Round 2, Vote 16 (HOH Top Centers)

[feffan]

You watched him play, so he doesn't have the mystical legend status that every other player has. You've seen all of his failures on replay in high definition - things that tend to get omitted or forgotten from the careers of the old time players as we gradually lionize them over time.

He's the best playmaker not already on the list, and though I didn't participate, I'm baffled at how little consideration he seems to get, with relatively very little explanation as to why. Seems that people just don't like him.

edit: I would still take LaFontaine for the final spot.

I´ve also been following this closely (thanks all participants, been a great joy reading...) without being a part of voting or discussions and this have been my thougt as well. I think Sedin would have benefitted more from playing in decades no one had seen. With Sedins resumé; peak with Hart, Art Ross, 2 first all star team, SC-finals apparance and prime with 6 more seasons around PPG + impressive leading Tre Kronor to an WC-gold.
Before that playing in more of a shut down-role both in his NHL-team and Tre Kronor (Olympic Gold). That shut down-years would have given him more grodun if in the past I believe. The eyetest sats Sedins weren´t ready for first line-duty, but if playing in the 30-50´s it probably would be made as a point. Especially with his Guldpucken and All Star Team from SHL (Elitserien), as that could be argued he´s one of or the top player outside NHL.

And he is someone that doesn´t impresse you in a Forsberg-way. So seing him play could actually make him lesser, as he´s one of those who don´t shine much (outside some amazing passing...) but does most things right.

Summonary of my toughts about Sedin: Thornton at 34 (wich I think his high, would have placed him about 10 places neck to neck with Modano as many there between were greater player than him in my eyes...) and Sundin/Zetterberg at 54/55. Sedin is clearly behind Thorntons accomplishments, Thornton with the longer prime and just about same peak. But not 34:th best center and not even 60:th gap. Sundin with longer prime and lesser peak, Sedin could be argued ahead depending how much you put international play in to it. Zetterberg could be said to be Sedin reversed. What Sedin has done in the regular season, Zetterberg has done in the PO:s. Z and Sedin should be neck to neck for me.

 

[Hardyvan123]

All that stuff aside, I think the question is resolved by my post above, is it not? Colville didn't fall off a cliff, he spent part of a season injured and then took an AHL coaching job where he only played the odd game, likely in emergency scenarios. And it's not like he didn't have good reasons for making that move (oldest skater in the league, team in extreme turmoil, good career move).

Still is his resume the top one in this round?

Don't see it being any better or even really close to Sedin , Lafontaine or Roenick.

All 3 of those guys were much better scorers in terms of VsX and top 10 finishes) in a much larger league.

scoring should be a large part of any centers resume right?

 

[MXD]

I´ve also been following this closely (thanks all participants, been a great joy reading...) without being a part of voting or discussions and this have been my thougt as well. I think Sedin would have benefitted more from playing in decades no one had seen. With Sedins resumé; peak with Hart, Art Ross, 2 first all star team, SC-finals apparance and prime with 6 more seasons around PPG + impressive leading Tre Kronor to an WC-gold.
Before that playing in more of a shut down-role both in his NHL-team and Tre Kronor (Olympic Gold). That shut down-years would have given him more grodun if in the past I believe. The eyetest sats Sedins weren´t ready for first line-duty, but if playing in the 30-50´s it probably would be made as a point. Especially with his Guldpucken and All Star Team from SHL (Elitserien), as that could be argued he´s one of or the top player outside NHL.

And he is someone that doesn´t impresse you in a Forsberg-way. So seing him play could actually make him lesser, as he´s one of those who don´t shine much (outside some amazing passing...) but does most things right.

Summonary of my toughts about Sedin: Thornton at 34 (wich I think his high, would have placed him about 10 places neck to neck with Modano as many there between were greater player than him in my eyes...) and Sundin/Zetterberg at 54/55. Sedin is clearly behind Thorntons accomplishments, Thornton with the longer prime and just about same peak. But not 34:th best center and not even 60:th gap. Sundin with longer prime and lesser peak, Sedin could be argued ahead depending how much you put international play in to it. Zetterberg could be said to be Sedin reversed. What Sedin has done in the regular season, Zetterberg has done in the PO:s. Z and Sedin should be neck to neck for me.

