Round 2, Vote 16 (HOH Top Centers)

[Iain Fyffe]

One would expect that with the emergence of elite talent and players from all of the non Canadian sources (and increased Canadian sources as well) since the early 70's though right?

Exactly. One would expect that, and that's what one finds. So presumably no issue then.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Henrik Sedin has commented in the past that he may return to Sweden at a future date. Perhaps the Hart voters felt that return was imminent and they gave him the Hart Trophy as a going away present?

i find that hypothesis extremely hard to accept. since when has anybody-- fans, media, their peers, the league, anybody-- ever gone out of their way to honour either sedin when they could have slighted them?

henrik won that toss-up hart the same way thornton won his, or theodore his-- an extremely hot finish.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

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.

But aren't all of those players on our list already?

 

[tarheelhockey]

But aren't all of those players on our list already?

Yes, which is kind of the point -- does the 13th best center in 199x really overshadow the 5th best center in 193x?

 

[Hardyvan123]

So because he played spot duty at D four years earlier in New York, and wasn't an All Star defenseman right off the bat in his first season back from the war, it's more plausible that there was some sort of age-biased voting than that he simply got better?

The more plausible explanation in my eyes is that playing D well in the NHL is hard and takes experience, even for a good player. That's why not just any player can jump back there and do it.

This wasn't some guy in his prime but the oldest Dman in the league that's where eyebrows should be raised right?

It wasn't that he just wasn't an all star Dman in 46 he wasn't in the top 9, out of 20 full time guys that year, then as the oldest Dman in the league he suddenly goes to 7th and then 4th?

 

[Hardyvan123]

I agree that it should be questioned, quantified, and examined closer. I'd just like to see some reason as to why we should suspect it was a retirement gift, beyond the fact that you find it unusual.

You mentioned that Colville went from unranked, to 7th, to 4th in all-star team voting and suggested it could be a retirement gift from the voters. No other theories for the 4th place finish were put forth by you, and the voting records were the only evidence cited.

Those three seasons happen to be Colville's first full seasons on defense. Not strange at all that he would show improvement in his first seasons playing the position. It was later discovered by another poster that his quick decline was indeed the result of injury/health issues, and the opportunity to coach the Rangers' minor league team likely influenced his decision to retire. Rather than do this research from the beginning, it was apparently easier to claim chicanery on the part of the all-star team voters and force others to do the legwork to disprove your theory.

Not really, i was being a bit lazy as he was the oldest guy in the league and Dmen tended to retire in their early 30's in that era.

We have no way of knowing if he would have feel off the cliff before that injury or would have declined, as pretty much all other Dmen did then.

Like I said in the previous post it would have been one thing if he was doing this in his prime but doing so as the oldest Dman in the league really is telling right?

And we can't have it both ways here in 46 giving him the benefit of the doubt (a transition year) then a 7th place finish, which is still 2nd tier, then that 4th place as the oldest Dman in the league.

There is no corresponding evidence(other than the all star voting) to suggest a larger impact by Colville other than GP and some minimal offence but when he is 4th he plays in 55 of 60 games his PPG decreases slightly and through out the NYR are among the bottom feeders in GA.

Like I stated earlier it's possible he improved that much but also extremely highly unlikely.

If we are going to be so generous and give him that much benefit of doubt we should do it for all players right?

 

[Hardyvan123]

Exactly. One would expect that, and that's what one finds. So presumably no issue then.

There is always issues, or a difference of opinion , here in the History section.

The biggest thing is going forward and doing this project in 5,10 plus years and if the bar remains higher for the more recent guys or not.

At some point eras will make any such projects more "accurate and fair", which is of course subjective.

(Mod)

 

[Hardyvan123]

Yes, which is kind of the point -- does the 13th best center in 199x really overshadow the 5th best center in 193x?

The overlap for Pat is Wayne in 80 and Sakic who started in 89, was Colville the 5th best center over the start of a 10 year period anyways?

Also if it was just Canadain centers for both guys it would be one thing and one era has to have the least and another the most right just as talent fluctuates a bit over time.

Either way I think Roenick has a better resume than LaFontaine does.

