HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 3 (2009 update)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-11-2009, 03:48 PM
  #26
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
I will grant that Cyclone Taylor was hockey's first great innovator - demonstrating the value of play making, the necessity for defensemen to be able to skate backwards, the best rover and an overall great player BUT when all is said and done you have to look at the results.

Playing for Vancouver in the PCHA, Taylor was the league's best player from 1913 to 1920 but Vancouver even though they had other excellent HOF quality players(goalie/defense/forward) during this period was not a dominant team, five of the eight seasons saw them at or below .500. The two best seasons were war years 1915 Stanley Cup and 1917. Taylor dominated in 1915 but it was the only Stanley Cup championship that he contributed to.

Factor out the innovation and the fact that the NHA which did not feature seven man hockey and there is a significant gap in overall performance that favours Lalonde and Malone.
Please do more thorough research. He was the MVP of the cup winning Ottawa Senators while he was a defenceman.

Also, the PCHA was a three team league for most of it's existence, so, it was impossible for any team to dominate.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 03:50 PM
  #27
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Triffy View Post
Thanks, that's certainly something that needs to be considered every time when comparing Soviet players across the eras. Right now I don't feel like I want to get involved into the discussion whether Makarov was the better player.



http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p...3#post17229303

There's the table.

So in 1969 he was the best of the players I've compared him to. In 1970 he was 2nd to Maltsev (104 vs. 20 points). In 1971 again 2nd to Maltsev (70-61). In 1972 there was a tie between Maltsev and Kharlamov. In 1973 Kharlamov finally won, altough Petrov was really close (107-104). In 1974 Kharlamov (26) was behind both Mikhailov (67) and Maltsev (38). In 1975 he was again viewed the best player of his line by quite clear margin (81-49 vs. Petrov). 1976 even wider difference.

So 8 seasons, during which he was 3 times viewed the best of the group of players I compared him to. During the same time frame Maltsev was the best player of the group 2 or 3 times, whether you consider the '72 to be a tie or a win for Maltsev.

That would suggest that he was considered the best player of his line during that time span, I'll give you that. It must be noted, though, that a couple of years later Mikhailov won the MVP twice in a row. And during the same years, Petrov won the scoring title.
What it really comes down to is that I saw them all play multiple times, and Kharlamov was the game breaker. The guy everyone on opposing teams tried to shut down. The guy who was dangerous every time he was on the ice and taking the focus off his linemates.

He was also the guy receiving more praise than others from his coaches, countrymen and Russian fans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Gear View Post
No.
Quote:
И какие бы звезды и среди соперников, и среди партнеров ни окружали Харламова на льду, он оставался сильнейшим среди сильнейших, первым среди равных.
Anatoli Tarasov trained both of them, and in his book he told about Valeri:"No matter what kind of star players was in his environment on ice, he always was best among best, first among equals."
Even if only having seen 20 or so games with him is not enough, word of mouth from Russia is pretty adamant over the issue. They are as vehement in defending Kharlamov as the Greatest Russian player ever as Canadians are of saying Orr is the greatest defenseman ever.

I have a few Russian friends who will to their deaths defend that he was the best of the best out of everyone they ever watched from their country, and these are friends who know much about Ice hockey.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:09 PM
  #28
lextune
I'm too old for this
 
lextune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 9,563
vCash: 500
My list as of today:

21. Bobby Clarke
22. Mike Bossy
23. Mark Messier
24. Jaromir Jagr
25. Terry Sawchuk
26. Ted Lindsay
27. Valeri Kharlamov
28. Bryan Trottier
29. Steve Yzerman
30. Joe Sakic
31. Edouard "Newsy" Lalonde
32. Viacheslav Fetisov
33. Glenn Hall
34. Larry Robinson
35. Fred "Cyclone" Taylor

The case for Clarke was mostly made last round. And I already made a post about Bossy, (and I stand solidly behind the Bossy post that Jekyll made a few posts after mine as well). After that I think I could still move a few players around.

lextune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:10 PM
  #29
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post
I assume those 34 for Trottier is including Pens years. What do they look like without?
Hmmm, I just went and Manually counted them, and it seems Bossy had 18 goals, not 17.
http://stanleycupplayoffs2008.com/ts...Register.aspx?
That is where I got it from, but from my manual count from Hockey_Summary_Projects files, it is off by a goal.

