Best Player In the World

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I like to see you guys take this back a bit further. I'd like to see what you guys think from 1900-1910. I read that Hod Stuart, Frank McGee and Tommy Phillips were considered the best in the world during this era.

Roughly this if the goal is to stick to larger time frames and ignore season by season

1900-1909: Tommy Phillips, Frank McGee, Hod Stuart, Russell Bowie
1910-1917: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde
1918-1921: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde, Frank Nighbor
1922-1925: Frank Nighbor
1925-1932: Howie Morenz
1933-1939: Eddie Shore
1940-1944: Bill Cowley
1945-1950: Maurice Richard
1951-1955: Gordie Howe
1956-1959: Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau
1960-1964: Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, Bobby Hull
1965-1969: Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita
1970-1975: Bobby Orr
1976-1979: Guy Lafleur
1980-1987: Wayne Gretzky
1988-1993: Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux
1994-1997: Mario Lemieux
1998-2001: Jaromir Jagr
2002-2004: Peter Forsberg
2006-2007: Nicklas Lidstrom, Joe Thornton
2008-2011: Sidney Crosby, Alexander Ovechkin

Based much of this on comments in this thread. This list is a combination of perception on the time and how I think history does/will remember it.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'll try to post something later today about the early era. These three would certainly be in the running for some seasons.

Cool, please do. The list I posted could definitely use more nuance before World War I.

 

[overpass]

I think people are being too quick to de-throne Lemieux here.

Here's what happened: In 1994, Lemieux only played 22 games, but there were no games at all played in the fall/winter of 1994 because of the lockout, so he pretty much played all the games he could. Fedorov having one great year doesn't just knock Lemieux off his throne either. Lemieux still had the highest PPG of anyone that season. He misses the spring of 95, but plays the entire fall/winter of 95 and is clearly the best player in the world.

It takes time to lose the title of best player in the world. Looking at it in present day...If Crosby misses the first couple months of the 11-12 season his name will still be in the conversation for best player in the world.

I was 10 years old at the time. I may not have known much, but I never had any doubt that Mario Lemieux was the best hockey player in the world.

 

[canucks4ever]

Roughly this if the goal is to stick to larger time frames and ignore season by season

1900-1909: Tommy Phillips, Frank McGee, Hod Stuart, Russell Bowie
1910-1917: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde
1918-1921: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde, Frank Nighbor
1922-1925: Frank Nighbor
1925-1932: Howie Morenz
1933-1939: Eddie Shore
1940-1944: Bill Cowley
1945-1950: Maurice Richard
1951-1955: Gordie Howe
1956-1959: Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau
1960-1964: Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, Bobby Hull
1965-1969: Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita
1970-1975: Bobby Orr
1976-1979: Guy Lafleur
1980-1987: Wayne Gretzky
1988-1993: Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux
1994-1997: Mario Lemieux
1998-2001: Jaromir Jagr
2002-2004: Peter Forsberg
2006-2007: Nicklas Lidstrom, Joe Thornton
2008-2011: Sidney Crosby, Alexander Ovechkin

Based much of this on comments in this thread. This list is a combination of perception on the time and how I think history does/will remember it.

I like your list, but i would make a few changes.

Bobby Clarke should probably get mentioned somewhere between orr and lafluer, i would give lafluer the status from 1977-1980, then gretzky takes over in 1981. Clarke was clearly better than lafluer in 75 and 76 based on the coach's polls.

From 1995-1997 it should be lemeuix with lindros and jagr in brackets, because although lemeiux was the best, the debates were between jagr and lindros as to who would take the torch from mario.

Jean Beliveau should only be mentioned until 1961, although he won a hart in 1964, he had two back to back off-seasons in 1962 and 1963, so by the summer of 1963 his stock probably dropped off big time and was replaced by either bathgate or mahovlich.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Cool, please do. The list I posted could definitely use more nuance before World War I.

