100 Greatest NHL players

[shadoz19]

Yzerman would definately be #92 on the most conservative lists.

 

[pei fan]

Bossy is one that had a career cut short by injury. He probably would have been higher had he played longer. Jagr's 5 scoring titles make him one of the NHL's elite players of all time. I think Jagr's last couple of seasons have made a lot of people forget just how dominant he was during his career.

I agree and I think people have short memories with another example of this being Lidstrom.He had a somewhat off year last year and all of a sudden everyone forgets how dominant he was.

 

[Trottier]

For the first time I'm going to have to disagree with you. Gretzky, Lemiuex, Beliveau and other superstars that have gone on to win the cup have had strong supporting casts. There hasn't been an NHL superstar that has single handedly won a cup. Maybe a playoff round here and there but not a championship.

I am truly not suggesting otherwise. My point (last time ) is that when presented the opportunity to win, great players often raise their level of performance and are the small difference between raising the Cup and not. Again, I point to the names of players who have won Conn Smyth's over the years. With rare exception they were the best players on their teams and among the best in the entire league. That does not mean that they could have done it on their own, or without a superb supporting cast. Not at all. And, one cannot (despite my previous sarcasm) hold it against Marcel Dionne that he played on a lot of lousy teams, none ever real Cup material. However, players who have had the opportunity to play on teams with a legit chance win in the playoffs and who have produced bigtime when given that chance should be noted.

So, in the end, I think both sides are right. Mario Lemeiux, to take this example to its conclusion, would not have won the Cup in 1991-92 were it not for having a superb cast of teammates. However, once presented that opportunity, he elevated his game even higher than normal (which is world-class to begin with) and rose above all other players, leading his team. Conversely, there are examples of other "superb" players throughout the years who have not. For this fan at least, those performances in the spring of '91 and '92 cemented Mario's place in history. (An argument can be made that prior to winning those Cups - and had he never won a Cup - Mario would have been looked upon by history along the same lines as Marcel Dionne. That is, an exceptional offensive talent. Period.)

My frustration is when someones suggests that "well, Joey Kocur has his name on the Cup too, does that make him "great?" Of course not. For while the 4th line winger on a team has a very defined and important role, it is absurd to suggest that he has the same amount of importance/impact as the #1 center, dman or goaltender (i.e., core players).

Guys like Federko and Gartner have some very impressive playoff stats. Federko led the NHL in playoff scoring in '86 and didn't even play in the finals.

I just learned something. Seriously. That's an interesting bit of info. I vaguely recall the Blues losing out to the Flames in a full seven-game series that spring.

 

[pnep]

- Here are selections for the Conn Smythe trophy for years prior: http://www.hhof.com/html/newsconn.shtml. They were selected by a commitee for the Society for International Hockey Research, from 1918-1964 (so every year is covered). You may want to consider incorparating that data.

Thanks for the reference!!!

I shall add these data in mine HHOF Monitor

 

[octopi]

I have put together a system that ranks all NHL players in terms of greatest careers. Here is how it works:

7 pts Hart Trophy
7 pts Norris Trophy
5 pts 1st Team all star
3 pts 2nd Team all star
2 pts Winning a Stanley Cup
Scoring: 7 pts for 1st, 6 for 2nd, 5 for 3rd, 4 for 4th, 3 for 5th, 2 for 6th, 1 for 7th. 2 pt bonus for winning by 25%, 4pt bonus for winning by 50%

I also have a goalie rating system that needs some kinks worked out so I will not be posting it right now.

This system is not perfect by any means, and I am considering different adjustments. Please let me know what you think and feel free to ask any questions. I know that the first question will be "What about the Conn Smythe trophy?" Well, the Smythe has only been awarded since 1965 so, that leaves out a HUGE number of players that never had the chance to win it. Given the league's great history, it is not fair to penalize the older players by awarding points for the Smythe.

