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.

Round 2, Vote 13 (HOH Top Centers)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-04-2014, 05:24 PM
  #51
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Finally, you admit that there is a magic line in your mind at 1980, where everything that happened before was the suck, and everything that happened afterwards was the best.

Anyway, I won't comment on it further in public until the voting results are released.
Do you even read what you are posting here or did someone hijack your access?

You have probably commented the most on my comments about post 1970 NHL and the expansion on non Canadian talent, there are no surprises here.

Seriously have commented quite a bit on the dilution of the NHL in the first wave of expansion and my views on the growth of elite talent outside of Canada post 1970ish and how it wove with the NHL (or didn't).

As for Savard and Sittler someone else commented that Savard was slightly better on alot of things to make for a better case.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 05:34 PM
  #52
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
That makes him third amongst the available players.

This list doesn't cover or cover perfectly 6 of the currently eligible players (Petrov, Larionov, Mackey, Fredrickson, Keats, Nedomansky). AMongst guys below Sundin, we find quite a few guys that are clearly better than him (think Ted Kennedy, Sergei Fedorov, Dave Keon), a few guys that are better than him (Modano, namely) and another group who is somewhat in between those two groupings (think Pavel Datsyuk, Hooley Smith).

Amongst guys higher than Sundin, you also have players who are not as good (think Clint Smith and Henrik Sedin)... but that's really the only ones I can think of. It's a rough indicator of offensive prowess. I guess one can go either way with Sittler.

Otherwise, Marty Barry was CLEARLY the best playoff player available last round, and was probably the best playoff player available since Ted Kennedy went in. If he wasn't, well then that probably means all the best playoff-performing goalies are straight out of the 30ies, and we obviously know it's not the case.
Barry is in so I won't belabor the point but in the top 60 dman project there were great lengths taken to show how great and important Shore was in the playoffs to that Boston team.

If Barry truly was the clearly best playoff performer last round, then those Bruins teams underachieved given all of the top 60 talent accolades given to those teams and players by this group generally (Shore, Clapper, Barry, Thompson and MaKay is 30).

true some of Barry's best playoff performances were with the Wings but those teams alot had extremely good depth scoring in the playoffs as well.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 05:47 PM
  #53
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,595
vCash: 500
Initial impressions.

Okay.... 2-day-late intial impressions!

Newcomers :

I really need to know a bit more on Nedomansky. Always figured him to be mostly a RW... RW's being usually worse players than Centers, unless you play for the Habs. Good job so far. I can say quite conclusively that Nedomansky isn't dismissed right away, and if he misses my top-8 it will be close. Can pretty much end up anywhere between 2 and 9.

I initially thought Duke Keats came eligible both at the right time and at the appropriate time. That is, at this point in the project, but after Fredrikson and Mackey. This said... Keats was solid in his lone complete NHA season, and the left for WWI. That makes.... many seasons, and he had proven l he could more than hold is own in one of the two best leagues of the era. And a noted playmaker as well. At this point, he screams "not top-4".

Lafontaine -- boy, that guy was good. And quite a flash, really. I don't think we can vote him in at this point, but no what ifs. I can't see how Lafontaine could be ranked higher than, say, Sundin. Did not conclusively show that '93 was anything else than a crazy spike in a crazy season. Sad, but true.

Zetterberg -- a bit torn here. Gut feeling screams "better than Sundin", and his body of work can already be considered complete enough. A part of me doesn't want Datsyuk that high with Zetterberg too low. Another part of me feels some of us completely forgotten that those two players played with Nik Lidstrom. I'd feel more at ease ranking them in a few years, to be honest, but I don't think we can keep him out of the Top-60.

Lemaire : There are variants, but he's really similar to Larionov. Lemaire was a better goalscorer. And he also had success with players not named Lafleur... and possibly even had his best seasons WITHOUT Lafleur. And a few VERY good playoffs performances as well. In a very laid-back role. And we share the same birthday.

If I'd have to name a Top-4 at this point? Four of Larionov, Mackey, Nedomansky, Petrov and Savard.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 05:50 PM
  #54
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Barry is in so I won't belabor the point but in the top 60 dman project there were great lengths taken to show how great and important Shore was in the playoffs to that Boston team.

