HOH Top 60 Centers of All-Time: Round 1 Preliminary Discussion Thread

[Hardyvan123]

I don't agree with the logic that being 8th or 9th out of 20 automatically makes someone an average player. Condensing talent on less teams doesn't lessen the competition. The best if the best are still there they aren't the ones being squeezed out the marginal players are.


Let's look at it like this. Team Canada only has 4 center spots to go around. Does that mean the talent pool of center among Canadian players is lessened and the fifth best center is suddenly less of a player?

You can also look at it like all star teams. There are what like 40 spots between the two teams? Someone has to be 20th best among those players it doesn't make them average.

If the league doubled in size tomorrow the top players in the league would remain the same. You would have more marginal.players filling the bottom rungs of the league not challenging for trophies and post season all star appearances in any meaningful way. Yeah they are there but they are basically filler for all intents and purposes in this context.

People are getting sidetracked here, Ralph was around the 8th or 9th best center in the time he was in a 6 team NHL.

The year after expansion he was 18th in scoring for centers which is still about average, mostly due to others having more PP and top 6 minutes probably.


Even at his best, was he ever considered a top 5 center in the NHL?

Or even a top 10 center? Perhaps a marginal top 10 guy, perhaps not.

And we have to keep in perspective his place among Canadian centers, which was the world he lived in and a standard that should be used against later players and vice versa.

The Canadian standard hasn't changed.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

This post makes it clear that you think the talent pool is directly proportional to the size of the NHL:



By this logic, the 8th best player in 1967-68 is twice as good as the 8th best player in 1966-67.

No you are inferring that logic, not me.

I'm only talking about the fact that in a small number of players, around 20ish full time centers, maybe a bit more, the best case for Backstrom is 8th or 9th which really isn't that good is it?

Immediately after expansion nothing changed really except the dispersion of some of the talent over 12 teams instead of 6.

The infusion of new players came from the already existing talent pool, which in this case was from the minors for the most part.

You keep saying "out of 20 full time centers." The only reason there was 20ish full time centers was because there was only 6 teams. In 1967, when there are 12 teams, all of a sudden there's 40ish full time centers. The 8th best guy is still the 8th best guy, he hasn't gotten any better or worse, but the way you're coming off it makes a big difference now that he's 8th out of 40 instead of only 20.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Average players tend to be replaced very quickly, within 500 games easily. True in a 6 team league or 30 team league.

The ability to beat-out competition for a defined spot on a team season after season and perform at the expected level while playing against elite players is what sets these players apart.

Teams that cannot compete against the elite lines, target the average lines to regain and take the advantage. When the opportunity arises such players become the difference makers that are required to produce. 1972 Summit Series, Paul Henderson and Ron Ellis amongst the forwards, Bill White and Gary Bergman amongst the defensemen being prime examples.

Also note that in international competition - 1974 Summit Series against the USSR, an aging Ralph Backstrom was tied for second in scoring with Alexander Yakushev behind Bobby Hull:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1974_Summit_Series#Scoring_leaders

From 59-67 he was around the 8th or 9th best Canadian center in the league, feel free to argue otherwise, and 22nd among all other Canadian players in points.

In 74 do you think Backstrom was even a top 20 center in the world?

Now that other nations were also producing top quality centers?

Where exactly is the case for Backstrom?

 

[Hardyvan123]

You keep saying "out of 20 full time centers." The only reason there was 20ish full time centers was because there was only 6 teams. In 1967, when there are 12 teams, all of a sudden there's 40ish full time centers. The 8th best guy is still the 8th best guy, he hasn't gotten any better or worse, but the way you're coming off it makes a big difference now that he's 8th out of 40 instead of only 20.

It's for context against later players when the NHL would also include elite non Canadians. That's why I prefer to use the Canadian standard for all Canadian players, to keep if fair for all players.

For example players over Patrick Marleau's career.

In the post before, Ralph was never considered a top 5 Canadian Center or even a top 10 player for any period of time, hard to make a case for top 80 center of all time for him.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Ralph was blocked by Jean and Henri because eh wasn't good enough to replace them, alot of his placing in the top 80, IMO is based on some notion of would've, could've and the infamous 6 SC argument.

This is what makes Backstrom a special case. He gets stuck behind 2 all time great centers and put into a checking role, which obviously affects his offensive production. Looking at his scoring when he did replace these guys, he likely would have been a 2nd line center on many other teams, and even a 1st line center on one or two.

