes, but it seem complete revisionist history (or maybe we just lived in different media landscape), the last 25 years total team defense was overrated if anything, it was considered to be by far the most important thing to win (when in reality at least according to numbers it was not more important than offense), higher than team offense and everyone repeated offense sell tickets, defense win championship, the idea that it is underrated seem false to me.

Think which team is considered the greatest of all time, 70s Habs, in large part because of their defense. Think who tend to get considered as great coach, tend to be the one that coached the great defensive team.

All-time player ranking underrating defensive contribution because it is much harder to track would be true, but different from underrating the importance of team defense in winning.

 

[MadLuke]

I can't find it, but at some point here, I said something along the lines of: If we only had tabulated goals all this time, and some blogger or some private firm started tracking who the players were that setup/created the play on each goal and compiled it, it'd be considered the greatest achievement in human history.

But because we had it the whole time, it's like "pssh, assists...who cares?"

And this would give point to player that never touched the puck and remove them to player that were the last one to touch it before the player that scored did and we would maybe have a totally different image of some players of the past we didn't see than what we have now.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Good comparison with Jordan. For Gretzky, it's also a bit like Jordan where part of his greatness is captured in the "greatness vs best" thing as well, as both guys somewhat defined and popularized their sports/or served as the face for the various aspects popularizing them during the time of great increase of cultural clout in non baseball professional sports. A big part of their greatness is their popular acclaim and the popular acclaim they bought to their leagues/sports.
I frequently tell the story of growing up, if you asked me who the greatest hockey player was, it would be an immediate and obvious answer of "Gretzky" even though when watching he wasn't close to the best by that time and it would be Lindros and some others. It was all based on popular sentiment (and stats).

Don't get me started on Jordan overratedness himself though lol, as well as him being a big reason why the NBA wussified even worse than the NHL (and to be clear for me this even ain't an old school/new school Jordan vs Lebron thing, I personally don't give Lebron or whoever now the time of day, and in any case don't think there is any real efficacy in comparing players from different eras).

Could be because you were a kid growing up and didn't really know much about the game or what makes a player great.

You're not in a forum for grammar schoolers now.

 

[tabness]

Could be because you were a kid growing up and didn't really know much about the game or what makes a player great.

You're not in a forum for grammar schoolers now.

As I said, pretty sure the reason I would instinctively say Gretzky back then was popular acclaim (which obviously encompasses both hockey people and media including the awards) as well as stats, and let me tell you, awards and stats are the bread and butter of HF lol

 

[Bear of Bad News]

As I said, pretty sure the reason I would instinctively say Gretzky back then was popular acclaim (which obviously encompasses both hockey people and media including the awards) as well as stats, and let me tell you, awards and stats are the bread and butter of HF lol

Heaven forbid that people discuss things with more rigor than when you were growing up. And on a discussion forum, no less.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

General question - overrated and underrated by whom?

My first impression is players like Scott Niedermayer and Ron Francis are overrated, and Patrik Elias is underrated. That's probably true for the hockey media as a whole, but it's certainly not the case on HOH. Which "audience" are we looking at here?