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

[HabzSauce]

Can't think of too many overrated, so I'll do underated goalies, no particular order.

Underated:
- Vokoun
- Bishop
- Crawford
- Craig anderson

HM: belfour

 

[Michael Farkas]

Ugh, yuck...Vokoun and Belfour, yes. The rest of those guys...especially Crawford...no thank you.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

I personally overrate Kirk McLean, Trevor Linden, Patrick Marleau, and Chris Drury.

And Dany Heatley, Steve Duchene, and Eric Desjardins.

 

[MadLuke]

2 vezina went right away in HHOF Belfour ? (And if my memory is right, highest ranked in nhl 94 PC version, he was usually my goaltender went I built super teams)

well he did not made that list:

100 Greatest NHL Players of All Time | NHL.com

League announced remaining 67 legends at gala event in Los Angeles

www.nhl.com

While Fuhr did, so I can see the point.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Ommmmg no.

Mario couldnt keep his head up either!
Little 5'11 Lithuanian Kasparitis knocked him around several times because Mario was watching the puck not the players! Mario ASKED the team to get Kasparitis so that he wouldn't have to face him again.

Gordie Howe? Mr. Elbows? The guy who you sucker punch once and 9 years later he returns it and vocally lets you know why?!

No. Howe & Lemieux are wired entirely differently.

Lindros was big and physical. Played an all-around game. Much like Gordie.

Mario was a one-way player. Absolutely fabulous offensively. But not physical and barely played any defense.

 

[DitchMarner]

Eric Lindros:

Evgeni Malkin:

I think it's hard to argue Lindros' stretch isn't better. I don't think it's absurd to suggest he was at least a Malkin-level player in his prime. I've read the opinion on multiple occasions that Malkin at his best was as good as Crosby/Ovechkin if not better (although that pertains more to one or two year peak than to overall prime).

Malkin is ranked just outside the top 50 by this board. Since 2013, he's had one season as a top ten scorer. Obviously he's had a much better playoff career than Lindros.

 

[The Panther]

Lindros missed 182 games (no lockout) in his first 7 seasons.
Crosby missed 150 games in his first 7 seasons.

This is incorrect.

First 7 seasons of each player:

-- Lindros 431 games
-- Flyers 544 games
Lindros missed 113 games, and thus appeared in 79.2% of the games (and 100% of playoff games)

-- Crosby 434
-- Pens 574
Crosby missed 140 games, and thus appeared in 75.6% of the games.

 

[The Panther]

In Lindros' prime ('94 to '99), he was third in points per game and actual points. He did miss a lot of games, but he played enough that he was third in plus/minus as well.

This is correct, and the only players out-pacing prime Lindros in scoring were Mario Lemieux and Jaromir Jagr, probably the #2 and #3 (or #4) greatest offensive players in the history of the game. Which is to say that if you shift prime Lindros to any period in hockey history, with the exception of maybe 1970-71, and 1980-1996, he's #1 in scoring for a six-season span. By 1996-97, Lindros was matching Mario Lemieux in scoring. (During this span, he had better ES results than Jagr and way better than Mario.)

In addition, he was the #1 physical force in the League, and (along with Gordie Howe) probably #1 all time in terms of elite forwards.

He also led the playoffs in scoring. Won the Hart. Won the scoring title.

And yet there were people here who think he's not a top-100 player. It's insanity.

I'd take that six-year window over the entire careers of guys like Andreychuk and Ciccarellii personally. There probably haven't been too many more dominant six season primes since '67. Off the top of my head, I'm not sure Crosby has a better stretch of six seasons. McDavid, maybe.

This is also correct. I mean, people will say Guy Lafleur had a better six-season span. Yes, he did, in terms of accomplishments.

But was Guy Lafleur going to outscore mid-90s Lemieux and Jagr? No, he wasn't. So, at best, he wasn't going to do any better in scoring than Lindros. And of course, he wasn't a physical force like Lindros.

There's this weird punishment-curve for Lindros that's way disproportionate to what gaps in his career deserve.

 

[MadLuke]

This is incorrect.

Maybe counting all the 1992 season game Lindros missed ?

 

[MadLuke]

he's #1 in scoring for a six-season span.