I totally agree with you regarding Thornton -- definitely too high, to the point that it skews subsequent voting.

We, as a group, didn't fail in many regards. Thornton was such failure.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Points are harder to come by when there's a whole line having career years. I mean, there couldn't be two first lines and the line above him ended up 1st, 2nd and 4th in scoring.

For somebody who often says the word "context", the fact that you completely disregard that is astonishing. Not to mention that, during that 6th year, Colville actually ended up playing defense as well due to injuries.

The thing is that Neil wasn't a guy driving the bus on his teams, his teams had very good depth scoring while others in this round are the clear offensive leaders of their teams in Lafontaine, Sedin and Roenick and even Foyston at times.

There is really no way around the fact that Colville is a large gap behind the 3 modern guys offensively and that gap is very large even in an apple to apple best 6 years.

 

[MXD]

Still is his resume the top one in this round?

Don't see it being any better or even really close to Sedin , Lafontaine or Roenick.

All 3 of those guys were much better scorers in terms of VsX and top 10 finishes) in a much larger league.

scoring should be a large part of any centers resume right?

Had Roenick spent a season (and part of another) at D, his result would also have been lower. I think we were quite clear on this...

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Look we know that all star voters have voted for players in the wrong position before and that they have made questionable decisions before (a couple of really questionable Harts in the era for instance in Tom Anderson, Babe Pratt, al Rollins and Ted Keneddy) why is it so hard for you to see the validity of the questioning here?

We know what the voters did and it seems very odd, yet my questioning that seems to be the issue here and not the players at hand.

The issue with your questioning is you're not supplying anything about Colville. It's general criticisms that call into question all award voting.

The Hart voters taking the most valuable to their team angle to the extreme doesn't apply to the all-star voting Colville received.

We already covered the farewell tour votes not fitting. You could then question why his play fell off a cliff the next season, which is answered by an injury causing him to retire.

So where's the evidence to support that his all-star consideration at defense wasn't merited? It would probably be more fruitful to let this one go, I found you pointing out Colville's offense dropping his final year before the war much more compelling.

 

[MXD]

The thing is that Neil wasn't a guy driving the bus on his teams, his teams had very good depth scoring while others in this round are the clear offensive leaders of their teams in Lafontaine, Sedin and Roenick and even Foyston at times.

There is really no way around the fact that Colville is a large gap behind the 3 modern guys offensively and that gap is very large even in an apple to apple best 6 years.

This is probably worse than your argument about Hooley Smith being a passenger on teams where he got Hart votes.

 

[Hardyvan123]

None of Sedin/Lafontaine/Roenick really seem deserving of the final spot, for varied reasons. Sedin is one-trick pony par excellence, Lafontaine unfortunately spent way too much time on IR, and Roenick was just too meh.

Funny that those guys, despite their faults are the leaders offensively this round and that the gap between them and the others is quite large.

If none of them is deserving which other player is and why would be the question?

Joe couldn't make the Leafs in 2 consecutive years despite the Leafs having a dire need at center, played with really good line mates who might have supported his totals and has a short career and still doesn't stack up anywhere near offensively to Sedin.

Colville really doesn't stand out from his team mates all that much and never has the peak of prime of the 3 guys that you don't like for 60th either.

Foyston has good scoring finishes in a 3-4 team league but was also inconsistent and it's hard to place him in an integrated league of all Canadians at that time

 

[Hardyvan123]

This is probably worse than your argument about Hooley Smith being a passenger on teams where he got Hart votes.

That's just plain garbage, the offensive resumes speak for themselves plain and simple, TDMM spelled it out in posts 3 and 4 in this round and one can easily go to the NYR team scoring pages to see how much depth those teams had and I did so and posted it last round as well.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

That's just plain garbage, the offensive resumes speak for themselves plain and simple, TDMM spelled it out in posts 3 and 4 in this round and one can easily go to the NYR team scoring pages to see how much depth those teams had and I did so and posted it last round as well.

On the other hand, Sedin and Lafontaine are clearly the two worst defensive players this round, right?

 

[MXD]

Let's consider a team with the following makeup

Centers

Evgeny Malkin
Mike Ribeiro

RW

Tomas Vanek
Brad Marchand

LW

Alexander Ovechkin
Michael Ryder


Who ends up icing the following lines

AO - Ribeiro - Vanek
Ryder - Malkin - March and

Malkin probably won't lead his team in scoring. But if he maintains his production around AO, Vanek and Ribeiro, we could safely assume that Malkin had the better season, because he was able to do so with lesser players.

And its also a situation where team success are indicative. Had the Rangers been fighting with the Amerks for 7th place, we could easily infer that the elements of the Rangers lineup were crap. But its not the case.

 

[Hardyvan123]

The issue with your questioning is you're not supplying anything about Colville. It's general criticisms that call into question all award voting.

No one is supplying very much for or against colville, the bottom line is that we have limited information about the guy. My questions are fair I'm not asking anyone to prove why he got more votes in his last full 2 seasons, it's open for speculation both ways right?

The Hart voters taking the most valuable to their team angle to the extreme doesn't apply to the all-star voting Colville received.

how do you know that exactly? we see voters vote for players in the wrong positions even in recent times.

See I don't know why the voters did what they did and by asking questions I'm getting tons of feedback from asking legitimate questions here.

(mod)

We already covered the farewell tour votes not fitting. You could then question why his play fell off a cliff the next season, which is answered by an injury causing him to retire.

yes the injury did clear up the following season but no we don't know what changed from 46 to 47 to 48 and it's a strange record and pattern at that age right?

Or perhaps you didn't actually look at the 46 link I provided when he was tied for oldest Dman in the league of 20 full time guys and doesn't rank in the top 9?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=games_played

then the following year he goes to 7th?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=games_played

then when he is 33 and in his last full season he goes to 4th in voting?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=games_played

but then again maybe it wasn't that Neil was getting better but that the competition was getting much worse.

That might be more plausible than "retirement votes" but we still don't know why.

So where's the evidence to support that his all-star consideration at defense wasn't merited? It would probably be more fruitful to let this one go, I found you pointing out Colville's offense dropping his final year before the war much more compelling.

See above, I don't know if they were merited or not but being the oldest Damn in the league and then getting a 7th and then a 4th while not getting any younger should raise some questions right?

Yet a couple of guys here are saying that Sedin isn't worthy here despite being the 1st team all star 2 years in a row in a fully integrated mature league?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Still is his resume the top one in this round?

Don't see it being any better or even really close to Sedin , Lafontaine or Roenick.

All 3 of those guys were much better scorers in terms of VsX and top 10 finishes) in a much larger league.

scoring should be a large part of any centers resume right?

Scoring should be a large part of it, but Colville and Primeau stick out in this group as players who were characterized by a strong defensive game. Colville to the point that he was a 2nd AS at defense.


In terms of looking at these guys as complete players -- not just as offensive performers, here's how I see it:

Neil Colville - Approx. the 4th best center during a 5-year span at center (I said "era" earlier, which was too broad) and also versatile enough to briefly have a comparable rank at defense.

Frank Foyston - According to our list, he was the 8th best center during his prime (though higher during his peak), and in a relatively small and dispersed talent pool. Was a very versatile player capable of moving around the lineup, so he probably had a well rounded skillset and decent defense (at least, that's implicit in playing rover).

Pat Lafontaine - I would have a hard time seeing his multi-year prime (not just a single-year spike) ranked over the contemporary versions of Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Messier, or Gilmour. Once you get outside of that brief prime and look at full careers, he's quickly surpassed by Larionov, Savard, Hawerchuk, Francis, Oates, Sakic, even Stastny if you want to call them peers. That puts him around 13th in his peer group, with severe weaknesses in durability, versatility, defense... pretty much anything outside of scoring ability.

Joe Primeau - Our list would have him 6th among his peers, and IMO it would probably be a tight race between him and Cooney Weiland for that position if we were to get down to details.

Jeremy Roenick - Similar to LaFontaine, I'd have a hard time seeing him break into the top-dozen of his peer group. Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Messier, Sakic, Fedorov, Oates, Francis, Modano, Sundin, Gilmour, Lindros, Forsberg all overshadowed Roenick during his age 20-30 period alone.

Henrik Sedin - Pretty clean-cut 6th in his peer group IMO, behind Crosby, Malkin, Thornton, Datsyuk, Zetterberg.


I'm more impressed by Sedin's being 6th-best in 2001-14 than with Primeau or Foyston being 6th-best during the earlier stages of history. LaFontaine and Roenick are simply lost in a crowd of third-tier centers during their era. Then there's Colville, who was among both the best center and the best defensemen, depending where he decided to play.

Having talked my way through this, I'm still liking Colville as a candidate here but I'm now leaning away from Foyston and Roenick and toward Sedin as the other candidate. Sedin really does get the shaft in our evaluations due to his modernity.

 

[Hardyvan123]

On the other hand, Sedin and Lafontaine are clearly the two worst defensive players this round, right?

Sedin isn't bad defensively and Pat wasn't a bad 2 way player was he?

Offensive stats are much more clear and less subjective than defensive ones as well.

no I don't think we can clearly saw that those 2 are the worst defensive guys here and even if they were (not really sure how we can measure it) the gap certainly isn't as large as the offense they provide is it?

Sedin: 1, 4, 7, 13, 20
Lafontaine: 2, 8, 15, 16, 18
Colville: 7, 7, 10, 10

 

[MXD]

Sedin isn't bad defensively and Pat wasn't a bad 2 way player was he?

Offensive stats are much more clear and less subjective than defensive ones as well.

no I don't think we can clearly saw that those 2 are the worst defensive guys here and even if they were (not really sure how we can measure it) the gap certainly isn't as large as the offense they provide is it?

Sedin: 1, 4, 7, 13, 20
Lafontaine: 2, 8, 15, 16, 18
Colville: 7, 7, 10, 10

Put a line with a lesser center but two better wingers on equal footing to Sedin's line, and see his finishes vanish pretty quickly.

Still, I'm a bit with Tarheel here : there's certainly a muddying of the gap between Sedin and the guys I initially had above him last round (that is, everyone but Roenick).

 

[Rob Scuderi]

No one is supplying very much for or against colville, the bottom line is that we have limited information about the guy. My questions are fair I'm not asking anyone to prove why he got more votes in his last full 2 seasons, it's open for speculation both ways right?

With the absence of any substance, it should be taken for what it was. Not speculation from people who didn't see it happen with no reason to doubt it.

how do you know that exactly? we see voters vote for players in the wrong positions even in recent times.

See I don't know why the voters did what they did and by asking questions I'm getting tons of feedback from asking legitimate questions here.

So Ovechkin getting voted at the wrong spot applies to players from the 1940s, and no one else up for voting because?

See above, I don't know if they were merited or not but being the oldest Damn in the league and then getting a 7th and then a 4th while not getting any younger should raise some questions right?

I answered this already. If you want to explore the precipitous drop in all-star quality defenseman in a single offseason I'd love to read it. I don't think the circles we're spinning are too helpful though so I'll let up.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Using a by the book definition of Hart, Tom Anderson was certainly not a bad choice.

well it would be nice if voters used the same criteria from year to year but it's clear that they probably don't

As for Rollins, we can assume that the award was given for the preceding season - or at least that it was factored in. If we use the same reasoning With Colville, it could mean that his prior year was better than it looked. Thus making this a purely neutral operation.

Why would anything other than the year in question be factored into a yearly in season award?

How exactly terrible was Pratt's pick ? I mean, if we go that route, I can say that Sedin was also not a very enlightened choice either.

Pratt wasn't known as a very good defender and sure his 13th in scoring seemed good in the day (since most Dmen didn't join in the rush and according to some this wouldn't happen until Harvey or Orr reinvented the game but that's another point).

Most of us would agree that with even voting metrics across time that Pratt's Hart would be in the weakest teer and by quite a bit.

As for Sedin it was close but I would have taken Sid but the Canucks made a huge push about eastern bias after Christmas and it seemed to have some impact (of course that baseless speculation on my part).

 

[tarheelhockey]

Pat wasn't a bad 2 way player was he?

This might be my memory playing tricks on me, but I remember LaFontaine as a no-defense kind of player.

no I don't think we can clearly saw that those 2 are the worst defensive guys here and even if they were (not really sure how we can measure it) the gap certainly isn't as large as the offense they provide is it?

Sedin: 1, 4, 7, 13, 20
Lafontaine: 2, 8, 15, 16, 18
Colville: 7, 7, 10, 10

Look what happens when we express this in terms of centers only:

Sedin: 1, 1, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 20
Lafontaine: 2, 7, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19
Colville: 3, 4, 5, 6, 10

I can't see how LaFontaine has a ghost of an argument against Sedin in this measurement. Colville pulls ahead of LaFontaine based on roundedness, versatility and the common-sense approach that he can't be a top scoring center while he's an all-star at defense.

You know I am a proponent of the early-mid 1990s as the peak of hockey talent pools, but LaFontaine is too far back in the "pack" among his peers to belong ahead of guys like Sedin and Colville who were for at least a few sustained years among the top handful of centers in the world.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

This might be my memory playing tricks on me, but I remember LaFontaine as a no-defense kind of player.

I also remember him as a no-defense player, but my memories of him are from after injuries had already taken a toll on him.

Look what happens when we express this in terms of centers only:

Sedin: 1, 1, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 20
Lafontaine: 2, 7, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19
Colville: 3, 4, 5, 6, 10

I can't see how LaFontaine has a ghost of an argument against Sedin in this measurement. Colville pulls ahead of LaFontaine based on roundedness, versatility and the common-sense approach that he can't be a top scoring center while he's an all-star at defense.

You know I am a proponent of the early-mid 1990s as the peak of hockey talent pools, but LaFontaine is too far back in the "pack" among his peers to belong ahead of guys like Sedin and Colville who were for at least a few sustained years among the top handful of centers in the world.

I'm not exactly a major advocate for Lafontaine, but two points:

1) If you are confining things just to centers, Lafontaine faced much stiffer competition than Sedin, namely from Gretzky and Lemieux

2) The case for Lafontaine is not point production. As a point producer, he is definitely behind Sedin. And behind Roenick, as well, in everything but his best season. The case for Lafontaine is goal scoring. I see Lafontaine as easily the best goal scorer this round, and easily the worst playmaker. (Foyston is the only other center this round I'd say was more of a goal scorer than a playmaker). So yes, it really depends on how much you value goalscoring over playmaking or defense.

 

[MXD]

well it would be nice if voters used the same criteria from year to year but it's clear that they probably don't



Why would anything other than the year in question be factored into a yearly in season award?



Pratt wasn't known as a very good defender and sure his 13th in scoring seemed good in the day (since most Dmen didn't join in the rush and according to some this wouldn't happen until Harvey or Orr reinvented the game but that's another point).

Most of us would agree that with even voting metrics across time that Pratt's Hart would be in the weakest teer and by quite a bit.

As for Sedin it was close but I would have taken Sid but the Canucks made a huge push about eastern bias after Christmas and it seemed to have some impact (of course that baseless speculation on my part).

Well.. If anything, textbook definition of Hart is most valuable player.

A player can be the MVP even if he's only, say, the 5th best player in the league in a given year. Its a widely accepted thesis for Anderson's Hart. Parallel with Jose Theodore. Not the best goalie that season, but the best scorers on that team wouldn't have made the top-6 of any other team, except very weak ones.

The theory about Rollins is popular as well.

Nobody will argue that Pratt Hart is 3rd tier material. A big reason for this is the year. Another is that he wasn't exactly a defensive ace. 13th in scoring is not the problem though. Goodfellow and Seibert were in a similar situation. Pronger was much further than that too.