Alright, I took a stab at it. I wanted to list two players for each time period, since picking a single best is often difficult. Some of the slices are a bit thin, bit that's due to the short career of Frank McGee more than anything; if only the best player were considered it would reduce the divisions. Careers were generally shorter in the early years anyway, so you have to expect greater turnover as to who's the best. The first player listed below is the better of the two, IMO.

1887-1890: Allan Cameron, Archie McNaughton
1891-1894: Havilland Routh, Weldy Young
1895-1899: Dan Bain, Bob McDougall
1900-1902: Russell Bowie, Hod Stuart
1903-1906: Russell Bowie, Frank McGee
1907-1908: Russell Bowie, Tommy Phillips
1909-1914: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde
1915-1919: Cyclone Taylor, Frank Nighbor

That gets you to WWI. All the usual disclaimers about IMO, etc are in place.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Alright, I took a stab at it. I wanted to list two players for each time period, since picking a single best is often difficult. Some of the slices are a bit thin, bit that's due to the short career of Frank McGee more than anything; if only the best player were considered it would reduce the divisions. Careers were generally shorter in the early years anyway, so you have to expect greater turnover as to who's the best. The first player listed below is the better of the two, IMO.

1887-1890: Allan Cameron, Archie McNaughton
1891-1894: Havilland Routh, Weldy Young
1895-1899: Dan Bain, Bob McDougall
1900-1902: Russell Bowie, Hod Stuart
1903-1906: Russell Bowie, Frank McGee
1907-1908: Russell Bowie, Tommy Phillips
1909-1914: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde
1915-1919: Cyclone Taylor, Frank Nighbor

That gets you to WWI. All the usual disclaimers about IMO, etc are in place.

I'm certainly not an expert on the time period, but I'm somewhat surprised to to see Mike Grant in the 1890s.

 

[Czech Your Math]

interesting thread.

re: the lockout season, if you include it i think the answer is forsberg. as i recall, he was the consensus art ross favourite going into the '05-'06 season.

if you asked someone during the lockout, they might say that thornton has the potential to be the best in the world at the other end of the lockout, but he hadn't proven it yet.

at the same time, people were predicting sakic was going to fall off a cliff, which is why it was so surprising he put up 100 in the post-lockout season.

lidstrom at various points in the last ten years has certainly been the best player in the world. i don't know that he was very often acknowledged as such, especially not in the popular imagination. definitely not mid-decade though.

and jagr, nobody saw his rejuvenation post-lockout coming. after those washington years, he simply was not in the argument in '04-'05.

if you're going to give it out, i really don't think it could be anyone but forsberg, even though he always came with the "if he's healthy" disclaimer.

I don't think there was much of a consensus going as to who was the best player coming out of the lockout. I could see Forsberg being that player if he didn't miss half of the 2004 season (and the 2005 WCH as well). Lidstrom and Naslund would be in the discussion. Sakic had just finished 2nd in scoring and had two 2nd's and a 5th in the four seasons before the lockout. St. Louis and Kovalchuk didn't have the track record. Most people didn't expect Jagr to have such a great season, although there was a minority who did. That was based mainly on him having the highest PPG in the RSL and his play in the World Championships in 2005 (against players like Lidstrom and Thornton). Thornton was strong in that tourney too and had a very good 2003 season, but a bit of an off year in 2004. I doubt there was a clear consensus, with a whole season missed and uncertainty about post-lockout rule enforcement.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

I understand that this isn't about 'who had the best season', and is about the consensus. However, I think that anyone who really watched 2001 would say that Sakic was the best player in the world that year.
Jagr was sleep walking through the year until Lemieux came back, and Lemieux did something incredible in coming back, but he wasn't suddenly the best player in the world. He was certainly top 10 though.

 

[Czech Your Math]

I think people are being too quick to de-throne Lemieux here.

