2009 Top 100 Update Preliminary Discussion Thread

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
While Bower is regarded as the fourth best goalie of his era, he wasn't competing peak to peak with Plante or Sawchuk except maybe a small overlap early during his peak (from about '60-'66). All-Star goalies during three of his five best seasons (when he led the league in SV%) include Charlie Hodge (2x), Roger Crozier, and Gump Worsley. It's probable that without Sawchuk, Hall, and Plante in the league he's a four or five time all-star but I don't think he'd match Benedict's dominance over such a long period of time.

Pretty much what I was thinking too.
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
When talknng about Bower, One has to take into consideration that the poor guy was buried in the minors for most of his prime years. He was 33 when he joined the Leafs in 58 & played until he was 45. He only played one complete NHL season prior to age 33. I know people don't like to give credit for what ifs but this is a guy who played his prime years in the AHL when there were only 6 major league goalie jobs. He finally was given a chance at age 33 & proved himself one of the best
 
Last edited:

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
When talknng about Bower, One has to take into consideration that the poor guy was buried in the minors for most of his prime years. He was 33 when he joined the Leafs in 58 & played until he was 45. He only played one complete NHL season prior to age 33. I know people don't like to give credit for what ifs but this is a guy who played his prime years in the AHL when there were only 6 major league goalie jobs. He finally was given a chance at age 33 & proved himself one of the best

He could have been a late bloomer too:)

Like you said, he did have a full season at age 29, and he played 70 games, but did not distinguish himself. His first season with the leafs was not great either.
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
He could have been a late bloomer too:)

Like you said, he did have a full season at age 29, and he played 70 games, but did not distinguish himself. His first season with the leafs was not great either.
Fair enough. He might have been a late bloomer. however, that one season at age 29 was on a terrible Rangers team. His first season in 58-59 with the Leafs was pretty good actually. Second in the league in GAA on a Leaf team the squeaked into the playoffs in the last game of the season. Thornton, you were around then, you know very well that a NHL calibre player could get buried in the minors for years in those days.

BTW, I am not a Bower or a Leaf Fan but I do respect Johnny Bower.
 
Last edited:

lextune

I'm too old for this.
Jun 9, 2008
11,436
2,365
New Hampshire
My final count is:

C - 39
D - 26
G - 20
RW - 18
LW - 17

Not good enough with excel to break it all down to how many in the top 50 etc. etc.....

There must be a trick you guys know , unless you are just manually counting them out. :P
 

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,164
2,612
Vancouver
If you have your positions in a separate column you can use the function "=countif(cells you want to count,"position")". So if you want to count the number of Cs in the cells A1-A50, it'd be =countif(A1:A50,"C").
 

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
Fair enough. He might have been a late bloomer. however, that one season at age 29 was on a terrible Rangers team. His first season in 58-59 with the Leafs was pretty good actually. Second in the league in GAA on a Leaf team the squeaked into the playoffs in the last game of the season. Thornton, you were around then, you know very well that a NHL calibre player could get buried in the minors for years in those days.

BTW, I am not a Bower or a Leaf Fan but I do respect Johnny Bower.

Lots of players were on that terrible Rangers team, and terrible Hawks teams, etc

We could "what if" Rollins and Rayner played for good teams as well. Or What If Durnan started his career before age 28-29, or if Dryden did not retire early.

Some what if's I don't mind, but thinking how well a player would have done if he started in the NHL 10-13 years earlier is too much for me to try to process:)
 

lextune

I'm too old for this.
Jun 9, 2008
11,436
2,365
New Hampshire
If you have your positions in a separate column you can use the function "=countif(cells you want to count,"position")". So if you want to count the number of Cs in the cells A1-A50, it'd be =countif(A1:A50,"C").

Cool. Thanks.

Top 50:

C - 16
D - 12
G - 9
RW - 9
LW - 4

:D
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
Lots of players were on that terrible Rangers team, and terrible Hawks teams, etc

We could "what if" Rollins and Rayner played for good teams as well. Or What If Durnan started his career before age 28-29, or if Dryden did not retire early.