If Barry truly was the clearly best playoff performer last round, then those Bruins teams underachieved given all of the top 60 talent accolades given to those teams and players by this group generally (Shore, Clapper, Barry, Thompson and MaKay is 30).

true some of Barry's best playoff performances were with the Wings but those teams alot had extremely good depth scoring in the playoffs as well.
... Mackey?!?!?!

Here is a list of forwards 33 and + that played in the NHL in 29-30, a year that saw rule changes which, at first glance, appears to favour players which had great speed. Something older players tend to lose or to have lost :

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...y=games_played

- Bill Cook is a Top-40 player of all-time and, conservative guesstimate, a Top-8 RightWinger of all time. We're currently looking at players in the 150-225 range. He was 33.

- Ty Arbour was at first glance a seviceable winger in the PCHL who had a somewhat lacklustre career in the NHL. Not sure he would have gotten a job in a 6-team league. But it was a 10-teams league. He was 33.

- Frank Fredrikson did pretty well on a VERY, VERY terrible team in a short stint. He was 34. Not sure what to make of this.

- Don't know if Reg Noble was an eligible player for this process, but he did play quite a bit of D in his career and I don't know if he was a D or a F for that particular season. A quick perusal of games played tells me he was a D. He was 33, on a bad team, and I guess he could have been a decent candidate for a Bottom-10 spot on the round 1 lists. If he was a F, he was no better than Mackey offensively. If he was a D, well, it's irrelevant, as speed requirements weren't quite the same.

- I don't know who is Herb Drury, but I don't think it'S relevant, and he did worse than Mackey. He was 34.

- Mickey Mackey -- fighting for some icetime on a team that might have been overly favoured by the changes, good defensively by all accounts, clearly on the downside of his career, that was decently long... as the current post shows. Age 35.

- Frank Nighbor, a Top-8 center of all-time according to this very project, toiling between average teams in a year that might have been too much for him, even though he probably had its uses. Age 37.

Frankly, how to expect a +- Top-175 player of all-time to excel in not favourable conditions, when the only guy who did excel was a Top-40 player (and two years younger...)?... I don't know, really.


Last edited by MXD: 02-04-2014 at 06:38 PM.
MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 05:52 PM
  #55
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Okay.... 2-day-late intial impressions!

Newcomers :

I really need to know a bit more on Nedomansky. Always figured him to be mostly a RW... RW's being usually worse players than Centers, unless you play for the Habs. Good job so far. I can say quite conclusively that Nedomansky isn't dismissed right away, and if he misses my top-8 it will be close. Can pretty much end up anywhere between 2 and 9.

I initially thought Duke Keats came eligible both at the right time and at the appropriate time. That is, at this point in the project, but after Fredrikson and Mackey. This said... Keats was solid in his lone complete NHA season, and the left for WWI. That makes.... many seasons, and he had proven l he could more than hold is own in one of the two best leagues of the era. And a noted playmaker as well. At this point, he screams "not top-4".

Lafontaine -- boy, that guy was good. And quite a flash, really. I don't think we can vote him in at this point, but no what ifs. I can't see how Lafontaine could be ranked higher than, say, Sundin. Did not conclusively show that '93 was anything else than a crazy spike in a crazy season. Sad, but true.

Zetterberg -- a bit torn here. Gut feeling screams "better than Sundin", and his body of work can already be considered complete enough. A part of me doesn't want Datsyuk that high with Zetterberg too low. Another part of me feels some of us completely forgotten that those two players played with Nik Lidstrom. I'd feel more at ease ranking them in a few years, to be honest, but I don't think we can keep him out of the Top-60.

Lemaire : There are variants, but he's really similar to Larionov. Lemaire was a better goalscorer. And he also had success with players not named Lafleur... and possibly even had his best seasons WITHOUT Lafleur. And a few VERY good playoffs performances as well. In a very laid-back role. And we share the same birthday.

If I'd have to name a Top-4 at this point? Four of Larionov, Mackey, Nedomansky, Petrov and Savard.
No hesitation in saying he's the best offensive player in this group.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 06:51 PM
  #56
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
No hesitation in saying he's the best offensive player in this group.
Better than Savard? Please explain. Remove Gretzky and Lemieux, and I see 1 Art Ross each for them (1988 for Savard, 1993 for Lafontaine), but Savard just has more seasons at a high level. Was Lafontaine really any better on a per game basis?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 07:13 PM
  #57
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Do you even read what you are posting here or did someone hijack your access?