Here's what happened: In 1994, Lemieux only played 22 games, but there were no games at all played in the fall/winter of 1994 because of the lockout, so he pretty much played all the games he could. Fedorov having one great year doesn't just knock Lemieux off his throne either. Lemieux still had the highest PPG of anyone that season. He misses the spring of 95, but plays the entire fall/winter of 95 and is clearly the best player in the world.

It takes time to lose the title of best player in the world. Looking at it in present day...If Crosby misses the first couple months of the 11-12 season his name will still be in the conversation for best player in the world.

I think everyone takes the years as being the season ending in that year. Also, if you mean "considered the best when healthy and if/when comes out of retirement" then he was still considered the best, but playing 22 games in two seasons trumps that IMO. Once you're considered among the top 2-3 skaters in the league, I think you get a mulligan for an off year, but it's a bit different when there's real question as to whether the player can play close to a full season (e.g. Lemieux, Lindros, Forsberg, Crosby). I'd still say it's between Crosby and Ovechkin entering this season, but if St. Louis and the Sedins weren't such late bloomers, it might be close. Another off year by either Ovechkin or Crosby, for whatever reasons, will open the door to other players being in the discussion.

 

[Czech Your Math]

I understand that this isn't about 'who had the best season', and is about the consensus. However, I think that anyone who really watched 2001 would say that Sakic was the best player in the world that year.
Jagr was sleep walking through the year until Lemieux came back, and Lemieux did something incredible in coming back, but he wasn't suddenly the best player in the world. He was certainly top 10 though.

I don't disagree with Sakic being the best over the entire season, but it was less than clear as to who was the best entering the next season. Jagr had won 4 consecutive Rosses and Lemieux's comeback was amazing. One season doesn't completely change perception, much like Iginla and St. Louis didn't suddenly become the best in the world based on single seasons.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

I'm certainly not an expert on the time period, but I'm somewhat surprised to to see Mike Grant in the 1890s.

His competition is Bain and McDougall, unfortunately. He'd probably be third for that time period.

 

[Peter9]

Roughly this if the goal is to stick to larger time frames and ignore season by season

1900-1909: Tommy Phillips, Frank McGee, Hod Stuart, Russell Bowie
1910-1917: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde
1918-1921: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde, Frank Nighbor
1922-1925: Frank Nighbor
1925-1932: Howie Morenz
1933-1939: Eddie Shore
1940-1944: Bill Cowley
1945-1950: Maurice Richard
1951-1955: Gordie Howe
1956-1959: Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau
1960-1964: Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, Bobby Hull
1965-1969: Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita
1970-1975: Bobby Orr
1976-1979: Guy Lafleur
1980-1987: Wayne Gretzky
1988-1993: Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux
1994-1997: Mario Lemieux
1998-2001: Jaromir Jagr
2002-2004: Peter Forsberg
2006-2007: Nicklas Lidstrom, Joe Thornton
2008-2011: Sidney Crosby, Alexander Ovechkin

Based much of this on comments in this thread. This list is a combination of perception on the time and how I think history does/will remember it.

Howe wasn't even the first all-star winger in 1954-55 or 1955-56 and in the first of those two seasons, he wasn't even on the second all-star team. Beliveau was number one from 1955-61, supplanted by Hull, who remained on top until Orr's advent as a star.

 

[JFA87-66-99]

Alright, I took a stab at it. I wanted to list two players for each time period, since picking a single best is often difficult. Some of the slices are a bit thin, bit that's due to the short career of Frank McGee more than anything; if only the best player were considered it would reduce the divisions. Careers were generally shorter in the early years anyway, so you have to expect greater turnover as to who's the best. The first player listed below is the better of the two, IMO.

1887-1890: Allan Cameron, Archie McNaughton
1891-1894: Havilland Routh, Weldy Young
1895-1899: Dan Bain, Bob McDougall
1900-1902: Russell Bowie, Hod Stuart
1903-1906: Russell Bowie, Frank McGee
1907-1908: Russell Bowie, Tommy Phillips
1909-1914: Cyclone Taylor, Newsy Lalonde
1915-1919: Cyclone Taylor, Frank Nighbor

That gets you to WWI. All the usual disclaimers about IMO, etc are in place.

