I suspect Mikhailov and Vasiliev are the two top-100's being referred to.
I don't think there's all that big of a gap between Fetisov and Vasiliev as far as defensemen go, but in terms of offense obviously Fetisov would have been a big advantage as you've stated.
From all I can gather, Kharlamov is considered the greatest Soviet hockey player by the Russians themselves. They should know a lot better than myself, so I'll take their word for it until I see a really convincing case for someone else. The fact that Tretiak's MVP voting record is so much better has made me think about moving him ahead, but as it stands I still have Kharlamov first.
Just to play Devil's Advocate here, from what I've heard the Russian fans & players have a greater appreciation for the aesthetics of the game. They would probably rank Lafleur higher in this poll than most North Americans. Could be why Kharlamov is considered the best. They love those lovely(style-wise) players.
I don't think it really has that much to do with the size of the rink or the length of the competition. Traditionally, European countries are very emotionally tied to their national teams. In basically every sport with some popularity over here (there are exceptions, like tennis or cycling) the greatest prize is the Olympic Gold or the World Championships. Thus we tend to look at hockey the same way. Somebody mentioned it in another thread, when Sweden beat arch rival Finland 6-5 in the 2003 WHC Swedish television had 3.8 million viewers out of a possible 9 million. The Olympic tournament is without any doubt the single most important hockey competition in Sweden. It will definitely mean just as much in Vancouver, despite playing on NHL-sized rinks. The Ice Hockey Olympic tournament is probably the second or third most anticipated sports event in Sweden, trailing only the FIFA World Cup and possibly the UEFA European Football Championships.You raise an interesting point. European fans tend to appreciate players for their perceived performance on the large Olympic sized rink in events or short series while North American fans tend to appreciate perceived performance on the standard NHL rink over seasons and playoffs.
The Lafleur / Kharlamov analogy is interesting. Off ice they had issues with motor vehicles. Lafleur was involved in two serious one car accidents - first in 1971, just after being drafted by the Canadiens, he rolled his car driving from Quebec to Montreal. Kharlamov was also involved in two serious car accidents, paying the ultimate price in the second one.
If the attitude is "the Russians think that Kharlamov is the best, so he is the best", well, it's hard to argue against it I guess. I still think that in many ways Fetisov, Firsov and Makarov's (and Tretiak's) careers were more impressive and at least in my mind there is, er, reasonable doubt about it. We'll see if there will be any serious arguments in the future, or if it's more like Gretzky thing; "he is the best ever and that's it".
If the attitude is "the Russians think that Kharlamov is the best, so he is the best", well, it's hard to argue against it I guess. I still think that in many ways Fetisov, Firsov and Makarov's (and Tretiak's) careers were more impressive and at least in my mind there is, er, reasonable doubt about it. We'll see if there will be any serious arguments in the future, or if it's more like Gretzky thing; "he is the best ever and that's it".
I can't tell....Are you trying to say that there has been no serious argument about whether Gretzky was the best or not....?
I'd love it if a column was added to show the position movement from the last Top 100.
Sure there are Super Mario & Bobby Orr or even Kharlamov fans who argue that their man was the best - and obviously not totally without reason (in the 1st 2 cases, that is). But I think that if any sports/hockey magazine, for example, would pick someone else than Gretzky as the best hockey player ever, it would be very controversial and people would question their credibility; such were the numbers/performances that Gretzky procuded, in the NHL and in international tournaments. In my opinion, there were certainly more exciting and flashier players, but it's REALLY HARD to make a case for anybody else.
But whether there has been a "serious argument" or not, well, I guess I don't know...
I thought Lindsay making the Top 25 last time was a big step forward as I feel he is one of the most overlooked stars because of his famous linemate. Seeing him listed below Messier, Jagr, and Bossy just doesn't seem right to me.
I thought Lindsay making the Top 25 last time was a big step forward as I feel he is one of the most overlooked stars because of his famous linemate. Seeing him listed below Messier, Jagr, and Bossy just doesn't seem right to me.
I can understand that as seeing Lidstrom as the 17th best player OF ALL TIME just doesn't seem right to me. He was too high last time and his playing hasn't gotten any better.
But what are ya gonna do eh?
So if I didn't get a confirmation for the last round of voting does that mean my rankings were missed? No big deal, just wondering.