Anyways, here is from their Isles finals days only. Bossy alone missed a game in the finals(82-83).

Bossy: 18 goals, 35 points in 23 games
Trottier: 9 goals, 30 points in 24 games.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:14 PM
  #30
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,478
vCash: 500
Pcha

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Please do more thorough research. He was the MVP of the cup winning Ottawa Senators while he was a defenceman.

Also, the PCHA was a three team league for most of it's existence, so, it was impossible for any team to dominate.
Please. The reference was clearly made to his prime PCHA days 1913-1920,a period during which he did not play for Ottawa.

Also I am fascinated by the claim that it is impossible to dominate a three team league given that Vancouver was the only stable franchise that did not move or leave the league.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:19 PM
  #31
Triffy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Country: Finland
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
Even if only having seen 20 or so games with him is not enough, word of mouth from Russia is pretty adamant over the issue. They are as vehement in defending Kharlamov as the Greatest Russian player ever as Canadians are of saying Orr is the greatest defenseman ever.

I have a few Russian friends who will to their deaths defend that he was the best of the best out of everyone they ever watched from their country, and these are friends who know much about Ice hockey.
I have utmost respect for contemporary opinion of players who I haven't seen play. That's why I ranked him the best Soviet on my initial list. And I don't want to push Kharlamov down just to pimp the other players. Maybe he was the best player the Soviet Union ever produced. The numbers I posted definitely do not show that he was not. What they do show, however, is that his linemates and especially Maltsev weren't that far off him. And that's just players from Kharlamov's era.

Too bad there's very few or no regular Russian HOH section posters. Well besides pnep, but he does not count, you have to be a human being to qualify.

Where was that Tarasov's quote from?

Triffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:27 PM
  #32
lextune
I'm too old for this
 
lextune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 9,563
vCash: 500
I also take issue with Bossy getting the "soft" label and feel that that played a significant part in his Hart share results.

He led the playoffs in goals three times and took vicious punishment while doing so. Soft players don't come back for more of that type of treatment.

lextune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:36 PM
  #33
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,951
vCash: 500
Some useful info from HO on guys this round:

The effects of Lemieux and Gretzky on awards: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=608582

Highlights:
Mark Messier. He would have earned his 3rd career Hart trophy, his 1st and 2nd Art Ross trophies, he would have led the league in assists, and he would have become a seven-time all-star (4 first-team, 3 second-team).

Bryan Trottier. He would have earned his 2nd career Hart trophy and would have been a five-time all-star (4 first-team, 1 second-team).

Mike Bossy. He would have earned his 3rd, 4th and 5th goal-scoring crowns and he would have won his 1st and 2nd Art Ross trophies.

Steve Yzerman. The biggest impact of all. He would have earned his 1st (and possibly 2nd) Hart trophies (see discussion re 1988); he would have won his 1st Art Ross trophy; he would have led the league in assists once and goals twice; he would have been a four-time all-star (2 first-team; 2 second-team).

However, Yzerman was inconsistant. If Third Team All-Stars existed, he would only have two:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=407941

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 04:41 PM
  #34
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,951
vCash: 500
Here's seventieslord's great analysis of Sakic vs. Yzerman that confirms what my eyes told me - Sakic was a bit better than Yzerman.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=583598

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 05:00 PM
  #35
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,387
vCash: 500
I appreciate all the replies -- I still disagree with a lot of it, but at least both sides have now documented our reasoning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lextune View Post
In 18 seasons Trottier finished in the top ten six times. Bossy, in only 10 seasons, finished in the top ten eight times. Six of those eight seasons he finished in the top five, as opposed to Bryan's three top five finishes.

Being in the top five twice as much is more than just a small advantage for me.
The bottom line is that while they were both in the league, Bossy outscored Trottier by around 9 points per year (source). I think Trottier's Selke-calibre defense and checking abilities more than offset Bossy's additional 9 points per year. For whatever it's worth, all of the Hart trophy voters who covered their careers agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
I can understand how they look similar. Heaven knows that Bossy was the guy running that Offense up front though.