This is definately a nice stab at the early era of hockey. I'd say from 1985-1900 you'd have to have Mike Grant's name in there.

 

[matnor]

My point was that he was on pace for 132 points, which is the highest point total since 1996. Yeah the game is different now I'm saying it would have been arguable considering the Pens would have been a top 3 seed in the East and had a legit shot at the title, something the Pens with that Jagr didn't really have considering IIRC they were either a 7 or 8 seed.

It's easy to forget that just the season before, Ovechkin scored at almost the exact same pace as Crosby last season. Crosby had 66 points in 41 games (1.61 ppg) while Ovechkin had 65 points in 41 games (1.59 ppg) to start the season. Or, for that matter, Ovechkin had 88 points in 52 games (1.69 ppg). Extrapolating Crosby's number from his best hot streak in his career is not really a good idea I would say.

 

[seventieslord]

This is my attempt to try and mix things up by including defensemen and goalies and forwards and by doing a top 5 instead and I'm going by season to season assessment.

I'm going by stats in the regular season and playoffs combined as well as media and fan perception. I'm starting with the 1990-91 season.

1990-91 : top 5 in no particular order : Lemieux, Gretzky, Hull, Bourque, Belfour
1991-92 : Lemieux, Messier, Roy, Leetch, Gretzky
1992-93 : Lemieux, Roy, Selanne, Belfour, Lafontaine
1993-94 : Gretzky, Fedorov, Leetch, Hasek, Bourque
1994-95 : Lindros, Hasek, Jagr, Coffey, Chelios HM Bondra
1995-96 : Lemieux, Jagr, Lindros, Sakic, Fedorov-Forsberg (tied) this was the year of the forwards
1996-97 : Lemieux, Hasek, Jagr, Selanne, Karyia
1997-98 : Hasek, Jagr, Kariya, Forsberg, Gretzky, HM Bure, Selanne, Lindros, Tkatchuk
1998-99 : Jagr, Hasek, MacInnis, Selanne, Cujo
1999-00 : Jagr, Bure, Pronger, Kolzig, Stevens HM Turek, Cujo, Blake
2000-01 : Sakic, Lemieux, Jagr, Lidstrom, Hasek
2001-02 : Iginla, Naslund, Lidstrom, Sundin, Theodore HM Bertuzzi, Demitra, Hasek, Jagr, Roy
2002-03 : Forsberg, Bertuzzi, Brodeur, Lidstrom, Naslund HM Hejduk, MacInnis, Hatcher, Thornton, Turco
2003-04 : St. Louis, Sakic, Kovalchuk, Brodeur, Niedermayer HM Chara, Naslund, Luongo, Iginla, Pronger

I did it up until the lockout.

first, this is not the point of this thread, and second, Gretzky shouldn't be in your top 5 for 1994, let alone first. he did not receive a single hart vote that year because he was awful defensively by this point, piling up points on a poor team.

also, 1993 is way off. if based on regular season and playoff, Gilmour was the best overall player that year, with Lemieux his only real competition.

for that matter, Gilmour should be a slam dunk for 1994 if based on regular season and playoffs, and what actually happened over perceptions.

 

[canucks4ever]

first, this is not the point of this thread, and second, Gretzky shouldn't be in your top 5 for 1994, let alone first. he did not receive a single hart vote that year because he was awful defensively by this point, piling up points on a poor team.

also, 1993 is way off. if based on regular season and playoff, Gilmour was the best overall player that year, with Lemieux his only real competition.

for that matter, Gilmour should be a slam dunk for 1994 if based on regular season and playoffs, and what actually happened over perceptions.