Some what if's I don't mind, but thinking how well a player would have done if he started in the NHL 10-13 years earlier is too much for me to try to process:)
I think it is up to the individual to make that choice. There are no right or wrong answers here. It is all judgemental. I don't necessarily give full credit for missed years but I do keep them in mind, For instance, I tend to favor Mario more than most because I can envision his accomplishments if he had a full career. Same goes for Orr, Schmidt, Brimsek, Roy Conacher etc. If Milt Scmidt was a superstar when he went to war at 24 & he was a superstar at 28 when he came back, I think one can safely assume that he would have been a superstar in the intervening years. I kind of think the same way about Bower. If he was a star at age 35, then I can envision him as a star at 25 if he had the opportunity. I am sure most will disagree with me here but I personally think you can give credence to what ifs.
 

Kyle McMahon

Registered User
May 10, 2006
13,301
4,352
Well, do you think Benedict would have been No. 1 for his era had he played in the late 50s and early 60s? I don't. I don't think he comes close. Better than Plante, Hall or Sawchuk? Absolutely not. He would have been No. 4. Just like Bower was. Do you think Bower would have been No. 1 at Benedict's time? Absolutely he would have been.

No I don't. That's pure conjecture, and there isn't one shred of evidence that Bower would have been better than Benedict if he'd played 40 years earlier. All we know is that Benedict was the best goalie of that era. Would he have been behind the Big Three if he played in the 50's and 60's? Probably, but we don't know. We do know that Bower was behind them.

Not all eras are equal. Sports are cyclical. The second half of the 80s and much of the 90s gave us tremendous talent at centre and defence. The second half of the 90s and the first half of the 00s gave us outstanding depth at right wing and goaltending. Now there is tremendous depth at centre again, and depth at LW that we haven't seen in decades.

I am in full agreement that not all eras are equal. That's why I don't have Lidstrom ranked anywhere near Harvey despite their fairly similar accomplishments. But it's not like I dropped him down to 60th or something because of it.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
My final count is:

C - 39
D - 26
G - 20
RW - 18
LW - 17

Not good enough with excel to break it all down to how many in the top 50 etc. etc.....

There must be a trick you guys know , unless you are just manually counting them out. :P

First impression - that's an awfully small number of defensemen - Just 30% more than the number of goalies. I personally think there should be closer to twice as many defensemen, as goalies.
 

Canadiens Fan

Registered User
Oct 3, 2008
737
8
I know Cleghorn, he's on my list around 90 or so. Maybe the dirtiest player of all time, lol.

I've read as much about him as the next guy interested in the history of hockey I'd guess. I just don't think he was as big a deal as Shore. Certainly Shore was not emulating him directly, since Shore came into the WCHL as a rookie playing exactly as we would see him play later in Boston:



I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. And maybe it's just homerism (which is funny since Shore retired 31 years before I was born, lol), but I have Shore firmly entrenched as the 2nd greatest D-Man in hockey history.

I was just rereading "Lions in Winter" and I came across this great quote about Doug Harvey from Hall of Fame referee Red Storey.

Doug Harvey was the best defenseman I ever saw because he could control a game like nobody I've ever seen. Bobby Orr could break open a game at any time and was an incredible player. But Harvey could take it over. If Montreal got a goal up on you and Harvey decided you weren't going to score, that was it. Go take your shower, the game is over.
 

Nalyd Psycho

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
24,415
14
No Bandwagon
Visit site
Well, do you think Benedict would have been No. 1 for his era had he played in the late 50s and early 60s? I don't. I don't think he comes close. Better than Plante, Hall or Sawchuk? Absolutely not. He would have been No. 4. Just like Bower was. Do you think Bower would have been No. 1 at Benedict's time? Absolutely he would have been.

Not all eras are equal. Sports are cyclical. The second half of the 80s and much of the 90s gave us tremendous talent at centre and defence. The second half of the 90s and the first half of the 00s gave us outstanding depth at right wing and goaltending. Now there is tremendous depth at centre again, and depth at LW that we haven't seen in decades.

So, your argument is, Bower played in a tougher era, therefore he's better?

And, personally, I think Benedict would have had more seasons where he was comparable to Plante, Hall and Sawchuk than Bower did.
 

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
I was just rereading "Lions in Winter" and I came across this great quote about Doug Harvey from Hall of Fame referee Red Storey.

Like I said, the guys could be close to a coin flip, but I have Shore ahead for a very good reason. Between the dawn of Hockey and 1950, Shore was considered to have been 1 of the two greatest players ever to play the game. Until Howe materialized, Morenz and Shore kept that title neatly wrapped. They were a head and shoulders above their peers.

Shore will be my #2 Dman behind Orr, with Harvey right after him.
 

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
I was just rereading "Lions in Winter" and I came across this great quote about Doug Harvey from Hall of Fame referee Red Storey.

Its funny because Red Storey says almost the exact same things about Eddie Shore in the legends of Hockey DVD. Off the top of my head on top of calling him the best , he mentioned how Shore was hated in every arena but Boston, and that Even if you knew nothing about Hockey, you would know Shore was the best player on the ice just by watching, and that he was the Bobby Orr of his time. Red Horner was up next and said Shore was as great a Defenseman who ever played in the league.
 

tommygunn

Registered User
Dec 2, 2008
590
2
Between the dawn of Hockey and 1950, Shore was considered to have been 1 of the two greatest players ever to play the game.
That 1950 'Top Players of the Half-Century' poll is interesting as it has Morenz the runaway winner. Richard, Taylor, and Nighbor come next, in that order. Shore comes in 5th, tied with 7 others.

Until Howe materialized, Morenz and Shore kept that title neatly wrapped. They were a head and shoulders above their peers.

Well, Richard came before Howe.. and was considered 'the best'.. better than Morenz, Shore, or anybody else prior.
 

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
That 1950 'Top Players of the Half-Century' poll is interesting as it has Morenz the runaway winner. Richard, Taylor, and Nighbor come next, in that order. Shore comes in 5th, tied with 7 others.
That Canadien press poll was also conducted in Montreal, was it not?

According to all newspaper clippings that can be read from archives and the Legends of Hockey DVD, Shore and Morenz had no peers until the 50's.


Well, Richard came before Howe.. and was considered 'the best'.. better than Morenz, Shore, or anybody else prior.
Richard by this point had only accomplished his goal scoring feats because of the war years. Montreal voters had a huge love for the guy.
 

Canadiens Fan

Registered User
Oct 3, 2008
737
8
That Canadien press poll was also conducted in Montreal, was it not?

According to all newspaper clippings that can be read from archives and the Legends of Hockey DVD, Shore and Morenz had no peers until the 50's.



Richard by this point had only accomplished his goal scoring feats because of the war years. Montreal voters had a huge love for the guy.

Ironically, the Canadian Press only incorporated French reporters the year after the poll was taken in 1951. The headquarters were actually based in Toronto and still are.
 

lextune

I'm too old for this.
Jun 9, 2008
11,436
2,365
New Hampshire
I have Shore ahead for a very good reason. Between the dawn of Hockey and 1950, Shore was considered to have been 1 of the two greatest players ever to play the game. Until Howe materialized, Morenz and Shore kept that title neatly wrapped. They were a head and shoulders above their peers.

Shore will be my #2 Dman behind Orr, with Harvey right after him.

Another excellent point.
 

tommygunn

Registered User
Dec 2, 2008
590
2
Richard by this point had only accomplished his goal scoring feats because of the war years. Montreal voters had a huge love for the guy.
Nonetheless, the 'best player' crown passed from Morenz, Shore, et al to Richard, before it passed on to Howe.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,672
16,395
That Canadien press poll was also conducted in Montreal, was it not?

According to all newspaper clippings that can be read from archives and the Legends of Hockey DVD, Shore and Morenz had no peers until the 50's.



Richard by this point had only accomplished his goal scoring feats because of the war years. Montreal voters had a huge love for the guy.

As Canadiens and Tommy said, Canadian Press was... Well, not really La Presse Canadienne at that time. The crown was passed from Morenz, to Shore, to Richard.

What I've red lately actually convinces me that Richard belongs ahead of Shore, if only slightly.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->