It should be noted that Trottier's fluke "Off" year, was a result of his injury, and that they were not playing together for most of that year. Bossy's linemates that year were Sutter and Tonelli, and he for the most part, elevated them quite well and gave them career years.
Bossy's scoring did not miss a beat without Trottier, unless anyone think s 2-3 goals and a point or two is missing a beat. His points and goals totals barely changed at all, and his +/- did not suffer either.
Trottier & Bossy had great chemistry -- Bossy even said that he would have preferred to play with Trottier (rather than Gretzky) because they complemented each other so well (source). It's possible Bossy was just complimenting his friend & teammate, but it also shows how they both helped each other (and obviously their team succeed.

The fact that Bossy basically maintained his scoring pace without Trottier is a plus -- it shows that Bossy was not the product of Trottier, but nobody was suggesting that was the case. (That's definitely not what I was suggesting, I hope it didn't sound like I was).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
I would not say "Vastly" superior myself. Having watched both many many times, I still think Bossy is an underrated defensive player.

He was never a liability as some might claim, nor was he the last guy back. He was always in position, responsible and reliable.

Trottier does get bonus points for more PK time in this category.
First, for the record, I'll acknowledge you've watched Trottier & Bossy more than I have.

I don't dispute that Bossy was a responsible defensive player. However, among history's elite forwards, Trottier is generally considered one of the very best defensively. I know this from watching him play -- but more objectively you have the multiple years with serious Selke consideration (1981, 1984, 1986, 1988), his willingness to accept a purely defensive role to help his team win ('91 & '92 Pens), a significantly higher plus/minus than his linemate Bossy (source), and the fact that he played more on the PK (not reflected in the plus/minus stat). Trottier was also one of the best face-off winning centres ever.

In short I feel that Bossy was basically average, defensively, for a star player, while Trottier was among the very best ever -- that's a big advantage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
This is the part I hate. Hart voting does indeed go to Trottier. It should be noted however, that Bossy was always in the voters Doghouse. He was the guy coming into the league vocally demeaning the league for its violence and fighting and his lack of a physical game, advocating that the league should ban fighting. He was labeled as "Soft" early on, and the label stuck with him, even though he was anything but soft. He would take any amount of punishment, go into any corner or stand anywhere and take crosschecks repeatedly to get a goal.

Trottier by contrast, was always hitting everything in sight and being more "noticeable" in his style. But for my money, Bossy was always right there with Trottier, even if the voters were a bit biased against him.
I'm not convinced that the voters were out to penalize Bossy -- remember, the people that vote for the Hart trophy are the same people who vote for the year-end all-star teams, where Bossy fared extremely well. I think I need something a little more specific to show there was a bias. Both Potvin and Trottier fared better in Hart voting than Bossy and I think that's a good indication of their value to the Islanders franchise.


Last edited by Hockey Outsider: 08-11-2009 at 05:06 PM.
Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 05:46 PM
  #36
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
I don't dispute that Bossy was a responsible defensive player. However, among history's elite forwards, Trottier is generally considered one of the very best defensively. I know this from watching him play -- but more objectively you have the multiple years with serious Selke consideration (1981, 1984, 1986, 1988), his willingness to accept a purely defensive role to help his team win ('91 & '92 Pens), a significantly higher plus/minus than his linemate Bossy (source), and the fact that he played more on the PK (not reflected in the plus/minus stat). Trottier was also one of the best face-off winning centres ever.
First, I wouldn't say that a difference of 40 in plus-minus over 10 years is significant on its own. Second, much of the difference is because Trottier killed penalties and got plus-minus credit for shorthanded goals. I estimate, based on PPGA and SH goals scored by the Islanders, that Trottier was on the ice for 25 SH goals more than Bossy, which all but eliminates the plus-minus gap at even strength.

I think your overall argument is still strong, especially the Hart voting.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 05:53 PM
  #37
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
*** PLEASE NOTE THE VOTING DEADLINE ***

Vote 18 will begin now and debates will run through Sunday 8/16. Any extension to this time frame will be annouced prior to the deadline. Votes must be submitted no later than midnight EST on Sunday 8/9, and voting will run until this time or until all voters have sent their vote in, whichever comes first. THESE DEADLINES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE SO PLEASE READ THROUGH THE ENTIRE THREAD.

I will be sending out confirmations when I receive ballots from the voters now. Any voter who does not get a confirmation within 24 hours of submitting a ballot should assume I never received it and should either resubmit it or contact me to arrange a different method to submit the ballots. Please submit all ballots via PM to FissionFire or email them to hohtop100@yahoo.com

PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL VOTE FOR YOUR TOP 15 OUT OF THE POOL OF ELIGIBLE PLAYERS.