You have probably commented the most on my comments about post 1970 NHL and the expansion on non Canadian talent, there are no surprises here.

Seriously have commented quite a bit on the dilution of the NHL in the first wave of expansion and my views on the growth of elite talent outside of Canada post 1970ish and how it wove with the NHL (or didn't).

As for Savard and Sittler someone else commented that Savard was slightly better on alot of things to make for a better case.
I agree that the average quality of hockey in the 80s was better than the 70s. On the other hand, Savard played in the weakest division in the 80s, so it somewhat evens out.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 07:56 PM
  #58
bigbuffalo313
Registered User
 
bigbuffalo313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 2,534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I'm not sure whether I'm going to have Zetterberg in my top-8 this round, but the more I look at his resume the more I admire his career against his contemporaries.

The following is a look at post-2005-lockout centers. This somewhat arbitrarily cuts off Zetterberg's first two seasons in the NHL, which were in '03 and '04.

PlayerGPGAPPPGRecognitionRank on top-60 list
Joe Thornton6731795747531.121xHart, 1xRoss, 1x1AS, 2x2AS#34
Sidney Crosby5262654757401.411xHart, 1xRoss, 1x1AS, 1x2AS#22
Henrik Sedin6731475396861.021xHart, 1xRoss, 2x1AS?
Pavel Datsyuk6052174286451.073xSelke, 1x2AS#43
Eric Staal6602713696400.971x2AS?
Henrik Zetterberg6172423916331.031xSmythe, 1x2AS?
Evgeni Malkin5032333826151.221xHart, 2x Ross, 1xSmythe, 3x1AS#40
Ryan Getzlaf6101794065850.96 ?
Jason Spezza5512133715841.06 ?


Basically, if you look at guys who aren't already ranked, Zetterberg is either a better scorer or a MUCH better defender than all of them, and he has a better playoff resume by a significant margin.
Crosby should have two first team all star selections

Did people forget 2013 wasn't a full lockout. I already corrected TDMM on St. Louis winning the Art Ross and nobody pointed out that Crosby has two instead of one first team all stars selections

Back to the topic of Z, I'm not sure where he should go. I think he should go next round, but his playoff performing might squeeze him into my top 4 this round.

bigbuffalo313 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 08:05 PM
  #59
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbuffalo313 View Post
Crosby should have two first team all star selections

Did people forget 2013 wasn't a full lockout. I already corrected TDMM on St. Louis winning the Art Ross and nobody pointed out that Crosby has two instead of one first team all stars selections

Back to the topic of Z, I'm not sure where he should go. I think he should go next round, but his playoff performing might squeeze him into my top 4 this round.
Hockey-reference.com still doesn't include some things from 2013. Since only a few of us are doing any research for the project, there is a lot of pressure on us to spit out as much as possible, so errors will occur. Even errors that would be obvious to us in normal conversation ( like no duh St Louis has 2 Art Rosses, if we were actually focusing on him rather than Malkin, I would obviously remember that).

Sucks, but at this point, it is unavoidable

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 08:13 PM
  #60
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
... Mackey?!?!?!

Here is a list of forwards 33 and + that played in the NHL in 29-30, a year that saw rule changes which, at first glance, appears to favour players which had great speed. Something older players tend to lose or to have lost :

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...y=games_played

- Bill Cook is a Top-40 player of all-time and, conservative guesstimate, a Top-8 RightWinger of all time. We're currently looking at players in the 150-225 range. He was 33.

- Ty Arbour was at first glance a seviceable winger in the PCHL who had a somewhat lacklustre career in the NHL. Not sure he would have gotten a job in a 6-team league. But it was a 10-teams league. He was 33.

- Frank Fredrikson did pretty well on a VERY, VERY terrible team in a short stint. He was 34. Not sure what to make of this.