A top 5 for 1994 is very hard because so many players had great seasons. Scott stevens, ray bourque and brian leetch were awesome, fedorov and gilmour were the best two way forwards, hasek and beezer were amazing in net. Others like bure, oates, gretzky, maccinnis, neely and roy all had good years too.

 

[seventieslord]

A top 5 for 1994 is very hard because so many players had great seasons. Scott stevens, ray bourque and brian leetch were awesome, fedorov and gilmour were the best two way forwards, hasek and beezer were amazing in net. Others like bure, oates, gretzky, maccinnis, neely and roy all had good years too.

yeah, I realize 1994 is tough to do. but if it's regular season and playoffs.... gotta be Gilmour. What I'm more sure of is that Gretz doesn't belong near that top-5.

 

[canucks4ever]

yeah, I realize 1994 is tough to do. but if it's regular season and playoffs.... gotta be Gilmour. What I'm more sure of is that Gretz doesn't belong near that top-5.

If regular season and playoffs is the criteria, hasek or forsberg might be #1 in 1999, tim thomas is the clear cut best for this year.

 

[Czech Your Math]

It's easy to forget that just the season before, Ovechkin scored at almost the exact same pace as Crosby last season. Crosby had 66 points in 41 games (1.61 ppg) while Ovechkin had 65 points in 41 games (1.59 ppg) to start the season. Or, for that matter, Ovechkin had 88 points in 52 games (1.69 ppg). Extrapolating Crosby's number from his best hot streak in his career is not really a good idea I would say.

I agree, although it wasn't even Crosby's best hot streak of a half season or more. In 2007, he scored 68 points in his first 41 games (1.66 ppg) and in 42 consecutive games scored 76 points (1.81 ppg). How does this compare to others of the dead puck era?

I might have missed some streaks, but the best I can tell since '94 there are only 13 players with at least two 41+ game stretches of 1.49 ppg or better (Note- only one streak per season is counted):

8- Jagr
5- Lindros
4- Ovechkin, Lemieux
3- Crosby, Selanne, Forsberg, Thornton
2- Malkin, Sakic, Alfredsson, Gretzky, Fedorov

If you start from '95, that eliminates Gretzky and Fedorov... if you start from '97, that eliminates Sakic and reduces Lindros, Selanne and Forsberg to 2 streaks each. Of the streaks I counted since '94:

Players w/ at least 2 streaks of 1.49+ ppg
---------------------------------------------------
Lemieux 2.66**, 1.88, 1.77, 1.70
Jagr 2.07**, 1.87, 1.78, 1.64, 1.63, 1.59***, 1.54, 1.49
Gretzky 1.87*, 1.49
Crosby 1.81, 1.61
Fedorov 1.76*, 1.56
Lindros 1.70, 1.62, 1.62**, 1.61, 1.55*
Ovechkin 1.69, 1.61, 1.52, 1.50***
Thornton 1.68***, 1.61, 1.49
Selanne 1.66, 1.57**, 1.52
Forsberg 1.64, 1.51**, 1.49***
Alfredsson 1.59***, 1.52
Sakic 1.58, 1.51**
Malkin 1.57, 1.55
NHL seasons > 6.00 gpg: *1994, **1996, ***2006

Crosby's streaks are 7th, 22nd and 38th of those I counted. Two players I thought might have at least two streaks of 1.49+, but didn't, were Bure (1.65) and Kovalchuk (1.61).

If adjusted for league scoring, Crosby's are 12th, 18th and 29th (although I'm sure I missed some streaks on an adjusted basis). Others with multiple adjusted streaks in the top 30 that I counted include Jagr (6), Lemieux (4), Lindros (3), Forsberg (2), Ovechkin (2), Thornton (2), and 1 each for Selanne, Francis, Gretzky, Sakic, Malkin, Leclair, Alfredsson and Fedorov. The top 13 are Lemieux and Jagr 4 times each (all top 9), Selanne, Forsberg, Lindros, Crosby and Ovechkin.