I imagine you mean by ppg, I am not sure it follow someone must be third after Lemieux-Jagr, 07-12 Crosby for example scored at an higher 1.44 in a lower scoring era, McDavid 2019-2024 would be quite something nore sure it is a given that Lindros goes above 1.67 ppg, Jagr 1.54 from 96-01 would have been hard to beat. It is a bit saying when Yzerman was being third behind Lemieux-Gretzky, no one else would have done better than third... so he would have been first anywhere else and now we have all of Yzerman-Lindros-Jagr that would be number 1 in any 6 years windows without Lemieux-Gretzky presents...

And hear there is a bit of a timing bump, Lindros play in the higher scoring era of 94-96, 184 of the possible 214 games, a not that terrible 86% or 70.5 games by 82 pace, with a 1.53 ppg

From 97-99 the lower scoring era he play 186 of the possible 246 games, for a lower 61.7 games by 82 pace at a 1.31 ppg, by playing less game in the lower scoring era he pushed is ppg for the total windows less than those who did.

PLaying more would still be number 2 after Jagr easily, but closer to the Forsberg-Selanne-Kariya type

But was Guy Lafleur going to outscore mid-90s Lemieux and Jagr?

Possibly
94 and 95 they are touchable.

 

[Michael Farkas]

This is incorrect.

First 7 seasons of each player:

-- Lindros 431 games
-- Flyers 544 games
Lindros missed 113 games, and thus appeared in 79.2% of the games (and 100% of playoff games)

-- Crosby 434
-- Pens 574
Crosby missed 140 games, and thus appeared in 75.6% of the games.

Lindros elected to not play his first season. That's not factored in here?

 

[The Panther]

Lindros elected to not play his first season. That's not factored in here?

Are you serious?

 

[Michael Farkas]

A little bit. That's one of the things that comes with dealing with Lindros.

Games missed are games missed. If it HAS to be an injury, call it a headache...

*ashes cigar*

 

[daver]

After the 96/97 season, Lindros had been going toe-to-toe with Jagr for best offensive player after Mario for the previous three seasons. He also had a playoff run worthy of his regular season dominance. He is the heir apparent to the best player in the world after Mario's retirement at age 23.

In 97/98, he is healthy for the first 55 games and is 6th in points and 5th in PPG: NHL Stats

In 98/99, he is healthy for the first 69 games and is 2nd in points and 3rd in PPG: NHL Stats

If we write off 97/98 as a down year, what do we think of his 98/99 season? Jagr has taken it up a notch while Lindros is battling with Selanne at his peak. He hasn't seemed to improved in two years. In 98/99, he also had a significant drop in his PIMs.

I think it is safe to say Lindros peaked early offensively in his career due to his size and physical maturity at a younger age than most and wasn't quite at peak Jagr's level.

Or was he already affected by injuries by 98/99 and we didn't see his true peak?

Or can we look at 98/99 as a healthy Lindros without his peak physicality and judge his true offensive ceiling sans his physicality?

 

[Davenport]

My goalie for the under-rated monument is Frank "Mr. Zero" Brimsek. Played 10 seasons in the NHL, and was on the first or second All Star team the first eight seasons. Earned himself the Vezina Trophy twice. Hoisted the Stanley Cup twice. In fact, during his rookie season - 1938-39 - Brimsek led the league in wins, shutouts and goals-against-average, then led the Bruins to a Stanley Cup

championship. Earned himself the Calder Trophy. Any discussion of the greatest American-born hockey players which does not have serious consideration of Brimsek is not a serious discussion.

 

[VanIslander]

Brimsek is always outside the top 100 of the HfBoards all-time drafts for the last 20 years... but he and Tretiak should be in the same zip code (an outdated "snail mail" reference - though the term 'snail mail' died when billion-dollar Amazon delivered quickly).

 

[JackSlater]

My goalie for the under-rated monument is Frank "Mr. Zero" Brimsek. Played 10 seasons in the NHL, and was on the first or second All Star team the first eight seasons. Earned himself the Vezina Trophy twice. Hoisted the Stanley Cup twice. In fact, during his rookie season - 1938-39 - Brimsek led the league in wins, shutouts and goals-against-average, then led the Bruins to a Stanley CupView attachment 894416 championship. Earned himself the Calder Trophy. Any discussion of the greatest American-born hockey players which does not have serious consideration of Brimsek is not a serious discussion.