- Don't know if Reg Noble was an eligible player for this process, but he did play quite a bit of D in his career and I don't know if he was a D or a F for that particular season. A quick perusal of games played tells me he was a D. He was 33, on a bad team, and I guess he could have been a decent candidate for a Bottom-10 spot on the round 1 lists. If he was a F, he was no better than Mackey offensively. If he was a D, well, it's irrelevant, as speed requirements weren't quite the same.

- I don't know who is Herb Drury, but I don't think it'S relevant, and he did worse than Mackey. He was 34.

- Mickey Mackey -- fighting for some icetime on a team that might have been overly favoured by the changes, good defensively by all accounts, clearly on the downside of his career, that was decently long... as the current post shows. Age 35.

- Frank Nighbor, a Top-8 center of all-time according to this very project, toiling between average teams in a year that might have been too much for him, even though he probably had its uses. Age 37.

Frankly, how to expect a +- Top-175 player of all-time to excel in not favourable conditions, when the only guy who did excel was a Top-40 player (and two years younger...)?... I don't know, really.
Okay my putting MaCKay in 1930 on that list was a little lazy on my part, point taken but I could have added Weiland who greatly outscored Barry in the playoffs during their overlapping time as well.

The point of the matter is that we could stretch out the top 60 lists to top 200-300's and the amount of guys on that Bruins era 30-36 would be a lot higher than their playoff record would deserve on the face of it, yet for modern guys in a 30 team league, never mind post 06 salary cap and the point that Zetts only won 1 Sc has come up in this thread already which boggles my mind.

I think Barry was undervalued in the past ATD for some really good reasons actually.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 08:26 PM
  #61
bigbuffalo313
Registered User
 
bigbuffalo313's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 2,534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hockey-reference.com still doesn't include some things from 2013. Since only a few of us are doing any research for the project, there is a lot of pressure on us to spit out as much as possible, so errors will occur. Even errors that would be obvious to us in normal conversation ( like no duh St Louis has 2 Art Rosses, if we were actually focusing on him rather than Malkin, I would obviously remember that).

Sucks, but at this point, it is unavoidable
Sorry I just get really irritated by mistakes, especially ones that mess up something pretty recently

bigbuffalo313 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 08:40 PM
  #62
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Here are the VsX 7 year scores (1926-2013), this post, with the exception of using Hockey Outsider's calculation to update scores to include last year.

Top-7 weighted VsX for Centers (1926-2013):

Rank Player Rank
1 Wayne Gretzky 155.1
2 Phil Esposito 123.4
3 Mario Lemieux 120.4
4 Jean Beliveau 108.9
5 Stan Mikita 108.1
6 Bill Cowley* 103.5
7 Marcel Dionne 103.2
8 Howie Morenz 102.8
9 Joe Sakic 97.9
10 Frank Boucher 95.4
11 Elmer Lach* 95.4
12 Max Bentley* 94.9
13 Steve Yzerman 93.5
14 Bryan Trottier 93.5
15 Joe Thornton 93.3
16 Syl Apps Sr 93
17 Peter Forsberg 90.9
18 Nels Stewart 90.5
19 Sidney Crosby 90.5
20 Adam Oates 90.2
21 Marty Barry 89.9
22 Mark Messier 89.5
23 Norm Ullman 88.7
24 Jean Ratelle 88.5
25 Peter Stastny 88.3
26 Sid Abel 87.8
27 Bobby Clarke 87.6
28 Ron Francis 87.6
29 Milt Schmidt 87.5
30 Henri Richard 86.2
31 Dale Hawerchuk 85.9
32 Denis Savard 85.4
33 Eric Lindros 85.4
34 Alex Delvecchio 84.9
35 Gilbert Perreault 84.6
36 Darryl Sittler 84.1
37 Henrik Sedin 82.8
38 Clint Smith* 82.6
39 Mats Sundin 82.3
40 Doug Gilmour 82.3
41 Pierre Turgeon 82.3
42 Pavel Datsyuk 82.0
43 Mike Modano 81.7
44 Jeremy Roenick 81.5
45 Ted Kennedy 81.5
46 Sergei Fedorov 81
47 Evgeni Malkin 80.7
48 Bernie Nicholls 80.3
49 Cooney Weiland 79.4
50 Pat LaFontaine 78.8
51 Hooley Smith 78.8
52 Doug Weight 78.6
53 Brad Richards 78.4
54 Eric Staal 78.4
55 Phil Watson 78.1
56 Alexei Yashin 77.6
57 Bernie Federko 77.3
58 Vincent Lecavalier 77.2
59 Henrik Zetterberg 76.7
60 Joe Primeau 76
61 Don McKenney 75.8
62 Jacques Lemaire 75.5
63 Jason Spezza 75.2
64 Phil Goyette 74.9
65 Vincent Damphousse 74.2
66 Bill Thoms 74.2
67 Marc Savard 73.9
68 Neil Colville 73.2
69 Dave Keon 73.2
70 Rod Brind'Amour 72.8
* wartime star