 

[Hardyvan123]

This is what makes Backstrom a special case. He gets stuck behind 2 all time great centers and put into a checking role, which obviously affects his offensive production. Looking at his scoring when he did replace these guys, he likely would have been a 2nd line center on many other teams, and even a 1st line center on one or two.

Really? I guess that's a fair consideration but you have to take the Ying with the Yang, if he plays on Boston, no 6 SC's either, let's be fair here then.

Also his production didn't always increase when Jean and Henri were slowed by injuries either, there is too much "what if" being projected here.

Also name the teams and seasons where he would be a top line or 2nd line center in the NHL in those 06 days.

I'm pretty sure Phil Housley would have looked really good in an Oiler uniform in the 80's but it seems no one was buying that argument, why buy it for Ralph?

 

[MXD]

There are arguments for Backstrom in the Top 80. But I think he has to be quite a bit below Jacques Lemaire.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It's for context against later players when the NHL would also include elite non Canadians. That's why I prefer to use the Canadian standard for all Canadian players, to keep if fair for all players.

For example players over Patrick Marleau's career.

In the post before, Ralph was never considered a top 5 Canadian Center or even a top 10 player for any period of time, hard to make a case for top 80 center of all time for him.

Ralph was a lot closer to a top 10 Canadian player in his day than Marleau is/was...

 

[Hardyvan123]

Ralph was a lot closer to a top 10 Canadian player in his day than Marleau is/was...

Maybe in terms of overall play, haven't really look at the case, but Marleau was a much better goal scorer and that difference is probably too large to ignore.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Phil Goyette

This is what makes Backstrom a special case. He gets stuck behind 2 all time great centers and put into a checking role, which obviously affects his offensive production. Looking at his scoring when he did replace these guys, he likely would have been a 2nd line center on many other teams, and even a 1st line center on one or two.

Ralph Backstrom was ahead of Phil Goyette on the Canadiens. Yet when Phil Goyette was traded to the Rangers, Goyette led the Rangers in scoring twice in the O6 era. Post 1967 expansion he led the expansion Blues in scoring once and on the 1970-71 Sabres was second to Gilbert Perreault despite having a better PPG production.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/g/goyetph01.html

Evaluating depth players is a lot more complicated than some would have you believe.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Also his production didn't always increase when Jean and Henri were slowed by injuries either, there is too much "what if" being projected here.

Would need to hear some more specifics about the injuries of those two, they both seemed to be relatively healthy, especially Richard...I know Backstrom's best year was the year Beliveau missed the most number of games. I'm sure C1958 could fill us in here.

Also name the teams and seasons where he would be a top line or 2nd line center in the NHL in those 06 days.

Looking at the early 60's up to expansion I think he could have challenged Oliver and Kurtenbach for a top 3/6 role in Boston. I think he would have been a 1st or 2nd liner on NYR before Ratelle came, ahead of Ingarfield and probably challenging Goyette for the top line role. There was likely a small window for him as the 2nd line C in Chicago before Esposito developed as well.

I'm pretty sure Phil Housley would have looked really good in an Oiler uniform in the 80's but it seems no one was buying that argument, why buy it for Ralph?

I don't see how these are the same. Housely's production would have increased on the Oilers. Backstrom was put in a checking role, so it hindered his offensive production.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Ralph Backstrom

Would need to hear some more specifics about the injuries of those two, they both seemed to be relatively healthy, especially Richard...I know Backstrom's best year was the year Beliveau missed the most number of games. I'm sure C1958 could fill us in here.



Looking at the early 60's up to expansion I think he could have challenged Oliver and Kurtenbach for a top 3/6 role in Boston. I think he would have been a 1st or 2nd liner on NYR before Ratelle came, ahead of Ingarfield and probably challenging Goyette for the top line role. There was likely a small window for him as the 2nd line C in Chicago before Esposito developed as well.



I don't see how these are the same. Housely's production would have increased on the Oilers. Backstrom was put in a checking role, so it hindered his offensive production.

1959 Playoffs when Beliveau was injured, Backstrom as a rookie stepped up.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1959.html

you referred to 1961-62,

1964-65 when both Richard and Beliveau missed over 10 RS games each, Backstrom again stepped up and finished second in team scoring:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1965.html

 

[Killion]

Sure and I can find write ups that Nieds is one of the best 5 Dmen of all time but I don't take it at face value either.... Ralph was blocked by Jean and Henri because eh wasn't good enough to replace them, alot of his placing in the top 80, IMO is based on some notion of would've, could've and the infamous 6 SC argument.