 

[sr edler]

of the three guys that every one of us saw, is it fair to say that roenick is the one that you'd be most scared of taking over a series and turning it his way? not necessarily in the sense that roenick goes nuts and kills the other team single-handedly, but that he's the guy who will pot two quick goals to erase a lead, or have a mark messier shift where he sends your guy to the ER and 30 seconds later is standing over your goalie celebrating a goal.

because that was my impression-- though, to be fair, the only one of lafontaine's series i ever followed closely was montreal/buffalo in '93. roenick just seemed like a game-breaker in a way that, for all their points, lafontaine and henrik didn't.

Roenick took over playoff series? Give an example of when he did. Henrik Sedin took over the Sharks series in 2011, the Conference Finals. He also had a very good series against the Kings in 2010 I think when Mikael Samuelsson scored liked 7–8 goals or something.

 

[Hardyvan123]

This might be my memory playing tricks on me, but I remember LaFontaine as a no-defense kind of player.

Well he wasn't a Feds by any means but his ES play wasn't horrible either as he played a 80's style in the vein of Wayne and Mario.

We have more information on him than we have on Primeau or Foyston, ie the eye test and other metrics but seriously people didn't seem to hold it against Espostio or other players in this project.

In pure defensive terms sure Pat would be 6th this round with the information we have.

Look what happens when we express this in terms of centers only:

Sedin: 1, 1, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 20
Lafontaine: 2, 7, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19
Colville: 3, 4, 5, 6, 10

I can't see how LaFontaine has a ghost of an argument against Sedin in this measurement. Colville pulls ahead of LaFontaine based on roundedness, versatility and the common-sense approach that he can't be a top scoring center while he's an all-star at defense.

man that's some really broad strokes you are painting here to be fair if we are only going to compare centers let's make the comparison fair and have them against Canadian centers which would be more fair right?

And how does one factor in the number of teams and first line centers for each team vying for those scoring finishes?

it's really hard to see how Colville bridges the gap that much here unless one doesn't account for the differences all that much.

I don't have time right now but will post the top finishes by Canadian centers and the guys listed above, as well as Roenick.

Right off the top Sedin has Malkin, Zetts and Dats post 06 for starters.

You know I am a proponent of the early-mid 1990s as the peak of hockey talent pools, but LaFontaine is too far back in the "pack" among his peers to belong ahead of guys like Sedin and Colville who were for at least a few sustained years among the top handful of centers in the world.[/QUOTE]

 

[MXD]

I'd describe Lafontaine as a non-lazy but not really efficient defensive player

I think "no-defense" is unduly harsh in his case.

 

[sr edler]

Wasn't basically everyone in the happy 80s and early 90s a "no-defense" player? And with basically everyone I mean "basically everyone".

 

[tarheelhockey]

1) If you are confining things just to centers, Lafontaine faced much stiffer competition than Sedin, namely from Gretzky and Lemieux

Removing Gretzky and Lemieux gives us the following.

Sedin - 1, 1, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 20
vs
LaFontaine - 1, 5, 8, 9, 9, 10, 11, 18

It narrows the gap a bit, but this is about as generous as you can be in terms of taking away the two best players of the generation on only one side of the equation.

2) The case for Lafontaine is not point production. As a point producer, he is definitely behind Sedin. And behind Roenick, as well, in everything but his best season. The case for Lafontaine is goal scoring. I see Lafontaine as easily the best goal scorer this round, and easily the worst playmaker. (Foyston is the only other center this round I'd say was more of a goal scorer than a playmaker). So yes, it really depends on how much you value goalscoring over playmaking or defense.

Lafontaine as a goal scoring center (with the Wayne/Mario adjustment)
Lafontaine - 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 15, 16, 18

Sedin as an assist scoring center
Sedin - 1, 1, 1, 4, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18

Sedin has the slightly higher peak, LaFontaine has a couple extra years of longevity (who saw that coming, huh?).

IMO, it's pretty arbitrary to value goal scoring over defense to the point that that one would look at these numbers and put LaFontaine over Sedin on only that basis. I mean, we had to play with the numbers to even make it look this close... how does LaFontaine take the next step up to get over Sedin? I can't see it.