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.

HOH Top 60 Defensemen List & Voting Record - MXD

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-23-2012, 10:06 AM
  #1
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,638
vCash: 500
HOH Top 60 Defensemen List & Voting Record - MXD

MXD
Rank Player
1 Bobby Orr
2 Doug Harvey
3 Ray Bourque
4 Eddie Shore
5 Nicklas Lidstrom
6 Denis Potvin
7 Red Kelly
8 Larry Robinson
9 Slava Fetisov
10 Chris Chelios
11 Brad Park
12 King Clancy
13 Earl Seibert
14 Pierre Pilote
15 Sprague Cleghorn
16 Tim Horton
17 Paul Coffey
18 Al MacInnis
19 Scott Stevens
20 Serge Savard
21 Mark Howe
22 Hod Stuart
23 Bill Gadsby
24 Valeri Vasiliev
25 J.C. Tremblay
26 Chris Pronger
27 Rod Langway
28 Ken Reardon
29 George Boucher
30 Dit Clapper
31 Lester Patrick
32 Eddie Gerard
33 Marcel Pronovost
34 Bill Quackenbush
35 Guy Lapointe
36 Butch Bouchard
37 Moose Johnson
38 Harry Cameron
39 Alexander Ragulin
40 Scott Niedermayer
41 Mike Grant
42 Borje Salming
43 Brian Leetch
44 Lionel Conacher
45 Jack Stewart
46 Ebbie Goodfellow
47 Larry Murphy
48 Tom Johnson
49 Harry Howell
50 Herb Gardiner
51 Sergei Zubov
52 Jan Suchy
53 Babe Pratt
54 Alexei Kasatonov
55 Ching Johnson
56 Cy Wentworth
57 Frank Patrick
58 Jacques Laperriere
59 Carl Brewer
60 Rob Blake
61 Phil Housley
62 Sylvio Mantha
63 Harvey Pulford
64 Doug Wilson
65 Joe Simpson
66 Pat Stapleton
67 Fern Flaman
68 Eric Desjardins
69 Flash Hollett
70 Allan Stanley
71 Frantisek Pospisil
72 Lennart Svedberg
73 Babe Siebert
74 Zdeno Chara
75 Art Ross
76 Gary Suter
77 Jimmy Thomson
78 Art Coulter
79 Joe Hall
80 Gus Mortson

Players from the Top 60 not to appear on this list
None

Players ranked highest overall on this list
Ken Reardon (28)
George Boucher (29)
Lester Patrick (31)
Herb Gardiner (50)
Cy Wentworth (56)
Frank Patrick (57)
Joe Simpson (65)

Players ranked lowest overall on this list
Borje Salming (42
Brian Leetch (43)
Jacques Laperriere (58)

Players unique to this list
None

Round Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 7 Rank 8 Rank 9 Rank 10
Vote 1Bobby OrrDoug HarveyRaymond BourqueEddie ShoreNiklas LidstromDenis PotvinRed KellyLarry RobinsonVyacheslav FetisovChris Chelios
Vote 2Denis PotvinLeonard "Red" KellyLarry RobinsonChris CheliosViacheslav FetisovKing ClancyPierre PiloteBrad ParkPaul CoffeyAl MacInnis
Vote 3King ClancyPierre PiloteEarl SeibertBrad ParkSprague CleghornTim HortonPaul CoffeyAl MacInnisScott StevensChris Pronger
Vote 4Earl SeibertTim HortonAl MacInnisChris ProngerScott StevensBill GadsbyBorje SalmingValeri VasilievSerge SavardDit Clapper
Vote 5Bill GadsbyMark HoweBorje SalmingValeri VasilievSerge SavardDit ClapperBill QuackenbushGuy LapointeBrian LeetchRod Langway
Vote 6Mark HoweSerge SavardEddie GerardMarcel PronovostBill QuackenbushGuy LapointeJC TremblayRod LangwayEmile BouchardLionel Conacher
Vote 7Marcel PronovostGuy LapointeJC TremblayEmile BouchardJack StewartLionel ConacherScott NiedermayerCarl BrewerAlexei KasatonovEbbie Goodfellow
Vote 8Hod StuartChing JohnsonMoose JohnsonJC TremblayBuck BoucherEmile BouchardCarl BrewerAlexei KasatonovTom JohnsonEbbie Goodfellow
Vote 9Moose JohnsonKen ReardonBuck BoucherEmile BouchardCarl BrewerHarry CameronTom JohnsonEbbie GoodfellowSilvio ManthaZdeno Chara
Vote 10Ken ReardonBuck BoucherLester PatrickCarl BrewerHarry CameronTom JohnsonSilvio ManthaHarry HowellBabe SiebertDoug Wilson
Vote 11Ken ReardonLester PatrickHarry CameronTom JohnsonSilvio ManthaArt CoulterHarry HowellDoug WilsonHarvey PulfordAllan Stanley
Vote 12Harry CameronMike GrantSilvio ManthaHarry HowellBabe PrattFrantisek PopsisilHarvey PulfordAllan StanleyAlexander RagulinFern Flaman


Last edited by overpass: 02-23-2012 at 11:03 AM.
overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 10:30 AM
  #2
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,550
vCash: 500
makes no sense how he was so high on Reardon. I mean, if you have Reardon at 28, fine, but then you have to have Jack Steward around 24, and Quackenbush around 20.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 10:40 AM
  #3
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
makes no sense how he was so high on Reardon. I mean, if you have Reardon at 28, fine, but then you have to have Jack Steward around 24, and Quackenbush around 20.
MXD has always been a supporter of the Habs (Reardon and Bouchard) over the Wings (Quackenbush and Stewart) of the 1940s. Consensus in this project seemed to swing in favour of the Wings duo, but I don't think they're a slam dunk over Reardon and Bouchard.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 10:56 AM
  #4
Hawkman
Moderator
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,224
vCash: 500
I don't have a problem with this, but what is the purpose of posting individual's voting records. How is this interesting or important in the big overall picture of the HOH Top 60 Defensemen List?