Well, thats your prerogative. You saw Smith & Nieds play. I saw those guys and I distinctly remember Backstrom. Absolutely brilliant player. Crafty. Tied up the leagues greats like a Master Pretzel Maker. Hull, Mahovlich, you name it. He excelled in the role of Checking Center. That was his job. No, he didnt have the innate natural scoring abilities of Jean Beliveau or Geoffrion however in a 6 team league he consistently produced points in the average to slightly better than average ranges in comparison to his contemporaries. He wanted to step it up, move into a more offensive role however he was just too invaluable as a checker, as a shutdown specialist for Blake to be moving him up the ladder and who would he displace? Richard or Beliveau? Dont think so. I just dont understand why it is that guys like Backstrom and Carbo dont receive the "love" they actually deserve. Had Backstrom played for the Leafs or Chicago, Detroit, let alone Boston or New York, absolutely he wouldve been a 2nd or 1st line Center and no guesswork or "what if's" about it. You'd have seen a far more dynamic 2 way player with firepower on his Left & Right Wings.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Ralph Backstrom was ahead of Phil Goyette on the Canadiens. Yet when Phil Goyette was traded to the Rangers, Goyette led the Rangers in scoring twice in the O6 era. Post 1967 expansion he led the expansion Blues in scoring once and on the 1970-71 Sabres was second to Gilbert Perreault despite having a better PPG production.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/g/goyetph01.html

Evaluating depth players is a lot more complicated than some would have you believe.

Simply, this is where the talent evaluation comes to the forefront. Same thing goes for international stars that aren't on the same playing field as the rest of the pack for but a few games every few years. I know C1958 and I agreed that Holecek did not look the part in the goalie project. It's an important part of the process because it helps to identify adaptability and sustainability - among other things.

How would a club decide if Backstrom was worth acquiring based on statistical prowess if he's stuck behind two far superior centers? How would a club decide that Jordan Staal was worth acquiring given his limited scoring opportunities behind Crosby and Malkin? Talent evaluation.

It helped me greatly with Billy Smith in the goalie project. I was all locked and loaded to make the "product of the system" argument upon seeing Chico Resch's and Rollie Melanson's results behind Al Arbour...but I watched and saw that Billy Smith was a terrific goalie that helped augment what the Islanders were doing as opposed to merely being a byproduct of it.

If and when the time comes to discuss Ralph Backstrom, I know I'll be utilizing game footage to help aid in my evaluation of him. I wish I had the time to do it for everyone for the Round 1 voting list as well, but being on this panel doesn't pay as well as I had hoped...

 

[Rob Scuderi]

To rail on Backstrom for his scoring finishes sort of misses the point. I took him over the Pecas of the world on my list because the post expansion guys had a chance to play a larger role on their team than an 06 checker like Backstrom did. He did finish 5th in center all-star team voting in 1962 as well.

Phil Housley was a one-way player being fed icetime on bad teams, you couldn't get more opposite of Backstrom.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Not to mention, Backstrom was a difference-maker:

Pollock believed drafting good young prospects was the key to long term success in the NHL. To this end he was always scheming, sometimes years in advance, in order to be in position to pick up the "cream of the crop" in any annual entry level draft.

Among one of his shrewdest moves, was a series of trades in which the Canadiens obtained the first overall pick in the 1971 NHL Entry Draft, the year in which Guy Lafleur would be eligible. It appeared as if the first overall selection would be held by the California Golden Seals so he persuaded Seals owner Charlie Finley to trade the Seals' pick and François Lacombe in return for Montreal's first round pick and a veteran Ernie Hicke. However, during the 1970-71 season, the Los Angeles Kings were playing even more poorly than the hapless California Seals. The Kings were in danger of "beating" the Seals out for last place, and if this happened Pollock would lose his first overall pick. Pollock cleverly traded the aging but still valuable Ralph Backstrom to the Kings for two insignificant players. Backstrom's presence lifted the Kings out of last place, the Seals finished at the bottom, granting the Habs the first pick. Pollock hesitated between Lafleur and Marcel Dionne, but chose Lafleur with his overall no.1 pick.[2]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Pollock

That said, I don't see Backstrom as a serious threat for the top 60

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Still haven't received an answer about my list, should I be concerned about that?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Still haven't received an answer about my list, should I be concerned about that?

Nobody who submitted after Oct 10 was notified yet.

