HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Hockey Talk by Country > Russia
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

Top 50 Russian -All Time

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-04-2011, 06:29 PM
  #26
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Since USSR collapse I'd say in a top 50 you would get for sure Bure Fedorov Mogilny Yashin Gonchar Markov Zubov Datsyuk Kovalchuk Malkin Ovechkin that's about it. No goalies not that many defensemen lots of forwards...

Konstantinov could have been there maybe Ozolinsh also.

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2011, 06:32 PM
  #27
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Kamensky would definitely be there also. He played so good for USSR in the mid-late 80's that I was almost considering him for the 80's only...

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2011, 06:34 PM
  #28
cska78
Registered User
 
cska78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,708
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to cska78 Send a message via Yahoo to cska78
Kmylev, Lomakin, Pryakhin, Semak, Zhamnov, Starikov, Stelnov.

cska78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2011, 09:43 AM
  #29
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
What???????

Do you mean those guys on a top 50 list? Those are some of the worst products of Soviet hockey ever : Priakhin-Starikov-Khmylev...

Stelnov and Lomakin OK not more Semak very good but not top 50 the same with Zhamnov.

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2011, 11:14 PM
  #30
hammerwielder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pushkin View Post
What???????

Do you mean those guys on a top 50 list? Those are some of the worst products of Soviet hockey ever : Priakhin-Starikov-Khmylev...

Stelnov and Lomakin OK not more Semak very good but not top 50 the same with Zhamnov.
I agree. I would also omit Yashin, Gonchar and Markov and include Varnakov and Skvortsov. Incredibly skilled speedsters. Also Khabibulin.

I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suggest Mishakov, as the first Russian physical player. If you watch the ice-level replay of the '72 gold medal game, you see a bunch of ballerinas out there. Mishakov was ahead of his time, in the Soviet system at least. Now I'm gonna duck.

hammerwielder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2011, 11:35 PM
  #31
Hanji
Registered User
 
Hanji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammerwielder View Post
I agree. I would also omit Yashin, Gonchar and Markov and include Varnakov and Skvortsov. Incredibly skilled speedsters. Also Khabibulin.

I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suggest Mishakov, as the first Russian physical player. If you watch the ice-level replay of the '72 gold medal game, you see a bunch of ballerinas out there. Mishakov was ahead of his time, in the Soviet system at least. Now I'm gonna duck.
Don't confuse a lack of physical play with being weak. One of the trademarks of Soviet hockey was the ability to take physical abuse; even as far back as '72.
Just because every Soviet didn't play like Mishakov doesn't mean they were ballerinas.
Apart from a handful of well documented instances, Soviets took a regular beating from NHLers yet were always tough enough to bounce right back up.
I firmly believe the essence of toughness is not the ability to dish out punishment, it's the ability to take it; something the Soviets could always do.

Hanji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2011, 11:01 AM
  #32
hammerwielder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanji View Post
Don't confuse a lack of physical play with being weak. One of the trademarks of Soviet hockey was the ability to take physical abuse; even as far back as '72.
Just because every Soviet didn't play like Mishakov doesn't mean they were ballerinas.
Apart from a handful of well documented instances, Soviets took a regular beating from NHLers yet were always tough enough to bounce right back up.
I firmly believe the essence of toughness is not the ability to dish out punishment, it's the ability to take it; something the Soviets could always do.
Oh, I quite agree. The Soviets had tremendous upper body strength and all their NHL opponents came to understand they could not be intimidated in the least. What I was referring to is the ability to use aggressive physical play as a component of the offensive arsenal. It can be a highly effective strategy as evidenced by the styles of modern European players such as Ovechkin and Forsberg. This was not a feature of early Russian doctrine which is why I suggest Mishakov was innovative, and it is only a suggestion. He was the Kenny Linseman of the '72 Soviet team. He got under opponents' skin and drew stupid retaliation penalties. Also kind of developed the role of skilled enforcer, if one can call it that.

hammerwielder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2011, 12:13 PM
  #33
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Please Soviet Hockey top 50= Skills Talent and Artistry.
No need to bring the goons and all that garbage into it. Go to the bush league nhl forum instead.

And what GoldMedal Game are youn talking about? The Worlds Final or the Olympics Final?

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2011, 12:19 AM
  #34
hammerwielder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pushkin View Post
Please Soviet Hockey top 50= Skills Talent and Artistry.
No need to bring the goons and all that garbage into it. Go to the bush league nhl forum instead.