Life Lesson#1. Life is not fair. That said, I say mega points for Selke trophy winners. I mean, nice system, but hugely flawed. No way should Steve Yzerman be that far down the list. I mean, Teemu Selanne is a nice guy, but he's about 30 places ahead of Yzerman. Ummm, not in any fraction of reality, he's not. Sorry.
Winning a Stanley Cup should count much, much,more.

 

[octopi]

Steve Yzerman-tied for 92nd shows his lack of dominance in the game.Even though
the system gives credit for finishing 2nd to 7th in scoring the system uncovers
one of the biggest myths on this board.Take Lemieux and Gretzky out of the
picture and Yzerman is "very rarely" the next best player. Rarely would he be top
5 with Gretzky and Lemieux out of the picture.Yzerman is by a par 5 the most
over-rated player on this board.By the way he is one of my favorite players
personally.

Frankly, I don't think the Wings could have done better switching ANY player for Yzerman. Y'know, most people would have upped and quit hockey after an osteotomy.

If anyone is overrated, its Wayne "God forbid I ever play physical contact hockey" Gretzky.Noone's denying he's a greatly skilled guy, but he wouldn't have been nearly so fearsome had he not had his bodyguards to cream anyone who as much as look at him cross-eyed.

 

[chooch*]

Frankly, I don't think the Wings could have done better switching ANY player for Yzerman. Y'know, most people would have upped and quit hockey after an osteotomy.

If anyone is overrated, its Wayne "God forbid I ever play physical contact hockey" Gretzky.Noone's denying he's a greatly skilled guy, but he wouldn't have been nearly so fearsome had he not had his bodyguards to cream anyone who as much as look at him cross-eyed.

Totally Agreed! Youre gonna give ogobongopoho a fit! With his magical points sytem I guess he never saw any real players play either. Let me guess - he;s an edmonton fan.

Every game #99 played was an allstar game for him given his bodyguards- no slashing no hitting and in a weak no defence division all of his big years. Imagine how many points Mario could have gotten under those circumstances?

#99 The Great One won an Art Ross with -25 for the year; team player eh?

Just hung out at centre .

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Thanks for the reference!!!

I shall add these data in mine HHOF Monitor

No problem!

 

[Ogopogo*]

Life Lesson#1. Life is not fair. That said, I say mega points for Selke trophy winners. I mean, nice system, but hugely flawed. No way should Steve Yzerman be that far down the list. I mean, Teemu Selanne is a nice guy, but he's about 30 places ahead of Yzerman. Ummm, not in any fraction of reality, he's not. Sorry.
Winning a Stanley Cup should count much, much,more.

You don't like the way it shakes out, that is fine. Thanks for your opinion.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Totally Agreed! Youre gonna give ogobongopoho a fit! With his magical points sytem I guess he never saw any real players play either. Let me guess - he;s an edmonton fan.

Every game #99 played was an allstar game for him given his bodyguards- no slashing no hitting and in a weak no defence division all of his big years. Imagine how many points Mario could have gotten under those circumstances?

#99 The Great One won an Art Ross with -25 for the year; team player eh?

Just hung out at centre .

Saying that I never saw any "real" players play is really not necessary. I suspect that I have watched as much hockey as anybody born in 1971.

Criticizing Gretzky is probably less productive than criticizing me. Having your opinion about Mario vs Wayne is great but, I am attempting to put together the evidence to prove who was superior. If you have some evidence to present, I would love to see it. I am open to all facts and reason.

You have to consider that Mario had a much superior teammate to aid in his scoring exploits. Jaromir Jagr was a far greater scorer than anyone Gretzky ever played with so, to say that Wayne had it easier is not necessarily true. They both played in the NHL against the best players in the world. Arguing that one had it easier than the other is a red herring. Ultimately, if a player can score, he will do it under any circumstances, with any teammates in any era. Gretzky showed that he could do it on a brutal team (Edmonton 79-81, LA when he first arrived and his 3 years with NYR) and he also produced on a good team.

As well, I think you misunderstand what the +/- statistic represents. The truth is that all it really tells us is how good of a team a player was on. A player on a very good team has a very good +/- and a player on a very bad team has a very bad +/-. It has nothing to do with defense, being a team player or anything of individual significance. If I understand your interpretation of the stat correctly, Gretzky was a great team player when he was +98 in 1984-85 but he was suddenly a horrible team player when he was a -25 in 1993-94. Is that correct?