Colville is a better match up to Pat sure but is he really the guy to beat this round and does he match up that well with Sedin as Pat?

 

[tarheelhockey]

This wasn't some guy in his prime but the oldest Dman in the league that's where eyebrows should be raised right?

It wasn't that he just wasn't an all star Dman in 46 he wasn't in the top 9, out of 20 full time guys that year, then as the oldest Dman in the league he suddenly goes to 7th and then 4th?

I think it's valid to look at the class of opponents that competed for AS voting at defense during those years and understand that it's one of the historic low marks.

1947:
Ken Reardon, Mtl 13 (4-0-1)
Butch Bouchard, Mtl 12 (2-3-0)
Jack Stewart Det 11 (2-2-1)
Bill Quackenbush, Det 11 (2-2-1)
Jack Crawford, Bos 9 (1-3-0)
Wally Stanowski, Tor 5 (1-0-2)
Neil Colville, NYR 5 (0-1-3)
Glen Harmon, Mtl 3 (0-1-1)
Murray Henderson, Bos 2 (0-0-2)
Gus Mortson, Tor 1 (0-0-1)

1948
Bill Quackenbush, Det 23 (4-1-0)
Jack Stewart Det 21 (3-2-0)
Ken Reardon, Mtl 19 (2-3-0)
Neal Colville, NYR 14 (2-1-1)
Jim Thomson, Tor 12 (1-2-1)
Butch Bouchard, Mtl 7 (0-2-1)
Jack Crawford, Bos 7 (0-1-4)
Frank Eddolls, NYR 2 (0-0-2)
Gus Mortson, Tor 2 (0-0-2)
Murray Henderson, Bos 1 (0-0-1)


That said, I don't see why we should "raise our eyebrows" at the notion of a good defensive center converting to defense successfully. And I don't see why it matters that he was 31 at the time, that's not exactly geriatric even by 1940s standards.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I think it's valid to look at the class of opponents that competed for AS voting at defense during those years and understand that it's one of the historic low marks.

1947:
Ken Reardon, Mtl 13 (4-0-1)
Butch Bouchard, Mtl 12 (2-3-0)
Jack Stewart Det 11 (2-2-1)
Bill Quackenbush, Det 11 (2-2-1)
Jack Crawford, Bos 9 (1-3-0)
Wally Stanowski, Tor 5 (1-0-2)
Neil Colville, NYR 5 (0-1-3)
Glen Harmon, Mtl 3 (0-1-1)
Murray Henderson, Bos 2 (0-0-2)
Gus Mortson, Tor 1 (0-0-1)

1948
Bill Quackenbush, Det 23 (4-1-0)
Jack Stewart Det 21 (3-2-0)
Ken Reardon, Mtl 19 (2-3-0)
Neal Colville, NYR 14 (2-1-1)
Jim Thomson, Tor 12 (1-2-1)
Butch Bouchard, Mtl 7 (0-2-1)
Jack Crawford, Bos 7 (0-1-4)
Frank Eddolls, NYR 2 (0-0-2)
Gus Mortson, Tor 2 (0-0-2)
Murray Henderson, Bos 1 (0-0-1)


That said, I don't see why we should "raise our eyebrows" at the notion of a good defensive center converting to defense successfully. And I don't see why it matters that he was 31 at the time, that's not exactly geriatric even by 1940s standards.

I posted it earlier in the thread, Neil was either the oldest or tied as the oldest full time Dman in the league 46-48 so that's why it is important.

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

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

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

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

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.

Keep in mind that this is partly because some of the guys Sedin is competing against haven't accumulated much career value. I would be surprised if Toews and Stamkos don't end up passing him when all is said and done. Also, if you stretch things back as far as 2001, you could start making arguments for Sakic and Forsberg

 

[tarheelhockey]

The overlap for Pat is Wayne in 80 and Sakic who started in 89, was Colville the 5th best center over the start of a 10 year period anyways?

I'm not quite sure how you're framing that question, so I'll go back to what I said before:

During the 5 or 6 year period leading up to WWII, Colville was approx. the 5th best center in the league.


