MOD note: This was originally intended to be an update of the 2008 Top 100 list, but only the top 70 was completed. Link to the completed 2008 Top 100 list is at the bottom of this post.
This is the final list of the Top 70 Hockey Players as determined by the History of Hockey community at HFBoards:
Until Valeri Kharlamov is in the top 5, the list lacks credibility. He is considered the greatest russian player who ever lived so if he's going to be on this list, he has to be top 5. Keep in mind, Canada could not stop this guy during the 1972 super series until bobby clarke "intervened". PS - i'm not russian.
Until Valeri Kharlamov is in the top 5, the list lacks credibility. He is considered the greatest russian player who ever lived so if he's going to be on this list, he has to be top 5. Keep in mind, Canada could not stop this guy during the 1972 super series until bobby clarke "intervened". PS - i'm not russian.
As one of Kharlamov's biggest supporters and a guy who watched many many games he played in, I am laughing very very hard at your post.
Making statements like that and then questioning our credibility?
Kharlamov is in the Lafleur/Jagr/Bossy tier, not the Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr/Howe tier.
And I rank him much higher than most.
Many many people question whether or not Kharlamov is even the greatest Russian of all time, let along a top 5 all time player. I do agree he is the greatest Russian, but you should probably do a little research.
Until Valeri Kharlamov is in the top 5, the list lacks credibility. He is considered the greatest russian player who ever lived so if he's going to be on this list, he has to be top 5. Keep in mind, Canada could not stop this guy during the 1972 super series until bobby clarke "intervened". PS - i'm not russian.
- Canada could so much not stop him that... non-partner Alex Yakushev was the best scorer?
- I mean, you do realize that I could have said the same thing about Maurice Richard... but that I also would have lots more of material to back up my claim? (For the record, I didn't even have Richard in my top-5)
Is there anyone on the planet who thinks Valeri Kharlamov would have even made an impact in the Summit Series had Bobby Orr been there to match up against him?
Is there anyone on the planet who thinks Valeri Kharlamov would have even made an impact in the Summit Series had Bobby Orr been there to match up against him?
Of course he would have had an impact. He was the USSR's best player. Would his impact have been as great? Doubtful - Canada would have had a much easier time at the Summit Series if they had their best player.
Someone I know is putting together a detailed study that Makarov is actually better than Kharlamov. I'm all ears, because based on the empirical data, like points finishes, all-stars, mvp voting, and international play, Makarov appears to have a major edge.
Someone I know is putting together a detailed study that Makarov is actually better than Kharlamov. I'm all ears, because based on the empirical data, like points finishes, all-stars, mvp voting, and international play, Makarov appears to have a major edge.
That's what my eyes tell me too; I think he was a little bit better. It'll never be the universal truth, but at least it would be nice to be able to make such an argument without getting ridiculed.
As far as individual skills go, I'd give Makarov the edge in skating, 1-on-1 skills and goal-scoring. This is based on 30 games or so that I've seen. Then again, I'm no hockey analyst or haven't really 'studied' it, so it would be interesting to see what a more of an expert is going to say.
That's what my eyes tell me too; I think he was a little bit better. It'll never be the universal truth, but at least it would be nice to be able to make such an argument without getting ridiculed.
As far as individual skills go, I'd give Makarov the edge in skating, 1-on-1 skills and goal-scoring. This is based on 30 games or so that I've seen. Then again, I'm no hockey analyst or haven't really 'studied' it, so it would be interesting to see what a more of an expert is going to say.
Just to add: of course Makarov probably had some big advantages, like playing on teams that were mostly better-coached and physically stronger plus he had Fetisov and Kasatonov on defense, but I'm sure all this will be taken into consideration.
Just to add: of course Makarov probably had some big advantages, like playing on teams that were mostly better-coached and physically stronger plus he had Fetisov and Kasatonov on defense, but I'm sure all this will be taken into consideration.
I think you forgot to take in consideration that Kharlamov had two Top-100 players on his unit.
But Makarov played on perhaps the best 5 man unit ever to play together for an extended period.
As for the "seeing is believing" approach, Kharlamov looked to be the more gifted player to me.
I don't disagree with you, but the post you were quoting sounded like Kharlamov's regular partners were Sergei Berezin, Andrei Lomakin, Igor Ulanov and Andrei Zyuzin.
I'm also of the approach that says : It's not the skill that matters; it's what you do with it.
I don't disagree with you, but the post you were quoting sounded like Kharlamov's regular partners were Sergei Berezin, Andrei Lomakin, Igor Ulanov and Andrei Zyuzin.
I'm also of the approach that says : It's not the skill that matters; it's what you do with it.
I think its safe to say that all of the great Soviet players played mostly with other great Soviet players. While the 5 man unit Makarov played on was perhaps the best, you are correct in stating that its not a huge gap to the other great Soviet units. It makes me wonder, if the USSR did not fall apart how good would the Federov, Bure, Mogilny, Konstantinov, ?(maybe Gonchar, Kasparaitis) unit have been.
I think you forgot to take in consideration that Kharlamov had two Top-100 players on his unit.
Khrushchev and Bretzhnev?
And Makarov had Krutov and Larionov, I don't think it's that much worse, if at all. But on defense, Fetisov-Kasatonov were the big advantages that Kharlamov didn't have. Vasiliev-Gusev/Lutchenko wasn't quite up there.
But like I said, IMO Makarov was slightly better than Kharlamov - no matter the 'different era' or anything - and it would be interesting to see a comprehensive analysis on the subject.
And Makarov had Krutov and Larionov, I don't think it's that much worse, if at all. But on defense, Fetisov-Kasatonov were the big advantages that Kharlamov didn't have. Vasiliev-Gusev/Lutchenko wasn't quite up there.
But like I said, IMO Makarov was slightly better than Kharlamov - no matter the 'different era' or anything - and it would be interesting to see a comprehensive analysis on the subject.
I suspect Mikhailov and Vasiliev are the two top-100's being referred to.
I don't think there's all that big of a gap between Fetisov and Vasiliev as far as defensemen go, but in terms of offense obviously Fetisov would have been a big advantage as you've stated.
From all I can gather, Kharlamov is considered the greatest Soviet hockey player by the Russians themselves. They should know a lot better than myself, so I'll take their word for it until I see a really convincing case for someone else. The fact that Tretiak's MVP voting record is so much better has made me think about moving him ahead, but as it stands I still have Kharlamov first.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD
I don't disagree with you, but the post you were quoting sounded like Kharlamov's regular partners were Sergei Berezin, Andrei Lomakin, Igor Ulanov and Andrei Zyuzin.
I'm also of the approach that says : It's not the skill that matters; it's what you do with it.
Hey! The Soviets would have been absolutely invincible with Igor out there! (That's the guy in my avatar btw )
I suspect Mikhailov and Vasiliev are the two top-100's being referred to.
I don't think there's all that big of a gap between Fetisov and Vasiliev as far as defensemen go, but in terms of offense obviously Fetisov would have been a big advantage as you've stated.
From all I can gather, Kharlamov is considered the greatest Soviet hockey player by the Russians themselves. They should know a lot better than myself, so I'll take their word for it until I see a really convincing case for someone else. The fact that Tretiak's MVP voting record is so much better has made me think about moving him ahead, but as it stands I still have Kharlamov first.
My thoughts exactly. As for Tretiak's MVP voting record, I think at least part of that is that he was far better than every other Soviet goalie, so he stood out more in comparison. For some reason, the USSR/Russia has never been as good at developing goaltenders as it has been at the other positions.
I suspect Mikhailov and Vasiliev are the two top-100's being referred to.
I don't think there's all that big of a gap between Fetisov and Vasiliev as far as defensemen go, but in terms of offense obviously Fetisov would have been a big advantage as you've stated.
From all I can gather, Kharlamov is considered the greatest Soviet hockey player by the Russians themselves. They should know a lot better than myself, so I'll take their word for it until I see a really convincing case for someone else. The fact that Tretiak's MVP voting record is so much better has made me think about moving him ahead, but as it stands I still have Kharlamov first.
Hey! The Soviets would have been absolutely invincible with Igor out there! (That's the guy in my avatar btw )
Just to play Devil's Advocate here, from what I've heard the Russian fans & players have a greater appreciation for the aesthetics of the game. They would probably rank Lafleur higher in this poll than most North Americans. Could be why Kharlamov is considered the best. They love those lovely(style-wise) players.
