Round 2, Vote 10 (HOH Top Centers)

[Hockey Outsider]

OFFENSIVE ANALYSIS

Here are the results of the "Vs. X" offensive benchmarking:

METHOD ONE: seven season analysis

Player|Result
Adam Oates | 90.2
Jean Ratelle | 88.5
Dale Hawerchuk | 85.9
Eric Lindros | 85.4
Alex Delvecchio | 84.9
Gilbert Perreault | 84.6
Pavel Datsyuk | 82
Evgeni Malkin | 80.7
Hooley Smith | 78.8
Igor Larionov | 53.7

The table has been updated through 2013. Four important notes:

• Larionov didn't play in the NHL until he was 29 and was past his offensive peak.
• Bowie never played in the NHL and his results have been excluded.
• Malkin has only played seven NHL seasons and had significant injuries during two of them, which really hurts his score (I'm excluding 2014 which is in progress).
• The "Vs X" analysis only looks at scoring statistics - important context such as linemates, team style (conservative vs. run and gun), etc. are not taken into account.

Despite Lindros's short, injury plagued career, his peak offensive value was still comparable to Hawerchuk and Perreault. Newly-eligible Ratelle jumps to 2nd place; I'm somewhat surprised that he ranks ahead of the great Jet and Sabre.

METHOD TWO: ten season analysis

Player|Result
Adam Oates | 87
Jean Ratelle | 84.4
Alex Delvecchio | 83.3
Dale Hawerchuk | 82.4
Gilbert Perreault | 80.8
Eric Lindros | 77.8
Pavel Datsyuk | 76
Hooley Smith | 71.6
Evgeni Malkin | 60.6
Igor Larionov | 51.1

The same caveats apply here as well. Since this analysis is based on a (weighted) ten season analysis, players with short careers like Lindros and especially Malkin are hurt further.

Delvecchio really moves up thanks to his consistency and reliability.

ALL-STAR VOTING RESULTS

Here are the first-, second-, and third-team year-end all-star voting results:

Player | First | Second | Third | Total
Wayne Gretzky | 8 | 7 | 1 | 16
Jean Beliveau | 6 | 4 | 1 | 11
Mario Lemieux | 5 | 4 | 0 | 9
Stan Mikita | 6 | 2 | 0 | 8
Phil Esposito | 6 | 2 | 0 | 8
Bobby Clarke | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7
Bill Cowley | 4 | 1 | 1 | 6
Syl Apps | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6
Milt Schmidt | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6
Henri Richard | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6
Norm Ullman | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6
Ted Kennedy | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6
Elmer Lach | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5
Joe Sakic | 3 | 0 | 2 | 5
Marcel Dionne | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5
Bryan Trottier | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5
Sidney Crosby | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5
Joe Thornton | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5
Gilbert Perreault | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5
Peter Forsberg | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4
Frank Boucher* | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4
Hooley Smith* | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4
Max Bentley | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4
Dave Keon | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4
Steven Stamkos | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4
Sid Abel | 2 | 1(2) | 0 | 3(4)
Evgeni Malkin | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3
Howie Morenz* | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3
Mark Messier | 2(4) | 0(1) | 1 | 3(6)
Eric Lindros | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3
Steve Yzerman | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3
Neil Colville | 0 | 2(3) | 1 | 3(4)
Peter Stastny | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3
Ron Francis | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3
... | | | |
Pavel Datsyuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Dale Hawerchuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Alex Delvecchio | 0 | 1(2) | 0 | 1(2)
Adam Oates | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1
Jean Ratelle | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1

A few points:

• This is an update of TDMM's post from the previous round. I'm assuming his starting point is correct, but I haven't verified this myself.
• As a reminder, TDMM was able to award a third team all-star (unofficial, but derived from the actual voting results) for every year from 1931 to 2013 except 1941, 1962, 1953 and 1958.
• For players with numbers in brackets (i.e. Mark Messier), the first number shows the results only at centre. The second number (in brackets) shows the total results for centre plus any other positions where they finished top three or better in voting.
• Players with an asterisk (*) next to their name played a significant portion of their career before 1930-31 (the first year all-star teams were determined) and their rankings may be understated.

As discussed above, Bowie never played in the NHL and Larionov arrived at age 29, past his prime, explaining their absences.

Perreault has by far the best all-star record remaining. Malkin's is surprisingly strong given his short career. After ranking quite well under the offensive metrics, Ratelle has a poor showing in this category.

HART TROPHY ANALYSIS

Here are the Hart trophy results for each player. I'm using a cut-off of 5% the maximum available votes:

Player|Results
Eric Lindros | 1st, 3rd, 6th, 9th
Evgeni Malkin | 1st, 2nd, 2nd
Hooley Smith | 2nd, 3rd, T-4th
Jean Ratelle | 4th, 8th
Gilbert Perreault | 5th, 7th
Dale Hawerchuk* | 2nd
Pavel Datsyuk | 3rd
Adam Oates | 4th
Alex Delvecchio | none
Igor Larionov | none
Russell Bowie | N/A

The same disclaimer as before applise to Larionov and Bowie.

* In 1982, Hawerchuk was 5th in Hart voting with a 4% share, however this was an unusual year as Gretzky won the only unanimous Hart in history. Only two other players reached the 5% thresold that year (Trottier and Bossy).

 

[seventieslord]

What? What did you call me?

Son, you're forgetting yourself.

Well played, sir.

 

[seventieslord]

OFFENSIVE ANALYSIS

Here are the results of the "Vs. X" offensive benchmarking:

METHOD ONE: seven season analysis

Player|Result
Adam Oates | 90.2
Jean Ratelle | 88.5
Dale Hawerchuk | 85.9
Eric Lindros | 85.4
Alex Delvecchio | 84.9
Gilbert Perreault | 84.6
Pavel Datsyuk | 78.9
Hooley Smith | 78.8
Evgeni Malkin | 73.2
Igor Larionov | 53.7

The table has been updated through 2013. Four important notes:

• Larionov didn't play in the NHL until he was 29 and was past his offensive peak.
• Bowie never played in the NHL and his results have been excluded.
• Malkin has only played seven NHL seasons and had significant injuries during two of them, which really hurts his score (I'm excluding 2014 which is in progress).
• The "Vs X" analysis only looks at scoring statistics - important context such as linemates, team style (conservative vs. run and gun), etc. are not taken into account.

Despite Lindros's short, injury plagued career, his peak offensive value was still comparable to Hawerchuk and Perreault. Newly-eligible Ratelle jumps to 2nd place; I'm somewhat surprised that he ranks ahead of the great Jet and Sabre.

METHOD TWO: ten season analysis

Player|Result
Adam Oates | 87
Jean Ratelle | 84.4
Alex Delvecchio | 83.3
Dale Hawerchuk | 82.4
Gilbert Perreault | 80.8
Eric Lindros | 77.8
Pavel Datsyuk | 71.7
Hooley Smith | 71.6
Evgeni Malkin | 55
Igor Larionov | 51.1

The same caveats apply here as well. Since this analysis is based on a (weighted) ten season analysis, players with short careers like Lindros and especially Malkin are hurt further.

Delvecchio really moves up thanks to his consistency and reliability.

ALL-STAR VOTING RESULTS

Here are the first-, second-, and third-team year-end all-star voting results:

Player | First | Second | Third | Total
Wayne Gretzky | 8 | 7 | 1 | 16
Jean Beliveau | 6 | 4 | 1 | 11
Mario Lemieux | 5 | 4 | 0 | 9
Stan Mikita | 6 | 2 | 0 | 8
Phil Esposito | 6 | 2 | 0 | 8
Bobby Clarke | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7
Bill Cowley | 4 | 1 | 1 | 6
Syl Apps | 2 | 3 | 1 | 6
Milt Schmidt | 3 | 1 | 2 | 6
Henri Richard | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6
Norm Ullman | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6
Ted Kennedy | 0 | 3 | 3 | 6
Elmer Lach | 3 | 2 | 0 | 5
Joe Sakic | 3 | 0 | 2 | 5
Marcel Dionne | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5
Bryan Trottier | 2 | 2 | 1 | 5
Sidney Crosby | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5
Joe Thornton | 1 | 2 | 2 | 5
Gilbert Perreault | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5
Peter Forsberg | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4
Frank Boucher* | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4
Hooley Smith* | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4
Max Bentley | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4
Dave Keon | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4
Steven Stamkos | 0 | 2 | 2 | 4
Sid Abel | 2 | 1(2) | 0 | 3(4)
Evgeni Malkin | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3
Howie Morenz* | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3
Mark Messier | 2(4) | 0(1) | 1 | 3(6)
Eric Lindros | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3
Steve Yzerman | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3
Neil Colville | 0 | 2(3) | 1 | 3(4)
Peter Stastny | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3
Ron Francis | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3
... | | | |
Pavel Datsyuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Dale Hawerchuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Alex Delvecchio | 0 | 1(2) | 0 | 1(2)
Adam Oates | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1
Jean Ratelle | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1

A few points:

• This is an update of TDMM's post from the previous round. I'm assuming his starting point is correct, but I haven't verified this myself.
• As a reminder, TDMM was able to award a third team all-star (unofficial, but derived from the actual voting results) for every year from 1931 to 2013 except 1941, 1962, 1953 and 1958.
• For players with numbers in brackets (i.e. Mark Messier), the first number shows the results only at centre. The second number (in brackets) shows the total results for centre plus any other positions where they finished top three or better in voting.
• Players with an asterisk (*) next to their name played a significant portion of their career before 1930-31 (the first year all-star teams were determined) and their rankings may be understated.

As discussed above, Bowie never played in the NHL and Larionov arrived at age 29, past his prime, explaining their absences.

Perreault has by far the best all-star record remaining. Malkin's is surprisingly strong given his short career. After ranking quite well under the offensive metrics, Ratelle has a poor showing in this category.

HART TROPHY ANALYSIS

Here are the Hart trophy results for each player. I'm using a cut-off of 5% the maximum available votes:

Player|Results
Eric Lindros | 1st, 3rd, 6th, 9th
Evgeni Malkin | 1st, 2nd, 2nd
Hooley Smith | 2nd, 3rd, T-4th
Jean Ratelle | 4th, 8th
Gilbert Perreault | 5th, 7th
Dale Hawerchuk* | 2nd
Pavel Datsyuk | 3rd
Adam Oates | 4th
Alex Delvecchio | none
Igor Larionov | none
Russell Bowie | N/A

The same disclaimer as before applise to Larionov and Bowie.

* In 1982, Hawerchuk was 5th in Hart voting with a 4% share, however this was an unusual year as Gretzky won the only unanimous Hart in history. Only two other players reached the 5% thresold that year (Trottier and Bossy).

Sheesh. First I look at the vsx and I think Ratelle has to be a shoo-in, and I start to question why I'm so sure Delvecchio should be top 2. And Y'know, even after the ten season analysis I can't help but wonder, why were we all so sure about Delvecchio over Ratelle in round 1?

Perreault looks pedestrian on those two lists, but then he's the runaway all-star team leader. Hooley too. (Someone really needs to sum up everything he brought to the table so that the people without ATD experience appreciate his greatness a little more)

Malkin looks really weak from a career value standpoint. But then he's also the only three time first teamer... or did that just mean three time highest scoring center?

And then as good as Ratelle looked above, he looks poor by all-star votes.

Larionov last certainly looks like Quaker oats right now.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Sheesh. First I look at the vsx and I think Ratelle has to be a shoo-in, and I start to question why I'm so sure Delvecchio should be top 2. And Y'know, even after the ten season analysis I can't help but wonder, why were we all so sure about Delvecchio over Ratelle in round 1?

Perreault looks pedestrian on those two lists, but then he's the runaway all-star team leader. Hooley too. (Someone really needs to sum up everything he brought to the table so that the people without ATD experience appreciate his greatness a little more)

Malkin looks really weak from a career value standpoint. But then he's also the only three time first teamer... or did that just mean three time highest scoring center?

And then as good as Ratelle looked above, he looks poor by all-star votes.

Larionov last certainly looks like Quaker oats right now.

How often has that meant something else? I understand the Hart argument, but what supports this idea?

 

[seventieslord]

How often has that meant something else? I understand the Hart argument, but what supports this idea?

Take a look at the correlation between Hart and scoring race post lockout.

It wasn't nearly as much like that before, and especially not pre expansion.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Take a look at the correlation between Hart and scoring race post lockout.

It wasn't nearly as much like that before, and especially not pre expansion.

I said I get the Hart voting argument, you were talking about all-star teams.

edit: Setting Delvecchio and Smith aside, Lindros is the only other center to lead the NHL in scoring available.

Malkin - 3 times (2008, 2009, 2012)
Lindros - 1 time (1995)

If you want to look at potential outlier situations
Oates - 2nd behind Gretzky in 1991
Hawerchuk - 2nd behind Gretzky in 1985
Ratelle - 2nd behind Esposito in 1972 (probably not the same as getting stomped by Gretzky, but putting this up there anyways)

Perreault and Datsyuk never led centers in scoring and had no outlier situations.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Sheesh. First I look at the vsx and I think Ratelle has to be a shoo-in, and I start to question why I'm so sure Delvecchio should be top 2. And Y'know, even after the ten season analysis I can't help but wonder, why were we all so sure about Delvecchio over Ratelle in round 1?

Perreault looks pedestrian on those two lists, but then he's the runaway all-star team leader. Hooley too. (Someone really needs to sum up everything he brought to the table so that the people without ATD experience appreciate his greatness a little more)

Malkin looks really weak from a career value standpoint. But then he's also the only three time first teamer... or did that just mean three time highest scoring center?

And then as good as Ratelle looked above, he looks poor by all-star votes.

Larionov last certainly looks like Quaker oats right now.

Most of this panel ranked Maltsev over Perreault...to those people I ask: How many AS teams does Perreault have if Maltsev is in the NHL?

 

[seventieslord]

I said I get the Hart voting argument, you were talking about all-star teams.

edit: Setting Delvecchio and Smith aside, Lindros is the only other center to lead the NHL in scoring available.

Malkin - 3 times (2008, 2009, 2012)
Lindros - 1 time (1995)

If you want to look at potential outlier situations
Oates - 2nd behind Gretzky in 1991
Hawerchuk - 2nd behind Gretzky in 1985
Ratelle - 2nd behind Esposito in 1972 (probably not the same as getting stomped by Gretzky, but putting this up there anyways)

Perreault and Datsyuk never led centers in scoring and had no outlier situations.

Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. Yeah, I don't have the same backup for the all-star notion... Not saying it isn't there, but i don't have it myself.

By the way, as far as datsyuk/Malkin goes, if we look at their whole bodies of work over the last 8 seasons, as opposed to award or award vote counting (not an unreasonable thing to ask considering the era) it sure isn't an open and shut case.

Only counting post lockout, Datsyuk has played 100 more games and scored 40 more points. Malkin has outperformed him offensively by 13% per game, but datsyuk has outperformed Malkin immeasurably defensively. If they were defensemen, this would be open and shut for datsyuk of course, but they are forwards.

I'd be interested to know why someone would have Malkin definitively ahead at this point.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Sheesh. First I look at the vsx and I think Ratelle has to be a shoo-in, and I start to question why I'm so sure Delvecchio should be top 2. And Y'know, even after the ten season analysis I can't help but wonder, why were we all so sure about Delvecchio over Ratelle in round 1?

I think Ratelle deserves to be in this round.

Perreault looks pedestrian on those two lists, but then he's the runaway all-star team leader. Hooley too. (Someone really needs to sum up everything he brought to the table so that the people without ATD experience appreciate his greatness a little more)

Nalyd did a pretty good job on this bio:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=59322353&postcount=60

Larionov last certainly looks like Quaker oats right now.

I've always been very underwhelmed by his NHL resume, and combine the fact that he was the least talented member of the Soviet line that made him famous, I'm not seeing it. He might have been the glue that made it work, but glue guys do not belong here. Petrov is much more deserving.

 

[sr edler]

I've always been very underwhelmed by his NHL resume, and combine the fact that he was the least talented member of the Soviet line that made him famous, I'm not seeing it. He might have been the glue that made it work, but glue guys do not belong here. Petrov is much more deserving.

He was 29 when he entered the league, look at what everyone else did in the NHL beyond 29 and you will see some guys fall off pretty quickly. Hawerchuk for example have one good season beyond 29. Lindros practically nothing. Larionov has a very good NHL resume for his age and circumstances. PPG season at 35 while being a defensive second or even third line type of center behind Yzerman|Fedorov. One can even say he, and not Shanahan, was the guy that put the Wings over the playoff hump because before he arrived the Wings hadn't even made it out of the second round. And he had 18 points in 14 games in the playoffs in 1994 when the Sharks bounced the Wings.

Larionov had 63 points at age 38, 43 points at age 42. And he brought the intangibles. He wasn't as good offensively as Krutov but being talented isn't only about how many points you put up, especially not as a classical schooled Soviet center. On the whole Larionov was a smarter and I'll say better player than Krutov.

 

[quoipourquoi]

One can even say he, and not Shanahan, was the guy that put the Wings over the playoff hump because before he arrived the Wings hadn't even made it out of the second round. And he had 18 points in 14 games in the playoffs in 1994 when the Sharks bounced the Wings.

The year before he arrived, Detroit was in the Finals. His first year saw them lose in the Conference Finals. Then Shanahan arrived. Larionov was quite good, but he wasn't the catalyst for their success.

 

[steve141]

On Larionov:

I've always been very underwhelmed by his NHL resume, and combine the fact that he was the least talented member of the Soviet line that made him famous, I'm not seeing it.

Why? Who are you comparing to? Makarov was better than Larionov, but I think many people are underestimating how rare it is for a player to make an impact after 30. Even Canadians rarely finish in the top ten in scoring after 30, certainly not in the 90s. When people compare Makarov and Larionov to other NHL players they often compare the Soviets in their 30s to the NHL players in their 20s.

There are a lot of factors to consider to explain why the Soviet players would have a hard time moving to the NHL. Most European players take a couple of years to get used to the bigger ice, the differences in playing systems, and the differences in culture/language. Even so, both Larionov and Makarov had successful NHL careers after 30 by any standard. We don't even need to make any excuses.

Larionov struggled offensively during his first two seasons (on terrible teams that finished a collective -530 over those two seasons), but was always excellent defensively. After that he delivered good offensive seasons for his age.

Larionov has the 15th most regular season points ever for a center from his 29 year season and on. How was Larionov able to stay and be productive for so long if his NHL years were "underwhelming"?

Among centers Larionov has the 3rd most playoff points ever from age 29 and on. How is that underwhelming, considering he was primarily a defensive center?

Though his scoring numbers are good for his age, Larionov was primarily a defense first center, and should be judged as such. It's unfortunate that we didn't get Keon and Larionov in the same round, as I see little separation between them. What is it that makes Keon better than Larionov?

Everyone knows how good a prime the KLM line had in the 80s. Larionov was then a valuable NHL player into his 40s. Prime+longevity - I don't see what else he could have done?

 

[sr edler]

The year before he arrived, Detroit was in the Finals.

Yeah, I totally forgot that, probably because of their forgettable appearance. Must have been because Larionov wasn't there.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think many people are underestimating how rare it is for a player to make an impact after 30. Even Canadians rarely finish in the top ten in scoring after 30, certainly not in the 90s.

From 1992-2001, five of ten Hart Trophies went to players in their 30s.

And most of those statistics you're citing for Larionov were greatly aided by the 82-GP era and the four-round playoff era. You're basically cutting off any potential competition from other eras by only looking at raw numbers. Hence why they aren't particularly impressive.

 

[VMBM]

Among centers Larionov has the 3rd most playoff points ever from age 29 and on. How is that underwhelming, considering he was primarily a defensive center?

Though his scoring numbers are good for his age, Larionov was primarily a defense first center, and should be judged as such. It's unfortunate that we didn't get Keon and Larionov in the same round, as I see little separation between them. What is it that makes Keon better than Larionov?

In the NHL maybe, but I'd seriously question that he was a defense first center in CSKA/Soviet ntl team; a two-way center, fine, but not a 2-way/defensive forward a la Clarke, or even much less a la Bob Gainey. I mean, it's KLM we're talking about, with Fetisov and Kasatonov behind them, i.e. one of the best defensive pairs ever. Krutov and Makarov were the primary penalty killers (just like Petrov and Mikhailov were for the '70s USSR).
This is how Russian sports journalists Leonid Trakhtenberg and Anatoly Bochinin described KLM:

They continued the golden run by their predecessors. They knew no compromise - only forward, only attack, who cares about defense!

http://www.chidlovski.com/personal/1974/liners/segold.htm

My problem with Larionov basically is that his linemates were so clearly superior to him in the 1980s; the stats, accolades and eye test prove this (the latter is subjective, of course).

European centers like Petrov and Nedomansky also had far more prolific domestic and international careers, although Larionov does have that Soviet MVP (1988) over Petrov. Overall, Larionov's Soviet/international career might be closer to players like Kapustin and Vikulov than to Makarov, Firsov, Mikhailov, Kharlamov, Maltsev... or Petrov. Sure, his NHL career - where he did show great longevity and adaptability - should give him some 'extra points', but it still should be secondary to his Soviet career IMO.

And I know I've said this a million times before, but I'd also seriously question the claim that Larionov was the 'brains' or even 'the glue' of the unit: Krutov and Makarov did just fine when Tyumenev/Shepelev were centering them (the 1985-86 Super Series; e.g. 6-1 and 6-3 wins over Montreal and Edmonton, respectively) or when Larionov was mediocre (1987 Canada Cup; Makarov 15 pts, Krutov 14 pts, Larionov 3 pts).

 

[Canadiens1958]

Gilbert Perreault Defensively I

....or maybe he was just talented enough that they just let him do his thing?

Punch Imlach, for one, is on record as being in awe at his talent level. There's no hard and fast rule saying he would have to pound Perreault into a system game. I've never once read anything saying Perreault was any good defensively, and his GF:GA ratio was actually very weak for a 1000 point player.

This would need to be much better substantiated. I can't see anyone just taking your word for it on this one.

So now we have an artificial, arbitrary 1000 point benchmark to consider. Never read anything from Scotty Bowman, Al Arbour or HHOF voters or analysts anywhere use this metric or benchmark. Regardless you fail to even define this mythical GF:GA ratio into gradients - elite down to poor.

Regardless, when compared to 1980s Selke winners like Kasper and Murray Perreault is an equal or slightly better, a bit weaker than Poulin,better than non-winners like Steen allegedly Hawerchuk defensive savior in Winnipeg.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/k/kaspest01.html

1983 playoffs vs Canadiens posted last round with quotes from opposition - obviously you did not read this per above. Also Bowman did play Perreault against Gretzky with success (documentable), extra shifted him at LW against Lafleur and played him at LW internationally in Canada Cups. Simply not done if the player cannot adjust to the different defensive responsibilities. Evidenced this round by Alex Delvecchio and his career, Syd Howe, Jacques Lemaire and others during their careers.

 

[steve141]

On Larionov:

Sure, his NHL career - where he did show great longevity and adaptability - should give him some 'extra points', but it still should be secondary to his Soviet career IMO.

I agree full-heartedly. But too often on this board do I see Larionov's and Makarov's careers written off because there's the sentiment that they couldn't make it in the NHL. What I am trying to establish is that when you actually look at the numbers their NHL careers were comparable to other star players for their age.

To determine their rankings against the other star players you need judge their 80s work. If you feel that Larionov's prime in the 80s was subpar to others give him a low ranking, but don't do it because of his NHL years.

 

[BraveCanadian]

On Larionov:


I agree full-heartedly. But too often on this board do I see Larionov's and Makarov's careers written off because there's the sentiment that they couldn't make it in the NHL. What I am trying to establish is that when you actually look at the numbers their NHL careers were comparable to other star players for their age.

To determine their rankings against the other star players you need judge their 80s work. If you feel that Larionov's prime in the 80s was subpar to others give him a low ranking, but don't do it because of his NHL years.

Huh? Practically everyone on this board thinks Makarov is a large omission from the Hall of Fame.

I'm fairly certain that most people on the history board also understand that Larionov was a good NHL player even though he was older and past his prime when he came over (like Makarov).

The issue is that "the Russian Gretzky" is probably the weakest member of the KLM line by most accounts. (although still a great playmaker)

If anything, those two get extra points around here just for having a serviceable NHL career in comparison to Krutov who flamed out scarfing down hotdogs and being depressed due to alienation from culture/language shock.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

On Larionov:

Why? Who are you comparing to? Makarov was better than Larionov, but I think many people are underestimating how rare it is for a player to make an impact after 30. Even Canadians rarely finish in the top ten in scoring after 30, certainly not in the 90s. When people compare Makarov and Larionov to other NHL players they often compare the Soviets in their 30s to the NHL players in their 20s.

There are a lot of factors to consider to explain why the Soviet players would have a hard time moving to the NHL. Most European players take a couple of years to get used to the bigger ice, the differences in playing systems, and the differences in culture/language. Even so, both Larionov and Makarov had successful NHL careers after 30 by any standard. We don't even need to make any excuses.

Larionov struggled offensively during his first two seasons (on terrible teams that finished a collective -530 over those two seasons), but was always excellent defensively. After that he delivered good offensive seasons for his age.

There is no doubt that there was a big adjustment that he had to make, but all we have to go on is what he did in the NHL, and what he did in the Soviet Union. If Larionov's numbers for that age are good, then Ratelle and Oates' are out of this world (see below).

Larionov has the 15th most regular season points ever for a center from his 29 year season and on. How was Larionov able to stay and be productive for so long if his NHL years were "underwhelming"?

Among centers Larionov has the 3rd most playoff points ever from age 29 and on. How is that underwhelming, considering he was primarily a defensive center?

I don't know the numbers, but I'd wager that Larionov has among the most games played of centers after the age of 29 too. These numbers aren't too impressive considering the lack of adjustment for eras. I'm not convinced he was primarily a defensive center either. A two-way role? Yeah, I could see that, but he's not a shutdown guy.

In this project, we're in the business of judging the best of all time. Just "good" does not belong here. Larionov had a PPG season in the highest scoring era ever in 95-96 at age 35? Okay, Ratelle put up 105 points in his age 35 year. Oates put up 76 in 82 games. Adjust the scoring for era, and these are the point totals:

Larionov: 70
Ratelle: 92
Oates: 88

Larionov's best season of adjusted points is 70. Looking at Ratelle and Oates, Ratelle beat that number seven times after the age of 29, and Oates beat it nine times.

Though his scoring numbers are good for his age, Larionov was primarily a defense first center, and should be judged as such. It's unfortunate that we didn't get Keon and Larionov in the same round, as I see little separation between them. What is it that makes Keon better than Larionov?

Keon and Larionov are worlds apart defensively.

On Larionov:

I agree full-heartedly. But too often on this board do I see Larionov's and Makarov's careers written off because there's the sentiment that they couldn't make it in the NHL. What I am trying to establish is that when you actually look at the numbers their NHL careers were comparable to other star players for their age.

Makarov does not deserve to be written off. He has an elite Soviet prime that Larionov simply does not have.

To determine their rankings against the other star players you need judge their 80s work. If you feel that Larionov's prime in the 80s was subpar to others give him a low ranking, but don't do it because of his NHL years.

Here are the top finishes in MVP voting and Soviet scoring finishes for the KLM line:

Points

Krutov: 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 8
Larionov: 2, 2, 3, 5, 9, 10
Makarov: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 8

MVP

Krutov: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5
Larionov: 1, 4, 4
Makarov: 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4

His 80s work is far behind his linemates. There's something to be said for being the "defensive conscious" of his line (which I'm not convinced he was elite at), but that's not close.

 

[steve141]

From 1992-2001, five of ten Hart Trophies went to players in their 30s.

If your point is that Larionov was not as good as Lemieux and Hasek I think 99% of the world agrees with you. The point still stands though. Most forwards peak in their mid twenties, most of the players already on the list declined significantly after 30 or were already retired. How many Hart's did Hawerchuck win in his 30s again?

And most of those statistics you're citing for Larionov were greatly aided by the 82-GP era and the four-round playoff era. You're basically cutting off any potential competition from other eras by only looking at raw numbers. Hence why they aren't particularly impressive.

Not really, I was responding to the claim that Larionov's NHL years were underwhelming by showing that he produced as well as expected from a star player after 30. A look at his contemporaries shows the same thing:

Scoring by 29+ old HOF forwards since 1978

Rank | Player | Points
1|Mark Messier|1046
2|Wayne Gretzky|1020
3|Adam Oates|1004
4|Ron Francis|912
5|Marcel Dionne|843
6|Brett Hull|788
7|Joe Sakic|758
8|Doug Gilmour|716
9|Joe Mullen|690
10|Brendan Shanahan|668
11|Peter Stastny|648
12|Igor Larionov|644
13|Steve Yzerman|633
14|Mike Gartner|601
15|Gilbert Perreault|563
16|Mats Sundin|561
17|Luc Robitaille|549
18|Dino Ciccarelli|534
19|Mario Lemieux|512
20|Joe Nieuwendyk|510
21|Jari Kurri|448
22|Darryl Sittler|436
23|Bobby Clarke|415
24|Guy Lafleur|412
25|Bryan Trottier|406
26|Bernie Federko|387
27|Lanny McDonald|339
28|Glenn Anderson|330
29|Denis Savard|325
30|Dale Hawerchuk|293

As is clear from the above table of his contemporaries, Larionov performed about as well as could be expected from a star forward in his 30s during his era. He wasn't Gretzky, but there are a lot of great players who did worse than him aswell.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Not really, I was responding to the claim that Larionov's NHL years were underwhelming by showing that he produced as well as expected from a star player after 30. A look at his contemporaries shows the same thing:

Scoring by 29+ old HOF forwards since 1978

Rank | Player | Points
1|Mark Messier|1046
2|Wayne Gretzky|1020
3|Adam Oates|1004
4|Ron Francis|912
5|Marcel Dionne|843
6|Brett Hull|788
7|Joe Sakic|758
8|Doug Gilmour|716
9|Joe Mullen|690
10|Brendan Shanahan|668
11|Peter Stastny|648
12|Igor Larionov|644
13|Steve Yzerman|633
14|Mike Gartner|601
15|Gilbert Perreault|563
16|Mats Sundin|561
17|Luc Robitaille|549
18|Dino Ciccarelli|534
19|Mario Lemieux|512
20|Joe Nieuwendyk|510
21|Jari Kurri|448
22|Darryl Sittler|436
23|Bobby Clarke|415
24|Guy Lafleur|412
25|Bryan Trottier|406
26|Bernie Federko|387
27|Lanny McDonald|339
28|Glenn Anderson|330
29|Denis Savard|325
30|Dale Hawerchuk|293

As is clear from the above table of his contemporaries, Larionov performed about as well as could be expected from a star forward in his 30s during his era. He wasn't Gretzky, but there are a lot of great players who did worse than him aswell.

If you want this table to have any value at all, add a games played column, and a point-per-game column. Do that, and I almost guarantee Larionov is in the bottom 10, maybe bottom 5 in PPG.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I think I agree with both sides on Larionov's NHL career. The word "underwhelmed" was probably unfair to him, as he showed pretty well for a guy his age. But in the context of this group of players, there are guys who aged even better, and by a significant margin.

Unless someone really goes to bat for his Soviet performance and shows that the posts above are missing something about his performance compared to the NHL stars of the era, I'm personally not likely to think much about Larionov in this round.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

If you want this table to have any value at all, add a games played column, and a point-per-game column. Do that, and I almost guarantee Larionov is in the bottom 10, maybe bottom 5 in PPG.

Larionov is actually last in points per game: link

Three things in Larionov's favour. One, he was above average defensively relative to this group (clearly in the top ten and possibly in the the top five). Two, more than half of his games occurred during the Dead Puck Era (1997-2004), artificially depressing his scoring totals (though this is true of around one-third of the players listed). Third, he played longer than most (Larionov scoring 0.70 ppg over 921 games, through age 43, is more impressive than Savard scoring 0.71 ppg over 460 games, through age 35 - even before we take into account the first two points).

I'm still not sure where I'd rank Larionov (hypothetically, since I'm not a participant in the project) but this argument doesn't really help his case, at least without digging into it further and weighing the factors discussed above.

 

[seventieslord]

So now we have an artificial, arbitrary 1000 point benchmark to consider. Never read anything from Scotty Bowman, Al Arbour or HHOF voters or analysts anywhere use this metric or benchmark. Regardless you fail to even define this mythical GF:GA ratio into gradients - elite down to poor.

Regardless, when compared to 1980s Selke winners like Kasper and Murray Perreault is an equal or slightly better, a bit weaker than Poulin,better than non-winners like Steen allegedly Hawerchuk defensive savior in Winnipeg.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/k/kaspest01.html

1983 playoffs vs Canadiens posted last round with quotes from opposition - obviously you did not read this per above. Also Bowman did play Perreault against Gretzky with success (documentable), extra shifted him at LW against Lafleur and played him at LW internationally in Canada Cups. Simply not done if the player cannot adjust to the different defensive responsibilities. Evidenced this round by Alex Delvecchio and his career, Syd Howe, Jacques Lemaire and others during their careers.

Sorry, but what was the hockey reference link supposed to tell us?

And perreault is better defensively than selke winning forwards? According to whom, exactly? You're not doing so well at proving your wild assertion here.

Does anyone have anything they can provide about Perreault's defensive game?

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Does anyone have anything they can provide about Perreault's defensive game?

A quote from last year's ATD:

His Gallic flair still is apparent on occasion , "I don't know anyone who skates as easily as he does," Scotty Bowman said but Perreault now backchecks with the fervor he once devoted to scoring. "His defensive game is much stronger now", Jim Schoenfeld said, "He's very strong in his own end of the ice, whereas before he was much more offensive-minded.....and yet, he can still break it open when he gets the puck. He's one of the few guys left in the league who can bust it open all by himself".

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=60152373&postcount=94

He also had two seasons of useful penalty killing at the end of his career where he was second and third in SH TOI among forwards for PKs that were 8.43% better than the league average. But, it's safe to say that had more to do with the other members of that PK (Mike Ramsey, Craig Ramsay, Bill Hajt) than Perreault becoming a great penalty killer.