I suspect it has a lot more to do with the fact that the Oilers were a great team in '84-'85 and the Kings were brutal in '93-'94.

Comparing Wayne and Mario is great but, trying to discredit either it foolishness. I am simply assembling the evidence to see what it tells us. The evidence that I have uncovered so far tells me that Gretzky had a greater career. As I continue to assemble more pieces of the puzzle maybe I will come to a different conclusion but, at this point, I don't think that will happen.

Thank you for your input.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Frankly, I don't think the Wings could have done better switching ANY player for Yzerman. Y'know, most people would have upped and quit hockey after an osteotomy.

If anyone is overrated, its Wayne "God forbid I ever play physical contact hockey" Gretzky.Noone's denying he's a greatly skilled guy, but he wouldn't have been nearly so fearsome had he not had his bodyguards to cream anyone who as much as look at him cross-eyed.

One of Gretzky's greatest skills was his ability to avoid checks. All teams had tough guys so, I really don't believe that players were afraid to hit Wayne. If that was the case, they really didn't belong in the NHL.

 

[God Bless Canada]

One other thing I have to hand it to Ogopogo on: his willingness to make his system living and breathing. By that, I mean he's willing to accept advice on how to modify and improve his ratings system. Sure it's flawed, but so is any other ranking system.

But I will say this: Gretzky did have a linemate who was not only Jagr's equal, he was better: Jari Kurri. Kurri is unquestionably, in my opinion, the best all-round European born and trained player of all time. (Mikita is, of course, the greatest Euro-born player of all time, but he came to Canada at an early age). Kurri had that awesome one-timer. Gretzky also played with Messier, and while I'm not a Messier fan, I can't deny his place among the all-time greats. I know I wouldn't have Jagr anywhere near as high as he is on this ranking.

 

[chooch*]

So if Gretzky wasn't a team player because he was -25 in 1994, what does that say when he was plus-50-something when winning those Art Ross Trophies in the 1980s? Hmmm. Selective memory? But that's another rant for another thread that has thankfully been closed.

One other thing I have to hand it to Ogopogo on: his willingness to make his system living and breathing. By that, I mean he's willing to accept advice on how to modify and improve his ratings system. Sure it's flawed, but so is any other ranking system.

But I will say this: Gretzky did have a linemate who was not only Jagr's equal, he was better: Jari Kurri. Kurri is unquestionably, in my opinion, the best all-round European born and trained player of all time. (Mikita is, of course, the greatest Euro-born player of all time, but he came to Canada at an early age). Kurri had that awesome one-timer. Gretzky also played with Messier, and while I'm not a Messier fan, I can't deny his place among the all-time greats. I know I wouldn't have Jagr anywhere near as high as he is on this ranking.

That statement by ogopngo that Mario had a better linemate tells me this is anotehr young Edmondton fan's thread- Jagr was a puppy when Mario was in his prime; then MArio left. And ya want to know what - they rarely played together on the same line!

Thats like saying that Mario had Trottier - yes but not the Trottier of 1979!!


The Oilers of 99 were FAR superior to Marios teams. #99 in his prime could not have led Marios teams to 2 Cups.

Remember 99 just hung out at centre - my proof - he won teh art ross as a -25! Here's some more proof - I actually saw Lafleur, Mario, Orr and 99 play. And I can tell you - 99 hung out at centre!

So thanks for the stats but what memories do you have of the players!

I mean Morenz was voted the greatest player of the first 50 years of hockey; in the second 50 years you have what 12 better players? Funny how stats work!

 

[tom_servo]

If I understand your interpretation of the stat correctly, Gretzky was a great team player when he was +98 in 1984-85 but he was suddenly a horrible team player when he was a -25 in 1993-94. Is that correct?

Why won't you respond to this, chooch?

Remember 99 just hung out at centre - my proof - he won teh art ross as a -25!

So I guess he was a backchecking dynamo in '85. Whatever.

 

[Ogopogo*]

That statement by ogopngo that Mario had a better linemate tells me this is anotehr young Edmondton fan's thread- Jagr was a puppy when Mario was in his prime; then MArio left. And ya want to know what - they rarely played together on the same line!

Thats like saying that Mario had Trottier - yes but not the Trottier of 1979!!


The Oilers of 99 were FAR superior to Marios teams. #99 in his prime could not have led Marios teams to 2 Cups.

Remember 99 just hung out at centre - my proof - he won teh art ross as a -25! Here's some more proof - I actually saw Lafleur, Mario, Orr and 99 play. And I can tell you - 99 hung out at centre!

So thanks for the stats but what memories do you have of the players!

I mean Morenz was voted the greatest player of the first 50 years of hockey; in the second 50 years you have what 12 better players? Funny how stats work!

In 1989 Lemieux had Rob Brown (115 pts) Paul Coffey (113) and Dan Quinn (94). In 1990 Lemieux had Coffey, Brown, Cullen, Stevens and Recchi. In 1991 Mario didn't play much but, in 1992 he had Stevens, Mullen, Murphy, Recchi, Jagr, Coffey, Tocchet and Francis. 1993 he had Stevens, Tocchet and Francis all over 100 points with Jagr at 94, Murphy at 85 and Mullen at 70. Lemieux then missed some time and came back in 1996 with Jagr (149) Francis (119) Nedved (99) Sandstrom (70) and Zubov (66). In 1997 Jagr had 95 points in 63 games and Francis had 90 points.

Why do I mention all of this? To simply say that Mario indeed had a good team around him for a lot of his career. Jaromir Jagr plays RW, Mario plays C - are you trying to say that they NEVER played on the same line? Are you saying that they never played together on a powerplay? Was Mario an island and only playing with 4th liners his entire career?

It is obvious that you are a Mario fan, there is nothing wrong with that. But, the evidence suggests that Wayne and Mario both had some pretty good teammates.

Both players are great, the evidence suggests that Wayne had a greater career. Remember, he broke the all time single season points record on a team where the second leading scorer had 75 points.

To say that Wayne simply hung out at center tells me that you did not see much of the Oilers in the 80s. His skills were amazing, as were Mario's.

Thank you for your input into the discussion.

 

[chooch*]

In 1989 Lemieux had Rob Brown (115 pts) Paul Coffey (113) and Dan Quinn (94). In 1990 Lemieux had Coffey, Brown, Cullen, Stevens and Recchi. In 1991 Mario didn't play much but, in 1992 he had Stevens, Mullen, Murphy, Recchi, Jagr, Coffey, Tocchet and Francis. 1993 he had Stevens, Tocchet and Francis all over 100 points with Jagr at 94, Murphy at 85 and Mullen at 70. Lemieux then missed some time and came back in 1996 with Jagr (149) Francis (119) Nedved (99) Sandstrom (70) and Zubov (66). In 1997 Jagr had 95 points in 63 games and Francis had 90 points.

Why do I mention all of this? To simply say that Mario indeed had a good team around him for a lot of his career. Jaromir Jagr plays RW, Mario plays C - are you trying to say that they NEVER played on the same line? Are you saying that they never played together on a powerplay? Was Mario an island and only playing with 4th liners his entire career?

It is obvious that you are a Mario fan, there is nothing wrong with that. But, the evidence suggests that Wayne and Mario both had some pretty good teammates.

Both players are great, the evidence suggests that Wayne had a greater career. Remember, he broke the all time single season points record on a team where their second leading scorer had 75 points.

To say that Wayne simply hung out at center tells me that you did not see much of the Oilers in the 80s. His skills were amazing, as were Mario's.

Thank you for your input into the discussion.

Youre welcome and thank you too for your stats. Theyre meaningless. What memories do you have - please justify your beliefs! Dont rely on empty stats!!!! Not everyone puts blind faith into them like you do! You need to question these things!!

Did you know that when 99 was winning his first art ross, 12 players were over 100 points!!!!!

Why dont you do draw a comparison to the 12th highest scorer today and extrapolate what St louis would have scored thsi year (for fun since you liek stats!)

You were talking of a great linemate in Jagr to discredit Mario - ignoring Kurri and ignoring that Jagr and Mario definetly were not linemates and in any case in Marios prime jagr was an 18 year old and didnt play regular at times even!

 

[Ogopogo*]

Youre welcome and thank you too for your stats. Theyre meaningless. What memories do you have - please justify your beliefs! Dont rely on empty stats!!!! Not everyone puts blind faith into them like you do! You need to question these things!!

Did you know that when 99 was winning his first art ross, 12 players were over 100 points!!!!!

Why dont you do draw a comparison to the 12th highest scorer today and extrapolate what St louis would have scored thsi year (for fun since you liek stats!)

You were talking of a great linemate in Jagr to discredit Mario - ignoring Kurri and ignoring that Jagr and Mario definetly were not linemates and in any case in Marios prime jagr was an 18 year old and didnt play regular at times even!

Did you know that, in Mario's highest scoring season (199 pts in 1988-89) there were four players with at least 150 points?

I appreciate that you don't put blind faith into stats. How do you reconcile that with your argument that Gretzky's -25 in 1994 shows that he is not a team player and only hangs out at center?

I think you need to take a look at this:

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=140072

I have plenty of memories and they coincide nicely with the facts and numbers. If memories don't jive with the facts and numbers, perhaps the memories are too greatly influenced by personal bias? Just a thought.

 

[pei fan]

Totally Agreed! Youre gonna give ogobongopoho a fit! With his magical points sytem I guess he never saw any real players play either. Let me guess - he;s an edmonton fan.

Every game #99 played was an allstar game for him given his bodyguards- no slashing no hitting and in a weak no defence division all of his big years. Imagine how many points Mario could have gotten under those circumstances?

#99 The Great One won an Art Ross with -25 for the year; team player eh?

Just hung out at centre .

Nice of you to bring up the +/- stats.I think Mario's career +131 would definetly
rank in the top 1000.

 

[chooch*]

Did you know that, in Mario's highest scoring season (199 pts in 1988-89) there were four players with at least 150 points?

I appreciate that you don't put blind faith into stats. How do you reconcile that with your argument that Gretzky's -25 in 1994 shows that he is not a team player and only hangs out at center?

I think you need to take a look at this:

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=140072

I have plenty of memories and they coincide nicely with the facts and numbers. If memories don't jive with the facts and numbers, perhaps the memories are too greatly influenced by personal bias? Just a thought.

Or perhaps the numbers are meaningless or youre looking at the wrong numbers!
Again you need to justify your thoughts of 99 as #1; dont point just to stats or to the Hockey News ratings or something - those also have a bias (check who was asked in their top 100 survey - I recall there were VERY few Quebec based writers - I recall only 1 out of dozens! Maybe there is a bias; again you MUST question these things)

I'm not putting blind faith in the stats - I know what a +/- is and when a Lafleur has a +/- thats close to Waynes and Guy had 136 points and Wayne had 215 I know why!! And I can guess if asked who is the only art ross winner who finished the season a minus player!!! It concides with my memory of Wayne as a player.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Or perhaps the numbers are meaningless or youre looking at the wrong numbers!
Again you need to justify your thoughts of 99 as #1; dont point just to stats or to the Hockey News ratings or something - those also have a bias (check who was asked in their top 100 survey - I recall there were VERY few Quebec based writers - I recall only 1 out of dozens! Maybe there is a bias; again you MUST question these things)

I'm not putting blind faith in the stats - I know what a +/- is and when a Lafleur has a +/- thats close to Waynes and Guy had 136 points and Wayne had 215 I know why!! And I can guess if asked who is the only art ross winner who finished the season a minus player!!! It concides with my memory of Wayne as a player.

I don't believe in surveys. If a person has never seen Eddie Shore play, how can he vote for him? My system flies in the face of the Hockey News survey. I discount it as drivel.

