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.

Future Project?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-31-2014, 12:07 PM
  #1
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Future Project?

Been following the goalie, d, and center project, and am looking forward to the wingers. Love the depth and effort you guys collectively go to, and I refer to your lists quite often for my own devices.

Two things constantly come up as roadblocks, and end in a lot of back and forth, unresolved argument - longevity vs. height of peak, and era biases, including the European influx.

Somewhere down the line, and I wouldn't be involved as I couldn't claim to argue about much before 2000, I'd love to see this project - Its 1972, and instead of the Russians its someone alien, you're the GM - who are your top 9 forwards, 6 defensemen, and 2 goalies? Then 1976 and every 4 years onward, and backwards as well.

Voting would likely have to include 1st line/pairing on down to 3rd, and there would be a difference between the starter and the backup, of course.

If its generally accepted that the very top of the crop is elite, regardless of era, and that the top players in any era would transfer to other eras, regardless of gap between them and the 10th scorer, or depth of teams and talent pools, etc - would this not all but eliminate era bias?

And would it also not give an objective look at peak weighed against longevity? Career points padding would be useless, but actually being amongst the elite repeatedly over time would count the highest.

Its just a thought I've been having - I signed up to share it, maybe you guys will roll with it in the future.

Tam O Shanter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2014, 12:22 PM
  #2
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,910
vCash: 500
So basically, a year by year listing of (for example) the top 10 players in the world that season? I think it would be too time consuming to do in the same format that we have been doing the top players project (spending a week discussing each season before voting...), but it's definitely an interesting topic for discussion.

One potential obstacle is that the number of English-language websites about the European leagues is quite limited. My International and European reference thread is an attempt to consolidate much of the information we have about non-NHL hockey in one place, but it's far from complete


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 03-31-2014 at 12:32 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2014, 12:47 PM
  #3
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,171
vCash: 500
I believe we've discussed ranking non-NHL Europeans, which would be a good first step.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2014, 02:10 PM
  #4
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
So basically, a year by year listing of (for example) the top 10 players in the world that season? I think it would be too time consuming to do in the same format that we have been doing the top players project (spending a week discussing each season before voting...), but it's definitely an interesting topic for discussion.

One potential obstacle is that the number of English-language websites about the European leagues is quite limited. My International and European reference thread is an attempt to consolidate much of the information we have about non-NHL hockey in one place, but it's far from complete
year-by-year would be insanely time consuming. I may not have suggested every 4 years, but that's what I meant to say. Even then, injuries would still be a hit and miss problem, and some guys would get shafted by when they left their primes.... someone like Gilmour, perhaps, who might not make it if it hit on 92 and 96.

Ah well, at least I got the thought out there, maybe someone will be inspired to tweak it.

Tam O Shanter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2014, 06:57 PM
  #5
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,171
vCash: 500
Year by year would be too much, but it would be feasible to do each decade (about 10-12 rounds depending when we start) or each era (slightly less arbitrary).

In any case, we need to survive the wingers list first

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-31-2014, 07:18 PM
  #6
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 21,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Year by year would be too much, but it would be feasible to do each decade (about 10-12 rounds depending when we start) or each era (slightly less arbitrary).

In any case, we need to survive the wingers list first
That's the thing -- it could be annoying due to carryovers.

My take for eras :

Early Years : 1885 up to 1910
East & WEst : 1910 up to 1926
Consolidation and growing pains : 1926-1942.
The O6 : 1942-1967
Expansion and WHA : 1967-1980
The Mullet Era : 1980 - 1994
In between lockouts : 1994-2004
Nu NHL : 2005-today

I admit that the first two groups could be merged.

Many players would play in both eras, so a prior determination would have to be made as whether those players are in an era or another.

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 01:30 PM
  #7
tony d
Ours for next 7 yrs.
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,746
vCash: 500
If we do it based upon eras, have a player be eligible for just 1 era (The era he played best in) so for Gretzky it would be 1980-1994 and not have him included in 1994-2004.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 01:36 PM
  #8
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tony d View Post
If we do it based upon eras, have a player be eligible for just 1 era (The era he played best in) so for Gretzky it would be 1980-1994 and not have him included in 1994-2004.
That's where it would get tricky. In order to make it work effectively, we might have to think in very large-scale terms like pre-WWII, Original Six, post-expansion. Otherwise there will be a lot of overlapping players getting cut off on both sides of their careers... heck, off the top of my head it seems like the majority of great players since 1980 would fall right on top of that 1994 cutoff.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 01:49 PM
  #9
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
my intention was, that regardless of time frame of intermittance, that how MANY best teams a player made would really describe his balance in terms of longevity vs elitehood.

That may be one of the most poorly explained thoughts ever.....

ie. Fedorov's great peak would get him first line status if the team fell on 1993-94 or so, then say these teams were hypothetically built every 4 years (to take on aliens, yes) he might not make another team, or would end up as a great 3rd line center for his defensive skills (all depending on what the thinktank determines) He would receive top marks (let's say 3 points) for 94, and 1 point for squeeking onto the 98 lineup, let's say.

Conversely, Gretzky, depending on when the years fell, would likely make 4 top lines, and maybe a second line, roughly = perhaps that would be worth 14 points.

The idea is that its tough to get a consensus on how much people value longevity vs peak = I think this could weigh both fairly. Selanne and Jagr, what they're doing right now, is great, and I love them both - but they are really just compiling career numbers, now (and loving the game, more power to them), compare that to a Bourque or Lidstrom who, although never really considered THE best player in the game, were truly elite at their positions for a long time, and would both make several top pairings on these hypothetical squads.

The other bias this hoped to address was era bias. Hopefully everyone from Hardy right to Canadiens58 could roughly agree on a team that is taken from a snapshot in time. One could walk away thinking, "this team would have no chance against that team from 30 years away (in either direction) but the proof would be in the pudding in that the guys chosen would have been the true best at the time, and the rest is up to what one's opinion of that time is. Personally, I subscribe to the thought that a top competitor is a top competitor, regardless of whether he's waling on expansion teams, or playing more Swedes, or whatnot. The numbers, the gaps in them, they mislead from truth, but the cream of the crop is always the cream of the crop.

Tam O Shanter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 02:12 PM
  #10
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,171
vCash: 500
That's kind of like how we typically use postseason All Star voting around here, since the general assumption is that the voters know better than anyone how the players stacked up on a year-by-year basis (particularly when there were so few that they would have seen everyone 10+ times per season).

Essentially what you're proposing is that we drill down to see if those All Star vote totals are actually valid, either confirming them or uncovering "bad" votes. Which I totally agree we should do, as time permits. Some of that has already happened in the rankings and in the ATD threads, but we could certainly use a lot more research on that front.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 02:29 PM
  #11
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,010
vCash: 500
How about going by years of birth and pick a certain period of time, say, 10 years? Players born 1920-1929, then those born 1930-1939, then 1940-1949 etc. No cut offs for eras (which are not always easy to define anyway).

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 02:35 PM
  #12
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
That's kind of like how we typically use postseason All Star voting around here, since the general assumption is that the voters know better than anyone how the players stacked up on a year-by-year basis (particularly when there were so few that they would have seen everyone 10+ times per season).

Essentially what you're proposing is that we drill down to see if those All Star vote totals are actually valid, either confirming them or uncovering "bad" votes. Which I totally agree we should do, as time permits. Some of that has already happened in the rankings and in the ATD threads, but we could certainly use a lot more research on that front.
Ya, I guess you're more or less right, actually. Especially for D and goalies. I've always had some problems with the LW's who've been 1st All Stars over great centers buried behnd greater centers. And then there's adding 3rd lines/pairings (which Devil's already done, I know). THEN there's the issue of voter competency - ie. The Ovechkin Fiasco of last year!! And finally, there is that team chemistry thing - Would enough people on here pick Jere Lehtinen, or Guy Carbonneau, Bergeron, Zetterberg, on a given year that voters picked a 3rd string one-way kinda guy.

You're right though - these bases are largely covered.

Ya, I don't know how I missed that, damnit! The more I think about it, the more the only big problem I have is with some wingers, especially LW, getting through weaker comp. Like, Luc Robitaille likely has way more AS's than Ron Francis, just due to position. I'd have rather found a spot for Francis than Luc, most years.

Tam O Shanter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 03:00 PM
  #13
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
this thread could just be deleted.....

Tam O Shanter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 03:17 PM
  #14
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,724
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I believe we've discussed ranking non-NHL Europeans, which would be a good first step.
Once a wingers project is done, I think this is definitely the next thing we should do. Much too little is known about these guys, and I think this would be very beneficial to get get a greater appreciation for these guys.

BillyShoe1721 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 09:42 PM
  #15
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
That's the thing -- it could be annoying due to carryovers.

My take for eras :

Early Years : 1885 up to 1910
East & WEst : 1910 up to 1926
Consolidation and growing pains : 1926-1942.
The O6 : 1942-1967
Expansion and WHA : 1967-1980
The Mullet Era : 1980 - 1994
In between lockouts : 1994-2004
Nu NHL : 2005-today

I admit that the first two groups could be merged.

Many players would play in both eras, so a prior determination would have to be made as whether those players are in an era or another.
I like this a lot, as it would make more sense, but perhaps be less contentious and fun (or annoying depending on one's perspective) as doing a whole project over a longer time span.

Pros and cons to any project but more discussion is better than less IMO.

I love the Mullet era heading, can 67-80 be the Hippie era (crawling from the wreckage of the good old 06 era where men were men and don cherry was among them, at least in the minors).

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 09:46 PM
  #16
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
the good old 06 era where men were men and don cherry was among them, at least in the minors).
ONLY in the minors.

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2014, 10:39 PM
  #17
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tam O Shanter View Post
(to take on aliens, yes)
I might have to make a thread about this tonight...

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2014, 08:14 PM
  #18
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,862
vCash: 500
Best swedish players of all time!

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2014, 08:20 PM
  #19
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Best swedish players of all time!
been done recently, at least in the poll section. On that note, why don't you guys put aside your differences with the Finns and make a Nordic Team. You'd be killers. While you're at it tell those Norwegians to stop skiing and start focusing on hockey......

Tam O Shanter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2014, 10:27 PM
  #20
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tam O Shanter View Post
been done recently, at least in the poll section. On that note, why don't you guys put aside your differences with the Finns and make a Nordic Team. You'd be killers. While you're at it tell those Norwegians to stop skiing and start focusing on hockey......
Poll Section? Why dont we just ask a random Texan guy? Oh yeah, that's what they did.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2014, 10:58 PM
  #21
Tam O Shanter
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
I might have to make a thread about this tonight...
I think it should be a book. Parallel Universe, hockey-themed, alien invasion. Same names, but in different roles.

Tam O Shanter is online now   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 03:23 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.