Comments:
  • Quote:
  • None of MacKay, Fredrickson, Keats, or Petrov played in the NHL during the specified time frame.

  • One could do a sorta VsX job on MacKay and Fredrickson in their time in the WHL (which should really benefit them one would think it being such a small league, if I have time I will go back to the link that has the PCHA scoring over time


    Quote:
  • Larionov and Nedomansky were not in their primes in the NHL, so I don't think posting their numbers would be useful.
  • No but we can at least compare them at the same age scoring wise in the NHL and big Ned wouldn't fare so well I'm afraid, other than those 2 years were he was older and better than Clarke.

    Even if one doesn't think that Igor was great defensively, and I think he was better than average, Big Ned brings very little to the table except his scoring.

    Quote:
  • Denis Savard should probably be added this round, based on his offense at the NHL level.
  • Remember, this is based off a player's best 7 years. So a player like Mats Sundin, who had many more than 7 good years will likely be underrated somewhat.
  • The reason for Pat Lafontaine's low score? He didn't even play 7 full seasons in his prime due to injuries. He's clearly better offensively than this number shows, but he's seriously lacking in the games played at a high level.
  • Joe Primeau has already been discussed - 3 excellent seasons (>90% score), 2 solid seasons, and 2 write-off seasons (<50% score) form his 7 year career.
  • Zetterberg has something of a Fedorov/Keon thing, where he regularly upped his offensive value in the playoffs. Only 1 Cup as a key player though.
  • Lemaire also upped his offensive value in the playoffs, but his regular season numbers are just dreadful, considering he spent his best years centering Steve Shutt and Guy Lafleur.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 09:01 PM
  #63
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Better than Savard? Please explain. Remove Gretzky and Lemieux, and I see 1 Art Ross each for them (1988 for Savard, 1993 for Lafontaine), but Savard just has more seasons at a high level. Was Lafontaine really any better on a per game basis?
I think he was.

Just from observation. And Lafontaine has a huge edge as a goal scorer.

Lafontaine: 468 goals in 865 games

Savard : 473 goals in 1196 games

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 09:07 PM
  #64
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Can somebody tell me why Denis Savard is better than Darryl Sittler? Offensively, they're very close, and I'd put Sittler ahead in terms of grit and leadership. Savard has a better reputation as a playoff performer, but Sittler was strong in his own right in the playoffs during his prime.
Where was this when Gilbert Perreault was up for voting? I still don't see what makes him any different than Hawerchuk and Savard...I guess it doesn't matter now though. Best to stay on topic...I guess maybe I can ask what made a flashy player like Perreault rank ahead of other guys with more grit/leadership and does Savard have those qualities as well?

Hawkey Town 18 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 09:11 PM
  #65
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Okay my putting MaCKay in 1930 on that list was a little lazy on my part, point taken but I could have added Weiland who greatly outscored Barry in the playoffs during their overlapping time as well.

The point of the matter is that we could stretch out the top 60 lists to top 200-300's and the amount of guys on that Bruins era 30-36 would be a lot higher than their playoff record would deserve on the face of it, yet for modern guys in a 30 team league, never mind post 06 salary cap and the point that Zetts only won 1 Sc has come up in this thread already which boggles my mind.

I think Barry was undervalued in the past ATD for some really good reasons actually.
Find a Barry contemporary forward who was better than him in the playoffs, and I'll call you a liar.

Is that really hard to realize that the production was WAYY different in the 30ies?