 

[seventieslord]

How is Ralph leagues ahead of Cassels or ronning?

Someone had to be the 8th or 9th best player in a 6 team Canadian only league right?

What is 8th or 9th of around 20 guys?

Sounds like an average guy to me.

Seriously he has a 7th and 9th place finish in a 6 team league and that's about it? Does he ever reach in the top 20 in scoring in a 6 game league?

Look I'm a huge career guy but Ralph isn't even close to cutting the mustard here.

None of the 3 guys have any merit in a top 80 list IMO.

Thank goodness TDMM dismissed this already; it would have taken me about 100 times as many words.

Does this really apply? I asked in the top 60 defenseman project on how a guy like Vasilev would have ranked in the NHL, even in ball park terms and the response was pretty much zip.

The how any player ranked in the world concept is usually only applied when the NHL is integrated, guys in pre integration are often assumed to have equal greatness in Russia and the NHL, for the 70's guys for instance.

I don’t recall this, but if you say so. I think the typical line of thinking is that if their team of very best players was about as good as our team of very best players, then the very best players on that team had to be somewhat close to ours.

Who cares though? Determining where a player ranked in the world at any given time should always be the goal. Your approach is backwayds as far as I’m concerned. The global approach means that from 1927-1963 or so, and from 1993 and on, a ranking within the NHL is the same as a global ranking. In between, small adjustments (larger the further down you go) need to be made due to elite players outside the NHL. Your “Canadian only†approach attempts to come to the same logical conclusions but outright ignores dozens of actual players whose results have to be part of the analysis.

Once again it takes more than being just any player to be the 2nd best scoring Canadian in the NHL over a 15 year period.

It's just one metric sure but guys don't reach that plateau without being extremely good...period. It's not a GP metric but probably the most important metric for a forward (scoring goals)

Except for scoring points, of course.

And you can’t seriously think that “having the 2nd most goals among canadian players over a 15-year period†is the same as “being the best scoring Canadian in the NHL over a 15 year periodâ€, can you?

All better in absolute peaks sure but for their careers?

Yes. Absolutely.

Would you consider putting him ahead of any of them?

Once again outside of the elite of the elite, maybe 10 wingers, the other 70 guys on any winger list aren't historically special either.

Look with different metrics his career doesn't shine as bright as other but there is no denying that he is the 2nd best Canadian goal scoring player during his time in the NHL.

Seriously, he’s been a better goal scorer than Crosby? Staal? Lecavalier? Stamkos? Sakic? Nash? Shanahan?

To be fair to him at least compare that to other "great players" on any wingers list and we aren't talking small sample here it's over a 14 year period.

I think you still haven’t quite grasped exactly how favourable a metric this is when used for ANY player.

Is he going to be a top 10 winger? No, but lots of guys with a much lesser metric (against similar competition) make the grade easily and Marleau is just dismissed?

Me thinks maybe he is getting judged by a different standard here.