Taking that as the standard unit of measurement, Lafontaine had a nicely defined 6-year prime from '88 to '93. How did he rank during that period? Behind Gretzky and Lemieux for sure, but we won't count them. Yzerman, Messier, Gilmour were all dominating during that window. Stastny and Savard were elite in the early part of it, Roenick and Oates in the later part. So all together, he was roughly the 6th best center at any point in that period (plus 99/66).

They both had a gap after that 6-year window, but for different reasons. Lafontaine was injured a lot. Colville was drafted by the army. Without projecting events that didn't happen, we can give Colville some benefit of the doubt here in regards to longevity, not to mention having a forgettable first season when he got back.

After that, Colville had those two solid years as a defenseman, including at 2AS berth in a pretty weak field.

When he got back, LaFontaine had one notable season when he was, what, the 9th best enter even if you don't count Wayne OR Mario OR Fedorov OR Forsberg? I'm chalking that comparison in Colville's favor.

To me, it's open-and-shut in Colville's favor. He has a case for #1 in this round, whereas I don't see a rational argument for Lafontaine over the rest of this field.

Either way I think Roenick has a better resume than LaFontaine does.

I agree.

Colville is a better match up to Pat sure but is he really the guy to beat this round and does he match up that well with Sedin as Pat?

Well I have them 1/2 at this point so that's the comparison I'd really like to see next

 

[tarheelhockey]

I posted it earlier in the thread, Neil was either the oldest or tied as the oldest full time Dman in the league 46-48 so that's why it is important.

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

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

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

But what's important about it?

Here are the ages of the oldest dmen in the league by year:

1936 - 37 (Dutton/Johnson)
1937 - 38 (Johnson)
1938 - 38 (Johnson)
1939 - 36 (Shore)
1940 - 37 (Shore)
1941 - 33 (Clapper/Goodfellow)
1942 - 34 (Clapper/Goodfellow)
1943 - 35 (Clapper/Goodfellow)
1944 - 36 (Clapper)
1945 - 37 (Clapper)
1946 - 38 (Clapper)
1947 - 32 (Colville/Cooper)
1948 - 33 (Colville)
1949 - 34 (Colville)
1950 - 33 (Crawford)
1951 - 33 (Stewart)
1952 - 34 (Stewart)
1953 - 33 (Bouchard)
1954 - 34 (Bouchard)
1955 - 35 (Bouchard)
1956 - 36 (Bouchard)

For one thing, Colville happened to turn 32 in the only season in at least a quarter-century in which that would have made him the league's senior defenseman. I don't see how that's anything more than an item of trivia.

For another, look at that list of names. The only guys not on our top-defensemen list were Colville and Dutton. Age and experience don't have nearly the negative effects on defensemen that they do on forwards.

Keep in mind that this is partly because some of the guys Sedin is competing against haven't accumulated much career value. I would be surprised if Toews and Stamkos don't end up passing him when all is said and done. Also, if you stretch things back as far as 2001, you could start making arguments for Sakic and Forsberg

That's true, but I wouldn't say that any of those players (other than perhaps Stamkos) were better than Sedin from the period 2007-2013. Without projecting into the future, it's fair to say that Sedin is pretty well locked into the #6 slot for that period, which is as long as the primes of several of these candidates.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I'm not quite sure how you're framing that question, so I'll go back to what I said before:

During the 5 or 6 year period leading up to WWII, Colville was approx. the 5th best center in the league.


Taking that as the standard unit of measurement, Lafontaine had a nicely defined 6-year prime from '88 to '93. How did he rank during that period? Behind Gretzky and Lemieux for sure, but we won't count them. Yzerman, Messier, Gilmour were all dominating during that window. Stastny and Savard were elite in the early part of it, Roenick and Oates in the later part. So all together, he was roughly the 6th best center at any point in that period (plus 99/66).