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 09:47 PM
  #66
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Where was this when Gilbert Perreault was up for voting? I still don't see what makes him any different than Hawerchuk and Savard...I guess it doesn't matter now though. Best to stay on topic...I guess maybe I can ask what made a flashy player like Perreault rank ahead of other guys with more grit/leadership and does Savard have those qualities as well?
I fully agree.

While we're on the topic...

What is the more impressive offensive resume:

- 1.17 PPG over 856 games centered around 1990
- 1.14 PPG over 1008 games centered around 1994

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-04-2014, 11:57 PM
  #67
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Find a Barry contemporary forward who was better than him in the playoffs, and I'll call you a liar.

Is that really hard to realize that the production was WAYY different in the 30ies?
Well from 30-35, when he was with the bruins he was 16th (basically all forwards) in playoff scoring behind 2 of his team mates and by all accounts Shore was a better playoff performer than he was as well

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

If we expand it for his whole career 30-39 (including his Detroit years) he is 1st, along with Conacher but those Detroit teams in those 3 years puts him over the top.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

It was the Boston years that I was primarily focusing on and it's funny in larger samples when guys like Forsberg/Feds/Crosby and Dats came up there wasn't the same level of "excitement" over their playoff resumes or if there was it was very muted.

like I stated earlier with Detroit it was a group offensive attack with many players contributing to the offense and sure Barry was the offensive leader on those teams but he also wasn't in a situation were he carried his teams either, like other guys did in the playoffs that have come up like Teeder for instance (or Savard this round still).

i'm the first guy to admit that ranking guys we have never seen with less information is very difficult to do fairly with more recent guys that we can, and often do nitpick to death here.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 04:37 AM
  #68
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Where was this when Gilbert Perreault was up for voting? I still don't see what makes him any different than Hawerchuk and Savard...I guess it doesn't matter now though. Best to stay on topic...I guess maybe I can ask what made a flashy player like Perreault rank ahead of other guys with more grit/leadership and does Savard have those qualities as well?
Perreault's all-star voting totals are pretty compelling, as is his impressive international record, which suggests that when given a bit of space (something he had very little of in Buffalo), he really was a better offensive player than his numbers suggested. I'm fine with where Perreault went in with respect to his contemporary Ratelle; I think we parsed the difference between them reasonably well.

Unlike Perreault, I don't see any meaningful argument that Savard and Hawerchuk were better than their scoring results would indicate. Comparing Savard to a guy like Sittler, who brought a good deal more in terms of intangibles and was very close in scoring, ehhh...give me Sittler, though it's close either way. Ultimately, I think there should be very little space between Hawerchuk/Savard/Sittler in this project. Savard and Sittler are both strong candidates to make my top-4 this round, along with Petrov.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 04:47 AM
  #69
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Find a Barry contemporary forward who was better than him in the playoffs, and I'll call you a liar.
When you take defense into account, there is a very good argument that Frank Boucher was the best postseason player of that generation. Barry wasn't nearly the all-around player Boucher was, and wasn't clearly better than Charlie Conacher and Syd Howe in terms of peak postseason scoring, either. Barry has an excellent playoff record, but it's not quite as outstanding as it's often made out to be.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 07:41 AM
  #70
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,834
vCash: 500
Very Debatable

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I agree that the average quality of hockey in the 80s was better than the 70s. On the other hand, Savard played in the weakest division in the 80s, so it somewhat evens out.
Very debatable and that is being charitable. Thru the seventies you still saw the residue of sponsorship. Canadiens had a core of players that they had retained from the sponsorship days - Lemaire, Cournoyer, Savard, Lapointe on the 1979 team that molded the team into a cohesive unit. Teams with such cores played better than the sum of their parts.

Eighties hockey was more entertaining especially Wayne Gretzky and the Oilers but they rarely played at or beyond their collective talent.

Also true for the European teams. Seventies Czech and Soviet teams played beyond their collective talent but the eighties teams rarely did.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 08:01 AM
  #71
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Also true for the European teams. Seventies Czech and Soviet teams played beyond their collective talent but the eighties teams rarely did.
Funny, I'd argue just the opposite with regards to the Soviets. Between Tarasov's dismissal in 1972 and Tikhonov's ascension in 1977, the Soviet program suffered through a coaching carousel which culminated in Boris Kulagin's firing during the last period of the USSR's final game of the 77' WEC-A tournament (one of the biggest, thought least known, facepalm moments in hockey history). Tikhonov reshaped the program in his image (and with an iron fist) and modernized Soviet hockey, incorporating "lessons learned" from Soviet setbacks in the 1970's at the hands of the Canadians and the Czechs.