My methods cut through the raw numbers to find out what players accomplishments are really worth. Read a few of my posts and how I determine the lists. If you take the time to understand you might not be so quick to throw out unsubstantiated judgments.

 

[Trottier]

Comparing Wayne and Mario is great but, trying to discredit either it foolishness.

Amen.

As a myopic NYI fan in the 1980s, I detested #99. But with the perspective of time, one realizes (or should realize) that we were lucky enough to witness a legend. Likewise, those who keep wanting to push #66 into retirement. Why? It's to our benefit the longer he plays.

Some players - very, very few actually - are above the pale when it comes to criticism, IMO, based on their performance alone. Gretzky, Lemeiux, and Orr in hockey (in my lifetime) Jordan in basketball, Montana in football. There are perhaps a couple of others. These guys transcended their respective sport. They are truly icons, on another level from all others.

And those who try to find fault with them look extremely petty and foolish doing so.

 

[chooch*]

I don't believe in surveys. If a person has never seen Eddie Shore play, how can he vote for him? My system flies in the face of the Hockey News survey. I discount it as drivel.

My methods cut through the raw numbers to find out what players accomplishments are really worth. Read a few of my posts and how I determine the lists. If you take the time to understand you might not be so quick to throw out unsubstantiated judgments.

You say:
"I like to use the stats and evidence available to uncover the truth - or as close to the truth as I can get."

Well, I'm trying to give you evidence but you dont want to listen. You just want stats!

There are so many things wrong with your "method" I dont know where to begin: Where is Bob Gainey??

Not even the top 100 of all time!!! I actually saw the Habs teams of the 70's and Gainey was as valuable to it as Messier to the 80's Oilers. A leader and Captain of the Habs, 16 years on one team - An award was created for him!

There are no intangibles on your list - You think Steve Shutt was a top 100 player but not Gainey? There is no justification for 7 points for a Hart and 0 points for being second in Hart voting? Or points for being a second team left winger (the weakest position for many years in the nhl) rather than the 3rd best centre in the league? I mean why not give points for being a Molson star of the game? Thats just as accurate as most of your system.

What do those asterisks mean? Deceased? Well Doug Harvey and Rocket are deceased. Did you copy this list from somehwere?

I guess what I'm trying to say is I am giving you evidence that you ask for : I actually saw Orr play and Mario and Wayne and Guy etc etc. And I can tell you that there was little difference between any of them!!!!!!!!!!! Except that one had some other factors that I wont get into or else something bad will happen to my posts

Finally: you shoudl admit that you are a committed Wayne and Edmonton fan. Its only proper.

 

[Ogopogo*]

You say:
"I like to use the stats and evidence available to uncover the truth - or as close to the truth as I can get."

Well, I'm trying to give you evidence but you dont want to listen. You just want stats!

There are so many things wrong with your "method" I dont know where to begin: Where is Bob Gainey??

Not even the top 100 of all time!!! I actually saw the Habs teams of the 70's and Gainey was as valuable to it as Messier to the 80's Oilers. A leader and Captain of the Habs, 16 years on one team - An award was created for him!

There are no intangibles on your list - You think Steve Shutt was a top 100 player but not Gainey? There is no justification for 7 points for a Hart and 0 points for being second in Hart voting? Or points for being a second team left winger (the weakest position for many years in the nhl) rather than the 3rd best centre in the league? I mean why not give points for being a Molson star of the game? Thats just as accurate as most of your system.

What do those asterisks mean? Deceased? Well Doug Harvey and Rocket are deceased. Did you copy this list from somehwere?

I guess what I'm trying to say is I am giving you evidence that you ask for : I actually saw Orr play and Mario and Wayne and Guy etc etc. And I can tell you that there was little difference between any of them!!!!!!!!!!! Except that one had some other factors that I wont get into or else something bad will happen to my posts

Finally: you shoudl admit that you are a committed Wayne and Edmonton fan. Its only proper.

You are giving me your opinion based on hockey you watched. I cannot dispute what you saw, that is what you saw. Unfortunately, what you saw does not translate into hard facts that I can use.