Okay so we skip Wayne and Mario then?

i ran the numbers and was surprised Pat was 5th in scoring over that time frame, including Wayne and Mario who were in the top 2 spots.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Yzerman was 3rd and then Pat in 4th (or 2nd if we take out Wayne and Mario) followed by

Moose (15 points behind Pat),
Oates 21 points behind Pat
Hawerchuck 30 points behind
Gilmour 54 points behind
then it starts to filter a bit but that's a really good 6 year period, in addition he has a 30 and 38 goal season before this time frame and his 70-46-50-96 last very good year which makes up one of his 7 VsX years and 2 injured years where he has lines of

16-5-13-18
22-12-15-27

so to warp it up it's a bit untrue to call him the 6th best center over that time frame IMO, or 8th in you include Wayne and Mario and he has a 9 year stretch were he was producing at a 558-343-404-747 clip which was good for 11th in that time frame and that includes seasons of 53, 16 and 22 games.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

They both had a gap after that 6-year window, but for different reasons. Lafontaine was injured a lot. Colville was drafted by the army. Without projecting events that didn't happen, we can give Colville some benefit of the doubt here in regards to longevity, not to mention having a forgettable first season when he got back.

After that, Colville had those two solid years as a defenseman, including at 2AS berth in a pretty weak field.

When he got back, LaFontaine had one notable season when he was, what, the 9th best enter even if you don't count Wayne OR Mario OR Fedorov OR Forsberg? I'm chalking that comparison in Colville's favor.

Hard to gauge Pat was 22nd in scoring during his last really good season but some guys had career on their 2nd best years that year too.

Obviously injuries and the 2 previous years rates (16-5-13-18 & 22-12-15-27) can't be taken at face value but how good is a 7th, 4th and an unknown 10-20th spot (my guess is that it is closer to 10 than 20 but that's just a guess) in a 6 team league?

this is 96 and the last high scoring season before clutch and grab come into play

http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_1996_skaters.html

To me, it's open-and-shut in Colville's favor. He has a case for #1 in this round, whereas I don't see a rational argument for Lafontaine over the rest of this field.

I can see the case for Neil over Pat, mainly due to the injuries but over Hank or Roenick is going to be alot harder to figure out IMO.

Here is Neil's best 5 season period as his last season before the war had a dip and some time on the back end.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

he has the same 5th in points overall (to Pat's 6 year sample which included Wayne and Mario) but the quality of players in this sample is...well that top 10 isn't very inspiring.

Like I said some might take Neil's complete game and career over Pat's high peak and much better offense but it's hard to say the same over Hank or Roenick who had much better overall games than Pat did (who was still playing an 80's offensive style at center).

here is Hank and his peak period 06-14 (current season)

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

He is 5th overall in points and has only 2 Canadian guys ahead of him in Sid and MSL.

He has some really good centers behind him that are better in Dats, Zetts and Malkin but Hank has produced and has been pretty good in terms of ES play as well, not a defensive superstar but plays a really great possession game.

Personally I have Roenick #1 this round with Pat and Hank as a clsoe 2nd (not sure on the order and then Neil) and then a gap down to the next 2 guys.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I think it's valid to look at the class of opponents that competed for AS voting at defense during those years and understand that it's one of the historic low marks.

1947:
Ken Reardon, Mtl 13 (4-0-1)
Butch Bouchard, Mtl 12 (2-3-0)
Jack Stewart Det 11 (2-2-1)
Bill Quackenbush, Det 11 (2-2-1)
Jack Crawford, Bos 9 (1-3-0)
Wally Stanowski, Tor 5 (1-0-2)
Neil Colville, NYR 5 (0-1-3)
Glen Harmon, Mtl 3 (0-1-1)
Murray Henderson, Bos 2 (0-0-2)
Gus Mortson, Tor 1 (0-0-1)

1948
Bill Quackenbush, Det 23 (4-1-0)
Jack Stewart Det 21 (3-2-0)
Ken Reardon, Mtl 19 (2-3-0)
Neal Colville, NYR 14 (2-1-1)
Jim Thomson, Tor 12 (1-2-1)
Butch Bouchard, Mtl 7 (0-2-1)
Jack Crawford, Bos 7 (0-1-4)
Frank Eddolls, NYR 2 (0-0-2)
Gus Mortson, Tor 2 (0-0-2)
Murray Henderson, Bos 1 (0-0-1)


That said, I don't see why we should "raise our eyebrows" at the notion of a good defensive center converting to defense successfully. And I don't see why it matters that he was 31 at the time, that's not exactly geriatric even by 1940s standards.

See those low vote totals? This is the era of NHL coach voting, and coaches were prohibited from voting for their own players. Means Colville was on 4 of 5 available ballots both seasons at D - actually pretty impressive when you look at it that way. Weak competition though obviously

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yzerman was 3rd and then Pat in 4th (or 2nd if we take out Wayne and Mario) followed by

Moose (15 points behind Pat),
Oates 21 points behind Pat
Hawerchuck 30 points behind
Gilmour 54 points behind

Right off the bat I think everyone here realizes that Lafontaine's peak pales in comparison to Messier's and Gilmour's. Point totals be damned, he's starting behind those guys and Yzerman as a hockey player.

Also, the way these numbers are framed gives a misleading impression of how highly Lafontaine was ranked in a given season.

1988 - 12th among centers in scoring. 7 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine did not. The centers who were ahead of him in scoring AND got AS votes were Lemieux, Gretzky, Savard, Yzerman, Stastny, Hawerchuk, Carson

1989 - 11th among centers in scoring. 4 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine was not one of them. Those in both categories were Lemieux, Gretzky, Yzerman, Nicholls.

1990 - 7th among centers in scoring. He finished behind Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and Yzerman in AS voting, and was only slightly ahead of Turgeon.

1991 - 10th among centers in scoring. 9 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine was not one of them. Ahead of him in both areas were Gretzky, Oates, Sakic, Yzerman, Roenick, Cullen, Janney and Messier (I'm assuming Fleury was a mistake).

1992 - 10th among centers in scoring. 4 of them finished ahead of him in AS voting -- Messier, Lemieux, Gretzky and Roenick. Yzerman was just slightly behind.

1993 - 2nd among centers in scoring, behind Lemieux. He was the 2AS behind Mario as well, though just a hair ahead of Gilmour and we know how Gilmour performed that spring after the voting.

Outside of 1993 and to a lesser extent 1990, there were pretty easily half a dozen better centers in the league at any given time. It's not like Lafontaine contributed anything besides points, either, so we are looking at his area of specialty here and he only cracked the top-10 two times in his peak years.

And, importantly, he has virtually nothing to add outside this 6-year prime.

so to warp it up it's a bit untrue to call him the 6th best center over that time frame IMO,

Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Messier, or Gilmour. Which of these would you feel he surpassed?

 

[Hardyvan123]

But what's important about it?

Here are the ages of the oldest dmen in the league by year:

1936 - 37 (Dutton/Johnson)
1937 - 38 (Johnson)
1938 - 38 (Johnson)
1939 - 36 (Shore)
1940 - 37 (Shore)
1941 - 33 (Clapper/Goodfellow)
1942 - 34 (Clapper/Goodfellow)
1943 - 35 (Clapper/Goodfellow)
1944 - 36 (Clapper)
1945 - 37 (Clapper)
1946 - 38 (Clapper)
1947 - 32 (Colville/Cooper)
1948 - 33 (Colville)
1949 - 34 (Colville)
1950 - 33 (Crawford)
1951 - 33 (Stewart)
1952 - 34 (Stewart)
1953 - 33 (Bouchard)
1954 - 34 (Bouchard)
1955 - 35 (Bouchard)
1956 - 36 (Bouchard)

For one thing, Colville happened to turn 32 in the only season in at least a quarter-century in which that would have made him the league's senior defenseman. I don't see how that's anything more than an item of trivia.

For another, look at that list of names. The only guys not on our top-defensemen list were Colville and Dutton. Age and experience don't have nearly the negative effects on defensemen that they do on forwards.

For the years in question 46-48 Clapper wasn't a full time Dman, he played 30 games in 46 and 6 games in 47.

Neil was the oldest full time Dman or extremely close to it in those 3 years, his ascending value in all star voting is unusual given his age, at best it indicates an extremely weak field.

