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.

Where do the great Soviets rank?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2010, 01:21 PM
  #101
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve141 View Post
I don't understand your point. It's not like we are not allowed to put more than one Russian on the list. There are four other Habs above Lafleur in the current top 20. That he doesn't stand out over other Habs players does not change his credentials one bit.



There is no consensus best Canadian player either. Most people have Gretzky as number one, but we all know that there are several reasonable people who would rather pick Orr, Howe or Lemieux instead.

He doesn't have to be the consensus best Russian to be high on the list. He has to be better than the other people currently in the high end spots of the list. From watching him play, and from all his awards and great statistics I think he is comparable to the players in the 20-25 range: Lafleur, Esposito, Clarke, Messier, Jagr, Trottier.
When the list was constructed, a lot of stock was put into the opinions of Russian observers. And they pretty much all had either Kharlamov or Tretiak as the best Russian player of all time, with Makarov usually pretty far behind.

I think the "assumption" was that Kharlamov was the best Soviet of all time, at least among forwards, because "who knows better than the Russians themselves." And then we look at Kharlamov and he's really hard to rank over Lafleur and Esposito - in fact, he dominated his (probably lesser) peers to a lower degree than they did.

But I'm really starting to think that this line of thinking is wrong. Makarov might be held back because we all wanted to put him quite a bit behind behind Kharlamov, because that's what the majority of Russian observers themselves seemed to think.

Edit: Here's a thread on the top 10 russian players of all time from 2007, before the HOH Top 100 was put together. Notice that Kharlamov is universally ranked over Makarov: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=331192

Even Makarov's own coach didn't pick him for the all-time Soviet team if you believe one of the Russian posters in that thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Gear View Post
Russian All-time unit, chosen by great coach V.V.Tikhonov:

Tretiak
Fetisov-Sologubov
Bobrov-Firsov-Kharlamov
Honestly, it's bizarre to me. The lack of respect for Makarov just doesn't line up with his statistical dominance.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-31-2010 at 01:36 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 02:02 PM
  #102
duck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Why do we need to translate their game onto NHL ice? This isn't the All-Time Draft. I realize the NHL is the best league in the world by a good margin, but this is a really Canada-centric view and is IMO exactly the kind of thing that the European posters are complaining about. Judge guys like Kharlamov for what they actually did, not what they could do in a North American setting.
Well, how do you hope to say that XXXXX player was better? Either postulate how North Americans would've translated onto Soviet Ice or vice versa, else you're comparing apples with oranges. And therefore, all these posts in this thread like "Kharlamov/Makarov/Petrov/Mikhailov are better than Jagr/Bossy/Kurri/etc" are absolutely meaningless because there isn't a fair comparison. If the level of play in the 70s was greater in the NHL than in the Soviet League, then the Soviet Players wouldn't have produced at such a prolific rate and their skill would be marginalized. Similarly, if the Soviet League was at a higher level, then 70s greats like Esposito should be considerably lower than the Soviet Players.

Bottom Line: As a group, the posts on here, despite recycled from previous threads, are indeed informative. However, they offer not even an ounce of objectivity when determining where to rate the players. The best way to rate the players is to have a separate European list (as they do in the ISS, I believe), and there being no intermixing between the two lists. Even that has flaws, but it gets rid of a lot of subjectivity present in current analysis/ranking methods.

duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 02:12 PM
  #103
steve141
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Makarov is not the best soviet player ever. Kharlamov and Fetisov are, followed by Tretiak. Makarov is more in the Firsov/Mikhailov level.
In my opinion of course. I admit to only having watched Kharlamov in the Summit Series. His play there did not impress me enough to say he was better than what I've seen from Makarov. Now, since many Russians hold him higher, it's possible he was much, much better in the Russian league, sans Clarke and all. If that is the case, you have to wonder why he didn't get better stats/awards though.

You are entitled to your opinion if that's what your eyes tell you however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Makarov may have won more individual awards in the soviet league, but largely my Russian friends tell me that was because by the time Makarov was taking over the team Tikhonov pillaged every other team to stack the red Army team and focus on working them together all year round for international play.
One dominant team does not explain why one forward was the highest scoring player in the league nine times. If he wasn't good enough some other player would have overtaken him. Why didn't they?

It's not like there wasn't serious competition between players. Looking at the scoring races, Makarov's teammates don't seem to have performed markedly better than the players from the other teams. In fact, the only constant at the top of the scoring table is Makarov, and his line mate Krutov.

The 1988-1989 CSKA Moscow team looks pretty lethal on paper though.


Last edited by steve141: 08-31-2010 at 02:19 PM.
steve141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 02:31 PM
  #104
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
When the list was constructed, a lot of stock was put into the opinions of Russian observers. And they pretty much all had either Kharlamov or Tretiak as the best Russian player of all time, with Makarov usually pretty far behind.

I think the "assumption" was that Kharlamov was the best Soviet of all time, at least among forwards, because "who knows better than the Russians themselves." And then we look at Kharlamov and he's really hard to rank over Lafleur and Esposito - in fact, he dominated his (probably lesser) peers to a lower degree than they did.

But I'm really starting to think that this line of thinking is wrong. Makarov might be held back because we all wanted to put him quite a bit behind behind Kharlamov, because that's what the majority of Russian observers themselves seemed to think.

Edit: Here's a thread on the top 10 russian players of all time from 2007, before the HOH Top 100 was put together. Notice that Kharlamov is universally ranked over Makarov: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=331192

Even Makarov's own coach didn't pick him for the all-time Soviet team if you believe one of the Russian posters in that thread:



Honestly, it's bizarre to me. The lack of respect for Makarov just doesn't line up with his statistical dominance.
I wonder if Makarov gets docked points from old-school russians for coming over to the NHL, sort of like many old-school NHLers still harbor a grudge against players who played in the WHA?

Though Fetisov does not seem to factor too negatively from this.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 02:39 PM
  #105
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,113
vCash: 500
Depth

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
When the list was constructed, a lot of stock was put into the opinions of Russian observers. And they pretty much all had either Kharlamov or Tretiak as the best Russian player of all time, with Makarov usually pretty far behind.

I think the "assumption" was that Kharlamov was the best Soviet of all time, at least among forwards, because "who knows better than the Russians themselves." And then we look at Kharlamov and he's really hard to rank over Lafleur and Esposito - in fact, he dominated his (probably lesser) peers to a lower degree than they did.

But I'm really starting to think that this line of thinking is wrong. Makarov might be held back because we all wanted to put him quite a bit behind behind Kharlamov, because that's what the majority of Russian observers themselves seemed to think.

Edit: Here's a thread on the top 10 russian players of all time from 2007, before the HOH Top 100 was put together. Notice that Kharlamov is universally ranked over Makarov: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=331192

Even Makarov's own coach didn't pick him for the all-time Soviet team if you believe one of the Russian posters in that thread:



Honestly, it's bizarre to me. The lack of respect for Makarov just doesn't line up with his statistical dominance.
Top 10 avoids the depth issue. So what if Kharlamov is ranked ahead of Makarov in a top 10. Nice but does not say anything about the contemporary level of competition each faced from goalies on out. Top 100 addresses such issues and let's everyone make their own analysis and interpretations.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 03:04 PM
  #106
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredrik_71 View Post
The great soviets has to be judged based on what you saw. I never saw Kharlamov, Firsov, etc live but I saw the KLM-line plenty with Fetisov and Kasatonov. And I have to say that this is the best line I ever saw, including the NHL. And my father say that Kharlamov-lines were better or just as good.
Due to nostalgia, I'd want to say Mikhailov-Petrov-Kharlamov was better, but I think I'd choose KLM anyway. Petrov's line has the statistics on their side (international play), but based on the games I've seen, KLM were a little more consistent, the individual players were quicker and more skillful [in general], and they played better power play (the Soviet PP occasionally downright sucked in the 70s!). Of course, they had a clear advantage on defense with Fetisov and Kasatonov, especially compared to someone like Alexander Gusev (I really don't like him ).

I think the Soviet hockey of the Seventies altogether is a bit overrated. I had this romanticized vision of the Russians being virtually unbeatable, but after studying the stats and watching numerous games it is really far from the truth; Czechoslovakia, for one, beat them all the time. Especially in 1976 and 1977, the Soviets had an extremely inconsistent and shaky hockey club. Only around 1978 things seemed to finally click and they became maybe the best hockey team the world has ever seen and - with the exception of that one famous hiccup - ruled supreme until 1983 or so.

IMO 1980s was the real Golden Age of Soviet hockey, if you look at the results and team play. Admittedly, on paper the teams of the 70s look generally stronger and have more stars, but they were beaten far more often than the 80s squads. Czechoslovakia wasn't probably as good in the 1980s as in the previous decade, but that alone doesn't explain it.

VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 03:21 PM
  #107
Haberdashery
 
Haberdashery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbio11 View Post
Just look at how Peter Stastny bum rushed the NHL in the 80s. He was far from being considered the best player in the former eastern block, yet he came over and dominated. He took the horrible, horrible Quebec team and made them competitive. In the 80s, he was often second to only Gretzky himself.
What the hell does "bum rushed" mean in this instance?

As for Stastny "far from being considered the best player in the eastern block" at the time...are you serious? Who was "far" better in 1980? Stastny was considered to be one of the best players in the world...period!!

Kharlamov's best years were behind him, Balderis was a flash-in-the-pan, Larionov, Makarov and Krutov were a little too young..... name a forward in the eastern block that was "far better" than Peter Stastny in 1980 when he defected.... not one player would have matched his rookie season or came close...he was 24 and a world superstar to everyone at the time except apparently you.

Seriously...name a Russian forward in 1980 that may have defected and proceeded to score more than 130 points as an NHL rookie. This should be comical. Hell..if he was far better...he would have scored 180 points at least. I'm anxious to hear about that player that apparently time has forgotten.

Haberdashery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 03:27 PM
  #108
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
I think the Soviet hockey of the Seventies altogether is a bit overrated. I had this romanticized vision of the Russians being virtually unbeatable, but after studying the stats and watching numerous games it is really far from the truth; Czechoslovakia, for one, beat them all the time. Especially in 1976 and 1977, the Soviets had an extremely inconsistent and shaky hockey club. Only around 1978 things seemed to finally click and they became maybe the best hockey team the world has ever seen and - with the exception of that one famous hiccup - ruled supreme until 1983 or so.

IMO 1980s was the real Golden Age of Soviet hockey, if you look at the results and team play. Admittedly, on paper the teams of the 70s look generally stronger and have more stars, but they were beaten far more often than the 80s squads. Czechoslovakia wasn't probably as good in the 1980s as in the previous decade, but that alone doesn't explain it.

What explains the mediocrity is Kulagin. It wasn't until Tikhonov took over that we saw more discipline and (more importantly) a more diversified Soviet game.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 03:43 PM
  #109
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,138
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdashery View Post
Kharlamov's best years were behind him, Balderis was a flash-in-the-pan, Larionov, Makarov and Krutov were a little too young..... name a forward in the eastern block that was "far better" than Peter Stastny in 1980 when he defected.... not one player would have matched his rookie season or came close...he was 24 and a world superstar to everyone at the time except apparently you.
The poster overdid it, but it is true that Stastny certainly wasn't even the consensus choice of being the best Czechoslovak player at the time. Or if he was, it was only because Hlinka, Martinec etc. were aging, and there weren't too many great young players to replace them. Stastny's most notable achievements before defecting was the Golden Hockey Stick in 1980 and being the top 2 scorer at the 1980 Winter Olympics (quite a few Czechoslovaks in the top 10, if I remember correctly). So it does look like he was 'emerging'...

Makarov was definitely a star already in 1980, and was selected the best forward at the 1979 World Championships... and definitely was considered a better player than Peter Stastny - which I think he was. Maybe not "far better", though. That doesn't necessarily mean that he would have had as good/better rookie season, but yes, he was capable of it... maybe with Krutov or someone else from Russia on his side.


Last edited by VMBM: 08-31-2010 at 03:52 PM.
VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 05:03 PM
  #110
Haberdashery
 
Haberdashery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
The poster overdid it, but it is true that Stastny certainly wasn't even the consensus choice of being the best Czechoslovak player at the time. Or if he was, it was only because Hlinka, Martinec etc. were aging, and there weren't too many great young players to replace them. Stastny's most notable achievements before defecting was the Golden Hockey Stick in 1980 and being the top 2 scorer at the 1980 Winter Olympics (quite a few Czechoslovaks in the top 10, if I remember correctly). So it does look like he was 'emerging'...

Makarov was definitely a star already in 1980, and was selected the best forward at the 1979 World Championships... and definitely was considered a better player than Peter Stastny - which I think he was. Maybe not "far better", though. That doesn't necessarily mean that he would have had as good/better rookie season, but yes, he was capable of it... maybe with Krutov or someone else from Russia on his side.

Stastny was most assuredly considered the best up and coming Czechoslovakian player of the time... Novy and Hlinka were of course more famous at the time, but were older and neither had the NHL potential that a 23-year-old Stastny had in regards to defecting in 1980.

Do you really think Makarov would have scored 120 points in the NHL at 20? He didn't do it at 28...... I realize it was a more wide open league at the time...but let's say he DID defect to the NHL in 1980 and scored 140 points ...would he have been better than Stastny?

Bear in mind - Stastny was bigger, nastier, played much better defensively, and was a center. You'd be hard pressed to find a GM who would rather have had Makarov than Stastny on their NHL team in the 1980's... a big nasty two way center who can put up as many points as a one-way, less than physical winger? Not even open for debate IMO.

Makarov was never a better "hockey player" than Peter Stastny in my opinion, just like Pavel Bure wasn't better than Mark Messier.

Haberdashery is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 05:23 PM
  #111
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdashery View Post
Stastny was most assuredly considered the best up and coming Czechoslovakian player of the time... Novy and Hlinka were of course more famous at the time, but were older and neither had the NHL potential that a 23-year-old Stastny had in regards to defecting in 1980.

Do you really think Makarov would have scored 120 points in the NHL at 20? He didn't do it at 28...... I realize it was a more wide open league at the time...but let's say he DID defect to the NHL in 1980 and scored 140 points ...would he have been better than Stastny?

Bear in mind - Stastny was bigger, nastier, played much better defensively, and was a center. You'd be hard pressed to find a GM who would rather have had Makarov than Stastny on their NHL team in the 1980's... a big nasty two way center who can put up as many points as a one-way, less than physical winger? Not even open for debate IMO.

Makarov was never a better "hockey player" than Peter Stastny in my opinion, just like Pavel Bure wasn't better than Mark Messier.
....hence all the problems of projecting NHL point totals with players not in the NHL at that time. However, it's still irrelevant because it doesn't dismiss the fact that Stastny wasn't considered the best European player circa 1980.

Best 'up and coming Czechoslovakian'? Certainly. However, ask any Czechoslovakian supporter in 1980 who's stick they'd want the puck on when the game is on the line. $500 the answer wasn't Stastny but Hlinka or Novy. Remember this discussion was never about NHL potential.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 05:48 PM
  #112
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,552
vCash: 500
Just curious:

What if the Wall doesn't come down and the Soviets remain as such, with a new top line of Bure-Federov-Mogilny. They play together for 10 years in the Soviet system. We in North America only see them in International competition. Would the perception be considerably different of them as individual players? Would Bure still play little defense,and if he did would we even notice if that line had the puck all the time? Would Federov only step it up when he felt like it? Would we think he was really "a big game player" because we didn't see him play all the time? Could Mogilny have been better than both of them with a fire lit under him at all times?

Like I said, I'm just curious what everyone's thoughts are. Because personally I think that line, in the Soviet system, would have been their best ever.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 05:54 PM
  #113
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdashery View Post
Stastny was most assuredly considered the best up and coming Czechoslovakian player of the time... Novy and Hlinka were of course more famous at the time, but were older and neither had the NHL potential that a 23-year-old Stastny had in regards to defecting in 1980.

Do you really think Makarov would have scored 120 points in the NHL at 20? He didn't do it at 28...... I realize it was a more wide open league at the time...but let's say he DID defect to the NHL in 1980 and scored 140 points ...would he have been better than Stastny?

Bear in mind - Stastny was bigger, nastier, played much better defensively, and was a center. You'd be hard pressed to find a GM who would rather have had Makarov than Stastny on their NHL team in the 1980's... a big nasty two way center who can put up as many points as a one-way, less than physical winger? Not even open for debate IMO.

Makarov was never a better "hockey player" than Peter Stastny in my opinion, just like Pavel Bure wasn't better than Mark Messier.
Stastny was never a great defensive player, dont make him out to be what he wasn't. Makarov wasn't in the nhl in the 80's, so you would have no idea whether the gm's would pick him or not. Wasn't Makarov outscoring stastny from 1990-1994? Yeah i rest my case. Your just assuming that because he was a center, that he was responsible defensively. Yet from the games i've seen, it was dale hunter that was backchecking on that team, i dont ever recalling stasnty being used in a shutdown role. Peter Stastny has similar top 10 finishes to guys like syll apps and milt schmidt, trust me if he was an 'intangibles' guy, he would get ranked alot higher than top 75 all times.

As for the guy that called Balderis a flash in the pan, lol. The guy was a superstar in the russian league for 7-8 years, nice flash in the pan.


Last edited by ushvinder: 08-31-2010 at 06:19 PM.
ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 05:55 PM
  #114
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haberdashery View Post

Do you really think Makarov would have scored 120 points in the NHL at 20? He didn't do it at 28...... I realize it was a more wide open league at the time...but let's say he DID defect to the NHL in 1980 and scored 140 points ...would he have been better than Stastny?
Makarov was 31 when he came over the the NHL - over the hill by Soviet standards.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 05:57 PM
  #115
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Just curious:

What if the Wall doesn't come down and the Soviets remain as such, with a new top line of Bure-Federov-Mogilny. They play together for 10 years in the Soviet system. We in North America only see them in International competition. Would the perception be considerably different of them as individual players? Would Bure still play little defense,and if he did would we even notice if that line had the puck all the time? Would Federov only step it up when he felt like it? Would we think he was really "a big game player" because we didn't see him play all the time? Could Mogilny have been better than both of them with a fire lit under him at all times?

Like I said, I'm just curious what everyone's thoughts are. Because personally I think that line, in the Soviet system, would have been their best ever.
It's hard to say. Bure certainly wouldn't have gotten away with cherrypicking like he did in the Soviet system.

The line certainly would have potential to be amazing - due to the sheer speed of all 3 players. A motivated Fedorov would have been a big step up from Petrov or Larionov.

I don't know though. Makarov was a far better playmaker than either Bure or Mogilny. (though who knows how they would have developed in the Soviet system).

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 06:04 PM
  #116
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
It's hard to say. Bure certainly wouldn't have gotten away with cherrypicking like he did in the Soviet system.

The line certainly would have potential to be amazing - due to the sheer speed of all 3 players. A motivated Fedorov would have been a big step up from Petrov or Larionov.

I don't know though. Makarov was a far better playmaker than either Bure or Mogilny. (though who knows how they would have developed in the Soviet system).
Would you agree that its possible we might rank all three more highly than we do having had them as individuals in the NHL?

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 06:27 PM
  #117
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Would you agree that its possible we might rank all three more highly than we do having had them as individuals in the NHL?
In some instances yes, some instances no....depends on the individual player.
At the end of the day, all we have to go by is what a player did and not what he 'might or might not have done in the NHL' - there are too many unknowns to make a correct assessment that way.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 06:54 PM
  #118
jcbio11
Registered User
 
jcbio11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bratislava
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 2,135
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Stastny was never a great defensive player, dont make him out to be what he wasn't. Makarov wasn't in the nhl in the 80's, so you would have no idea whether the gm's would pick him or not. Wasn't Makarov outscoring stastny from 1990-1994? Yeah i rest my case. Your just assuming that because he was a center, that he was responsible defensively. Yet from the games i've seen, it was dale hunter that was backchecking on that team, i dont ever recalling stasnty being used in a shutdown role. Peter Stastny has similar top 10 finishes to guys like syll apps and milt schmidt, trust me if he was an 'intangibles' guy, he would get ranked alot higher than top 75 all times.

As for the guy that called Balderis a flash in the pan, lol. The guy was a superstar in the russian league for 7-8 years, nice flash in the pan.
Oh trust me Stastny was an 'intangibles' guy. Big time. Read a whole book about him. Just a note though - I believe intangibles are greatly overrated around here (not sure if it's the case in the history board specifically, but for sure on the main board).

jcbio11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 07:28 PM
  #119
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Would you agree that its possible we might rank all three more highly than we do having had them as individuals in the NHL?
Sure, if the Soviet system had them playing as better players.

I'm not sure why it matters though. Just as one example, Scott Stevens wouldn't be ranked nearly so high if he hadn't been coached by Jacques Lemaire/Larry Robinson, but he was, and it made him a better player, and he is ranked accordingly. Same with Yzerman and Scottie Bowman. IF the Soviet system would have made these guys better players, then I would hope their rankings would reflect this.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 08:09 PM
  #120
Starchild74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve141 View Post
It's only hard to judge him against other players if your method of comparison is looking at total numbers in the NHL. I don't think people who have followed his career are as rare as you make it seem. Remember, there are a lot of Russian and Swedish posters on this forum, who watched every game they could in the 80s.

As far as I know, the people who saw him during his 500+ game career in Russia all say he was incredible. I don't know of anyone who says he is overrated, based on his play. He lead the Russian scoring race 9 times over ten years. That kind of dominance has only been seen by one other player in higher professional leagues. By all accounts, he is the Gretzky of the Russian league (no other comparison to Gretzky intended).

His reputation in international games is probably in the top five ever. Now, some would say that this is only a small sample size. I don't think that's true. International tournaments are more like the playoffs than the regular season. He played 148 international games over a 13 year span. That is about as big a sample size as Forsberg's, Beliveau's or Bossy's playoff careers. If we are willing to give them credit for being great playoff performers based on around 150 games, the same number of games should be enough to evaluate Makarov.

In addition to this we have 450+ NHL games, more than Ovechkin or Crosby has played. Again, not a small sample size. As we have already seen earlier in this thread, his performance stands up well with other 30+ players.

To summarize:
* He played 500+ games in the Russian league, earning more awards than any other forward.
* He played around 150 international games, putting in legendary performances with the KLM line.
* He played 450+ games in the NHL, scoring at a level only seen by other elite 30+ players.

Taken as a whole, he excelled at every stage. To not rank him as one of the top players ever you would have to work very hard to explain away his accomplishments.

Personally, I didn't see him play in the Russian league, but I saw most of the international games. There is no doubt in my mind that Makarov is the greatest Russian player ever.



Richard, Howe, Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Beliveau, Hull - No way better.
Esposito, Mikita, Trottier, Lafleur - I think this is his range.
Jagr, Yzerman, Sakic, Bossy - Slightly better.
Dionne, Kurri, Perreault, Brett Hull - Definitely better.
If you read any of my other posts I talk about this. THose that saw Makarov play in the Soviet league and those that saw the most of the Soviet games in the world Championships will have Makarov rated higher then people on here that are in North America and did not see those games. The point is that if a Canadian person only saw the Canada Cups and some world championships and Olympics while he was in his prime you can not argue that the Canadian poster is biased because he doesn't have Makarov higher on his rankings. That is the point

I never said he is overated but it seems on here their is a biased by some that feel if Makarov is not ranked in the top 10 or 20 all time players then it is a biased against Soviets or just pro Canadian. ONce again so no one talks about how great Makarov is. MAKAROV IS ONE OF IF NOT THE GREATEST SOVIET EVER. BUT IF YOU NEVER SAW HIM PLAY THOSE GAMES HOW CAN YOU COMPARE HIM TO A PERSON YOU SAW PLAY EVERY DAY. That is the point. It is not soviet bashing it is not under valuing Makarov or any other Soviet player

You can not compare World Championships with the Stanley Cup playoffs. most of the time World Championships are just a tournament. ROund Robin then the QF, SF and final but most of them are one game champioships. THe Playoffs in the NHL are best of 3 or 5 in the first round then best of 7 for the other rounds. It is not just one game where a team can get lucky or just play good and upset a team. FOr example the U.S in 1980 they played great in that one game agaisnt the SOviets. If it was a best of 3 or more the Soviets would have probably won. That is the difference with international play it is just a tournament.

Yes his NHL sample size is pretty good but the problem is he was past his prime and has good as he was, he was not great. If you just look at his NHL career and only his NHL career which is wrong to do by the way. He would not make it in the top 100 by his NHL numbers.

Once again he is one of the greatest but if you were living in North Amercia in the 80's it would be hard pressed to be able to see any of the games he played in the Soviet league. It would have also been hard pressed to see all the games that the Soviet's played in the World Championships. SO for most North Amercian's not ranking him in the top 100 is not a crime it is just unfortunate that is all. If someone takes the small sample size after this and rates him number 30 then that is a true compliment to Makarov and not a shot at him.

If a European who saw most of Makarov's Soviet games and only a few of Bryan Trottier and ranks Makarov alot higher then Trottier. He is not being biased he is not being anti Canadian he is just ranking players by who he might have seen more. That is the thing unlike today where you can see alsmot any game in the world or highlights of games back in the 70's and 80's not every single game was made available to the world

Maybe their should be two lists. the top 100 NHL players of all time. Then the top 100 international players of all time. Where the measure of greatness is how one performed in international play.

Starchild74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 08:22 PM
  #121
Starchild74
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
You're in a very small minority then. Most old-time Devils fans absolutely hate Fetisov.



Howe, Gretzky, Lemieux, and Orr were all clearly better than Makarov and anyone else on that list. I already said that Makarov is probably most comparable to Bossy and Kurri in the 1980s. And yes, ranking players is not an exact science, but there are some obvious ones.
Remember when you are rating or talking about players you can not let your personal feelings interefer or at least try not to. I mean I hate Claude Lemieux with a passion, however I can not ignore the fact that he was a clutch player in the playoffs and a decent player. I know why Devils fans hated Fetisov and know a few that were happy when he left and the Devils beat his Red WIngs that year. But their is no way you can say that Kasatonov is a better defenceman then Fetisov even in his Devils days because you or devils fans hate him. Now if you feel that Kasatonov adapted to the NHL better the Fetisov faster then that is your opinion which you are allowed to have. Also to make a statement that I am in the minority means that you know for a fact what every one else thinks which is not possible.

Yes there are obvious players that should be in the top 5 or top 10, maybe even the top 20. Who is to say that Makarov deserves to be ranked high and that is the point I have been trying to make. That it is not being biase or anti whatever not having some players higher or lower it is just opinions and also perception on the players

Starchild74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 08:35 PM
  #122
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,553
vCash: 408
Strange how, according to some on here, in the 87 Canada Cup the Soviets did not have a single player that could be comparable and to Mark Messier, Mario Lemieux, Wayne Gretzky, Raymond Bourque, Paul Coffey, Grant Fuhr. The 6 best players on the ice were on the same team!!! Yet, miraculously, without the 'out of this world' spectacular heriocs of Fuhrsie in the second game, Canada gets swept 2 straight. How can a clearly inferior lineup take a team with 3 of the best forwards ever produced and 2 of the best defensemen ever produced to the brink?

I guess it's unexplainable other than, it was nothing but a complete fluke, right. It's always a fluke when our superior lineups bearly beat those inferior European teams.

Up the Irons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 11:05 PM
  #123
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starchild74 View Post
Remember when you are rating or talking about players you can not let your personal feelings interefer or at least try not to. I mean I hate Claude Lemieux with a passion, however I can not ignore the fact that he was a clutch player in the playoffs and a decent player. I know why Devils fans hated Fetisov and know a few that were happy when he left and the Devils beat his Red WIngs that year. But their is no way you can say that Kasatonov is a better defenceman then Fetisov even in his Devils days because you or devils fans hate him. Now if you feel that Kasatonov adapted to the NHL better the Fetisov faster then that is your opinion which you are allowed to have. Also to make a statement that I am in the minority means that you know for a fact what every one else thinks which is not possible.
Fetisov sucked in NJ, period, and yes, Kasatonov adapted to the NHL faster or better. It has nothing to do with my "personal feelings." Kasatonov was better when the two of them played in NJ together and that's widely acknowledged among long-time Devils fans.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 11:24 PM
  #124
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustE View Post
Strange how, according to some on here, in the 87 Canada Cup the Soviets did not have a single player that could be comparable and to Mark Messier, Mario Lemieux, Wayne Gretzky, Raymond Bourque, Paul Coffey, Grant Fuhr. The 6 best players on the ice were on the same team!!! Yet, miraculously, without the 'out of this world' spectacular heriocs of Fuhrsie in the second game, Canada gets swept 2 straight. How can a clearly inferior lineup take a team with 3 of the best forwards ever produced and 2 of the best defensemen ever produced to the brink?

I guess it's unexplainable other than, it was nothing but a complete fluke, right. It's always a fluke when our superior lineups bearly beat those inferior European teams.
Running into a "Hot goalie" seems to be the most common excuse when Canada has trouble with another country's team. You see Hasek getting all the credit for 1998, when the Czech Republic actually outshot Canada.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2010, 11:45 PM
  #125
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,553
vCash: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Running into a "Hot goalie" seems to be the most common excuse when Canada has trouble with another country's team. You see Hasek getting all the credit for 1998, when the Czech Republic actually outshot Canada.
exactly.
I will concede that a number of top slots are aloted to players that predated our known Soviet hockey history, with Howe, Richard, Harvey and Morenz all in most people's top 20.

That still does not negate the fact that in best-on-best, Canada has rarely ran away with the competition (although we are the only country almost always in the final which does say something).

A non-hockey fan watching 72, 76, 87, 98 would conclude that those are 2 evenly matched teams of equal calibre (actually, in 72, they might say the less skilled team won).

Up the Irons 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 09:45 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.