Although Gainey was an excellent player, I cannot accept that he was as valuable to his team as Messier was to his. The simple fact that Messier won two Hart Trophies is testament to that. As well, Gainey was never selected as a 1st or 2nd team all star. He was an excellent player but, the facts don't substantiate putting him in the Messier class. Intangibles are measured somewhat by the all star voting and award winners. Nobody can provide a true measure of intangibles because nobody has seen every NHL player in action. How can you say that Gainey was better defensively than say, Gordie Howe or Ted Lindsay? If you have not seen all of them play, you really don't know for sure. The all stars and awards are given voted on by people that watch the players more than anyone. They are the most reliable eyewitnesses we have. No, it isn't perfect but, it is the best we have.

The data for 2nd in Hart voting was just provided to me two days ago. When I have time to implement that information into my system, I will post the updated results.

The asterisks are players that I have had to adjust their ratings manually because there was a lack of data available. Such as, the Norris trophy before 1954.

And please don't accuse me of copying from others. I spent a lot of time accumulating and analyzing data. Saying I copied this list is the same as calling me a liar. I am not a liar and that is the harshest insult you can give someone. Unless you have proof, do not call me a liar.

Yes, I am an Oilers fan and a Gretzky fan. That does not mean I throw facts away to prove what I want to prove. I am completely objective and I strive to find the truth, no matter what that may be.

Perfect? No but it is a lot better than trying to eyeball it based on what I have seen. I did not see the NHL in the 20s so I am using the eyeballs of people that did.

Present some evidence to back your ideas and we can discuss them.

 

[chooch*]

Although Gainey was an excellent player, I cannot accept that he was as valuable to his team as Messier was to his.

If you have not seen all of them play, you really don't know for sure. Unless you have proof, do not call me a liar.

Yes, I am an Oilers fan and a Gretzky fan. I am completely objective and I strive to find the truth, no matter what that may be.

I did not see the NHL in the 20s so I am using the eyeballs of people that did.

Present some evidence to back your ideas and we can discuss them.

The Truth is staring you in the face: Bob Gainey Conn Smythe Trophy winner, Best player in the world according to the Soviets at the time, Selke Award created for him, captain of the Habs, 5 Cups, HoF.

But your scoring-based list (heavily favoring players in a weak/run and gun division from the 80's ie West) can leave Gainey off totally.

If you were truly objective you'd admit Gainey was as valuable to the Habs of the 70's as Messier was to the Oilers.

Let me guess: you never saw the Habs of the 70's so you just have "objective" stats.
If you are using the eyeballs of the people who did see the players - please factor in that Morenz was named the greatest player of the First Half Century. You have 13 players of the next half century better than him. He is likely up there as Orr and Mario as the best ever. And oh, why dont you give something extra for Orr winning a Ross twice or his 124 plus minus as a defenceman without having to score 200+ points!!!

Your #99 bias is obvious as you impute the same points to a Ross as a Hart. So if the voters are just giving the Hart to the Ross winner that easily doubles the players points .I mean 99 was so valuable your Oilers won the Cup AFTER he left - or was that due to 99 making them better players ?

Maybe some research on the number of times a Hart was given to a Ross winner
can be done. And for a player who wins both in a year , then in your system you should put in a a reduction factor.

How about +/_ difference to scoring points so a guy who hangs at centre and gets 215 points but is only a +98 gets a big deficit versus someone who scores 136 and is a +80.


Hint: instead of using stats, because we never saw players of the 20's, I suggest you read books. They will tell you the things your very random system doesnt.

+ Sorry if I implied you didnt create this list yourself.

 

[VanIslander]

The Truth is staring you in the face: Bob Gainey Conn Smythe Trophy winner, Best player in the world according to the Soviets at the time, Selke Award created for him, captain of the Habs, 5 Cups, HoF.

If you were truly objective you'd admit Gainey was as valuable to the Habs of the 70's as Messier was to the Oilers.

I agree. That's why I have them both on my team's roster in this forum's all-time mock draft.