Round 2, Vote 11 (HOH Top Centers)

[sr edler]

MacKay was an excellent defensive forward, and practitioner of the hook check. He spent a lot of time at rover (which during that epoch of the PCHA was something like a defensive midfielder) before the PCHA dropped the 6th skater, and had a lot more defensive responsibilities than pure "forwards". MacKay is maybe a small tick behind Frederickson offensively, but he more than makes up for it in defensive value, IMO.

Tommy Dunderdale also spent some time at Rover, I think one or two seasons. Don't know if he was "excellent defensively" though. None of Fredrickson, Dunderdale, Morris, Foyston or Keats water-skied offensively though behind Cyclone Taylor.

 

[seventieslord]

Nice additions, I like those new players but I'll say I can't really see what separates Mickey McKay from contemporary players like Bernie Morris, Frank Fredrickson & Tommy Dunderdale, or even Frank Foyston. For what it's worth McKay never led a league [PCHA|WCHL] in points while Fredrickson & Dunderdale did it twice, and Morris once. And Foyston was a very versatile forward.

He's better than foyston and dunderdale offensively and defensively. Morris and Frederickson have a slight offensive edge, but he has a better all-around game than they do.

Anyone care to make an argument for having Crosby at #22 and Malkin over #40?

Crosby is a significantly better player.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I think Barry's a player who's flown under many voters rader because he doesn't have a sexy resume or name. I had him pretty low myself. He's got two Cups and one First Team All Star selection but doesn't really stand out as a world beater on paper. And I haven't even seen a photo of him, so he's kind of hard to relate to.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=43540349&postcount=56

 

[sr edler]

Those dreamy eyes.

 

[Sturminator]

Tommy Dunderdale also spent some time at Rover, I think one or two seasons. Don't know if he was "excellent defensively" though. None of Fredrickson, Dunderdale, Morris, Foyston or Keats water-skied offensively though behind Cyclone Taylor.

MacKay had excellent offensive seasons after Taylor retired, as well.

 

[MXD]

We have 20 players to add yet. I can only see four 30ies players making it (and one of them is a tweener, both as to whether he should be in and as to the decade/era he should be considered part of). In that optic, I can live with Barry not available. On the flip side, Barry would have had a good shot at my current Top-8. And would probably be end up in.

Come to think of it... There's probably two 30ies tweeners. And two others whose omission from the list would say more about the quality of the current panel than about the players themselves. Those two musts are Smith and Barry... If that part wasn't clear enough. I'll let you figure out who the tweeners are.

 

[MXD]

Damn, Barry looks drunk.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Instability

I think Barry's a player who's flown under many voters rader because he doesn't have a sexy resume or name. I had him pretty low myself. He's got two Cups and one First Team All Star selection but doesn't really stand out as a world beater on paper. And I haven't even seen a photo of him, so he's kind of hard to relate to.



So what happened in his seventh season? Did he change his style? TDMM said up thread Savard was basically nonexistent defensively in his Chicago prime years which should include his 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th season.

Coaching instability. Basically, first season spotted, 2nd-6th variable around mid average. 7th and beyond solid to very good.

 

[ted2019]

Vote 11 will begin now and debates are scheduled to run through Monday Jan 27 at 9PM EST. You may PM votes to Hawkey Town 18 starting on Sunday, Jan 26.

We will be sending out confirmations when we receive ballots from the voters. Any voter who does not get a confirmation within 24 hours of submitting a ballot should assume we never received it and should resubmit it and post in this thread saying they did so.

Vote 11 will be for places 41 through 44/45 (4/5 places) on the Top 60 list (If we can catch up and add 5 we will, if not, we will only add 4).

There are 12 eligible candidates for Vote 11. You will still only rank your Top 8 when voting.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:


Russell Bowie
Pavel Datsyuk
Dale Hawerchuk
Igor Larionov
Mickey MacKay
Evgeni Malkin
Mike Modano
Gilbert Perreault
Vladimir Petrov
Jean Ratelle
Denis Savard
Hooley Smith

Wasn't Perreault elected in the last round?

 

[MXD]

Wasn't Perreault elected in the last round?

Nope. Clear cut below the top3 + virtual tie between 4 and 6 kept him out. If there was a clear gap between 4-5 and 6, the could have been a case to elect Gilbert.

6 is a bit too much, especially with 7 not that far either.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Wasn't Perreault elected in the last round?

Nope. Clear cut below the top3 + virtual tie between 4 and 6 kept him out. If there was a clear gap between 4-5 and 6, the could have been a case to elect Gilbert.

6 is a bit too much, especially with 7 not that far either.

It is similar to what happened with Max Bentley and Norm Ullman in Vote 6...4th spot was too close to call so we only inducted 3 players

 

[Hardyvan123]

Anyone care to make an argument for having Crosby at #22 and Malkin over #40?

It's really not that hard, Sid has been a top elite stud from day 1 and Malkin has been less consistent.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Anyone care to make an argument for having Crosby at #22 and Malkin over #40?

This kind of argument has come up several times.

The purpose of the project is to rank the top 60 centers of all time, inclusive of over 100 years and thousands of eligible candidates. Just because two guys in 2014 are ranked closely to each other, it does not follow that they should rank closely on a list of the top players of all time.

 

[pluppe]

Crosby is a significantly better player.

Thanks, I'm convinced.

 

[pluppe]

Crosby has played more games (519 vs 496), easily has the better per-game offensive output (1.41 vs 1.23 PPG), while being the superior defensive player.

Also, a lot of players in this range are pretty close so I'd say that the difference isn't as large as their rankings would suggest.

If we want to nitpick Crosby did not have 519 games when he was voted in.

It's interesting when looking at the seasons when they have played at least 75 games that their peaks are pretty similar.

120, 109, 103, 102

113, 109, 106, 85 (Malkins first in North America)

Comes out to ppgs of
1,52 1,35 1,34 1,26 for Crosby

1,45 1,38 1,29 1,09 for Malkin

Crosby seem to have been much better in his shorter seasons than Malkin. I think this should bring Malkin closer than just looking at ppg would since full season often are valued higher in these kind of projects. If that is correct or not is of course something you could discuss.

It's really not that hard, Sid has been a top elite stud from day 1 and Malkin has been less consistent.

That is true. It's sad that we never will know what could have been after that otherwordly start his first 2 season.

This kind of argument has come up several times.

The purpose of the project is to rank the top 60 centers of all time, inclusive of over 100 years and thousands of eligible candidates. Just because two guys in 2014 are ranked closely to each other, it does not follow that they should rank closely on a list of the top players of all time.

I guess that is the argument and I understand that players get closer the further we come. Just think the separation is to large at this point when comparing them to those around them.

 

[Hardyvan123]

If we want to nitpick Crosby did not have 519 games when he was voted in.

It's interesting when looking at the seasons when they have played at least 75 games that their peaks are pretty similar.

120, 109, 103, 102

113, 109, 106, 85 (Malkins first in North America)

Comes out to ppgs of
1,52 1,35 1,34 1,26 for Crosby

1,45 1,38 1,29 1,09 for Malkin

Crosby seem to have been much better in his shorter seasons than Malkin. I think this should bring Malkin closer than just looking at ppg would since full season often are valued higher in these kind of projects. If that is correct or not is of course something you could discuss.



That is true. It's sad that we never will know what could have been after that otherwordly start his first 2 season.



I guess that is the argument and I understand that players get closer the further we come. Just think the separation is to large at this point when comparing them to those around them.