Best ppg streaks in first 41+ games since '95
------------------------------------------------------
Lemieux 2.66**, 1.80, 1.77, 1.66
Jagr 2.07**,1.78, 1.64, 1.63, 1.55***, 1.49
Francis 1.88**
Ovechkin 1.69
Crosby 1.66, 1.61
Kovalchuk 1.61***
Lindros 1.59, 1.56**, 1.49
Alfredsson 1.59***
Forsberg 1.49***

Crosby's best adjusted streaks to start the season rank 10th and 12th since '94. Joining him in the top 12 are Lemieux & Jagr (4 times each), Ovechkin and Francis (playing with the Mario brothers).

While these numbers don't support Crosby being at the level of Lemieux or Jagr, he is in some very elite company here.

 

[plusandminus]

I might have missed some streaks, but the best I can tell since '94 there are only 13 players with at least two 41+ game stretches of 1.49 ppg or better (Note- only one streak per season is counted):

8- Jagr
5- Lindros [...]

Interesting subject. How did you do that? What was your method, and what was your source?

 

[tazzy19]

yeah, I realize 1994 is tough to do. but if it's regular season and playoffs.... gotta be Gilmour. What I'm more sure of is that Gretz doesn't belong near that top-5.

Yeah, I mean, he only won the scoring title by 10 points. He should have been a one man show that year, playing defense, goal, and winning the Conn Smythe to top it off. Top 5 player by winning the Art Ross by 10 points after coming back from a career threatening back injury the year before? Not a chance.

 

[Peter9]

My comment above said Beliveau was No. 1 from 1955 to 1961, Hull supplanted him and stayed No. 1 until Orr's advent.

I should have added this: If contemporary views mean anything--and I was around and an avid hockey fan back in the 1950s, a regular reader of The Hockey News, Hockey Pictorial, Blueline, and the French-language monthly Sport Revue, as well as various Canadian newspapers--Beliveau was regarded as better than Howe after 1955. Hull took over in 1961-62 as Beliveau's scoring totals declined. Mikita was never regarded as Hull's equal. Hull was regarded as No. 1 until Orr's first high-scoring season. I lived through it all and I remember it well. Of course I recognize this board gives little if any weight to contemporary views.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

My comment above said Beliveau was No. 1 from 1955 to 1961, Hull supplanted him and stayed No. 1 until Orr's advent.

I should have added this: If contemporary views mean anything--and I was around and an avid hockey fan back in the 1950s, a regular reader of The Hockey News, Hockey Pictorial, Blueline, and the French-language monthly Sport Revue, as well as various Canadian newspapers--Beliveau was regarded as better than Howe after 1955. Hull took over in 1961-62 as Beliveau's scoring totals declined. Mikita was never regarded as Hull's equal. Hull was regarded as No. 1 until Orr's first high-scoring season. I lived through it all and I remember it well. Of course I recognize this board gives little if any weight to contemporary views.

Some posters yes, but not the board as a whole. I think the point of this thread is to take into account contemporary views.

 

[seventieslord]

Yeah, I mean, he only won the scoring title by 10 points. He should have been a one man show that year, playing defense, goal, and winning the Conn Smythe to top it off. Top 5 player by winning the Art Ross by 10 points after coming back from a career threatening back injury the year before? Not a chance.

So... scoring is everything, then? And assists 100% as important as goals? And contributing to wins and making an impact in the playoffs meaningless? And a top forward is automatically better than a top goalie or defenseman? And the eyewitness accounts of people who watched that season fall by the wayside in the face of all that? Gotcha.

 

[Epsilon]

So... scoring is everything, then? And assists 100% as important as goals? And contributing to wins and making an impact in the playoffs meaningless? And a top forward is automatically better than a top goalie or defenseman? And the eyewitness accounts of people who watched that season fall by the wayside in the face of all that? Gotcha.

Exactly. Gretzky's 1993-94 is a great example of a season that looks much better on paper than it actually was.