Vote 2 will be for places 11 through 20 on the Top 100 list.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:
Mike Bossy
Bobby Clarke
Viacheslav Fetisov
Glenn Hall
Jaromir Jagr
Valeri Kharlamov
Edouard "Newsy" Lalonde
Ted Lindsay
Mark Messier
Larry Robinson
Joe Sakic
Terry Sawchuk
Fred "Cyclone" Taylor
Bryan Trottier
Steve Yzerman
Me'thinks there's some kind of problems with the voting deadline...

As for the players themselves... As if I wasn't explicit enough, Newsey Lalonde was my highest ranked player, followed by Trottier and Bossy. Then comes as cast-off from the last round (Clarkie), then comes Taylor.

I'm open to arguments in regards of Taylor. I always ranked him below Lalonde, because I just feel Lalonde did more than Taylor, even if Taylor might have been the more gifted amongst them.

I won't send down Lalonde, Bossy, Trottier (and Clarke) : Taylor will go up, if there's some change in my rankings. I'll also give a pretty long look to Glenn Hall.

I can't tell how wrong it would be to induce Valeri Kharlamov in this round...

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 06:32 PM
  #38
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Please. The reference was clearly made to his prime PCHA days 1913-1920,a period during which he did not play for Ottawa.

Also I am fascinated by the claim that it is impossible to dominate a three team league given that Vancouver was the only stable franchise that did not move or leave the league.
The Patrick's wanted to maintain a competitive league. As such, players were sometimes reassigned to other teams in order to strengthen a potential doormat. This system worked quite well, as the PCHA standings were often close until the end.

I did in an-depth comparison of Taylor, Lalonde's (and Morenz's) careers a few months ago, so there is a lot of detailed information on the two up for voting in this thread: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=626910

Taylor and Lalonde will definitely be my one-two in this round. There is little doubt in my mind that they are the top two pre-Morenz players. If you are the best players of a 30-year stretch (the time covering the beginning of Stanley Cup play and the emergence of Morenz), you're a top-20 player in my books.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 07:59 PM
  #39
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,478
vCash: 500
Open to Interpretation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
The Patrick's wanted to maintain a competitive league. As such, players were sometimes reassigned to other teams in order to strengthen a potential doormat. This system worked quite well, as the PCHA standings were often close until the end.
Really open to interpretation. Sounds like you are describing a "House League", so the results would reflect the approach as opposed to reflecting the open competition of a pro league.

Not prepared to go into the workings of the PCHA or some of the other unique qualities at this time.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 08:59 PM
  #40
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,478
vCash: 500
Ranking the 15 Eligible

Ranking the 15 eligible for this round. Please note that eligibility is the factor as a few I would rank lower.

1.Bryan Trottier Simply a leader and by far the best on the list.

2.Terry Sawchuk Surprised that he is still being considered.

3.Bobby Clarke Definite 20-25 overall.

4. Mike Bossy About right.

5.Ted Lindsay About right.

6. Mark Messier Contributed to winning. Legacy tarnished because he hung around too long. Hard to resist at the salary he was earning.

7.Newsy Lalonde First great goal scorer with longevity. Not comfortable with the lack of team results.

8.Larry Robinson Started playing defense late in his junior career learned very quickly.Six Stanley Cup Championships. Leader and teacher who introduced many young defensemen to the NHL - Chris Chelios, Petr Svoboda, Eric Desjardins, Rob Blake.Ultimate teammate. Bad polo player.

9.Joe Sakic Talent and desire can overcome bad coaching. Graham James in junior, Jean Perron, Michel Bergeron, Pierre Page in Quebec.

10. Steve Yzerman Thank Scotty Bowman otherwise he is a compiler. Took awhile to get the message but at least he did.Others did not.

11.Glenn Hall Drifting down to where he belongs.Still a few rounds to go.

12.Jaromir Jagr Drifting down to where he belongs.

13.Vyacheslav Fetisov Probably the first Russian defenseman who could play an NHL style. Could hit - ask Wendel Clark, adapted well to the NHL game but a car accident where his younger brother was killed left its consequences.

14 Cyclone Taylor I have a bias towards the hockey innovators. Cyclone Taylor was that BUT I also have a bias towards winning and he fell short on this measure. Could be convinced but the points raised to date are pushing me in the other direction.

