View Single Post
12-04-2012, 07:46 AM
[email protected]
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
His inclusion on your list perhaps follows the logic of many of Bowmans choices. Linden was good enough and above all needed enough as a role player on Team Canada both in the 1996 World Cup and then on the 1998 olympic team. Bowman has a lot of those players on his list, not top-100 per se but able to fill other vital needs on a really good Team. A coach sees that.
I thought a little more on this and yes you pretty much hit it on the head. any list of "best" is going to be personal and is extremely open to interpretation.

Basically it comes down to a roster of 100 and Linden being a personal favorite and being skilled enough and versatile enough to play many roles.

His game also didn't go south in the playoffs and at his peak in the early 90's he makes "my team".

I also think alot of people are missing the openness of the term best.

There is no criteria that the guys in the magazine had to adhere to any sticky, heck they could have had a list of all post 67 players if they really wanted to.

Red even went as far to say that he would not include any players that he never saw play, which is his right isn't it.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote