Since USSR collapse I'd say in a top 50 you would get for sure Bure Fedorov Mogilny Yashin Gonchar Markov Zubov Datsyuk Kovalchuk Malkin Ovechkin that's about it. No goalies not that many defensemen lots of forwards...
Konstantinov could have been there maybe Ozolinsh also.
Do you mean those guys on a top 50 list? Those are some of the worst products of Soviet hockey ever : Priakhin-Starikov-Khmylev...
Stelnov and Lomakin OK not more Semak very good but not top 50 the same with Zhamnov.
I agree. I would also omit Yashin, Gonchar and Markov and include Varnakov and Skvortsov. Incredibly skilled speedsters. Also Khabibulin.
I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suggest Mishakov, as the first Russian physical player. If you watch the ice-level replay of the '72 gold medal game, you see a bunch of ballerinas out there. Mishakov was ahead of his time, in the Soviet system at least. Now I'm gonna duck.
I agree. I would also omit Yashin, Gonchar and Markov and include Varnakov and Skvortsov. Incredibly skilled speedsters. Also Khabibulin.
I'm going to go way out on a limb here and suggest Mishakov, as the first Russian physical player. If you watch the ice-level replay of the '72 gold medal game, you see a bunch of ballerinas out there. Mishakov was ahead of his time, in the Soviet system at least. Now I'm gonna duck.
Don't confuse a lack of physical play with being weak. One of the trademarks of Soviet hockey was the ability to take physical abuse; even as far back as '72.
Just because every Soviet didn't play like Mishakov doesn't mean they were ballerinas.
Apart from a handful of well documented instances, Soviets took a regular beating from NHLers yet were always tough enough to bounce right back up.
I firmly believe the essence of toughness is not the ability to dish out punishment, it's the ability to take it; something the Soviets could always do.
Don't confuse a lack of physical play with being weak. One of the trademarks of Soviet hockey was the ability to take physical abuse; even as far back as '72.
Just because every Soviet didn't play like Mishakov doesn't mean they were ballerinas.
Apart from a handful of well documented instances, Soviets took a regular beating from NHLers yet were always tough enough to bounce right back up.
I firmly believe the essence of toughness is not the ability to dish out punishment, it's the ability to take it; something the Soviets could always do.
Oh, I quite agree. The Soviets had tremendous upper body strength and all their NHL opponents came to understand they could not be intimidated in the least. What I was referring to is the ability to use aggressive physical play as a component of the offensive arsenal. It can be a highly effective strategy as evidenced by the styles of modern European players such as Ovechkin and Forsberg. This was not a feature of early Russian doctrine which is why I suggest Mishakov was innovative, and it is only a suggestion. He was the Kenny Linseman of the '72 Soviet team. He got under opponents' skin and drew stupid retaliation penalties. Also kind of developed the role of skilled enforcer, if one can call it that.
Please Soviet Hockey top 50= Skills Talent and Artistry.
No need to bring the goons and all that garbage into it. Go to the bush league nhl forum instead.
And what GoldMedal Game are youn talking about? The Worlds Final or the Olympics Final?
Please Soviet Hockey top 50= Skills Talent and Artistry.
No need to bring the goons and all that garbage into it. Go to the bush league nhl forum instead.
And what GoldMedal Game are youn talking about? The Worlds Final or the Olympics Final?
Evgeni Mishakov was no goon. He was a career 40-goal scorer (translated into NHL seasons) in both the Russian Elite League and in international play (with 48 goals in 91 games -- better in terms of goals per game than any of Balderis, Kamensky, A. Golikov and Shalimov, among others). He played on the initial version of Tarasov's torpedo line. His intangible qualities included fighting spirit, game discipline, team dedication, determination to win and strong two-way play. If you asked his teammates in the second half of the 60's I am guessing they would have had more regard for him than you apparently have. If you think those qualities aren't relevant and that very occasional flashes of brilliance in artistic achievement by the likes of Kovalev and Yashin better qualify them, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. My point in nominating Mishakov was that he had a well-rounded set of skills that were surprisingly contemporary for his time.
You are saying the NHL is bush league? Surely not. I assume you are saying that the forum is bush league?
I was referring to the USSR-Czech game in the final round of the 1972 Olympics, which though the final game of the tournament and determinative of the gold medal winner was not a gold medal game per se. My mistake.
Oh ok I see better what you mean now. By the way I didn't put Kovalev on my list.
Yashin would rank in the 40-50 spot because of his dedication for team Russia and simply because for 2-3 years in the late 90's early 00's he was a top 5 player in the world. I understand Mishakov qualities etc but don't try to say the guys weren't tough because they didn't replied and used goon tactics. I mean in those days they always fought till the end, unlike some recent Russian teams.
And finally yes nhl is bush league mainly because of how it is run and ruined by the stupid league management and all that. With the talent pool they have and the potential hockey has as a fantastic winter sport they are the one to blame for it being a little bush league not even relevant in the states and being beaten in ratings in Canada by the CFL...
Hockey should be a big sport in North America but with those idiots running it it's barely relevant. And most importantly has no credibility.
Back on topic I'd like to know who you would put in a top 50 like that from the last 20 years.
Oh, I quite agree. The Soviets had tremendous upper body strength and all their NHL opponents came to understand they could not be intimidated in the least. What I was referring to is the ability to use aggressive physical play as a component of the offensive arsenal. It can be a highly effective strategy as evidenced by the styles of modern European players such as Ovechkin and Forsberg. This was not a feature of early Russian doctrine which is why I suggest Mishakov was innovative, and it is only a suggestion. He was the Kenny Linseman of the '72 Soviet team. He got under opponents' skin and drew stupid retaliation penalties. Also kind of developed the role of skilled enforcer, if one can call it that.
Great, but why not say this originally? Why do you intentionally, as exampled by your 'I will now duck' comment, use a stereotypical and demeaning term to describe a country's style of play? That will only serve to drag a very interesting thread into the mud.
Mikhailov was no ballerina either in 1972... well, he never was. Neither was Petrov and not even Kharlamov; despite being small, he was strong and feisty. Shadrin and Yakushev were also strong. Ragulin was arguably the strongest guy out there and young Vasiliev was on the team too; a very physical player, though he didn't seem to dish out such hurtful hits yet in 1972 (Summit series) as later on.
I got a solid top 40 core and after that it's a matter of debate. One could have included the Golikovs, Drozdetski, Boris Alexandrov, Tumenev, and more 60's players but that's what I came up with. I probably forgot a few guys too.
I never said Russian players are ballerinas, it was the game I referred to that was a no-hitter because the Soviets weren't challenged physically so they didn't have to do anything. They were always physically up the challenge as they were incredibly strong, but they didn't often initiate a pounding physical style, and that's why I singled out a guy like Mishakov, who, rest his soul, was not as talented as many of his teammates but could rattle the boards with the best of them despite his size. And also scored a lot of points for the team until his last couple of seasons. I wouldn't put him in the top 50 personally but was just meant to stimulate debate. By "duck" I meant that I anticipated being attacked on the basis of a stereotype, when I wasn't making any stereotypical point at all.
Last edited by hammerwielder: 02-25-2011 at 09:18 PM.
Oh ok I see better what you mean now. By the way I didn't put Kovalev on my list.
Yashin would rank in the 40-50 spot because of his dedication for team Russia and simply because for 2-3 years in the late 90's early 00's he was a top 5 player in the world. I understand Mishakov qualities etc but don't try to say the guys weren't tough because they didn't replied and used goon tactics. I mean in those days they always fought till the end, unlike some recent Russian teams.
And finally yes nhl is bush league mainly because of how it is run and ruined by the stupid league management and all that. With the talent pool they have and the potential hockey has as a fantastic winter sport they are the one to blame for it being a little bush league not even relevant in the states and being beaten in ratings in Canada by the CFL...
Hockey should be a big sport in North America but with those idiots running it it's barely relevant. And most importantly has no credibility.
Back on topic I'd like to know who you would put in a top 50 like that from the last 20 years.
Huh? Other than the Grey Cup, when are you imagining this to be the case? And what would playoff football games in November have to do with the NHL?
Career or prime years? Larionov has a long and distinguished career but his 'prime' is a bit overrated. I'd take some other centers over Larionov if judging peak performance.
All in all I'd take Firsov who played center on occasion.
I consider Larionov's prime the KLM period that's it. Pretty tough to beat that!
Yeah, but you can make a case that he was the worst player on the Green Unit.
I mean, Makarov and Fetisov ruled, Krutov was one of the best power forwards of his time and Kasatonov was the reason that Fetisov could afford to be so aggressive going forward.
There is also Petrov, who was a very underrated player.
You can also make the case that take out anyone of the 5 and it's not the dominating GreenUnit anymore. I agree he wasn't that flashy and everything but he was the perfect center for that unit. Hockey sense A+
Just imagine if hooking and barbaric hockey and everything wasn't allowed Larionov would be seen even highly.
Petrov far better choice than Firsov wich I consider a winger.
The only reason I didn't put Fedorov is because he was never that great for Russia and didn't play that often...