Just to play Devil's Advocate here, from what I've heard the Russian fans & players have a greater appreciation for the aesthetics of the game. They would probably rank Lafleur higher in this poll than most North Americans. Could be why Kharlamov is considered the best. They love those lovely(style-wise) players.
That is very true, and it's something that has crossed my mind as well. Kharlamov is definitely a case where the legend may have outgrown the player. But most Canadians who watched him in the Summit Series felt he was the best as well, though that is a small sample size and Kharlamov was apparently at his absolute peak right around that time.
Just to play Devil's Advocate here, from what I've heard the Russian fans & players have a greater appreciation for the aesthetics of the game. They would probably rank Lafleur higher in this poll than most North Americans. Could be why Kharlamov is considered the best. They love those lovely(style-wise) players.
You raise an interesting point. European fans tend to appreciate players for their perceived performance on the large Olympic sized rink in events or short series while North American fans tend to appreciate perceived performance on the standard NHL rink over seasons and playoffs.
The Lafleur / Kharlamov analogy is interesting. Off ice they had issues with motor vehicles. Lafleur was involved in two serious one car accidents - first in 1971, just after being drafted by the Canadiens, he rolled his car driving from Quebec to Montreal. Kharlamov was also involved in two serious car accidents, paying the ultimate price in the second one.
That is very true, and it's something that has crossed my mind as well. Kharlamov is definitely a case where the legend may have outgrown the player. But most Canadians who watched him in the Summit Series felt he was the best as well, though that is a small sample size and Kharlamov was apparently at his absolute peak right around that time.
If you look at the Soviet stats from the Summit Series you will see that Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring followed by Vladimir Shadrin. Kharlamov made an instant impression in Canada in game one but then slowly came down to earth whereas Yakushev's performance grew as the series progressed.
Also Valeri Kharlamov was the most penalized Soviet player. He gave as good as he got BUT the apologists who want to paint Bobby Clarke as a villain tend to overlook such behavior.
If you look at the Soviet stats from the Summit Series you will see that Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring followed by Vladimir Shadrin. Kharlamov made an instant impression in Canada in game one but then slowly came down to earth whereas Yakushev's performance grew as the series progressed.
That's the thing though: Even if the numbers may not support it, almost every Canadian who witnessed the Summit Series live will instantly tell you that Kharlamov was the best they had to offer, just like the Russian fans. And of course many Canadian fans are tend to be a lot more biased towards displays of grit and courage, like the Russian fans tend to be with explosive speed or maneouvering. Despite those differences, many Canadians who watched tend to agree with the Russians on Kharlamov. Was everybody "deceived", for lack of a better term?
That's the thing though: Even if the numbers may not support it, almost every Canadian who witnessed the Summit Series live will instantly tell you that Kharlamov was the best they had to offer, just like the Russian fans. And of course many Canadian fans are tend to be a lot more biased towards displays of grit and courage, like the Russian fans tend to be with explosive speed or maneouvering. Despite those differences, many Canadians who watched tend to agree with the Russians on Kharlamov. Was everybody "deceived", for lack of a better term?
Maybe, but on the other hand...
It's not the skill that matters.
It's what you do with it.
That's the thing though: Even if the numbers may not support it, almost every Canadian who witnessed the Summit Series live will instantly tell you that Kharlamov was the best they had to offer, just like the Russian fans. And of course many Canadian fans are tend to be a lot more biased towards displays of grit and courage, like the Russian fans tend to be with explosive speed or maneouvering. Despite those differences, many Canadians who watched tend to agree with the Russians on Kharlamov. Was everybody "deceived", for lack of a better term?
First impressions carry a lot of weight.
In game one of the Summit Series Kharlamov scored the two secong period goals that broke the 2-2 first period deadlock. The resulting Soviet victory forever changed perceptions about NHL and
Soviet hockey.
In game eight, Paul Henderson scored the game/series winning goal in the last 31 seconds. Henderson also scored the game winning goal in games six and seven. While Henderson's goals are laudible people manage to keep them in perspective to the rest of his career an no one makes a case that Henderson is a Top 100 player.
The same balance should be brought to other analysis.
)