And what GoldMedal Game are youn talking about? The Worlds Final or the Olympics Final?
Evgeni Mishakov was no goon. He was a career 40-goal scorer (translated into NHL seasons) in both the Russian Elite League and in international play (with 48 goals in 91 games -- better in terms of goals per game than any of Balderis, Kamensky, A. Golikov and Shalimov, among others). He played on the initial version of Tarasov's torpedo line. His intangible qualities included fighting spirit, game discipline, team dedication, determination to win and strong two-way play. If you asked his teammates in the second half of the 60's I am guessing they would have had more regard for him than you apparently have. If you think those qualities aren't relevant and that very occasional flashes of brilliance in artistic achievement by the likes of Kovalev and Yashin better qualify them, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. My point in nominating Mishakov was that he had a well-rounded set of skills that were surprisingly contemporary for his time.

You are saying the NHL is bush league? Surely not. I assume you are saying that the forum is bush league?

I was referring to the USSR-Czech game in the final round of the 1972 Olympics, which though the final game of the tournament and determinative of the gold medal winner was not a gold medal game per se. My mistake.

hammerwielder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2011, 08:45 AM
  #35
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Oh ok I see better what you mean now. By the way I didn't put Kovalev on my list.
Yashin would rank in the 40-50 spot because of his dedication for team Russia and simply because for 2-3 years in the late 90's early 00's he was a top 5 player in the world. I understand Mishakov qualities etc but don't try to say the guys weren't tough because they didn't replied and used goon tactics. I mean in those days they always fought till the end, unlike some recent Russian teams.

And finally yes nhl is bush league mainly because of how it is run and ruined by the stupid league management and all that. With the talent pool they have and the potential hockey has as a fantastic winter sport they are the one to blame for it being a little bush league not even relevant in the states and being beaten in ratings in Canada by the CFL...

Hockey should be a big sport in North America but with those idiots running it it's barely relevant. And most importantly has no credibility.

Back on topic I'd like to know who you would put in a top 50 like that from the last 20 years.

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2011, 01:27 PM
  #36
Hanji
Registered User
 
Hanji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammerwielder View Post
Oh, I quite agree. The Soviets had tremendous upper body strength and all their NHL opponents came to understand they could not be intimidated in the least. What I was referring to is the ability to use aggressive physical play as a component of the offensive arsenal. It can be a highly effective strategy as evidenced by the styles of modern European players such as Ovechkin and Forsberg. This was not a feature of early Russian doctrine which is why I suggest Mishakov was innovative, and it is only a suggestion. He was the Kenny Linseman of the '72 Soviet team. He got under opponents' skin and drew stupid retaliation penalties. Also kind of developed the role of skilled enforcer, if one can call it that.
Great, but why not say this originally? Why do you intentionally, as exampled by your 'I will now duck' comment, use a stereotypical and demeaning term to describe a country's style of play? That will only serve to drag a very interesting thread into the mud.


Last edited by Hanji: 02-13-2011 at 06:04 PM.
Hanji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2011, 02:49 PM
  #37
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Yes why don't you put a list together...

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2011, 03:27 AM
  #38
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,627
vCash: 500
Mikhailov was no ballerina either in 1972... well, he never was. Neither was Petrov and not even Kharlamov; despite being small, he was strong and feisty. Shadrin and Yakushev were also strong. Ragulin was arguably the strongest guy out there and young Vasiliev was on the team too; a very physical player, though he didn't seem to dish out such hurtful hits yet in 1972 (Summit series) as later on.

VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2011, 09:00 PM
  #39
hammerwielder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 133
vCash: 500
1. Fetisov
2. Mikhailov
3. Makarov
4. Kharlamov
5. Maltsev
6. Krutov
7. Fedorov
8. Petrov
9. Firsov
10. Starshinov
11. Kasatonov
12. Bure
13. Bykov
14. Vasilyev
15. Anisin
16. Lebedev
17. Kapustin
18. Alexandrov
19. Mogilny
20. Lutchenko
21. Larionov
22. Tretiak
23. Yakushev
24. Shalimov
25. Bilyaletdinov
26. Markov
27. Konstantinov
28. Balderis
29. Tsygankov
30. Vikulov
31. Shadrin
32. Ragulin
33. Zhluktov
34. Bobrov
35. Vyacheslav Kozlov
36. Liapkin
37. Datsyuk
38. Alexandr Semin
39. Shepelev
40. Skvortsov
41. Kamensky
42. Varnakov
43. Khabibulin
44. Gusev
45. Semenov
46. Svetlov
47. Kovalchuk
48. Ovechkin
49. Nabokov
50. Malkin

I got a solid top 40 core and after that it's a matter of debate. One could have included the Golikovs, Drozdetski, Boris Alexandrov, Tumenev, and more 60's players but that's what I came up with. I probably forgot a few guys too.

