View Single Post
10-31-2012, 02:03 AM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,768
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
Which means given their position on the all-time list, that their offense was that much more effective and dominant compared to their peers and fellow top 10 players.

In my eyes, the top 4 can have Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr and Howe at any position and they all have strong arguments for being the best player of all-time but what is not contested is the fact that no one has yet come along (and it seems very unlikely that anyone anytime soon will) that can supplant them from the top 4.

There has to be tiers

1. Gretzky, Howe, Orr, Lemieux

2. Beliveau, Hull, Shore, Harvey

3. Jagr, Richard... Morenz, Bourque, Hasek, Roy, Lidstrom, Lafleur, Bossy, Clarke, Trottier, Messier...
I understand what you are saying here but I'll get to the reason your tiering might be off a bit after the next quote.

Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
It seems to me that there isn't much to separate the peaks enjoyed by most of the great defencemen, Orr excluded. Arguments could be made for Potvin, Shore, Harvey or others. It's unrealistic for someone to have more than 3 defencemen in the top 10, and with Orr as a given it's hard for Potvin to make it once elite level longevity comes into play.
I think that Potvin does have an argument for being top 10 but part of the problem is that some people go wow , I have 3,4 or even 5 Dmen already.

Tying the response top both quotes now I'll add this thought as I was reading through the thread, and particularly about Jagr, Lidstrom and Hasek.

I deliberately made a 2nd lsit that included only forwards because it's very hard to compare guys, and their impact on games when goalies play all 60 minutes, Dmen 25 plus and top forwards maybe a hair over 20 minutes.

Hockey is a weird sport that way and it's almost like the MVP in baseball and if SP or even closers should be in the running as they play a lot less games and have different impacts on the game.

Dmen have more impact on the games they play in than the top forwards, for the most part IMO as they play both offense and defense and probably 5 minutes more in a game as well on average over a career(at least in recent times when we ahve been tracking these things). Dmen are inherently more valuable then, all other things being equal.

It's pretty hard to equate a guy that we judge almost all on offense (say Wayne and Mario) to a guy like Bourque or Lidstrom and say which is better or put another way which had more impact on his teams fortunes.

Sure Wayne lead the pack and doubled alot of it in the 80's when he was so dominant offensively but at the end of teh day does it really matter that much if he has an extra 50 or 60 points in a a year when games are out of hand and not in question?

Luckily he was also the top playoff performer and internationally as well so he passes the test when we ask this question. Marcel Dionne doesn't in a lot of peoples eyes and Jagr is somewhere in between. for comparing forwards this is quite a bit easier than if we throw a guy like Potvin into the mix for comparison.

Potvin or Beliveau in the top 10
Bourque or Richard?
Jagr or Lidstrom?

Man now thing become alot less clear IMO.

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote