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.

THN: Top Seasons of All-Time (1999)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-18-2013, 08:33 PM
  #26
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hart voting for 1992-93:

HART: Mario Lemieux 248 (49-1-0); Doug Gilmour 99 (0-29-12); Pat LaFontaine 52 (1-12-11); Adam Oates 28 (0-6-10); Pierre Turgeon 12 (0-2-6); Teemu Selanne 5 (0-0-5); Chris Chelios 3 (0-0-3); Steve Yzerman 2 (0-0-2); Eric Lindros 1 (0-0-1)

Lafontaine was second in scoring. Gilmour was 7th in scoring (only 5 points back of Selanne who was tied for 5th though with many more goals obviously), and won the Selke (which I think was basically a consolation prize for not being able to win the Hart with Mario's season).

I mean, Selanne's 92-93 was great because he was a rookie, but in talking about the best seasons of all time, can you really give it to a forward who was only on 5 of 50 ballots, all of them 3rd place?
I thought the Hart was most valuable to his team not best player in the league. So,I don't know how Hart voting relates to best season which is the topic,

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 08:36 PM
  #27
popculturereference
Registered User
 
popculturereference's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The Oddities have basic explanations.

Bourque, as a 19 year old broke the stereotype that teenage defensemen unless they were Bobby Orr needed time. Barasso showed that teenaged high school goalies could be regulars in the NHL.Selanne = 76 goal rookie season.
This. The list is accompanied with explanations of why the season was chosen, and the reasoning matches what you have said here. Barrasso was chosen because he was an 18 year old that won the Calder and Vezina, whereas Selanne's season is more fondly remembered than Gilmour or Lafontaine because he scored 76 goals as a rookie. The list follows the formula of choosing seasons based on notability, rather than assessing it based on anything else.

popculturereference is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 08:37 PM
  #28
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Frankly, if we're talking about 92-93 alone, it's a joke that they listed Selanne over Lafontaine and Gilmour.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Voting will never tell you "how much."

You're acting like the voting is proof that a 76/132 season cannot be held above a 53/148 season or a 32/127 season - by anyone. It's really not a big deal for someone to praise a player with low Hart votes above players with exclusively 2nd and 3rd place votes. Hell, Gilmour was on significantly more ballots than LaFontaine (who was on less than half of all ballots), and Gilmour had 44 fewer goals than Selanne and 21 fewer points than LaFontaine.

Hart voting is a useful tool and all, but don't act like people can't disagree with the positioning of Lemieux's also-rans, especially given the difference in definition of "value" and "best," as well as the obviousness of Selanne winning a different award unanimously. I mean, it wasn't that long ago that you were saying Lidstrom was the best in 2005-06 (but not the most valuable) - and he had a lower percentage of top-three votes than this example with which you have a problem.

Voting records are tools; they are not evidence to suggest that a differing opinion on a different question is "a joke."
The real question is...

Why was Selanne's 1992-93 listed over either of Yzerman's top years?

In 1992-93, Yzerman finished ahead of Selanne with 58-79-137 (to Selanne's 76-56-132) and received Selke votes. In 1988-89, Yzerman scored 65-90-155 (highest point total not put up by Gretzky or Lemieux) AND received Selke votes, as well as won the Pearson.

It seems like it's a list of "most noteworthy seasons" rather than simply a compiled list of the best performances.

And even then, you'd think Fedorov's Hart/Selke combo (done exactly once) would be on that list.

Mind-boggling, some of the inclusions and exclusions.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 08:41 PM
  #29
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Also notable:

They included Richard's 50-in-50 (during a war year) as the #4 pick.

Never mind Elmer Lach's Hart and Art Ross winning performance as Montreal's star center that season. Myth is better than reality.

Speaking of myth, I was expecting to see Cam Neely's 93-94 on here after some of these...

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 08:44 PM
  #30
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The real question is...

Why was Selanne's 1992-93 listed over either of Yzerman's top years?
Because maybe you have overrated everything Red Wing and underrated everything else. I am not trying to be an ass to you but every comment is Fedorov this and Red Wing that.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 08:52 PM
  #31
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Voting will never tell you "how much."

You're acting like the voting is proof that a 76/132 season cannot be held above a 53/148 season or a 32/127 season - by anyone. It's really not a big deal for someone to praise a player with low Hart votes above players with exclusively 2nd and 3rd place votes. Hell, Gilmour was on significantly more ballots than LaFontaine (who was on less than half of all ballots), and Gilmour had 44 fewer goals than Selanne and 21 fewer points than LaFontaine.

Hart voting is a useful tool and all, but don't act like people can't disagree with the positioning of Lemieux's also-rans, especially given the difference in definition of "value" and "best," as well as the obviousness of Selanne winning a different award unanimously. I mean, it wasn't that long ago that you were saying Lidstrom was the best in 2005-06 (but not the most valuable) - and he had a lower percentage of top-three votes than this example with which you have a problem.

Voting records are tools; they are not evidence to suggest that a differing opinion on a different question is "a joke."
Okay, try it without the Hart voting:

Lafontaine was better than Selanne in 1992-93, both offensively and defensively.

Gilmour was only 5 points behind Selanne in 1992-93 and was miles better defensively and in every other way that didn't have to do with offense.

Listing Selanne over Lafontaine and Gilmour for 1992-93 when the vast majority of people who watched the season at the time would have taken Lafontainne and Gilmour is a joke. A lot of people though it was a shame that Lemieux had his ridiculous season when Gilmour had his career year and Gilmour got the Selke as something of a "consolation award." Though given the inclusions of Barrasso and Bourque's rookie seasons (instead of Bourque's 1990 or 1994, huh?), for whatever reason, they seem to put a big emphasis on what a player did as a rookie, so in that sense, I guess Selanne fits in.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 08:54 PM
  #32
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The real question is...

Why was Selanne's 1992-93 listed over either of Yzerman's top years?

In 1992-93, Yzerman finished ahead of Selanne with 58-79-137 (to Selanne's 76-56-132) and received Selke votes. In 1988-89, Yzerman scored 65-90-155 (highest point total not put up by Gretzky or Lemieux) AND received Selke votes, as well as won the Pearson.

It seems like it's a list of "most noteworthy seasons" rather than simply a compiled list of the best performances.

And even then, you'd think Fedorov's Hart/Selke combo (done exactly once) would be on that list.

Mind-boggling, some of the inclusions and exclusions.
Eh, Lafontaine and Gilmour's 1992-93 were better than Yzerman in the same year, too.

It's really strange they don't have Yzerman's 88-89 though, which is better than any of them.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 09:06 PM
  #33
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Okay, try it without the Hart voting:

Lafontaine was better than Selanne in 1992-93, both offensively and defensively.

Gilmour was only 5 points behind Selanne in 1992-93 and was miles better defensively and in every other way that didn't have to do with offense.

Listing Selanne over Lafontaine and Gilmour for 1992-93 when the vast majority of people who watched the season at the time would have taken Lafontainne and Gilmour is a joke. A lot of people though it was a shame that Lemieux had his ridiculous season when Gilmour had his career year and Gilmour got the Selke as something of a "consolation award." Though given the inclusions of Barrasso and Bourque's rookie seasons (instead of Bourque's 1990 or 1994, huh?), for whatever reason, they seem to put a big emphasis on what a player did as a rookie, so in that sense, I guess Selanne fits in.

And being a rookie should have alot of impact, rookies are not supposed to have seasons like Bourque, Selenne and Barrasso. They are anomalous from all the other players and other seasons. To me, those seasons out of those players are not supposed to happen but they did. I said this in the other thread, I'll say it again, it's disingenuous to disregard mitigating factors like rookie seasons when having these discussions.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 09:40 PM
  #34
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Okay, try it without the Hart voting
My contention is because you used Hart voting as evidence.

I too would take LaFontaine and Gilmour over Selanne in 1992-93 (though let's not ignore that goal-scoring is a thing; every season where someone has scored more than 76 goals is on there ahead of him, and he and Gretzky 1982 are the only ones in the top-10 all-time to do it without a top-five assist teammate), but again, specifically targeting that season on the list as "a joke" because of Hart voting doesn't make much sense in light of how one-third of the list goes against actual Hart winners - but that year didn't.

I mean, calling it "a joke"? Come on.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2013, 10:04 PM
  #35
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post
Because maybe you have overrated everything Red Wing and underrated everything else. I am not trying to be an ass to you but every comment is Fedorov this and Red Wing that.
Ok. So you then agree that a rookie winger who plays a poor defensive game and scores 76 goals and 132 points while playing with the league's top-scoring defenseman (Phil Housley, 97 points) is better than a center scoring 65 goals and 155 points while being double-shifted as the checking center because his team was so devoid of talent, and receiving Selke votes in doing so, with his best teammate being his scrappy, undersized left winger (Gerard Gallant) that he carried to 93 points. Also on Selanne's line: center Alexei Zhamnov, 72 points in 68 games (and when he was out, 72pt in 80gp center Thomas Steen). Also on Yzerman's line? Paul MacLean, 71 points in 76 games. The left winger on Selanne's line that first year was often Darrin Shannon, who had 60 points (Tkachuk had 51, and was playing a lot on it by the end of the year). The highest-scoring defenseman in Detroit in 89? Steve Chiasson, 47 points.

Yzerman had a team in 88-89 that was clearly less gifted offensively, save for its highest scoring player. And Yzerman also significantly outplayed Selanne in the defensive zone, as evidenced by the fact he was getting Selke votes.

The argument for Selanne over Yzerman in 1992-93 is at least understandable, because the Wings at that point had young Fedorov, Lidstrom, and Konstantinov on the team as well as having added PP specialist Dino Ciccarelli (to paraphrase then coach/GM Bryan Murray: "a lot of the guys just don't seem to want to go to the net; we need someone there to score goals.") However, the way Yzerman's scoring just took off when Carson was traded suggests that he could have finished much higher in the scoring race had Carson been dealt sooner. Yzerman also received Selke votes in 1993, in addition to scoring more points than Selanne.

And yes, goal-scoring is a "thing"... but Yzerman scored 65 and 58 in these seasons. Not exactly low. His 65 was third-place (behind Mario's 85 and Nicholls' 70). His 58 was 6th, and it was the 6th consecutive year Yzerman finished top-six in goal-scoring.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 01:59 AM
  #36
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
My contention is because you used Hart voting as evidence.

I too would take LaFontaine and Gilmour over Selanne in 1992-93 (though let's not ignore that goal-scoring is a thing; every season where someone has scored more than 76 goals is on there ahead of him, and he and Gretzky 1982 are the only ones in the top-10 all-time to do it without a top-five assist teammate), but again, specifically targeting that season on the list as "a joke" because of Hart voting doesn't make much sense in light of how one-third of the list goes against actual Hart winners - but that year didn't.

I mean, calling it "a joke"? Come on.
So we agree that Lafontaine and Gilmour were better than Selanne in 1992-93. Thank you.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 09:58 AM
  #37
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
So we agree that Lafontaine and Gilmour were better than Selanne in 1992-93. Thank you.
But not that it's "a joke" or that award voting can be used like that. And unless you're prepared to abandon the idea that Scott Stevens was a top-three player in 1993-94 or that Nicklas Lidstrom was the best player in 2005-06, you should probably not cite award voting as being "illustrative on how much better" players are than one another when criticizing THN for having a different opinion than the electorate.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:03 AM
  #38
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But not that it's "a joke" or that award voting can be used like that. And unless you're prepared to abandon the idea that Scott Stevens was a top-three player in 1993-94 or that Nicklas Lidstrom was the best player in 2005-06, you should probably not cite award voting as being "illustrative on how much better" players are than one another when criticizing THN for having a different opinion than the electorate.
Scott Stevens wasn't a top-three player in 1993-94. That would imply that he was better than one of:

1. Sergei Fedorov
2. Dominik Hasek
3. Raymond Bourque

I can see an argument for top-five. But he wasn't top three.

Nicklas Lidstrom was not the best player in 2005-06, Jaromir Jagr was (and should have won the Hart as well). Lidstrom was top-three, however. Lidstrom was the best player in 2001-02, although Jarome Iginla was most deserving of the Hart.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:21 AM
  #39
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But not that it's "a joke" or that award voting can be used like that. And unless you're prepared to abandon the idea that Scott Stevens was a top-three player in 1993-94 or that Nicklas Lidstrom was the best player in 2005-06, you should probably not cite award voting as being "illustrative on how much better" players are than one another when criticizing THN for having a different opinion than the electorate.
Scott Stevens and Nicklas Lidstrom are defensemen. I'm sorry, but I have a problem with a FORWARD like Selanne who was left off 45 of 50 Hart ballots, and then 10 years later, he's listed over players who were so obviously better than him that very same year because people remember the trivia of "most goals in a year as a rookie" or something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Scott Stevens wasn't a top-three player in 1993-94. That would imply that he was better than one of:

1. Sergei Fedorov
2. Dominik Hasek
3. Raymond Bourque

I can see an argument for top-five. But he wasn't top three.

Nicklas Lidstrom was not the best player in 2005-06, Jaromir Jagr was (and should have won the Hart as well). Lidstrom was top-three, however. Lidstrom was the best player in 2001-02, although Jarome Iginla was most deserving of the Hart.
I think Stevens and Bourque were basically equals in 1993-94, but you're right that Fedorov probably Hasek were better than both.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:31 AM
  #40
Epsilon
#TeamRaccoon
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 40,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
Thanks for posting that. This is a pretty terrible list, much worse than I remembered. Some seasons are insanely high relative to where they should be ranked and some are plain mystifying. The inclusions and placements of some season (Richard '45, Selanne '93, Howe '69, Hainsworth '29 and several others) clearly indicates that they didn't look far beyond raw stats. I would love to know why Bourque '80 is there.
There's plenty of things wrong with that list including too many rankings for novelty/trivia reasons. One thing that immediately jumps out at me is the lack of Jagr's 1998-99 season.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:38 AM
  #41
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
There's plenty of things wrong with that list including too many rankings for novelty/trivia reasons. One thing that immediately jumps out at me is the lack of Jagr's 1998-99 season.
The thing about the list is that it's purported to be a "best seasons" list when it's really a "noteworthy accomplishments/novelty seasons" list, with some amazing seasons thrown in.

And they still managed to miss the Hart/Selke combo of Fedorov, which to me is a better season AND more noteworthy than Brett Hull's best season.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:40 AM
  #42
Epsilon
#TeamRaccoon
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 40,279
vCash: 500
Anyone think doing a group list of these would be a fun project when the Top X at Position Y lists are finished?

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 10:52 AM
  #43
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Ok. So you then agree that a rookie winger who plays a poor defensive game and scores 76 goals and 132 points while playing with the league's top-scoring defenseman (Phil Housley, 97 points) is better than a center scoring 65 goals and 155 points while being double-shifted as the checking center because his team was so devoid of talent, and receiving Selke votes in doing so, with his best teammate being his scrappy, undersized left winger (Gerard Gallant) that he carried to 93 points. Also on Selanne's line: center Alexei Zhamnov, 72 points in 68 games (and when he was out, 72pt in 80gp center Thomas Steen). Also on Yzerman's line? Paul MacLean, 71 points in 76 games. The left winger on Selanne's line that first year was often Darrin Shannon, who had 60 points (Tkachuk had 51, and was playing a lot on it by the end of the year). The highest-scoring defenseman in Detroit in 89? Steve Chiasson, 47 points.

Yzerman had a team in 88-89 that was clearly less gifted offensively, save for its highest scoring player. And Yzerman also significantly outplayed Selanne in the defensive zone, as evidenced by the fact he was getting Selke votes.

The argument for Selanne over Yzerman in 1992-93 is at least understandable, because the Wings at that point had young Fedorov, Lidstrom, and Konstantinov on the team as well as having added PP specialist Dino Ciccarelli (to paraphrase then coach/GM Bryan Murray: "a lot of the guys just don't seem to want to go to the net; we need someone there to score goals.") However, the way Yzerman's scoring just took off when Carson was traded suggests that he could have finished much higher in the scoring race had Carson been dealt sooner. Yzerman also received Selke votes in 1993, in addition to scoring more points than Selanne.

And yes, goal-scoring is a "thing"... but Yzerman scored 65 and 58 in these seasons. Not exactly low. His 65 was third-place (behind Mario's 85 and Nicholls' 70). His 58 was 6th, and it was the 6th consecutive year Yzerman finished top-six in goal-scoring.

You seriously trying to push that 1992/93 Duck team was elite or something? Selanne scored 48 more goals than his next teammate, 48! Let that sink in, for a while.

The great Phil Housley over Hall of Famer Paul Coffey (26 asssits), Steve Chiasson (50 assists), Hall of Famer Mark Howe (31 assists), Hall of Famer Nick Lidstrom (37 assists) nevermind Brad McCrimmon (17 assists)and Yves Rancine (31 assists) were running around back there, both whom were excellent at getting the puck back in possession. Somehow, Phil freaking Housley offsets them all by his freaking self. I would like to take you seriously but all this Red Wing (specifically Yzerman and the god Fedorov) and glorification and I just can't.

Let's add Yzerman got 28 points in 12 games alone off of expansion teams Ottawa, TB and San Jose. Great way to pad stats eh? Nevermind the Red Wings lead the way in scoring with a record 369 goals potted that year. There is no way,no matter how much you try to twist reality, can you compare or upgrade the 92/93 Jets to how great the Wings were. The Jets were lousy, and were lucky they had an expansion team and a dismantled Oiler team in their division and eked into the playoffs.

Yzerman = established player on one of the best teams in the league. Selanne = unknown European rookie during a team w/o many Europeans on a crap team. Let's not try to compare shall we...

Quote:
San Jose, Ottawa and Tampa Bay combined to give up 1,141 goals in 1992-93. Not surprisingly, the three expansion teams combined to win only 44 games, including 23 by the Lightning -- a resounding success considering the Sharks won only 11 and the Senators just 10.
Selanne from all I can find,did not play on a line with Zhamnov and Tkachuk, it is mentioned over and over in several publications, that line, "The Olympic Line" was not formed until the next year, I am uncertain who he played with but it wasn't those two. Let's not forget Zhamnov and Tkachuk were rookies too, Big Walt had 17 NHL games under his belt walking into this season. I believe Selanne played with Steen and Shannon but I need confirmation. Almost positive Steen is correct. It should be noted, Selenne obliterated the Mike Bossy's record for goals by a rookie, by 24 goals.

Looking at the point totals on that Jet team during the NHL's biggest year and they are paltry at best. Housley with 79 assists than it drops off significantly, rookie Zhannov with 47, Steen with 50, Shannon with 40 and than not a player above 30, most below 20. Selanne goals alone beats the point totals of all the Jets player except Housley. So, really...you going to try and keep pushing that the Jets were some sort spectacular team? Especially compared to the Wings....

I am going to remind you, Selanne's rookie goal record is probably a record like many of Gretzky's that will never be broken.

Let's be frank (no pun intended), Selke Trohpy= garbage award, so please stop trying to force that award down my throat. It doesn't go to the best defensive forward, it goes to the forward with a lot of points that is very good at defense. Just so you know, I think the trophy is garbage, a fluff and glam piece of hardware.

If it truly went to the top defensive forward, Steve Kasper would have 10 and he doesn't. Selke trophy = garbage

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 11:03 AM
  #44
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
So we agree that Lafontaine and Gilmour were better than Selanne in 1992-93. Thank you.

Absolutely true, they are better but I think you're missing the point. It's best season. Selanne's rookie season will (most likely) never be matched. It belongs for that reason alone and in the context of the list. He is a European, during a time when there weren't many and smashes Bossy's rookie record, carries his team to the playoffs with a bunch of scrubs and nobodies. After Housley, there is not much on the team, Tkachuk = rookie, Zhamnov = rookie.

Selanne put 76 goals in with Steen centering him and Shannon riding the other wing. Steen and Shannon who? I think I remember Steen but that's it.

PS This needs to be said, I don't even like Selanne, I don't like his play, I barely think he is top 100 but I see the significance of his rookie season in context and comparison to all the other rookie seasons. I am not a fan of Selenne but I can look past all this and see what the season means.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 11:21 AM
  #45
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Scott Stevens and Nicklas Lidstrom are defensemen. I'm sorry, but I have a problem with a FORWARD like Selanne who was left off 45 of 50 Hart ballots, and then 10 years later, he's listed over players who were so obviously better than him that very same year because people remember the trivia of "most goals in a year as a rookie" or something.
So is your stance that Hart voting is evidence when comparing forwards to each other - even with a disparate level of goals? You haven't called their 4th (Richard over Lach) or their 16th (Bossy over Gretzky, Dionne) a "joke" yet, and they were named before the Hart winner - not after him.

I just think you put too much value in voting records - treating them almost like on-ice statistics (e.g. Vezina voting shares), when you yourself disagree with the philosophies of a healthy portion of the voters.

And look at this last phrase:

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
because people remember the trivia of "most goals in a year as a rookie" or something
You're going out of your way to minimalize it for no reason. You know why it's remembered more than LaFontaine's and Gilmour's seasons, just like you know why Richard's is remembered more than Lach's, just like you know why Bossy's is remembered more than Dionne's - or even Gretzky's.

Goals are a big deal. No joke.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 12:24 PM
  #46
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Country: Finland
Posts: 16,896
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Frankly, if we're talking about 92-93 alone, it's a joke that they listed Selanne over Lafontaine and Gilmour.
I'd think it is on the list only due to the fact that Selanne was a rookie. Even if he was "old" rookie. Normally that season is a regular high scoring finish for a top-forward. Nothing to sneeze at but nothing to write home about either.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 12:29 PM
  #47
Yamaguchi*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post
Wait? Where's Federov?

Didn't I get flamed and laughed at by many on here for saying Selanne's season was better than Fedorov's 95 season????

Well, low and behold

Fedorov's 93-94 was better. He got the Hart and the Pearson.

Selanne has never won a trophy of that caliber.

Yamaguchi* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 12:29 PM
  #48
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Country: Finland
Posts: 16,896
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The real question is...

Why was Selanne's 1992-93 listed over either of Yzerman's top years?

In 1992-93, Yzerman finished ahead of Selanne with 58-79-137 (to Selanne's 76-56-132) and received Selke votes. In 1988-89, Yzerman scored 65-90-155 (highest point total not put up by Gretzky or Lemieux) AND received Selke votes, as well as won the Pearson.

It seems like it's a list of "most noteworthy seasons" rather than simply a compiled list of the best performances.

And even then, you'd think Fedorov's Hart/Selke combo (done exactly once) would be on that list.

Mind-boggling, some of the inclusions and exclusions.
I don't think there is too much thought put on that list and it is more of a reflection of one/few guys idea of "noteworthy" seasons. Selanne as a rookie might be more impressive to someone as Yzerman with 155. It is purely up to preference.

Would be a nice to see a list of top-100 season's all-time to put together. Or maybe a list by seasons/position. Top-20?

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 12:33 PM
  #49
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Country: Finland
Posts: 16,896
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
Anyone think doing a group list of these would be a fun project when the Top X at Position Y lists are finished?
It jumped on my mind immediately after i opened this thread and saw how ridiculous those earlier list's were.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 12:41 PM
  #50
King Forsberg
16 21 28 44 68 88 93
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,837
vCash: 200
Yeah that's a great idea. Do a top 50 list like the top D men or goaltenders list. That would be pretty fun.

King Forsberg 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 01:58 PM.

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.