HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

HOH Top 70 Players of All Time (2009)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-03-2012, 01:33 AM
  #776
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
I don't think Fetisov vs. Bourque is debatable.
Apparently it's debatable, as long as you're willing to exclude all the evidence that makes the debate totally one-sided.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 04:12 AM
  #777
Theokritos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Apparently it's debatable, as long as you're willing to exclude all the evidence that makes the debate totally one-sided.
No need to be sarcastic. Bourque has the longevity and it's perfectly reasonable to rank him higher, but my point is that he wasn't in a different league than Fetisov when both were in their prime, both looked like equals and Fetisov might even has the higher peak. In that sense it's debatable, unlike Fetisov vs Gretzky/Lemieux, who were both in another league.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Feel free to prove that Canadians in the 30s were better than Russians in the 80s. Speed, puck-handling, shot, conditioning, passing, positioning...
That's not the point of the ranking!


Last edited by Theokritos: 11-03-2012 at 04:22 AM.
Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 09:34 AM
  #778
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
No need to be sarcastic. Bourque has the longevity and it's perfectly reasonable to rank him higher, but my point is that he wasn't in a different league than Fetisov when both were in their prime, both looked like equals and Fetisov might even has the higher peak. In that sense it's debatable, unlike Fetisov vs Gretzky/Lemieux, who were both in another league.



That's not the point of the ranking!
Hard to judge who was better in their prime.

Watching Fetisov meant seeing him play with the Green Unit.

Watching Bourque could mean he was on the ice with Allen Pedersen, Bob Sweeney, Keith Crowder and Randy Burridge.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 09:38 AM
  #779
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
No need to be sarcastic. Bourque has the longevity and it's perfectly reasonable to rank him higher, but my point is that he wasn't in a different league than Fetisov when both were in their prime, both looked like equals and Fetisov might even has the higher peak. In that sense it's debatable, unlike Fetisov vs Gretzky/Lemieux, who were both in another league.
Fetisov's peak vs Bourque's peak might be debatable, but Fetisov vs Bourque isn't much of a contest. In an all-time context, it would be silly to ignore that the players had similar peaks but one of them was clearly the better player in all other phases of his career.

Again, it seems to me that you're saying "it's debatable as long as you consciously exclude the factors that make it one-sided", which is kind of symbolic of where this whole conversation has been for the past couple of pages.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 06:11 PM
  #780
Theokritos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Fetisov's peak vs Bourque's peak might be debatable, but Fetisov vs Bourque isn't much of a contest. In an all-time context, it would be silly to ignore that the players had similar peaks but one of them was clearly the better player in all other phases of his career.
Again, it seems to me that you're saying "it's debatable as long as you consciously exclude the factors that make it one-sided", which is kind of symbolic of where this whole conversation has been for the past couple of pages.
Or maybe some people value peak higher than longevity. If you think that is silly, then I have to live with that. But I for my part wouldn't call "career guys" silly (or maybe even insincere? "consciously excluding the factors that make it one-sided") just because they see things in a different way...

On the substance of the debate, I don't have a big issue with what you say. As long as you also claim that (for example) Potvin vs Bourque is not much of a contest either, I'm fine with it. I don't agree 100%, but I see your point and I think it's very reasonable. We just don't agree on what to call a contest and what not. Does that make me silly? Feel free to think so.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2012, 07:39 PM
  #781
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
Or maybe some people value peak higher than longevity. If you think that is silly, then I have to live with that. But I for my part wouldn't call "career guys" silly (or maybe even insincere? "consciously excluding the factors that make it one-sided") just because they see things in a different way...

On the substance of the debate, I don't have a big issue with what you say. As long as you also claim that (for example) Potvin vs Bourque is not much of a contest either, I'm fine with it. I don't agree 100%, but I see your point and I think it's very reasonable. We just don't agree on what to call a contest and what not. Does that make me silly? Feel free to think so.
I don't think you're being silly because I think you understand that what you're calling "debatable" is only debatable in the sense that someone could take an extreme, blinders-on position that peak performance is literally the only thing that matters. And you don't seem to buy that. Neither does anyone else here as far as I can tell.

If you can find such a person, I'd be interested to know their opinion on Jim Carey.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2012, 09:22 AM
  #782
Theokritos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I don't think you're being silly because I think you understand that what you're calling "debatable" is only debatable in the sense that someone could take an extreme, blinders-on position that peak performance is literally the only thing that matters. And you don't seem to buy that. Neither does anyone else here as far as I can tell.

If you can find such a person, I'd be interested to know their opinion on Jim Carey
If we substract flukes (like Carey who has what, two good regular seasons coupled with two bad playoffs?) then the notion that peak trumps longevity seems just as reasonable to me as the contrary idea. Fetisov was world class from 1978-1989 and Bourque from 1980-2002, both are established all-time greats, not flukes.
Who was better? If Fetisov was better at his best than Bourque was at his best, then I'm fine with ranking Fetisov higher. So yes, I am silly in your eyes. Ranking Bourque higher due to his 10 additional years of excellence is also fine with me. I don't think one scale is better than the other, both are legit.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 09:25 AM
  #783
57special
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: MN
Posts: 1,443
vCash: 249
I'd take Perrault over at least ten of the players on the list. As much as I loved the Pocket Rocket ( grew up a Hab fan) Perrault had WAY more talent. One of those things that you don't know unless you saw them play in person.