I get your point but Sid has been better than Malkin at their peaks, like you pointed out above and also better at their respective low points as well.

both guys are still building their resumes and it's not hard to see Sid competing with a top 5 spot and Malkin with a top 10ish spot when it's all said and done either.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Gilbert Perreault should be ranked over his contemporary Jean Ratelle

1. These two players peaked at almost exactly the same time, and Perreault's All-Star record (voted on by people who saw them play) dwarfs Ratelle's

I'm using a 6 point minimum here - that means the player received at least 2 votes on a 5-3-1 point system

Perreault
6th (1971)
4th (1972)
3rd (1973)
3rd (1975)
2nd (1976)
2nd (1977)
5th (1978)
3rd (1980)

Total: 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th

Ratelle
4th (1968)
2nd (1972)
5th (1973)
5th (1976)
6th (1977)

Total: 2nd, 4th, 5th, 5th, 6th

2. The THN Panel that put together the 1997 Top 50 (later expanded to Top 100) list was loaded with people who were intimately involved in the NHL when Perreault and Ratelle were both in their primes

The judges who helped make the selections for this list included writers, journalists, and broadcasters (Don Cherry, John Davidson, Milt Dunnell, Stan Fischler, Dick Irvin, Brian McFarlane, Bob McKenzie, Jim Matheson, Harry Neale, Frank Orr), as well as coaches, referees, general managers, and former players (Al Arbour, Scotty Bowman, Emile Francis, Howie Meeker, Scotty Morrison, Roger Neilson, Bud Poile, Sam Pollock, Marcel Pronovost, Billy Reay, Glen Sather, Harry Sinden, Red Storey).

The THN panel ranked Perreault 47th and did not rank Ratelle: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_100_greatest_hockey_players_by_The_Hockey_News

The major criticisms of the list - the panel likely did no research into players who played before they started following hockey; the "top 100" is an aggregate of top 50 lists that the panelists sent in, so anyone near the bottom is only on the list with the support of a fringe minority - do not really apply here.

3. Ratelle's statistical advantage over Perreault is significant, but not nearly large enough where it is impossible to be overcome by other factors.

Ratelle has a Vs-X 7 year score of 88.5, while Perreault's is 84.6. A difference of 3.9 is big enough to take into account, but let's put it into perspective - Sakic's advantage over Yzerman and Trottier is 3.5. Hawerchuk's advantage over Sundin is 3.6. Phil Esposito's advantage over Mario Lemieux (yes, he has one if you don't take teammates into account) is 3.0.

Blah blah, numbers. The point is that Ratelle's raw offensive gap over Perreault is significant enough to be mentioned, but could easily be explained by factors that don't have anything to do with the quality of the players.

4. Ratelle and Perreault played in the late 70s - early 80s: the first Golden Era of the offensive defensemen. Ratelle had Brad Park; Perreault basically had nobody

Here's the best season of Perreault's career: 1975-76 when he finished 3rd in NHL scoring and was a 2nd Team All Star behind Hart winner Bobby Clarke: http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BUF/1976.html

The leading offensive defensemen on Buffalo were Jocelyn Guevremont and Jerry Korab.

Ratelle had Brad Park for the majority of his prime - remember, they were traded together from NY to Boston. Ratelle's excellent 1967-68 season (4th in NHL scoring) was without Park, however.

5. Ratelle's second prime from the ages of 31-36 (1972-1977) coincides perfectly with the emergence of Brad Park as an elite offensive defenseman.

Jean Ratelle's Top 10 points finishes:
1967-68 NHL 78 (4)
1968-69 NHL 78 (10)
1969-70 NHL 74 (6)
1971-72 NHL 109 (3)
1972-73 NHL 94 (6)
1975-76 NHL 105 (6)
1976-77 NHL 94 (7)

1971-72 is when Brad Park emerged as an elite two-way defenseman, scoring more points (73) than any defenseman but Bobby Orr had ever scored before. Here is Park's stat sheet: http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/p/parkbr01.html

Is the proof conclusive that Park was a huge help to Ratelle in 4 of the best 7 seasons of his career? No. But there is pretty good circumstantial evidence:

1) Park is widely considered one of the top 10-15 offensive defensemen of all time.
2) We know that elite offensive defensemen usually help the numbers of the forwards.
3) The people who watched these guys play would be the best judges of who was really driving the bus.
4) Park was a Norris runner-up 6 times - 4 to Bobby Orr, 2 to Denis Potvin - while Ratelle's All-Star record is quite unimpressive.