I agree Brimsek seems underrated. The guy was unquestionably the best American ever for around half a century or so and even within an American only context his name doesn't always come up. Even just looking at things like all star finishes keep in mind he missed two seasons right in his prime due to WW2.

 

[MadLuke]

FInland at the olympics / world cups

1998: Bronze
2002: ---------
2004: second place
2006: Silver
2010: bronze
2014: bronze

Lot of top 3 when we think of Canada-Usa-Sweden/Russia being above them and Czech for a while winning, maybe some Fins have been underrated ? some of their players that never played in the nhl, TImonen ? .

Is it possible for Selanne to be a tad underrated in some quarter, for example we can often hear that his rookie season being his best without a doubt, which point to his DPE years to be underappreciated ?

Long "prime" Selanne in international play.

Season	Age	Tm	Lg	GP	G	A	PTS
1991-92	21​	Finland	Olympics	8​	7​	4​	11​
1995-96	25​	Finland	WC-A	6​	5​	3​	8​
1996-97	26​	Finland	W-Cup	4​	3​	2​	5​
1997-98	27​	Finland	Olympics	5​	4​	6​	10​
1998-99	28​	Finland	WC-A	11​	3​	8​	11​
2001-02	31​	Finland	Olympics	4​	3​	0​	3​
2002-03	32​	Finland	WC-A	7​	8​	3​	11​
2004-05	34​	Finland	W-Cup	6​	1​	3​	4​
2005-06	35​	Finland	Olympics	8​	6​	5​	11​
				59​	40​	34​	74​

He had way more international success than playoff success (Jets-Ducks did not made them often, injured riddle sharks then has an old veteran) during his career and in North America we tend to value one much more than the other.

Strange saying that about someone in the all-time top 20 in points and almost top 10 in goals with 3 Rocket, he his less underrated as a goal scorer than Jagr for sure... but some season he did a lot for his team... without Kariya those ducks could be quite weak:

1997-98 Mighty Ducks of Anaheim Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts | Hockey-Reference.com

Check out the latest Mighty Ducks of Anaheim Roster, Stats, Injuries, Scores, Results, Shootouts and more on Hockey-Reference.com

www.hockey-reference.com

Resulting in only 15 playoffs games as a Ducks, hard to write your name in history in that situation compared to early Canucks Bure.

There some ways to adjust goals that say only Howe-Ovechkin-Jagr-Gretzky scored more adjusted goals than him.
He is super high in some corner:

Top 100 NHL Players of All-Time | TheHockeyFanatic

The Hockey Fanatic selects the top 100 NHL players of all-time. Based on all around play, longevity, championships won and contributions to the game of hockey.

www.thehockeyfanatic.com

But him some scoring only 22 less points than Jagr from 97 to 99 and being +58 on the Ducks team could be lost.

 

[blundluntman]

As far as goalies go, Brodeur is the most overrated goalie of all time by the casual fan.
Vokoun is the most underrated goalie by everyone.

 

[DitchMarner]

Top 100 NHL Players of All-Time | TheHockeyFanatic

The Hockey Fanatic selects the top 100 NHL players of all-time. Based on all around play, longevity, championships won and contributions to the game of hockey.

www.thehockeyfanatic.com

This is probably the absolute worst rankings list I've ever seen. Mario Lemieux at number 12 (lmao), Toews ahead of Crosby, no Ovechkin in the Top 100 (but Stamkos is included), Wendel Clark and Linden in the Top 100 but no Lindros. Absolute garbage.

 

[wetcoast]

Lindros was injured by his lack of hockey sense and spatial awareness.

He didn't get hurt bumping other guys or rough housing. He got hurt because he didn't develop of pro tendency in his developmental years, took exploitative advantage of his size, tried to bring that exploitative advantage with him to the NHL, and was routinely knocked unconscious for his incompleteness.

That's part of it but also the playing style and enforcement of the rules, or lack of them allowed players like Scott stevens to tee up on guys because defensive coverage wouldn't be blown because the ice was titled in favour of defensive teams with clutching grabbing contact away from the play and puck.

Plenty of guys from earlier times would have had the same problem but the game was slower and systems were different so attaching it all onto Lindros just doesn't seem right.

 

[Albatros]

Lot of top 3 when we think of Canada-Usa-Sweden/Russia being above them and Czech for a while winning, maybe some Fins have been underrated ? some of their players that never played in the nhl, TImonen ? .