15.Valeri Kharlamov His backers use descriptive phrases like flashy, a gamebreaker, had to be watched every second when he was on the ice, his coaches praised him - as if Russian coaches were never known to misdirect the media, member of one of the greatest teams in history. Sounds like a description of Yvan Cournoyer.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-11-2009 at 09:01 PM. Reason: typo
Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 10:05 PM
  #41
poise
Registered User
 
poise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 232
vCash: 500
I'd like to point out a comparison between Mike Bossy and Jaromir Jagr as I'm seeing many potential rankings with Bossy ahead of Jagr. It's easiest to compare between them since both are elite right wings.

Pointwise, Jagr's best seasons actually beat out Bossy's by raw numbers alone. Now, I think that adjusting the stats gives a worse picture of the situation than the raw numbers, and Bossy showed could produce in the mid to late 1980's which I believe was closer to Jagr's era than the early 1980's in terms of scoring ease (despite the goal per game averages).

Of course, Bossy has the advantages of goal scoring (slight). Defensively, while Bossy was pretty poor early on in his career, he did improve as time went on (though nothing higher than average, Trottier and Gillies still did most of the work). With that being said, Jagr was one of the poorest (elite) players without the puck I have witnessed (thankfully he controlled the puck so much). His improvement with the Rangers towards the end of his NHL career was too minimal and sporadic. Then there is the matter of the playoffs, where I would certainly assert Bossy was simply amazing, though Jagr was certainly great as well.

While Bossy does have Jagr beat in these areas, all of them are slight. Jagr on the other hand, has much better longevity than Bossy. Also, the physicality factor must be taken into account. While I can't agree with the fact that Bossy was soft (he really took abuse to get into the shooting positions) and it can easily be argued that Jagr never used his size and strength to full capability, take into account that it was most likely much harder and more demanding for defensemen to contain Jagr than Bossy. Jagr would wear you out, even passively.

I feel that the advantages that Mike Bossy has over Jaromir Jagr are slight (playoff performance, goal scoring, defensive play) while Jagr has a significant advantage over Bossy in longevity (which I would consider important) not to mention the slight advantage in playmaking and general offensive capability (and the fact that Jagr just dominated the game more than Bossy by the eyeball test) if you simply consider their peaks.

poise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 10:14 PM
  #42
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by poise View Post
I'd like to point out a comparison between Mike Bossy and Jaromir Jagr as I'm seeing many potential rankings with Bossy ahead of Jagr. It's easiest to compare between them since both are elite right wings.

Pointwise, Jagr's best seasons actually beat out Bossy's by raw numbers alone. Now, I think that adjusting the stats gives a worse picture of the situation than the raw numbers, and Bossy showed could produce in the mid to late 1980's which I believe was closer to Jagr's era than the early 1980's in terms of scoring ease (despite the goal per game averages).

Of course, Bossy has the advantages of goal scoring (slight). Defensively, while Bossy was pretty poor early on in his career, he did improve as time went on (though nothing higher than average, Trottier and Gillies still did most of the work). With that being said, Jagr was one of the poorest (elite) players without the puck I have witnessed (thankfully he controlled the puck so much). His improvement with the Rangers towards the end of his NHL career was too minimal and sporadic. Then there is the matter of the playoffs, where I would certainly assert Bossy was simply amazing, though Jagr was certainly great as well.

While Bossy does have Jagr beat in these areas, all of them are slight. Jagr on the other hand, has much better longevity than Bossy. Also, the physicality factor must be taken into account. While I can't agree with the fact that Bossy was soft (he really took abuse to get into the shooting positions) and it can easily be argued that Jagr never used his size and strength to full capability, take into account that it was most likely much harder and more demanding for defensemen to contain Jagr than Bossy. Jagr would wear you out, even passively.

I feel that the advantages that Mike Bossy has over Jaromir Jagr are slight (playoff performance, goal scoring, defensive play) while Jagr has a significant advantage over Bossy in longevity (which I would consider important) not to mention the slight advantage in playmaking and general offensive capability (and the fact that Jagr just dominated the game more than Bossy by the eyeball test) if you simply consider their peaks.
I'd say Bossy has more than a slight advantage in goal scoring. Jagr had three 50 goal seasons in 17 years. Bossy had nine consecutive seasons over 50, five of those seasons 60 goals or more.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 10:45 PM
  #43
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I'd say Bossy has more than a slight advantage in goal scoring. Jagr had three 50 goal seasons in 17 years. Bossy had nine consecutive seasons over 50, five of those seasons 60 goals or more.
Jagr has a bigger advantage in elite seasons and overall dominance. Bossy was only the second best player once. Bossy's peak was 1981-1986, during those seasons guys like Kent Nilsson, Peter Stastny, and Denis Savard were outpointing Bossy. Hell, in 1985 Dale Hawerchuk was better than Mike Bossy.