6. Perreault needs to get at least some credit for his performances for Team Canada

I get that Ratelle didn't really have many opportunities - he was 31 years old in 1972. I also get that the Rick Martin - Gilbert Perreault chemistry was probably part of the reason they were selected.

But those caveats aside, Perreault absolutely excelled in international play, and was regularly one of the players the Soviets feared the most. I realize that the NHL is the vast majority of his resume, but I think he should get more than zero credit for what he did internationally.

Conclusion: Ratelle will likely be in my top 8, but not over Perreault.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

ALL-STAR VOTING RESULTS

I posted the full table before but lets just focus on the players available this round.

Player | First | Second | Third | Total
Gilbert Perreault | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5
Hooley Smith* | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4
Evgeni Malkin | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3
Pavel Datsyuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Dale Hawerchuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Mike Modano | 0 |1 |1 | 2
Denis Savard | 0 |1 |1 |2
Jean Ratelle | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1

HOOLEY SMITH BEFORE 1930-31

Hooley Smith gets the asterix because he has some good seasons before 1930-31 when the All-Star Teams were officially released.

What can we say about his time before then?

• In 1925-26, he played on Frank Nighbor's RW and was 4th in Hart voting, 1st among RWs in the NHL. Contemporary sources raved about how impenetrable that pair was defensively (Nighbor won the Hart). However, 1925-26 was the last year before the WCHL (now WHL) fell, and Bill Cook completely destroyed the field in the WHL. I'm going to say that Hooley likely finishes 2nd in All Star RW voting in a consolidated league.
• In 1927-28, the 10 NHL GMs voted an unofficial All-Star Team and Hooley Smith received 2 1st place votes and 1 2nd place vote. Under any points system, he would have been a 2nd Team All Star, but they gave it to Harry Oliver who had 0 1st place votes and 3 2nd place votes. The New York Evening Post actually picked Smith as their 1st Team AS that year. IMO, that season is equivalent to a modern 2nd Team AS at RW. ((Source - warning large PDF)

I think it's fair to say that Smith was a 2nd Team All Star RW in 1928 and that he probably would have been a 2nd Team All Star RW in 1926 in a consolidated league behind Cook (there was an actual GM-voted team from every year in the late 20s, but we have been unable to find any of them other than 1928).

Adding in Hooley's two nods at RW and the above table looks like this:

Player | First | Second | Third | Total
Hooley Smith | 1 | 1(3) | 2 | 4(6)
Gilbert Perreault | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5
Evgeni Malkin | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3
Pavel Datsyuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Dale Hawerchuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Mike Modano | 0 |1 |1 | 2
Denis Savard | 0 |1 |1 |2
Jean Ratelle | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1

Keep in mind, however, that competition matters, and Smith's actual 1st Team nod at C in 1935-36 was quite weak, a gap between the Morenz/Boucher/Primeau generation and the Apps/Cowley/Schmidt one. Bill Thoms was 2nd Team AS C in 1935-36.

That said, I think it is pretty hard to keep someone who was top 3 at his position 6 times out at this point, regardless of his poor playoff performances.

___________________

At this point, Perreault, Smith, and Malkin clearly have the best All-Star records left. Those three are quite a big step over everyone else left by this single criteria - don't just count the totals, 1st Team > 2nd Team > 3rd Team, so one could certainly argue that Malkin fits right in there. But All-Star teams aren't everything. What are the knocks on these players?