I would say that, relative to their own level of talent, the 1980's Soviets played better as a team than the 1970's version did, especially after Tikhonov purged the last of the 70's stars following the disaster in Lake Placid.

This doesn't undermine your point vis--vis the Czech and NHL teams, which I agree with, but I really don't think this particular narrative applies well to the Soviets.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 08:48 AM
  #72
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,834
vCash: 500
Soviets

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Funny, I'd argue just the opposite with regards to the Soviets. Between Tarasov's dismissal in 1972 and Tikhonov's ascension in 1977, the Soviet program suffered through a coaching carousel which culminated in Boris Kulagin's firing during the last period of the USSR's final game of the 77' WEC-A tournament (one of the biggest, thought least known, facepalm moments in hockey history). Tikhonov reshaped the program in his image (and with an iron fist) and modernized Soviet hockey, incorporating "lessons learned" from Soviet setbacks in the 1970's at the hands of the Canadians and the Czechs.

I would say that, relative to their own level of talent, the 1980's Soviets played better as a team than the 1970's version did, especially after Tikhonov purged the last of the 70's stars following the disaster in Lake Placid.

This doesn't undermine your point vis--vis the Czech and NHL teams, which I agree with, but I really don't think this particular narrative applies well to the Soviets.
Management, coaching and administration vs the actual on ice performance.

Tikhanov managed to put together much better talent, especially on defense. Only flaw was that post Tretiak the Soviets could not find another goalie.

Seventies Soviets were not as deep on defense, some of their forwards had to have their time managed - 1972 rookie line was not quite ready for International competition, the team at times had to compensate for Konavalenko. The transition to Tretiak was not guaranteed. Still under Kulagin the team rallied, coming together as a unit to overcome the obstacles.

Eighties Soviets had more and deeper talent but their goaltending after Tretiak was never resolved. Team did not gel as well as the seventies. Similar to the eighties Oilers there was a sense about them that a bump in the road could easily derail the train. Similar to the sixties Hawks or the NHL teams today. Little changes have disproportionate consequences positive or negative.

Perhaps I am giving to much importance to the ability of a team to work around or support weaknesses but it is the weaknesses that inevitably make the difference.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 09:33 AM
  #73
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,027
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Barry is in so I won't belabor the point but in the top 60 dman project there were great lengths taken to show how great and important Shore was in the playoffs to that Boston team.

If Barry truly was the clearly best playoff performer last round, then those Bruins teams underachieved given all of the top 60 talent accolades given to those teams and players by this group generally (Shore, Clapper, Barry, Thompson and MaKay is 30).

true some of Barry's best playoff performances were with the Wings but those teams alot had extremely good depth scoring in the playoffs as well.
... And yet, all of this is true for Fedorov and the 90s Wings but you can't seem to drop his name without praising his playoff performances...

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 04:31 PM
  #74
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,353
vCash: 500
It may be useful/interesting to compare Zetterberg and Lemaire (both have fairly short careers - obviously Zetterberg's is still in progress), fairly similar offensive numbers, excellent defensive abilities, and strong playoff performances. The comparison could also include Primeau (short career, good defensively) and/or Lafontaine (another player with a short career, though his profile - higher peak, weaker defensive and weaker playoffs - is very different). Is anybody considering including some/all of these in their top eight this round? Would this comparison be useful?

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2014, 05:02 PM
  #75
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,834
vCash: 500
Yes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
It may be useful/interesting to compare Zetterberg and Lemaire (both have fairly short careers - obviously Zetterberg's is still in progress), fairly similar offensive numbers, excellent defensive abilities, and strong playoff performances. The comparison could also include Primeau (short career, good defensively) and/or Lafontaine (another player with a short career, though his profile - higher peak, weaker defensive and weaker playoffs - is very different). Is anybody considering including some/all of these in their top eight this round? Would this comparison be useful?
Yes. Lemaire and Zetterberg especially since they could play LW and C.

Canadiens1958 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 07:12 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.