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.

Round 2, Vote 7 (2009 update)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-11-2009, 09:32 PM
  #76
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
..Kindof. The same way Denneny and Stewart are both lacking something
Stewart is clearly lacking defence. But, what is Denneny lacking?

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 09:37 PM
  #77
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 500
Eliteness

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Well, now that ATD11 is over, yes, yes he does.

Seriously though, I wouldn't say he does. Only when compared to players like this he does. three times top-5 in goals and four times top-5 in assists isn't something that's all that common.

For example, four top-5s in assists is an achievement shared by 39 players in total. Three top-5s in goals is an achievement shared by only 65 players.

The list of players to have done both (or better) is as follows:

Gretzky (1), Howe (3), Lemieux (4), Beliveau (7), Morenz (11), Mikita (15), Lafleur (19), Esposito (20), Jagr (23), Taylor (27), Lindsay (30), Dionne (50), Bathgate (56), Bentley (57), Nighbor (likely 71), MacKay (won't come up but should), Fredrickson (won't come up), Morris (won't come up), and Joliat. 19 players in total.
Eliteness. Only true NHL contemporary of Joliat to do it was Morenz, a teammate. Cook, C.Conacher, and others did not whereas the others listed all have contemporaries on other teams.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 09:58 PM
  #78
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
But that is specifically oriented to Joliat's abilities. What about the amount of players with 7 total top 5 finishes in goals and or assists?
So, total top-5 finishes, regardless of goals or assists?

OK, hold on. Gotta grab another file..........


That becomes a list of 39 players:

31 - G. Howe (3)
24 - Gretzky (1)
16 - Esposito (20)
15 - Lemieux (4)
14 - Bo. Hull (5)
Beliveau (7)
Jagr (23)
12- Mikita (15)
M.Richard (9)
Lalonde (28)
Dionne (50)
Morenz (11)
Bathgate (56)
11 - F.Taylor (27)
Lindsay (30)
Lafleur (19)
10 - Bi.Cook (40)
F.Boucher (48)
Oates (est. 120th)
9 - Bossy (29)
Nighbor (est. 71st)
B.Trottier (26)
8 - N.Stewart (currently in discussion)
Cy Denneny (currently in discussion)
Malone (45)
Fredrickson (won't come up)
Sakic (32)
B.Morris (won't come up)
Lach (est. 75th)
Abel (est. 90th)
7 - Joliat (currently in discussion)
MacKay (est. 120th)
R.Conacher (est. 130th)
Schriner (est. 150th)
D.Bentley (est. 75th)
M.Bentley (57)
Cowley (est. 80th)
Coffey (46)

I left them in order of total top-5s just so we could compare where players ended up compared to this rudimentary list.

North American forwards with fewer total top-5s who are already voted in:

6 - Mahovlich (49)
Geoffrion (43)
C.Conacher (47)
5 - Apps Sr (38)
Yzerman (36)
Schmidt (34)
Clarke (21)
4 - H.Richard (55)
3 - Messier (22)

Interesting stuff.


Last edited by seventieslord: 09-11-2009 at 10:10 PM.
seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 10:04 PM
  #79
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Eliteness. Only true NHL contemporary of Joliat to do it was Morenz, a teammate. Cook, C.Conacher, and others did not whereas the others listed all have contemporaries on other teams.
I define eliteness as being among the handful of very best players at something. Cook, Conacher, Boucher, and others were elite players. Morenz was not "in a class by himself" in any particular era except speed, and he was able to be an excellent goalscorer and playmaker simultaneously, something the above three can't claim.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 10:11 PM
  #80
lextune
I'm too old for this
 
lextune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 9,737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Seriously though, I wouldn't say he does. Only when compared to players like this he does. three times top-5 in goals and four times top-5 in assists isn't something that's all that common.

For example, four top-5s in assists is an achievement shared by 39 players in total. Three top-5s in goals is an achievement shared by only 65 players.

The list of players to have done both (or better) is as follows:

Gretzky (1), Howe (3), Lemieux (4), Beliveau (7), Morenz (11), Mikita (15), Lafleur (19), Esposito (20), Jagr (23), Taylor (27), Lindsay (30), Dionne (50), Bathgate (56), Bentley (57), Nighbor (likely 71), MacKay (won't come up but should), Fredrickson (won't come up), Morris (won't come up), and Joliat. 19 players in total.
hmmm....this is an excellent, thought provoking, post.

lextune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 10:26 PM
  #81
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
So, total top-5 finishes, regardless of goals or assists?

OK, hold on. Gotta grab another file..........


That becomes a list of 39 players:

31 - G. Howe (3)
24 - Gretzky (1)
16 - Esposito (20)
15 - Lemieux (4)
14 - Bo. Hull (5)
Beliveau (7)
Jagr (23)
12- Mikita (15)
M.Richard (9)
Lalonde (28)
Dionne (50)
Morenz (11)
Bathgate (56)
11 - F.Taylor (27)
Lindsay (30)
Lafleur (19)
10 - Bi.Cook (40)
F.Boucher (48)
Oates (est. 120th)
9 - Bossy (29)
Nighbor (est. 71st)
B.Trottier (26)
8 - N.Stewart (currently in discussion)
Cy Denneny (currently in discussion)
Malone (45)
Fredrickson (won't come up)
Sakic (32)
B.Morris (won't come up)
Lach (est. 75th)
Abel (est. 90th)
7 - Joliat (currently in discussion)
MacKay (est. 120th)
R.Conacher (est. 130th)
Schriner (est. 150th)
D.Bentley (est. 75th)
M.Bentley (57)
Cowley (est. 80th)
Coffey (46)

I left them in order of total top-5s just so we could compare where players ended up compared to this rudimentary list.

North American forwards with fewer total top-5s who are already voted in:

6 - Mahovlich
Geoffrion
C.Conacher
5 - Apps Sr
Yzerman
Schmidt
Clarke
4 - H.Richard
3 - Messier

Interesting stuff.
Just to add to this - the list does somewhat correspond with what we have voted in so far, however, there are some anomalies that I thought I'd discuss.

Particular cases of interest are bolded.

Phil Esposito - Espo has the 3rd most total top-5 finishes but came out 20th on our list. I think the reason for this is that Orr is seen as being responsible for a lot of his success, and rightly so. Also, Espo was nothing special defensively.

Jaromir Jagr - Jagr is tied for the 5th-most top-5 finishes but was only 23rd on our list. He's being punished for inconsistency, lack of a two-way game, and attitude. However - If he did all this while being inconsistent and a one-man show half the time.... wow!

Newsy Lalonde - Lalonde had the 8th-most top-5 finishes but came out only 28th on our list. Why was he punished? Not sure. he was an inspirational leader, fiery and tough, balanced offensively... he had a penchant for dirty play, occasionally hurting his team. But not to the point he should drop this low relative to his scoring prowess.

Marcel Dionne - Dionne also has the 8th-most top-5 finishes but is 50th on the list. Basically, Dionne is seen as a playoff flop, rightly so, and though he's not exactly soft, he wasn't a tough player or a defensive star.

Andy Bathgate - bathgate also has the 8th-most top-5 finishes but fell all the way down to 56th. His playoff record is unimpressive, he was not a two-way player, was a pacifist, and apparently had trouble fitting into Toronto's system.

Cyclone taylor - Taylor has the 14th-most top-5 finishes but was 27th on our list. Like Lalonde, he's far too low down, for no good reason. He was a leader, he was fairly tough, balanced offensively, dynamite in the playoffs, and, these numbers are based only on the portion of his career where he was a forward, and ignores his time as an all-star defenseman which can only add to his resume.

Ted Lindsay - Lindsay is also tied for 14th-most top-5 finishes but sits at 30th. It's tough to see why the tough little bugger should be this low. I guess his poor showing in Hart voting and the fact that he was only the 3rd-4th best player on his team had something to do with it. Tough break.

Bill Cook - 17th in top-5 finishes, 40th on the list. Tough, a leader, good in the playoffs. Early player bias. Simple as that.

Frank Boucher - 17th in top-5 finishes, 48th on our list. Was the best playmaker of his time, by a wide margin. A great defensive forward, too. Early player bias again.

Adam Oates - Oates, by this measure, is in Frank Boucher territory but won't place anywhere near where Boucher will. He's the kind of guy you just run out of room for.

Frank nighbor - tied for 20th in top-5 finishes, which came from him being a great goalscorer AND playmaker, yet will be lucky to get the 71st spot on this list. He is the type of player whose intangibles should bring him higher on the list compared to his scoring prowess, not lower. By rights, he should be right where Taylor and Lalonde currently are, but shouldn't be. Absolutely, criminally overlooked player. Shame on us all.

Nels Stewart & Cy Denneny - tied for 23rd in top-5 finishes but will likely place around 65th-70th on the list. Likely fair, as they were bad skaters who weren't particularly good at anything else (both were tough, Denneny was a pretty good playmaker)

After that, only Fredrickson and Morris really stand out considering they won't be up for discussion in this project despite having outstanding scoring credentials. They're not really known for anything else other than regular season scoring, and there is comparitively little known about their styles of play. So it sucks to be them, I guess!

I'll come back later and look at the players who seemed to do quite well in voting compared to their scoring records.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 01:46 AM
  #82
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
It's not tunnel-visioned at all. It's reality.

The World Championships is a lesser tournament. Always has been. Always will be. It is not, has never been, and never will be a best-on-best. And therefore accomplishments in that tournament have to be taken with a grain of salt.
I do take them with a grain of salt! But they are not worthless. For example, if a Czech right wing like Vladimir Martinec has good WC numbers and is chosen to the all-star team 4 times over a prime Boris Mikhailov, that means something, to me at least. And if his performances (seen 8-9 games recently on DVD) support those awards & numbers, well, I have no reason to doubt that he was a great player - like numerous USSR players and some other Czechoslovak players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
The Czechs of the 70s were a good team, but not a great team. Don't care about the draw in 72. That was an exhibition game. You know you're reaching in an argument when you bring exhibition games results into the equation. (The round-robin victory in 76 absolutely means something, but Canada was better when it mattered the most).
Yes, the good ole "Team Canada didn't care" argument... well, whatever there. Yes, the round-robin meant something, since after losing to the Czechs, Team Canada had to at least get a draw vs. the Soviets to reach the finals. And I've got no problems to admit that Team Canada was the best team in the tournament. Could whine about Steve Shutt making a brutal check on Jiri Novak in the 1st final (and thus eliminating the center of probably the best CSSR line Martinec-Novak-B. Stastny), but nevermind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
You also diminish your argument when you make a comment like this: "Yeah, and the Canada Cup was probably the least relevant Canada Cup in sports. " Clearly, you don't have a credible argument. There aren't many sports with a Canada Cup. There is one in curling, but that one doesn't carry the significance that the Canada Cup had from 76 to 91, and that the World Cup had in 96. But that's because the Canada/World Cup in hockey was the only real best-on-best that existed in international hockey from 1973 to 1997.
Oh lord. I guess trying to make a joke is not very wise here (would have thought that the 'smilie' would have 'saved me').

Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
World Championships tend to be best-on-best tournaments. They are in basketball. They are in curling. And they're big deals in individual sports. But in hockey, it has nowhere near as much significance.

If you truly believe that hockey had only two superpowers in the 70s and 80s, then we shouldn't put any stock into what Mikhailov and Makarov did unless they were playing in the Canada Cup, or special events like Summit (which was a really, really special event), the Challenge Cup or Rendez-Vous 87. Canada's entries at the World Championships (when we sent teams) were far from our best possible teams. And the Soviets were beating vastly inferior teams. (Except for the Czechs, who won less than 40 per cent of the time, which is pretty lopsided in hockey).

The goal that Makarov scores against the Czechs probably is the same. (Unless Hasek is injured). But instead of facing Canada's best players not in the Stanley Cup playoffs (which, in the 80s, didn't have much talent to choose from, since five teams missed the playoffs), Makarov was facing Canada's best. (Or Canada's best according to Mike Keenan, if you will). And that changes the entire complexion of the tournament.

For the record, I do have Nedomansky and Holocek in my top 120. Both are in the 101-120 range, but they cracked the rankings. And I'm probably one of the few with Petrov in his rankings, although, again, Petrov is in the 101-120 range.
I would be interested to know, why do you have even those two + Petrov in the top 120. What is the 'method' by which you rate Soviet and other Eastern bloc players, if you don't care about their accomplishments outside Canada Cups and the odd Challenge Cup?

And BTW, Rendez-Vous? That was friggin' 2 games! Hey, it was great hockey (Kamensky=brilliant), but if those weren't 'exhibition' games, I don't know what were. At least in the Challenge Cup, it was basically Team Canada (forget Salming and especially Nilsson & Hedberg), but in the Rendez-Vous it was some sort of Team World vs. USSR - They didn't even bother to find out the winner of the series!

PS. Could someone, who is willing and able, count how many points Makarov scored in the 8 Canada Cup games he played vs. Team Canada? I'm betting my arse that his PPG is way over 1.00.


Last edited by VMBM: 09-12-2009 at 05:04 AM.
VMBM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 01:49 AM
  #83
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
He's right, though. Perreault had so much flash and dash but a brutal two-way game and when you look at his award voting and top-10 finishes in scoring his resume is really not all that special. I'm really hoping he doesn't get a chance to be voted in.
I think that is what we call 'an opinion', pt. 2

VMBM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 01:58 AM
  #84
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The lack of quality left wingers vs the plentiful number of quality centers spanning the history of hockey would be one factor why Moore should be ranked higher.
I disagree with this. While Moore may be seen as more valuable commodity, and rank much higher on the list of LW than Forsberg does on the list of C, I don't see why it makes him a better hockey player. Unless you want to argue that LW requires more skill to play than center, which would be in stark contrast to general opinion of the hockey world.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 02:10 AM
  #85
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
The bad NHL teams were, comparatively, better than the bad national teams...
Yeah, they were probably better than Poland, Netherlands, East Germany... that's about it.

VMBM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 02:16 AM
  #86
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
I would be interested to know, why do you even have those two + Petrov in the top 120. What is the 'method' by which you rate Soviet and other Eastern bloc players, if you don't care about their accomplishments outside Canada Cups and the odd Challenge Cup.
Personally, I don't put a lot stock into things that happened at the world championship and other international tournaments (unless comparing Eastern bloc players amongst eachother). I rank the Europeans based on the premise that their elite were on a fairly even footing with the Canadian elite of the time. Lots of people saw with their own two eyes that best the Soviets and Czechs had to offer in the 70's and 80's would have been elite NHL players. That's good enough for me, and I try to place them accordingly based partly on where I've placed comparable NHL players from the same era.

But I am in agreement with you that it is silly rank them low just because they "didn't prove themselves against Canada's best". I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest Makarov and Mikhailov would have been amongst the NHL's elite if they'd had the chance to do so. As you suggest, not bothering to rank them at all is probably preferable to slotting them at the bottom of a list as a "courtesy". The same goes for the pre-consolidation North American players. I can respect somebody not listing Taylor or Lalonde at all due to a lack of knowledge about them more than somebody who haphazardly throws them in at #50 or #60 because they know they were great, but "it was a century ago, talent was spread out, etc".

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 03:13 AM
  #87
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
I think that is what we call 'an opinion', pt. 2
Well, actually, it's common knowledge that he had a bad two-way game, (confirmed by adjusted +/- figures) and it his true that his record as far as award voting and top-10 (or even top-20) finishes is not as impressive as one would think. That's not opinion. "Perreault was not that great" is an opinion, and I'm prepared to back that opinion up with facts as seen above, and comparisons to other centers from history.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 03:15 AM
  #88
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Well, actually, it's common knowledge that he had a bad two-way game, (confirmed by adjusted +/- figures) and it his true that his record as far as award voting and top-10 (or even top-20) finishes is not as impressive as one would think. That's not opinion. "Perreault was not that great" is an opinion, and I'm prepared to back that opinion up with facts as seen above, and comparisons to other centers from history.
Check out my new thread

VMBM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 05:34 AM
  #89
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 500
Dickie Moore

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
I disagree with this. While Moore may be seen as more valuable commodity, and rank much higher on the list of LW than Forsberg does on the list of C, I don't see why it makes him a better hockey player. Unless you want to argue that LW requires more skill to play than center, which would be in stark contrast to general opinion of the hockey world.
Check how Moore's raw or adjusted 1958-59 Art Ross winning scoring totals would rank during the last 10 -15 seasons especially to Forsberg's Art Ross season then re-visit your point. Think that the better point definitely tilts towards Moore.

As for the other traits that Forsberg brought they were also evident in players like Dave Keon, Adam Oates, Peter Stastny,Doug Gilmour, Jean Ratelle, and other centers who are far from consideration. Some were a bit better at certain skills, while others were a bit weaker.The same cannot be said for Moore's attributes when compared to LWs that have yet to be considered.

Frankly I do not see how anyone can separate value from better. The two concepts are intertwined.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 05:48 AM
  #90
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 500
European Elite

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Personally, I don't put a lot stock into things that happened at the world championship and other international tournaments (unless comparing Eastern bloc players amongst eachother). I rank the Europeans based on the premise that their elite were on a fairly even footing with the Canadian elite of the time. Lots of people saw with their own two eyes that best the Soviets and Czechs had to offer in the 70's and 80's would have been elite NHL players. That's good enough for me, and I try to place them accordingly based partly on where I've placed comparable NHL players from the same era.

But I am in agreement with you that it is silly rank them low just because they "didn't prove themselves against Canada's best". I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest Makarov and Mikhailov would have been amongst the NHL's elite if they'd had the chance to do so. As you suggest, not bothering to rank them at all is probably preferable to slotting them at the bottom of a list as a "courtesy". The same goes for the pre-consolidation North American players. I can respect somebody not listing Taylor or Lalonde at all due to a lack of knowledge about them more than somebody who haphazardly throws them in at #50 or #60 because they know they were great, but "it was a century ago, talent was spread out, etc".
The same people also saw what the contemporaries of the Soviets and Czechs, the Swedes and Finns did in the NHL and WHA so a comparison of potential was available on the table. The unknown factor was whether they could perform under NHL conditions, number of games, travel, removed from their system. The consensus seems to be that they deserved or earned the chance to show that they could be elite NHL players. Nothing is given in hockey. It has to be earned.

The issue then becomes how much latitude is each player allowed when making such projections and that is where it gets tricky because certain posters tend to over compensate. Example Kharlamov gets special consideration because of the Clarke slash in 1972 yet Yakushev had an outstanding series and always raised his game against Canada. If Clarke had slashed Yakushev then the bleeding hearts faction would be singing the praisies of Yakushev instead of Kharlamov.

Disclaimer. This analogy in no way approves slashing.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 06:31 AM
  #91
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
PS. Could someone, who is willing and able, count how many points Makarov scored in the 8 Canada Cup games he played vs. Team Canada? I'm betting my arse that his PPG is way over 1.00.
Me!

Makarov (vs. Team Canada in the Canada Cups 1981-87):

Games Played: 8
Goals: 5
Assists: 7
Points: 12
Points Per Game: 1.5


Consistency-wise, he scored at least one point in every game. Does this prove anything? I don't know. Still, interesting, eh?

VMBM is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 06:51 AM
  #92
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 500
Alexander Yakushev

Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
Me!

Makarov (vs. Team Canada in the Canada Cups 1981-87):

Games Played: 8
Goals: 5
Assists: 7
Points: 12
Points Per Game: 1.5


Consistency-wise, he scored at least one point in every game. Does this prove anything? I don't know. Still, interesting, eh?
Compares favourably to Alexander Yakushev's performance during the 1972 Summit Series. 8 games, 7 goals, 4 assists with Yakushev showing that he could make the game after game adjustments required by an eight game series in a short time frame against the same opponent.

http://www.1972summitseries.com/index2.html

Doubtful that Yakushev will make the top 100.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 08:53 AM
  #93
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
I disagree with this. While Moore may be seen as more valuable commodity, and rank much higher on the list of LW than Forsberg does on the list of C, I don't see why it makes him a better hockey player. Unless you want to argue that LW requires more skill to play than center, which would be in stark contrast to general opinion of the hockey world.
Completely agree.

If based on more valuable commodity, it could be argued the top 10 should be full of goalies rather than void of them.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 09:42 AM
  #94
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
So, total top-5 finishes, regardless of goals or assists?

OK, hold on. Gotta grab another file..........


That becomes a list of 39 players:

31 - G. Howe (3)
24 - Gretzky (1)
16 - Esposito (20)
15 - Lemieux (4)
14 - Bo. Hull (5)
Beliveau (7)
Jagr (23)
12- Mikita (15)
M.Richard (9)
Lalonde (28)
Dionne (50)
Morenz (11)
Bathgate (56)
11 - F.Taylor (27)
Lindsay (30)
Lafleur (19)
10 - Bi.Cook (40)
F.Boucher (48)
Oates (est. 120th)
9 - Bossy (29)
Nighbor (est. 71st)
B.Trottier (26)
8 - N.Stewart (currently in discussion)
Cy Denneny (currently in discussion)
Malone (45)
Fredrickson (won't come up)
Sakic (32)
B.Morris (won't come up)
Lach (est. 75th)
Abel (est. 90th)
7 - Joliat (currently in discussion)
MacKay (est. 120th)
R.Conacher (est. 130th)
Schriner (est. 150th)
D.Bentley (est. 75th)
M.Bentley (57)
Cowley (est. 80th)
Coffey (46)

I left them in order of total top-5s just so we could compare where players ended up compared to this rudimentary list.

North American forwards with fewer total top-5s who are already voted in:

6 - Mahovlich (49)
Geoffrion (43)
C.Conacher (47)
5 - Apps Sr (38)
Yzerman (36)
Schmidt (34)
Clarke (21)
4 - H.Richard (55)
3 - Messier (22)

Interesting stuff.
I know many here give equal value to goals and assists, which makes this really interesting stuff.

But I'm one of those that value goals more than assists. So some of these numbers are a little skewed for me.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 10:33 AM
  #95
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 23,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Stewart is clearly lacking defence. But, what is Denneny lacking?
Footspeed, and not exactely the best defensive player.
(it doesn't take away anything from his achievements, just means that as far as "completeness" is concerned, he's below Joliat, though a part of his game (goalscoring) is superior to Joliat).

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 12:15 PM
  #96
Howe Elbows 9
Registered User
 
Howe Elbows 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,788
vCash: 50
All-star team voting at center:

Season First Second Third
1996-97 Lemieux Gretzky Forsberg
1997-98 Forsberg Gretzky Francis
1998-99 Forsberg Yashin Lindros
2002-03 Forsberg Thornton Modano

Forsberg's placements in the top 10 in Hart voting:

Season Rank Comment
1997-98 8th Second among centers in votes, after Gretzky (5th)
1998-99 7th Third among centers, after Yashin (2nd) and Lindros (6th)
2002-03 1st 48.5% edge in voting over Näslund. Closest center was Thornton (4th)

Forsberg was second to Peca in Selke voting in 1996-97. When he won the Hart, Peter was fourth in Selke voting, after Lehtinen, Madden and Walz.

Highest career regular season PPG among players with at least 500 GP:

Player GP G A TP PPG
Wayne Gretzky 1487 894 1963 2857 1.92
Mario Lemieux 915 690 1033 1723 1.88
Mike Bossy 752 573 553 1126 1.50
Bobby Orr 657 270 645 915 1.39
Marcel Dionne 1348 731 1040 1771 1.31
Peter Stastny 977 450 789 1239 1.27
Jaromir Jagr 1273 646 953 1599 1.26
Peter Forsberg 706 249 636 885 1.25
Phil Esposito 1282 717 873 1590 1.24
Kent Nilsson 553 264 422 686 1.24

Highest playoff PPG among players with at least 50 GP:

Player GP G A TP PPG
Wayne Gretzky 208 122 260 382 1.84
Mario Lemieux 107 76 96 172 1.61
Mark Messier 236 109 186 295 1.25
Mike Bossy 129 85 75 160 1.24
Bobby Orr 74 26 66 92 1.24
Jari Kurri 200 106 127 233 1.17
Gilbert Perreault 90 33 70 103 1.14
Peter Forsberg 151 64 107 171 1.13
Peter Stastny 93 33 72 105 1.13
Bernie Federko 91 35 66 101 1.11

Howe Elbows 9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 12:18 PM
  #97
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Check how Moore's raw or adjusted 1958-59 Art Ross winning scoring totals would rank during the last 10 -15 seasons especially to Forsberg's Art Ross season then re-visit your point. Think that the better point definitely tilts towards Moore.

As for the other traits that Forsberg brought they were also evident in players like Dave Keon, Adam Oates, Peter Stastny,Doug Gilmour, Jean Ratelle, and other centers who are far from consideration. Some were a bit better at certain skills, while others were a bit weaker.The same cannot be said for Moore's attributes when compared to LWs that have yet to be considered.

Frankly I do not see how anyone can separate value from better. The two concepts are intertwined.
But you're only comparing Moore to the historically weak LW populace, and Forsberg to the historically strong C position. We are comparing players of different positions to each other, not their levels of dominance over players of the same position. If that were the case, then why not rank Bobby Hull over Wayne Gretzky? Hull was the greatest LW by a larger margin than Gretzky (or Mario for those so inclined) was the greatest center.

Say you have two similar players, one LW and one C. Both finish with 80 points and are of equal value defensively, intangibles, etc. The LW leads his position in scoring, while the center is outscored by five other centers. Would you consider the LW the better hockey player? I would consider them both equal myself.

There are good reasons to rank Moore over Forsberg, but I don't feel positional dominance is one of them.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 12:28 PM
  #98
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,559
vCash: 500
Seems to me Denneny is getting underrated a bit.

It appears that Denneny and Nighbor were the Bossy and Trottier of their era in terms of scoring. But Denneny was also the muscle on their line while Nighbor was the defensive stalwart.

Denneny's offensive numbers are really remarkable. He is 2nd all time in goals per game with a .756 percentage to Bossy's .762. However, in his last 2 seasons (at age 36 & 37) he had 4 goals in 67 games. If those 2 years are dropped, his percentage is an incredible .935, 244 goals in 261 games. In the playoffs he had 16 goals in 25 games, but if the 2 years are dropped again its 16 in 21 games.

But Denneny also led the league in assists twice. So in his 10 seasons in the NHL before he collapsed offensively in the last two years, he came in the top 4 in scoring 8 times, 1st once, 2nd 5 times, 3rd once and 4th once.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 01:29 PM
  #99
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 500
Certain Perceptions

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
But you're only comparing Moore to the historically weak LW populace, and Forsberg to the historically strong C position. We are comparing players of different positions to each other, not their levels of dominance over players of the same position. If that were the case, then why not rank Bobby Hull over Wayne Gretzky? Hull was the greatest LW by a larger margin than Gretzky (or Mario for those so inclined) was the greatest center.

Say you have two similar players, one LW and one C. Both finish with 80 points and are of equal value defensively, intangibles, etc. The LW leads his position in scoring, while the center is outscored by five other centers. Would you consider the LW the better hockey player? I would consider them both equal myself.

There are good reasons to rank Moore over Forsberg, but I don't feel positional dominance is one of them.
Certain perceptions have to be adjusted. Left wing is simply harder to play than RW. LW does not have the favourable shooting angles(vast majority of goalies catch left) that a RW does and it is very rare that you see a RHS (Cashman) play LW whereas you regularly see LHS play RW. A LHS or RHS can play center but RHS are harder to find and all things being equal carry a premium.A LW who can play defense equal to a center and score at the same rate is worth significantly more to a team than the center - imagine Bob Gainey as an 80 point LW and you have your answer.

I fail to see how you can factor value out of the better consideration. Setting the fantasy league aspect aside where your example works since it produces a zero net, the LW in real on ice conditions would be the better player.

Your Hull/Gretzky/Lemieux analogy uses a vague sense of dominance. Granted that Gretzky and Lemieux are viewed as fairly close, almost in a Coke or Pepsi type of debate, but your Hull comparison to them misses the point completely.At a basic level if you take Bobby Hull's Art Ross years and compare them to Gretzky's or Lemieux's Art Ross years even after adjustments Hull does not come close. So the gap between Gretzky/ Lemieux and Hull is justified on all levels. If Hull's Art Ross season's would match or come close to Gretzky's or Lemieux's even after adjustments your analogy might have a chance.

Simply adjusted for length of season Dickie Moore in 1958-59, one of his two Art Ross years beats Forsberg in his Art Ross year as well as beating St.Louis, Iginla and Jagr. Given that Moore was a left winger this is even more impressive.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 09-12-2009 at 01:31 PM. Reason: addition
Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 01:51 PM
  #100
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,125
vCash: 500
Peter Forsberg

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirtless Joe View Post
All-star team voting at center:

Season First Second Third
1996-97 Lemieux Gretzky Forsberg
1997-98 Forsberg Gretzky Francis
1998-99 Forsberg Yashin Lindros
2002-03 Forsberg Thornton Modano

Forsberg's placements in the top 10 in Hart voting:

Season Rank Comment
1997-98 8th Second among centers in votes, after Gretzky (5th)
1998-99 7th Third among centers, after Yashin (2nd) and Lindros (6th)
2002-03 1st 48.5% edge in voting over Näslund. Closest center was Thornton (4th)

Forsberg was second to Peca in Selke voting in 1996-97. When he won the Hart, Peter was fourth in Selke voting, after Lehtinen, Madden and Walz.

Highest career regular season PPG among players with at least 500 GP:

Player GP G A TP PPG
Wayne Gretzky 1487 894 1963 2857 1.92
Mario Lemieux 915 690 1033 1723 1.88
Mike Bossy 752 573 553 1126 1.50
Bobby Orr 657 270 645 915 1.39
Marcel Dionne 1348 731 1040 1771 1.31
Peter Stastny 977 450 789 1239 1.27
Jaromir Jagr 1273 646 953 1599 1.26
Peter Forsberg 706 249 636 885 1.25
Phil Esposito 1282 717 873 1590 1.24
Kent Nilsson 553 264 422 686 1.24

Highest playoff PPG among players with at least 50 GP:

Player GP G A TP PPG
Wayne Gretzky 208 122 260 382 1.84
Mario Lemieux 107 76 96 172 1.61
Mark Messier 236 109 186 295 1.25
Mike Bossy 129 85 75 160 1.24
Bobby Orr 74 26 66 92 1.24
Jari Kurri 200 106 127 233 1.17
Gilbert Perreault 90 33 70 103 1.14
Peter Forsberg 151 64 107 171 1.13
Peter Stastny 93 33 72 105 1.13
Bernie Federko 91 35 66 101 1.11
So as an All Star Peter Forsberg was considered better than Yashin, Lindros, Modano, Thornton, in Hart voting he was not viewed favourably to Yashin or Lindros. Fourth in Selke after Lehtinen, Madden, Walz. Regular season PPG between P. Stastny and Kent Nilsson. Playoff PPG grouped with Perreault, Statsny, Federko.

Top 100?

Canadiens1958 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 03:45 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.