I'll take the guy that has seven finishes among the top 3 scorers over someone that simply has 1.

Jagr was able to dominate his peers each year from 1995-2001, except in 1997 when he missed 20 games. He was better than Mike Bossy, bossy could have played another 5 seasons and Jagr would still rank higher because his peak was better. Guys like savard, hawerchuk, kent nilsson, they aint any better than selanne, bure, kariya. The only difference is that Jagr was also outpointing Sakic, Forsberg and Lindros each year too. The fact that Lafluer ended up higher than him again is a joke.

I would be willing to listen to arguments that Bossy might have won the art ross in 1986 if Gretzky and Lemieux weren't around, but then again Kurri kept up his production in 1989 without gretzky. Ranking Bossy ahead of Jagr would be like saying "i dont like jagr so i'm going to rank players inferior to him and keep him down the list."


Last edited by ushvinder: 08-11-2009 at 11:01 PM.
ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2009, 11:27 PM
  #44
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
14 Cyclone Taylor I have a bias towards the hockey innovators. Cyclone Taylor was that BUT I also have a bias towards winning and he fell short on this measure. Could be convinced but the points raised to date are pushing me in the other direction.
Taylor won as many Stanley Cups as Clarke and Sakic did, just to pick a couple ahead of him on your list. Do they also fall short in the winning department?

In 12 full seasons of Stanley Cup play, Taylor won two Cups (1909, 1915) and appeared in another final (1918). He also played in a third final series as a sub near the end of his career in 1921. He was the leading scorer in both the 1915 and 1918 Cup series'.

Taylor also won two championships (pennants as they were called in that league) with Portage Lakes of the International League (1906, 07), hockey's first professional league. And that was by no means a second rate league, as it was home to several eventual HOF players. In one of those years he scored a hat trick in a 3-2 victory over Pittsburgh to clinch the title.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 12:12 AM
  #45
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,478
vCash: 500
Contemporaries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Taylor won as many Stanley Cups as Clarke and Sakic did, just to pick a couple ahead of him on your list. Do they also fall short in the winning department?

In 12 full seasons of Stanley Cup play, Taylor won two Cups (1909, 1915) and appeared in another final (1918). He also played in a third final series as a sub near the end of his career in 1921. He was the leading scorer in both the 1915 and 1918 Cup series'.

Taylor also won two championships (pennants as they were called in that league) with Portage Lakes of the International League (1906, 07), hockey's first professional league. And that was by no means a second rate league, as it was home to several eventual HOF players. In one of those years he scored a hat trick in a 3-2 victory over Pittsburgh to clinch the title.
Comparing to contemporaries. Pre NHA/PCHA in terms of winning Stanley Cups, Frank McGee,Ernie Johnson,Ernie Russell,Jack Marshall with 3-4 all out - performed Cyclone Taylor's one.

In the NHA/PCHA era. Joe Malone led the Quebec Bulldogs to two
consecutive Stanley Cups in the pre WWI period. No other NHA/PCHA team won two consecutive Stanley Cups. Malone also contributed to the 1924 Canadiens Stanley Cup championship. But Joe Malone is not eligible in this round.

Comparing to contemporaries Clarke,Sakic and Yzerman do fall short of Trottier.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 12:18 AM
  #46
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
10. Steve Yzerman Thank Scotty Bowman otherwise he is a compiler. Took awhile to get the message but at least he did.Others did not.
A compiler? Yzerman?
He carried that Wings team on his shoulders further than they deserved to go often, before finally getting help.

Quote:
12.Jaromir Jagr Drifting down to where he belongs.
I am honestly beginning to wonder when the first European player is going to get any sort of praise from you.