No! I’m only saying to judge other players by the exact same standard! Watch what happens when I take some other modern wingers I listed near the bottom:
*
*
Keith Tkachuk, 1993-2008: 9th in points, 23rd in PPG (among the top-100 in points)
Joe Mullen, 1982-1994: 14th, 26th
Alex Mogilny, 1991-2003: 15th, 15th
Peter Bondra, 1992-2004: 25th, 36th
Yvan Cournoyer, 1967-1978: 6th, 19th
Glenn Anderson, 1981-1994: 12th, 38th
Luc Robitaille, 1987-2004: 8th, 26th
Marian Hossa, 2000-2014: 4th, 15th
Daniel Alfredsson, 1996-2014: 4th, 19th
Theoren Fleury, 1990-2002: 9th, 20th
Zigmund Palffy, 1996-2006: 10th, 7th
Markus Naslund, 1996-2009: 9th, 44th
Dany Heatley, 2002-2014: 9th, 17th
Steve Shutt, 1975-1985: 11th, 41st
Daniel Sedin, 2004-2014: 9th, 17th
Ilya Kovalchuk, 2000-2013: 6th, 8th
Paul Kariya, 1995-2008: 5th, 9th
Lanny McDonald, 1975-1986: 8th, 28th
John LeClair, 1993-2006: 14th, 16th
Steve Larmer, 1983-1994: 11th, 31st
Patrik Elias, 1999-2012: 7th, 24th
Mark Recchi, 1990-2009: 3rd, 24th
Brian Propp, *1980-1991: 12th, 28th
Rod Gilbert, 1964-1977: 4th, 11th
*
And the compilers that I mentioned would have a hard time getting on my list:
*
Dave Andreychuk, 1984-1998: 10th, 37th
Mike Gartner: 1980-1997: 9th, 51st
Dino Ciccarelli: 1982-1997: 10th, 33rd
*
Do I really need to get into the top-40? Please tell me I don’t.
*
Even a guy like John Tonelli, who no one thinks was anything special offensively, was 20th and 59th from 1979-1990, and he brought so, so, much more to the table overall.
*
Patrick Marleau, 2001-2014: 14th, 45th
Or 1998-2014, as you’ve been using: 11th, 59th.
As you shrink the period to attempt to be more advantageous their points ranking will improve and PPG will decline. Pick your poison.
*
Anyway, 14th/45th and 11th/59th don’t really compare to anyone on the above lists, except for:
*
Bondra (25th, 36th)* and he was EXTREMELY goals heavy and had an obviously higher peak, leading the league twice. He also has historically remarkable penalty killing numbers (goals for generated versus goals allowed)
Naslund (9th, 44th) though Naslund had a remarkable peak that Marleau didn’t approach
Shutt (11th, 41st), though Shutt was an outstanding playoff scorer and HHOFer
Gartner (9th, 51st), though Gartner’s chosen period was 18 seasons long, had I used 81-94, he’d be 35th in PPG while remaining 9th in points, he’s also a model of consistency and quite a goal-heavy player. And like I said, I can’t even guarantee him a spot in my top-80.
*
Can you still see Marleau making it? All I’m asking is that you judge other players by the same standard you judge him by

 

[seventieslord]

To rail on Backstrom for his scoring finishes sort of misses the point. I took him over the Pecas of the world on my list because the post expansion guys had a chance to play a larger role on their team than an 06 checker like Backstrom did. He did finish 5th in center all-star team voting in 1962 as well.

Phil Housley was a one-way player being fed icetime on bad teams, you couldn't get more opposite of Backstrom.

Ha! True that!

There are arguments for Backstrom in the Top 80. But I think he has to be quite a bit below Jacques Lemaire.

I think they are pretty darned similar once you look at the offensive opportunities each received.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I don’t recall this, but if you say so. I think the typical line of thinking is that if their team of very best players was about as good as our team of very best players, then the very best players on that team had to be somewhat close to ours.

It's a rather alrge leap though, especially considering the Russian systematic play and how those early guys did in the NHL versus other guys the same age. there is something to it but it's not a 1 for 1 ratio IMO, as aprt of the greatness of the ussian teams was their team play and sum being better than their parts.

Who cares though? Determining where a player ranked in the world at any given time should always be the goal. Your approach is backwayds as far as I’m concerned. The global approach means that from 1927-1963 or so, and from 1993 and on, a ranking within the NHL is the same as a global ranking. In between, small adjustments (larger the further down you go) need to be made due to elite players outside the NHL. Your “Canadian only” approach attempts to come to the same logical conclusions but outright ignores dozens of actual players whose results have to be part of the analysis.

The Canadian standard runs through time though, to dismiss the Canadian ranking over time can only be done if one thinks Candadian hockey has declined or is somehow inferior, which obviously isn't the case.

The opposite way to do it and which many are doing, is the best player in the world or NHL case is obviously extremely biased against the integrated guys.

Except for scoring points, of course.

Sure let's use points as well then.

Marleau is still 11th in points and 6th among his Canadian peers in this metric, which is still elite level production.

And you can’t seriously think that “having the 2nd most goals among canadian players over a 15-year period” is the same as “being the best scoring Canadian in the NHL over a 15 year period”, can you?

No but having the 2nd most goals over that long of a time period certainly does suggest he was doing something right doesn't it?

He simply has the 2nd most goals of any Canadian player during his time in the NHL, either he is a huge outlier or he is a great goal scorer when compared to other guys with similar numbers (Being a top 5 in any category over a 15 year period). Being top 5 in that regard, in any point in history, is simply outstanding...period.

Seriously, he’s been a better goal scorer than Crosby? Staal? Lecavalier? Stamkos? Sakic? Nash? Shanahan?

Vinny yes and probably Nash and Shanny too but so what?

I think you still haven’t quite grasped exactly how favourable a metric this is when used for ANY player.

Then take "any player over during the same time frame, why don't they measure up to Patrick? simply put all but 1 Canadian scored less goals and all but 5 scored less points.