• Perreault: His statistics aren't as good as his All-Star record and unlike other players you can say that about, he doesn't have strong defensive anecdotes
• Smith: weak offensively compared to the other guys who are left, and unlike Fedorov, Keon, or Gilmour, he doesn't increase his scoring in the playoffs (in fact, he decreases it).
• Malkin: short, injury prone career to date.

That said, we need to ask just how long the knocks on these guys can keep them out.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

ALL-STAR VOTING RESULTS

I posted the full table before but lets just focus on the players available this round.

Player | First | Second | Third | Total
Gilbert Perreault | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5
Hooley Smith* | 1 | 1 | 2 | 4
Evgeni Malkin | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3
Pavel Datsyuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Dale Hawerchuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Mike Modano | 0 |1 |1 | 2
Denis Savard | 0 |1 |1 |2
Jean Ratelle | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1

HOOLEY SMITH BEFORE 1930-31


Hooley Smith gets the asterix because he has some good seasons before 1930-31 when the All-Star Teams were officially released.

What can we say about his time before then?

• In 1925-26, he played on Frank Nighbor's RW and was 4th in Hart voting, 1st among RWs in the NHL. Contemporary sources raved about how impenetrable that pair was defensively (Nighbor won the Hart). However, 1925-26 was the last year before the WCHL (now WHL) fell, and Bill Cook completely destroyed the field in the WHL. I'm going to say that Hooley likely finishes 2nd in All Star RW voting in a consolidated league.
• In 1927-28, the NHL GMs voted an unofficial All-Star Team and Hooley Smith was selected the 1st Team All Star at Right Wing ((Source - warning large PDF)

I think it's fair to say that Smith was a 1st Team All Star RW in 1928 and that he probably would have been a 2nd Team All Star RW in 1926 in a consolidated league behind Cook (there was an actual GM-voted team from every year in the late 20s, but we have been unable to find any of them other than 1928).

Adding in Hooley's two nods at RW and the above table looks like this:

Player | First | Second | Third | Total
Hooley Smith | 1(2) | 1(2) | 2 | 4(6)
Gilbert Perreault | 0 | 2 | 3 | 5
Evgeni Malkin | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3
Pavel Datsyuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Dale Hawerchuk | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Mike Modano | 0 |1 |1 | 2
Denis Savard | 0 |1 |1 |2
Jean Ratelle | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1

Keep in mind, however, that competition matters, and Smith's actual 1st Team nod at C in 1935-36 was quite weak, a gap between the Morenz/Boucher/Primeau generation and the Apps/Cowley/Schmidt one. Bill Thoms was 2nd Team AS C in 1935-36.

That said, I think it is pretty hard to keep someone who was top 3 at his position 6 times out at this point, regardless of his poor playoff performances.

___________________

At this point, Perreault, Smith, and Malkin clearly have the best All-Star records left. Those three are quite a big step over everyone else left by this single criteria - don't just count the totals, 1st Team > 2nd Team > 3rd Team, so one could certainly argue that Malkin fits right in there. But All-Star teams aren't everything. What are the knocks on these players?

• Perreault: His statistics aren't as good as his All-Star record and unlike other players you can say that about, he doesn't have strong defensive anecdotes
• Smith: weak offensively compared to the other guys who are left, and unlike Fedorov, Keon, or Gilmour, he doesn't increase his scoring in the playoffs (in fact, he decreases it).
• Malkin: short, injury prone career to date.

That said, we need to ask just how long the knocks on these guys can keep them out.

Only Smith and Malkin have been first team all-star.

And Malkin has 3 in only 7 seasons. Add a Hart, a Conn Smythe and 2 scoring titles, Malkin has a big edge in accomplishments compared to the rest of this group.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I know that the hockeycanada.ca site (http://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/Team-Canada/Men/World-Championship/2013-Stockholm/All-Stars) has Krutov, Larionov and Ruzicka as the 1985 WC All-Star forwards, but I think it's a mistake. For example, SFRP's Hockey Archive (Czech/international) has Makarov (RW), Ruzicka (C) and Krutov (LW) for 1985 (http://hokej.sfrp.cz/ms/ms1985.html). Chidlovski (http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=l001) doesn't have anything about Larionov being in the 1985 WC All-Star team either (only 1983 and 1986), plus it would be strange that Makarov, who was named the best forward in the 1985 WC, wouldn't have been selected to the All-Star team - although this has happened sometimes too (e.g. 1978 and 1983).