57special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 10:56 AM
  #784
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,789
vCash: 593
Longivity is nothing as long as a player puts beyond reasonable doubt that his prime or peak is not a fluke like Jim Careys career. Only when prime and peak is a tie longivity should matter. A player like Bourque may or may not have had the better career than Fetisov, but who was the better player is another matter.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:05 AM
  #785
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 57special View Post
I'd take Perrault over at least ten of the players on the list. As much as I loved the Pocket Rocket ( grew up a Hab fan) Perrault had WAY more talent. One of those things that you don't know unless you saw them play in person.
Having more talent doesn't necessarily make one a better hockey player.

This is a good example of just that.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 04:56 PM
  #786
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Longivity is nothing as long as a player puts beyond reasonable doubt that his prime or peak is not a fluke like Jim Careys career. Only when prime and peak is a tie longivity should matter. A player like Bourque may or may not have had the better career than Fetisov, but who was the better player is another matter.
It's really really clear the Bourque had an extremely better career post age 31 than Fetisov.

Heck there are probably over 100 players on D that did. Unless Fetisov is at an Bobby Orr level of dominance, which he wasn't, the back end of both guys careers has to matter as a separation between the 2 players.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 05:18 PM
  #787
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
I kind of agree with Gilbert P over Pocket Rocket but one thing Henri had was heart and the hatred to loose.Gilbert was bigger and more talented but Henri would give it most games.Reminds me of LA vs Toronto in 93 yes Gretzey was a lot better than Gilmour but the heart and spirit that Gilmour showed almost won the series

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 06:01 PM
  #788
FissionFire
Registered User
 
FissionFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 10,672
vCash: 500
So the move to Portland is done and I'm finally getting settled in. Assuming there are no other planned projects upcoming this summer for these boards I'm tentatively planning on doing another installment of the Top 100 list this summer. I'll post more specific details once they are worked out.

FissionFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 10:17 PM
  #789
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
I kind of agree with Gilbert P over Pocket Rocket but one thing Henri had was heart and the hatred to loose.Gilbert was bigger and more talented but Henri would give it most games.Reminds me of LA vs Toronto in 93 yes Gretzey was a lot better than Gilmour but the heart and spirit that Gilmour showed almost won the series
Henri had heart and was a very good 2 way player but there is the luck in his playing in Montreal as well.

As much as I'm a career guy having Henri only 5 spots behind Marcel and ahead of Forsberg doesn't seem right.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:11 PM
  #790
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,633
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
So the move to Portland is done and I'm finally getting settled in. Assuming there are no other planned projects upcoming this summer for these boards I'm tentatively planning on doing another installment of the Top 100 list this summer. I'll post more specific details once they are worked out.
I think we've moved onto positional lists at this point.

We'll be doing centers, then wingers, then I imagine we'll go back to an "all-position" list.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2013, 11:12 PM
  #791
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
On the other hand, would you keep Frank Brimsek in such a list? 'Cause you basically suggested kicking Frank Mahovlich out, and keeping Frank Brimsek in.
Brimsek or Mahovlich, if I only get one Frank?

Hmm. Mahovlich had a strong peak and a long career.

Brimsek was the best or second best goaltender in he world from the age of 23 to the age of 32 (from 1938-39 to 1947-48). He played two final seasons after that, finishing tenth in Hart voting in 1948-49.

I'll go with Brimsek over Mahovlich.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2013, 08:45 PM
  #792
Kloparren
Hth
 
Kloparren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,449
vCash: 500
I think the next list needs to give more consideration to dead puck era players and really appreciate the ones who were able to constantly produce b/t 1996-2004 (and I'd argue even longer than 2004 because though the style of hockey did change a bit since 2004, it's not like the actual scoring went up dramatically).

Kloparren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 10:57 PM
  #793
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kloparren View Post
I think the next list needs to give more consideration to dead puck era players and really appreciate the ones who were able to constantly produce b/t 1996-2004 (and I'd argue even longer than 2004 because though the style of hockey did change a bit since 2004, it's not like the actual scoring went up dramatically).
Not only that but the full integration of the NHL from around the early 90's makes top 10 and top 20 scoring finishes per season quite a different animal from a Canadian only league.

Certainly some consideration has to be given for that.

There is certainly room for the absolute best of the best from earlier time periods but some of the lesser lights pale in comparison to their later counterparts if one uses the apples to apples argument and comparison, ie takes into account the 6 teams to 30 difference and the composition of the league.

It will be very interesting to see if a guy like Henri Richard, as an example, can come out ahead of guys like Forsberg and Fedorov based on top ten finishes and playing for a dynasty in a 6 team league.

Even as a career guy, after taking into account their team and league situation there is very little support for putting a guy like Henri over Forsberg or Fedorov IMO, unless one completely ignores the differences in the league.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2013, 06:22 PM
  #794
Beau Knows
Captain Canada
 
Beau Knows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,230
vCash: 500
This list is really interesting. When will the next list be done? What major changes do you guys see in the rankings?

Beau Knows is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2013, 06:52 PM
  #795
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,101
vCash: 500
It is interesting to note that these were the players up for voting for places 71-80

Johnny Bower
Frank Brimsek
Bill Cowley
Anatoli Firsov
Bill Gadsby
Brett Hull
Dave Keon
Elmer Lach
Al MacInnis
Frank Nighbor
Bernie Parent
Borje Salming
Peter Stastny
Scott Stevens
Nels Stewart

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 09:12 PM
  #796
jigglysquishy
Registered User
 
jigglysquishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,384
vCash: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beau Knows View Post
This list is really interesting. When will the next list be done? What major changes do you guys see in the rankings?
I believe we're doing forwards this summer.

This list was done after the 08-09 season. Since then Brodeur, Lidstrom, Selanne, Ovi, Sid and Malkin have all done something noteworthy. I have Ovi in my top 70, though I doubt he'll make it. Selanne does have a chance, however. I doubt Brodeur jumps any higher. I don't think the '12 Cup run, further records or the extra Jennings will do much for the guys here.

Lidstrom's extra Norris will, however. Finishing twice more in the top ten in defensive scoring (including a second) as well as 1st and 2nd AS selection. He has a decent shot of making the top 15.

Thornton added an 8th in scoring. He also added a 2nd and 5th in assists. He'll likely finish top 10 in assists again this year.

Malkin added another Art Ross plus his first Hart. I have a hard time seeing the guys keeping a multiple Art Ross winner out of the top 70, but he's still young enough that I accept it. Also had another 1st AS selection.

Ovi won another Pearson. He added point finishes of 3 and 7. He added goal finishes of 3 and 5. He also added a 1st and 2nd AS selection.

Sid is Sid and it looks like he's gonna sweep the AS/Hart/Art Ross/Pearson race. Plus add a 1st AS.



I see Ovi and Sid joining the top 70. Selanne, Thornton and Malkin stand a chance too. Lidstrom likely jumps a few spots.


I see people re-evaluating Jagr. The further away we get from the late 90s the more dominant his play looks.

I'm most curious to see how we re-evaluate our top 10. I think the order of the Big Four is locked, but Beliveau might sneak into 5th.

jigglysquishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 11:09 AM
  #797
Kloparren
Hth
 
Kloparren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,449
vCash: 500
I'd be more interested in doing #71-140 or something, maybe exclude players who are still playing in order to keep it simple.

Too many top 100 or top 50 lists, let's see a 101-200 list.

Kloparren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 11:23 AM
  #798
RSeen
Registered User
 
RSeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,665
vCash: 500
Brodeur is the 6th best goalie? Give me a break, he is #1. Best of all time.

RSeen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 11:30 AM
  #799
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Not only that but the full integration of the NHL from around the early 90's makes top 10 and top 20 scoring finishes per season quite a different animal from a Canadian only league.

Means squat. Full integration would have zero affect on what a player did during his era if he played in another era. Prior to the 90s, other countries did not have player that were of NHL caliber. The Red Army you say? I think what the Canadian Teams did during the Canada Cup proved not only were they better but they could dominate. Sure didn't see any Russian keep up with Cup in 76 and he was on one leg.

Outside of the USSR, there were not many players deserving to be in the NHL from other countries. So what are we talking? A handful of Soviets that should have been in the NHL?!?!?! That does not make it a different animal. Makes it a few guys difference.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 03:45 PM
  #800
Kloparren
Hth
 
Kloparren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sendthepuck View Post
Since this was done. Crosby has added a 2nd place scoring finish. A rocket richard trophy. a 2nd team All star selection. Looks poised to add an Art Ross, Hart, Lindsay and 1st team AS.
Well I dunno what type of career Crosby will end up having but as far as forwards go, Gretzky/Lemieux are the top two for me followed by Howe then a bit of drop-off. I think Beliveau should be ahead of Hull and Richard is with the two of them. I certainly don't think that the difference between Hull and Mikita was 5th and 15th, many would prefer Mikita.

So I'd slot Crosby based on domination and trajectory around 5th-10th. Unfortunately, his career due to injuries or dead puck era or whatever may not ever make his whole body of work as good as those guys but certainly at his peak considering how much better than everyone else he is today, he's top 5-10.

It's so damn tough for a player to distinguish themselves above others today but if you're able to do it year after year like Crosby has when healthy and do it by the distance he's doing it then that's something else.

Kloparren 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 02:27 PM.

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.