Quote:
15.Valeri Kharlamov His backers use descriptive phrases like flashy, a gamebreaker, had to be watched every second when he was on the ice, his coaches praised him - as if Russian coaches were never known to misdirect the media, member of one of the greatest teams in history. Sounds like a description of Yvan Cournoyer.
His Coaches? Yes, of course they praised him.

Coaches and players on the opposing teams? They praised him even more than his own coaches often.

"He was fast, so hard to defend against out there," remembered Don Awrey, who was burned several times by #17. "I admired the way he used to come from behind and how he kept everyone on their toes. he was simply outstanding!"

"All of us were impressed, but none of us wanted to let on. I've seldom seen anyone come down on two NHL defencemen and beat them to the outside, go around them and then in on the net. It just isn't done."
-Harry Sinden. Team Canada head coach

"In my NHL career, I had to shadow a number of superstars - Bobby Hull being one of them. I would certainly put Kharlamov on the same level as Hull in terms of talent and ability."
-Ron Ellis, the terrific two-way Team Canada forward, was assigned to shadow the wily Russian.

The fiercely contested series continued in Game Six, and Canada had to find a way to stop the skilled Kharlamov. "Kharlamov was killing us," recalled John Ferguson, the assistant coach of Team Canada. "I called (Bobby) Clarke over to the bench, looked over at Kharlamov and said, 'I think he needs a tap on the ankle.' I didn't think twice about it."

Many observers claim Kharlamov's injury changed the momentum of the series, neutralizing the potent Soviet forward. "What hurt the Russians badly was losing their best player, Kharlamov," commented longtime player and analyst Howie Meeker. "Kharlamov was their best goal scorer; their best player to go wide around a not-too-mobile Canadian defence, and that was a big blow tpo the Russians."

"Kharlamov was the greatest individual hockey player i had ever played against in my entire career."

-Bobby Hull

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 05:40 AM
  #47
Howe Elbows 9
Registered User
 
Howe Elbows 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gävle, Sweden
Posts: 2,575
vCash: 676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post

Here are the top 5 In MVP voting in his generation among soviet forwards from 69-76 before his car accident really hobbled him.

Kharlamov: 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 5th
Maltsev: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 4th
Vikulov: 2nd, 3rd, 4th
Mikhailov: 2nd, 4th, 5th
Yakushev: 3rd, 4th, 5th
Petrov: 2nd, 4th
Firsov: 1st
Starshinov: 3rd

That is very telling.
And top 5 rankings among Soviet defensemen in MVP voting, 1968-1991:

Player First Second Third Fourth Fifth Total
Vyacheslav Fetisov 2 2 3 1 1 9
Valeri Vasiliev 1 2 3
Alexander Ragulin 1 1
Alexei Kasatonov 1 1

Thanks to Triffy/HO for information and summary. Were there any defensemen getting votes for this that I've forgotten about?

Fetisov won the MVP in 1982 and 1986, and in both years he finished ahead of Makarov in voting.

My tentative list:

21. Bobby Clarke
22. Jaromir Jagr
23. Valeri Kharlamov
24. Mark Messier
25. Terry Sawchuk
26. Cyclone Taylor
27. Vyacheslav Fetisov
28. Newsy Lalonde
29-31. Hall/Lindsay/Robinson

Bossy/Sakic/Trottier/Yzerman

Reading some of the comments in this thread, I get the impression that Lindsay and Hall will not end up as high on this list as they did last year (when Hall was 21st and Lindsay 23rd). Any comments on that theory?

Howe Elbows 9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 05:49 AM
  #48
Reks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Clarke shouldn't be ahead of Jagr and Kharlamov, IMO.

Reks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 07:14 AM
  #49
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post


"In my NHL career, I had to shadow a number of superstars - Bobby Hull being one of them. I would certainly put Kharlamov on the same level as Hull in terms of talent and ability."
-Ron Ellis, the terrific two-way Team Canada forward, was assigned to shadow the wily Russian.
l
"It's not the skill that matters, it's what you do with it."
- MXD

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-12-2009, 07:38 AM
  #50
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
"It's not the skill that matters, it's what you do with it."
- MXD
I think that's a bit unfair. I mean, Kharlamov did do SOMETHING with his skill(s), eh?

Unlike with Mikhailov and Petrov (usually), you needed often more than one player to stop Kharlamov (in his prime 1969-76, at least); i.e. he was fast and he could dangle, and thus he often created room for his linemates. That's something that statistics don't maybe show.

VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.