I don't remember what source I originally used when I created the international hockey reference thread. I thought I copied and pasted the table from elsewhere on hfboards, but I can't find any location for it other than that thread. So maybe I did get it from the hockeycanada site. I've generally found this French-language site the most accurate for such things, but it's tough to navigate when you barely understand French: http://www.passionhockey.com/

About Petrov: he was known as a 'difficult bugger', who had problems with authorities, so that might have affected his MVP voting sometimes. Actually, Larionov had those problems too, so it's possible in his case also. Hard to prove such things, of course, but because it's Soviet Union we're talking about, it's not impossible. Namely, it is really weird that e.g. in 1970 (51 goals domestically & good WC performance) and 1978 (1st in pts) Petrov did so poorly in the MVP voting. In 1979, he would have likely done well, but like mentioned, we don't have information outside the winner (Mikhailov). Another thing is that Petrov wasn't flashy, he wasn't very fast, and whereas Kharlamov and Mikhailov liked to have the puck, and - at least in Kharlamov's case - liked to challenge defensemen 1-on-1, Petrov was usually looking for his linemates (to make a pass to). Also, he doesn't have that one huge performance vs. Team Canada/NHL, like Kharlamov had in 1972 and Mikhailov in 1979 (Challenge Cup). Still, Petrov has those great scoring stats, and he has good, if not great, intangibles. He had some leadership qualities too; along with Mikhailov and Tsygankov, he was the one whom the other CSKA players deferred to in the 1970s (according to Viktor Tikhonov). Finally, playing with Kharlamov and Mikhailov might have had its benefits, but I don't believe for a second that a 'passenger' would have so regularly outscored his linemates; I mean, in a tournament or two, sure, but for over a decade? No way.

How close was Petrov to his linemates (and to Maltsev) statistically in international tournaments? I only posted their domestic numbers.

PS. Hopefully Vaclav Nedomansky will also be eligible soon. His international and domestic achievements outshine Larionov's, and he proved that he could play fairly well in the NHL as a >30 year-old. One of the best European goal-scorers of all-time.

I had my non-NHL Euros as Maltsev first, then Petrov/Nedomansky, then Larionov/Novy, so I hear you. But the 70s Czechoslovak team doesn't seem to get that much respect on this forum for whatever reason (except when Peter Stastny's early years are talked about... heh). In other words, don't wait for the the great CSSR players to come up anywhere nearly as soon as you are I think they should.

 

[BM67]

Gilbert Perreault should be ranked over his contemporary Jean Ratelle

1. These two players peaked at almost exactly the same time, and Perreault's All-Star record (voted on by people who saw them play) dwarfs Ratelle's

I'm using a 6 point minimum here - that means the player received at least 2 votes on a 5-3-1 point system

Perreault
6th (1971)
4th (1972)
3rd (1973)
3rd (1975)
2nd (1976)
2nd (1977)
5th (1978)
3rd (1980)

Total: 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th

Ratelle
4th (1968)
2nd (1972)
5th (1973)
5th (1976)
6th (1977)

Total: 2nd, 4th, 5th, 5th, 6th

The thing that strikes me in this is that Ratelle has 6 seasons where he falls below your threshold, but still received all-star votes. Perreault only has two seasons like that*.

Ratelle is punished by where you set the threshold much more than Perreault.

* In 83-84 Perreault has 4 voting points at center, and 3 more at LW.

 

[MXD]

Gilbert Perreault should be ranked over his contemporary Jean Ratelle

[...]