This has come up before with Ken Reardon was was an all-star from 46-50 despite playing in only

43-50 86%
52-60 87%
58-60 96%
46-60 77%
67-70 96%

Of his games, something which is reflective of the smaller competition pool and perhaps the quality of it as well. I won't even venture on voter patterns and just avoid the barrage.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Right off the bat I think everyone here realizes that Lafontaine's peak pales in comparison to Messier's and Gilmour's. Point totals be damned, he's starting behind those guys and Yzerman as a hockey player.

Sure overall but he was much more consistent than Gilmour who had his superhuman spike and best season in 93 for the Leafs and is there really a Steve Y, Moose and Gilmour in his peak never mind Wayne and Mario type of competition in the entire league in Colville best 6 years, never mind at the same position?

really I have a hard time rating Colville over Brindamour except rod was streaky and had some peaks and valleys in his career but also alot more career value too, but he didn't make the cut this round so be that as it may.

Also, the way these numbers are framed gives a misleading impression of how highly Lafontaine was ranked in a given season.

the metric I gave was his best 6 year consecutive stretch, were he was 5th overall, including Wayne and Mario and his 9 season stretch where he was 11th. It is a different metric than the regular season, where BTW Neil has 7,7,10,10 in a vastly smaller league just to compare. Pat's offense simply is much superior to Neil....Period

1988 - 12th among centers in scoring. 7 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine did not. The centers who were ahead of him in scoring AND got AS votes were Lemieux, Gretzky, Savard, Yzerman, Stastny, Hawerchuk, Carson

1989 - 11th among centers in scoring. 4 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine was not one of them. Those in both categories were Lemieux, Gretzky, Yzerman, Nicholls.

1990 - 7th among centers in scoring. He finished behind Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and Yzerman in AS voting, and was only slightly ahead of Turgeon.

1991 - 10th among centers in scoring. 9 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine was not one of them. Ahead of him in both areas were Gretzky, Oates, Sakic, Yzerman, Roenick, Cullen, Janney and Messier (I'm assuming Fleury was a mistake).

1992 - 10th among centers in scoring. 4 of them finished ahead of him in AS voting -- Messier, Lemieux, Gretzky and Roenick. Yzerman was just slightly behind.

1993 - 2nd among centers in scoring, behind Lemieux. He was the 2AS behind Mario as well, though just a hair ahead of Gilmour and we know how Gilmour performed that spring after the voting.

Outside of 1993 and to a lesser extent 1990, there were pretty easily half a dozen better centers in the league at any given time. It's not like Lafontaine contributed anything besides points, either, so we are looking at his area of specialty here and he only cracked the top-10 two times in his peak years.

88-93 is much more a golden age of centers than the 6 year period that Neil played in, not sure how to account for that but yes it is possible that the 12th or 13th best center in the best era for centers might possibly be more worthy than the 4th or 5th best of the "worst era."

And, importantly, he has virtually nothing to add outside this 6-year prime.

not so sure about the nothing part his 91 point season was untimely (it came in the golden age of centers once again) and he has 2 more severely injured plagued seasons with great pace and then a 30 and 38 goal season in the late 80's (once again not great but not horrible either)

Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Messier, or Gilmour. Which of these would you feel he surpassed?

Of course it would be none of those but I highly doubt Neil's skillset (and resume)would have been able to do the same.

Neil kinda looks like Gilmour without that 2 and 1/2 season peak in Toronto and doesn't have Doug's playoff pedigree either.

 

[tarheelhockey]

For the years in question 46-48 Clapper wasn't a full time Dman, he played 30 games in 46 and 6 games in 47.

Clapper wasn't listed in 47 or 48, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there.

In 1946 Clapper played D and played over half the season, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there either.

Neil was the oldest full time Dman or extremely close to it in those 3 years, his ascending value in all star voting is unusual given his age, at best it indicates an extremely weak field.

We already determined it was a weak field by simply looking at the AS ballots. This age-related tangent is a total non sequitir, and it's miles from your original point about the AS balloting which was also pretty flimsy. I don't see what it's adding to the discussion to keep digging into it.

This all boils down to a simple observation that could have been made without any controversy at all: Colville was a defenseman at a time when there weren't a lot of superstar defensemen in the league. There's no need to get into all this business about voter misconduct or unusual ages.