All time greats tend to score a lot of points is it favorable to measure Wayne on how many points he scored? He is the obvious example but you get my point I hope.

No! I’m only saying to judge other players by the exact same standard! Watch what happens when I take some other modern wingers I listed near the bottom:
*
*
Keith Tkachuk, 1993-2008: 9th in points, 23rd in PPG (among the top-100 in points)
Joe Mullen, 1982-1994: 14th, 26th
Alex Mogilny, 1991-2003: 15th, 15th
Peter Bondra, 1992-2004: 25th, 36th
Yvan Cournoyer, 1967-1978: 6th, 19th
Glenn Anderson, 1981-1994: 12th, 38th
Luc Robitaille, 1987-2004: 8th, 26th
Marian Hossa, 2000-2014: 4th, 15th
Daniel Alfredsson, 1996-2014: 4th, 19th
Theoren Fleury, 1990-2002: 9th, 20th
Zigmund Palffy, 1996-2006: 10th, 7th
Markus Naslund, 1996-2009: 9th, 44th
Dany Heatley, 2002-2014: 9th, 17th
Steve Shutt, 1975-1985: 11th, 41st
Daniel Sedin, 2004-2014: 9th, 17th
Ilya Kovalchuk, 2000-2013: 6th, 8th
Paul Kariya, 1995-2008: 5th, 9th
Lanny McDonald, 1975-1986: 8th, 28th
John LeClair, 1993-2006: 14th, 16th
Steve Larmer, 1983-1994: 11th, 31st
Patrik Elias, 1999-2012: 7th, 24th
Mark Recchi, 1990-2009: 3rd, 24th
Brian Propp, *1980-1991: 12th, 28th
Rod Gilbert, 1964-1977: 4th, 11th
*
And the compilers that I mentioned would have a hard time getting on my list:
*
Dave Andreychuk, 1984-1998: 10th, 37th
Mike Gartner: 1980-1997: 9th, 51st
Dino Ciccarelli: 1982-1997: 10th, 33rd
*
Do I really need to get into the top-40? Please tell me I don’t.
*
Even a guy like John Tonelli, who no one thinks was anything special offensively, was 20th and 59th from 1979-1990, and he brought so, so, much more to the table overall.
*
Patrick Marleau, 2001-2014: 14th, 45th
Or 1998-2014, as you’ve been using: 11th, 59th.
As you shrink the period to attempt to be more advantageous their points ranking will improve and PPG will decline. Pick your poison.
*
Anyway, 14th/45th and 11th/59th don’t really compare to anyone on the above lists, except for:
*
Bondra (25th, 36th)* and he was EXTREMELY goals heavy and had an obviously higher peak, leading the league twice. He also has historically remarkable penalty killing numbers (goals for generated versus goals allowed)
Naslund (9th, 44th) though Naslund had a remarkable peak that Marleau didn’t approach
Shutt (11th, 41st), though Shutt was an outstanding playoff scorer and HHOFer
Gartner (9th, 51st), though Gartner’s chosen period was 18 seasons long, had I used 81-94, he’d be 35th in PPG while remaining 9th in points, he’s also a model of consistency and quite a goal-heavy player. And like I said, I can’t even guarantee him a spot in my top-80.
*
Can you still see Marleau making it? All I’m asking is that you judge other players by the same standard you judge him by

Sorry but 2nd and 6th among Canadians and 6th and 11th in a fully combined league is a lot better for a lot of those guys, just go back and look at the metric it kind of speaks for itself right?

I'm using his career against his peers metric in this regular one can do a peak and prime as well and do it as consecutive or best 3,5,7 seasons whatever. the more ways one looks at all players the better picture we get of them and quite simply being a career guy myself Patrick definitely deserves serious consideration, and over many of those over guys listed above, on any top 80 wingers list.

Perhaps his current season, which will no doubt be included in the next project might challenge you to reconsider him, perhaps not.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

All these long posts about a player who didn't make a single list.

 

[seventieslord]

Wow... not sure what to even say from here.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Current centers

It's interesting to note that 5 or 6 current centers who will most likely make our top 80 list are off to great starts this season, even if it doesn't count in our evaluation of them for this project.

Sid, H Sedin, Zetts, Dats, Stamkos, Thorton and Malkin are all off to good to great starts.

 

[Hardyvan123]

All these long posts about a player who didn't make a single list.

I'm talking about Marleau if we consider him as a winger, which was in response to a post about him as a winger, center list is much harder to crack.