No need to reproduce everything for what I'm suggesting (you might also want to edit your post, but that's your prerogative), but I was about to post something to the effect that Perreault had the benefit of slightly better linemates, but think of it, that's basically a wash.

The interesting point though : Perreault hit his prime much younger than Ratelle did. How much of that can be attributed to the fact that Ratelle had very serious injuries in which his play had nothing to do with (as opposed to, say, Lindros), including one of them who should basically be treated as wartime leave, and how much of that is attributed to the league being smaller, is something up for debate.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The thing that strikes me in this is that Ratelle has 6 seasons where he falls below your threshold, but still received all-star votes. Perreault only has two seasons like that*.

Ratelle is punished by where you set the threshold much more than Perreault.

* In 83-84 Perreault has 4 voting points at center, and 3 more at LW.

Do you have a better idea for a threshold? I would prefer not to use years when the player only got 2 or 3 voting points. Especially all those 3 point years - to me, those just scream "a single 2nd place vote" in a 5-3-1 voting system.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

No need to reproduce everything for what I'm suggesting (you might also want to edit your post, but that's your prerogative), but I was about to post something to the effect that Perreault had the benefit of slightly better linemates, but think of it, that's basically a wash.

The interesting point though : Perreault hit his prime much younger than Ratelle did. How much of that can be attributed to the fact that Ratelle had very serious injuries in which his play had nothing to do with (as opposed to, say, Lindros), including one of them who should basically be treated as wartime leave, and how much of that is attributed to the league being smaller, is something up for debate.

I don't think there is any doubt Ratelle had better linemates - or at least that Perreault was farther ahead of his linemates than Ratelle was ahead of his. Here's a look at every time the two of them ranked among their teammates in scoring:

Ratelle led his team in scoring 6 times: 1968 by 1 point, 1969 by 1 point, 1972 by 3 points*, 1973 by 10 points, 1976 by 22 points**, 1977 by 8 points.

*would have been more but for injury
**he really led the Bruins by 7 points but including his games in NY gives 22 points

In 1968 and 1969, Ratelle was 1 point ahead of his linemate, HHOF Rod Gilbert.

Other high finishes on his team and who led the team in scoring: 2nd (1970 - Walt Tkaczuk), 2nd (1971 - Walt Tkaczuk), 2nd (1975 - Rod Gilbert), 2nd (1978 - Terry O'Reilly), 3rd (1966 - Bob Nevin), 3rd (1980 - Rick Middleton), 4th (1974 - Brad Park), 4th (1979 - Rick Middleton)

Perreault led his team in scoring 12 times: 1971 by 11 points, 1972 by 0 points*, 1973 by 5 points, 1976 by 26 points, 1977 by 22 points, 1978 by 12 points, 1979 by 18 points, 1980 by 17 points, 1982 by 5 points, 1983 by 3 points, 1984 by 10 points, 1985 by 14 points,

*tied with Rick Martin

Other high finishes: 2nd (1975 - Rene Robert), 5th (1974 - Rick Martin), 5th (1986 - Dave Andreycuk),

The only players to lead their teams in scoring more times than Perreault are Gretzky (19), Howe (17), and Sundin (13). Dionne, Hawerchuk, and Sakic tied with Perreault at 12. Iginla, Jagr, Lemieux, Modano, and Yzerman each led his team in scoring 11 times. Esposito at 10, a bunch of players tied at 9 (Source = matnor's thread)

 

[BM67]

Do you have a better idea for a threshold? I would prefer not to use years when the player only got 2 or 3 voting points. Especially all those 3 point years - to me, those just scream "a single 2nd place vote" in a 5-3-1 voting system.

Where the threshold is set doesn't matter. The line set is an illusion. It's the fact that you then assume that the seasons below that threshold don't matter, that is the problem. Is a year with 3 all-star votes and a Hart vote really worse than a year with 6 all-star votes and no Hart votes?

The number of votes also went up as time went on, so the 6 point threshold is a moving target as well.