More so in earlier years, like Esa Keskinen or Raimo Helminen were at minimum same level players with Esa Tikkanen. Or Matti Hagman before them. Later Ville Peltonen who only carved himself an NHL career in his mid-30s. Also in the 2000s there are underrated players, of course, but not to the same extent.

 

[wetcoast]

Why wouldn't Moore be in the Top 100?

I used him as an example as many use the hart voting results for propping up Clarke, Shore and then the hart results for Moore suddenly disappear.

He won two scoring titles. The 2nd one he won with 96 points, the record at that time. Only 16 players in the NHL have multiple Art Ross trophies since WWII. He also led the playoffs in scoring twice. Was on 6 Cup winners. And I would have Kucherov ranked ahead of him.

Moore still has a very short peak/prime and being on 6 cup winners kind of indicates that if he had played on the Bruins then he wouldn't be in the top 100.

I would agree, there is an argument for Forsberg over Clarke. But Forsberg's fractured career hurts his case.

Yet Forsberg played a hell of alot more than Moore did and I think forsberg played more prime games than Clarke did, clarke had some icing added to his cake but when we look at overall impact Foppa had more impact IMO, especially in the playoffs and internationally.

He only played 5 seasons with over 70 games. Clarke has the leadership, defense and toughness to his advantage. He also has a career plus/minus of 507. Only Robinson, Orr, Gretzky and Bourque are ahead of him.

The +/- thing careerwise really benefits players from strong teams playing in the 70s though.

Obviously Clarke was a great defensive player but it's not like foppa was some perimeter scoring guy who didn't bring anything else.

Clarke didn't break out until age 22 and it was post expansion has a 7 year prime then a noticeable drop off. Foppa was an impact player in his age 21 season and was an impact player until the age of 32.

Even in their 20 year old seasons it's hard to argue that Foppa wasn't better, he just chose to stay in Sweden for the Olympics that year.

I know that you really value peak and can understand why you might have Clarke ahead quite a bit but for most other people the prime of forsberg and playoffs/international should have them really close one would think and personally I see some arguments for Foppa here.

I also think that if we imagine a fully integrated NHL for Clarke, like the state of the league that foppa played in then clarke doesn't even stand out as much in his peak.

 

[MadLuke]

This is probably the absolute worst rankings list I've ever seen. Mario Lemieux at number 12 (lmao), Toews ahead of Crosby, no Ovechkin in the Top 100 (but Stamkos is included), Wendel Clark and Linden in the Top 100 but no Lindros. Absolute garbage.

List was in 2015, could have been peak Toews and bottom Ovechkin trime.

It is good to consult that kind of list with those with Brodeur > Roy, Mahovolich > Sakic/Crosby, Fuhr > Jagr, Linden > Malkin,Ovechkin, Chara, Keith in 2015 to get a sense of who get over and under rated outthere.

Gartner just abvove Hasek is quite wild...

 

[Overrated]

Sure they were a strong team because of the supporting cast and like I mentioned upthread Firsov was 15th in scoring in the Soviet league that year and fourth for his club team.

You could run the same methodology for Kharlamov and would end up with similarly odd placings. I'll show you Kharlamov's league numbers between 68/69 and 75/76 (his entire prime)

68/69 - 3rd (Assists are missing all together for the vast majority of players so I'll use goals only)
69/70 - 5th (Assists are missing all together for the vast majority of players so I'll use goals only)
70/71 - 2nd
71/72 - 1st
72/73 - 10th
73/74 - 10th
74/75 - 5th
75/76 - 13th

Yet he was still considered the best player in the USSR in the latter part of this period. He also likely was. His incredible performance against NYR and the Habs happened in the 75/76 season for example. His prime would likely continue if he didn't end up in a massive car crash which happened in summer 76. Some players just do much better against crap competition but they struggle once the opponents get strong. Unfortunately the NHL skews this a lot because most teams are quite equal in strength (especially nowadays) and there is no international hockey either. In fact even back then players like Clarke and Dionne had much higher drop offs in scoring when in playoffs or while engaged in international hockey. In reality they just weren't as good as some people think. Esposito for example didn't have this problem at all.

Just looking at "points" or "goals" can be misleading. Especially when it comes down to the Soviet league where more than half of all assists are missing all together.