Hawkman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 11:00 AM
  #5
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 37,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
I don't have a problem with this, but what is the purpose of posting individual's voting records. How is this interesting or important in the big overall picture of the HOH Top 60 Defensemen List?
I think it's nice to have the transparency and also to look at things such as players unique to so-and-so's list (I've actually been skipping over reading each list in detail and instead going down to that section, where extremes and uniques are listed). I'm not sure we really needed separate threads for every single one though given how little discussion there is for each of them; a single omnibus thread seems like it would have been better (plus then they are all in the same place and easy to find/reference).

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 11:02 AM
  #6
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
I don't have a problem with this, but what is the purpose of posting individual's voting records. How is this interesting or important in the big overall picture of the HOH Top 60 Defensemen List?
Full disclosure. Everyone has a chance to see the inputs that went into the final list, and discuss them if they wish. These lists are being linked to the main thread as well.

It's not the most exciting part of the process. No need to read it if you aren't interested.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 11:07 AM
  #7
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 35,877
vCash: 500
I think it's fantastic that we do this. In fact I'm pretty satisfied with the process overall. Someone could go back 50 years from now and have a completely accurate idea of how and why the final list was created.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 11:32 AM
  #8
dao256
Registered User
 
dao256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 500
vCash: 500
I to like reading the individual rankings. Helps those of us who are still learning about the history of hockey to learn more in depth as to why player X was better than player Y.

Oh, and we will get to find out who didnt rank Bobby #1

dao256 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 11:32 AM
  #9
Hawkman
Moderator
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I think it's fantastic that we do this. In fact I'm pretty satisfied with the process overall. Someone could go back 50 years from now and have a completely accurate idea of how and why the final list was created.
Why would someone 50 years from now care about this? I don't care who were considered the best hockey players in 1962 and I'm probably about your dad's age. What if the future players are considered better in some way and they don't care about the older players? How do you know this website will still be here? The internet could be structured completely differently. There may not even be traditional websites such as we have now.

Hawkman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 12:15 PM
  #10
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 35,877
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
Why would someone 50 years from now care about this? I don't care who were considered the best hockey players in 1962 and I'm probably about your dad's age. What if the future players are considered better in some way and they don't care about the older players? How do you know this website will still be here? The internet could be structured completely differently. There may not even be traditional websites such as we have now.
Maybe. The internet is archived in various ways, though, so I suspect it will still be accessible in perpetuity.

Anyway, I'd love to be able to go back to an archive from 1962 and find this kind of meticulous analysis written by people who actually saw those players in person. Imagine how different this kind of project would be if such a goldmine of information existed.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 12:43 PM
  #11
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Maybe. The internet is archived in various ways, though, so I suspect it will still be accessible in perpetuity.

Anyway, I'd love to be able to go back to an archive from 1962 and find this kind of meticulous analysis written by people who actually saw those players in person. Imagine how different this kind of project would be if such a goldmine of information existed.
Fully agree.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 01:21 PM
  #12
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 32,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
Why would someone 50 years from now care about this? I don't care who were considered the best hockey players in 1962 and I'm probably about your dad's age. What if the future players are considered better in some way and they don't care about the older players? How do you know this website will still be here? The internet could be structured completely differently. There may not even be traditional websites such as we have now.
Why would someone 50 years from now care about anything? We're all going to be trans-dimensional cyber beings anyways.

kmad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 01:23 PM
  #13
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 42,268
vCash: 500
MXD had Salming and Leetch back to back just like I did. But he had them about 20 spots lower than I did.

He seems to have changed his mind on Salming in Round 2.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2012, 04:34 PM
  #14
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 22,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
makes no sense how he was so high on Reardon. I mean, if you have Reardon at 28, fine, but then you have to have Jack Steward around 24, and Quackenbush around 20.
Gonna explain this later on -- my local pub just received the Beergeek Bacon and, well, I'm thirsty.

Obviously changed my mind, if you notice my Round 2 record : if anything, it's more

- Reardon
- Quackenbush
(gap)
- Bouchard
- Stewart

And all a bit lower as well... except for Stewart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
MXD has always been a supporter of the Habs (Reardon and Bouchard) over the Wings (Quackenbush and Stewart) of the 1940s. Consensus in this project seemed to swing in favour of the Wings duo, but I don't think they're a slam dunk over Reardon and Bouchard.
Agreed.

On the other hand, I'd like to point out that I had the lowest ranking for Jacques Laperrière and I that I ranked Babe Siebert really low. Something was wrong with Siebert's ranking (considering my Goodfellow's ranking), but I still wouldn't have him that much higher (not Top-50)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
MXD had Salming and Leetch back to back just like I did. But he had them about 20 spots lower than I did.

He seems to have changed his mind on Salming in Round 2.
Effectively. In retrospective, the ranking I'm a bit pissed about is JC Tremblay at 25th.


Don't worry -- I take time to write a somewhat more detailed post explaining why Reardon ahead of Bouchard and Stewart...

MXD 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 01:11 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.