I never said Russian players are ballerinas, it was the game I referred to that was a no-hitter because the Soviets weren't challenged physically so they didn't have to do anything. They were always physically up the challenge as they were incredibly strong, but they didn't often initiate a pounding physical style, and that's why I singled out a guy like Mishakov, who, rest his soul, was not as talented as many of his teammates but could rattle the boards with the best of them despite his size. And also scored a lot of points for the team until his last couple of seasons. I wouldn't put him in the top 50 personally but was just meant to stimulate debate. By "duck" I meant that I anticipated being attacked on the basis of a stereotype, when I wasn't making any stereotypical point at all.


Last edited by hammerwielder: 02-25-2011 at 09:18 PM.
hammerwielder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2011, 08:09 AM
  #40
MaxV
Registered User
 
MaxV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York, NY
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,218
vCash: 500
What about Zubov, hammerwielder?

MaxV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2011, 09:26 AM
  #41
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
That top 50 was full of nonsense...

Making a top 50 like that requires intelligence and knwoing the history of Soviet hockey so please no more of that...

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2011, 06:29 AM
  #42
Hossa
Registered User
 
Hossa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Abroad
Posts: 9,223
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pushkin View Post
Oh ok I see better what you mean now. By the way I didn't put Kovalev on my list.
Yashin would rank in the 40-50 spot because of his dedication for team Russia and simply because for 2-3 years in the late 90's early 00's he was a top 5 player in the world. I understand Mishakov qualities etc but don't try to say the guys weren't tough because they didn't replied and used goon tactics. I mean in those days they always fought till the end, unlike some recent Russian teams.

And finally yes nhl is bush league mainly because of how it is run and ruined by the stupid league management and all that. With the talent pool they have and the potential hockey has as a fantastic winter sport they are the one to blame for it being a little bush league not even relevant in the states and being beaten in ratings in Canada by the CFL...

Hockey should be a big sport in North America but with those idiots running it it's barely relevant. And most importantly has no credibility.

Back on topic I'd like to know who you would put in a top 50 like that from the last 20 years.
Huh? Other than the Grey Cup, when are you imagining this to be the case? And what would playoff football games in November have to do with the NHL?

Hossa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2011, 07:18 AM
  #43
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Your comment makes 0 sense...

Tretyak Vasilyev Fetisov Kharlamov Larionov Makarov for the best starting line up!

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2011, 01:34 PM
  #44
MaxV
Registered User
 
MaxV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York, NY
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pushkin View Post
Your comment makes 0 sense...

Tretyak Vasilyev Fetisov Kharlamov Larionov Makarov for the best starting line up!
That's a pretty good lineup, although I'm not sure Larionov is the best Russian Center of all time.

MaxV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2011, 07:25 AM
  #45
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
In his prime with two good linemates he was well a genius! Who would you put in front?

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2011, 08:02 AM
  #46
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,705
vCash: 500
Career or prime years? Larionov has a long and distinguished career but his 'prime' is a bit overrated. I'd take some other centers over Larionov if judging peak performance.

All in all I'd take Firsov who played center on occasion.

Tretiak
Fetisov-Vasiliev
Kharlamov-Firsov-Makarov

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2011, 08:48 AM
  #47
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Was Firsov really a center for the majority of games?But let's say the other five are pretty much safe picks!

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2011, 08:49 AM
  #48
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
I consider Larionov's prime the KLM period that's it. Pretty tough to beat that!

Pushkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2011, 11:30 AM
  #49
MaxV
Registered User
 
MaxV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York, NY
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pushkin View Post
I consider Larionov's prime the KLM period that's it. Pretty tough to beat that!
Yeah, but you can make a case that he was the worst player on the Green Unit.

I mean, Makarov and Fetisov ruled, Krutov was one of the best power forwards of his time and Kasatonov was the reason that Fetisov could afford to be so aggressive going forward.

There is also Petrov, who was a very underrated player.

Fedorov should also be considered.

MaxV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2011, 12:39 PM
  #50
Pushkin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
You can also make the case that take out anyone of the 5 and it's not the dominating GreenUnit anymore. I agree he wasn't that flashy and everything but he was the perfect center for that unit. Hockey sense A+

Just imagine if hooking and barbaric hockey and everything wasn't allowed Larionov would be seen even highly.

Petrov far better choice than Firsov wich I consider a winger.

The only reason I didn't put Fedorov is because he was never that great for Russia and didn't play that often...

Pushkin 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 10:28 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.