In any case, you've made it exceedingly clear that you're going to rank pre-1980 players at the bottom of your ballot no matter what arguments are made for them, so there's really no point in continuing a conversation about Colville.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yes, which is kind of the point -- does the 13th best center in 199x really overshadow the 5th best center in 193x?

Why not?

According to our list, the 12th best does, the 11th best does, the 10th best does.

Why not 13th?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Right off the bat I think everyone here realizes that Lafontaine's peak pales in comparison to Messier's and Gilmour's. Point totals be damned, he's starting behind those guys and Yzerman as a hockey player.

Also, the way these numbers are framed gives a misleading impression of how highly Lafontaine was ranked in a given season.

1988 - 12th among centers in scoring. 7 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine did not. The centers who were ahead of him in scoring AND got AS votes were Lemieux, Gretzky, Savard, Yzerman, Stastny, Hawerchuk, Carson

1989 - 11th among centers in scoring. 4 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine was not one of them. Those in both categories were Lemieux, Gretzky, Yzerman, Nicholls.

1990 - 7th among centers in scoring. He finished behind Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and Yzerman in AS voting, and was only slightly ahead of Turgeon.

1991 - 10th among centers in scoring. 9 centers got AS votes, Lafontaine was not one of them. Ahead of him in both areas were Gretzky, Oates, Sakic, Yzerman, Roenick, Cullen, Janney and Messier (I'm assuming Fleury was a mistake).

1992 - 10th among centers in scoring. 4 of them finished ahead of him in AS voting -- Messier, Lemieux, Gretzky and Roenick. Yzerman was just slightly behind.

1993 - 2nd among centers in scoring, behind Lemieux. He was the 2AS behind Mario as well, though just a hair ahead of Gilmour and we know how Gilmour performed that spring after the voting.

Outside of 1993 and to a lesser extent 1990, there were pretty easily half a dozen better centers in the league at any given time. It's not like Lafontaine contributed anything besides points, either, so we are looking at his area of specialty here and he only cracked the top-10 two times in his peak years.

And, importantly, he has virtually nothing to add outside this 6-year prime.



Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Messier, or Gilmour. Which of these would you feel he surpassed?

Should be noted that if goals are used instead of points Lafontaine would fare better. Being someone that values goals over assists, it is a significant factor for me.

Just wondering, did you get to see Lafontaine play much?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Just wondering, did you get to see Lafontaine play much?

Well at the time I didn't see him play "much" at the time because of the lack of national hockey media at the time. I remember him mostly from televised playoff games and highlight reels. But yes I was following hockey if that's what you're asking, primarily in the later part of his career as I was quite young in the 1980s.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Well at the time I didn't see him play "much" at the time because of the lack of national hockey media at the time. I remember him mostly from televised playoff games and highlight reels. But yes I was following hockey if that's what you're asking, primarily in the later part of his career as I was quite young in the 1980s.

No inference made. Just wondering.

After all, none of us have seen everyone enough to know what the actual list should look like. (The actual list being in Hockey Heaven)

 

[Hardyvan123]

Clapper wasn't listed in 47 or 48, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there.

In 1946 Clapper played D and played over half the season, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there either.



We already determined it was a weak field by simply looking at the AS ballots. This age-related tangent is a total non sequitir, and it's miles from your original point about the AS balloting which was also pretty flimsy. I don't see what it's adding to the discussion to keep digging into it.

This all boils down to a simple observation that could have been made without any controversy at all: Colville was a defenseman at a time when there weren't a lot of superstar defensemen in the league. There's no need to get into all this business about voter misconduct or unusual ages.

In any case, you've made it exceedingly clear that you're going to rank pre-1980 players at the bottom of your ballot no matter what arguments are made for them, so there's really no point in continuing a conversation about Colville.

I'm ranking guys the same way I have done in every round, best player/resume #1 ect...

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Voting Open

Voting is now open and will close on Monday the 17th at 9pm EST. Please PM me your votes for only the top 6 centers with numbers next to each name (i.e. 1. Wayne Gretzky). You will receive confirmation that your vote has been received within 24hrs. If you do not receive confirmation please re-send votes and let me know with a post in this thread.


Thanks,
HT18