Round 2, Vote 3 (HOH Top Centers)

[Hawkey Town 18]

IMPORTANT NOTE: Post 2 of every voting thread will contain instructions as to who to send your votes to. If you send your votes to the wrong person, we can't guarantee that they will be counted.

MOD: This is a strictly on-topic thread. Posts that don't focus on the centers listed in Post 2 will be deleted or moved at the discretion of the moderators. This will be strictly enforced in every Round 2 voting thread, regardless of who the OP is - TDMM

Before we begin, just a recap on how Round 2 will operate:

Round 2

• The top 8-10 ranked players from the aggregate list will be posted in a thread
• Players will be listed in alphabetical order to avoid creating bias
• Player merits and rankings will be open for discussion and debate for a period of at least five (5) days. Administrators may extend the discussion period if it remains active
• Final voting will occur for two (2) days, via PM. Everyone ranks their top 8 players.
• Top 4 players will be added to the list
• Final results will be posted and the process repeated for the next 4 places with remaining players until a list of 60 centers is obtained
• After Vote 5 (when we have a list of the top 20 centers), we may increase the number of players added per round to 5. Participants will be allowed to vote on whether to increase the number added per round to 5 or to stay at 4 per round
• If there are major breaks in the Round 2 voting totals, we may add more or less than the targeted 4 or 5 players in certain rounds
• The number of players available for discussion at once will increase from 8 as we move down the list, based on natural breaks in the aggregate list put together in Round 1

These might be tweaked to allow longer or shorter debating periods depending on how the process moves along.

Additionally, there are a couple guidelines we'd ask that everyone agree to abide by:

• Please try to stay on-topic in the thread
• Please remember that this is a debate on opinions and there is no right or wrong. Please try to avoid words like "stupid" "dumb" "wrong" "sophistry" etc. when debating.
• Please treat other debaters with respect
• Please don't be a wallflower. All eligible voters are VERY HIGHLY encouraged to be active participants in the debate.
• Please maintain an open mind. The purpose of the debate is to convince others that your views are more valid. If nobody is willing to accept their opinions as flexible there really is no point in debating.

Eliglible Voters (23):
bigbuffalo313; BillyShoe1721; Canadiens1958; DaveG; Dennis Bonvie; hardyvan123; Hawkey Town 18; intylerwetrust; Jigglysquishy; MadArcand; Mike Farkas; MXD; reckoning; Rob Scuderi; seventieslord; Sturminator; tarheelhockey; ted1971; the edler; TheDevilMadeMe; tony D; VanIslander; vecens24

All posters are encouraged to participate in the debates and discussions, but only those listed above will be eligible for the final votes.

Click to read more...

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Vote 3 will begin now and debates are scheduled to run through Tuesday, November 19th at 11:00pm EST. You may PM votes to Hawkey Town 18 starting on Monday, November 18th.

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 either resubmit it or contact the person collecting ballots to arrange a different method to submit the ballots.

Vote 3 will be for places 9 through 12 on the Top 60 list.

There are 9 eligible candidates for Vote 3. You will still only rank your Top 8 when voting.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:

Syl Apps
Marcel Dionne
Phil Esposito
Newsy Lalonde
Joe Sakic
Milt Schmidt
Fred Cyclone Taylor
Bryan Trottier
Steve Yzerman

 

[VanIslander]

Syl Apps

Uh,.. I had him 19th on my initial list. I'll have to pay attention to the arguments regarding him in this group of candidates.

Marcel Dionne

A polarizing figure given the knock on his lack of postseason team accomplishments and questionable work ethic (at times considered a cherry picker, though at other times a hard-working whirlwind).

 

[VanIslander]

Marcel Dionne, the 731 NHL goal scorer who netted 1771 points, both top-5 all time. He scored more goals and more assists than anybody between 1975-1985, scoring 100+ points an impressive eight times over that stretch but only twice was NHL 1st team all-star center (1977, 1980), twice 2nd team (1979, 1981), twice Lady Byng (1975, 1977). He was five times top-3 in NHL assists and five times top-3 in NHL points, and led the NHL in shots four times, currently second in all-time NHL career shots behind Bourque.

“He was a guy who could take control of a game at any moment because of his speed and his skill and his determination. Despite his size, he was a feisty enough player. He wasn’t afraid to, as coaches say, “get his nose dirtyâ€, and get involved. He didn’t play on the periphery.â€

Canada Cup Gold (1976)
IIHF Best Forward (1978)
Canada Cup Silver (1981)
IIHF Second Team All-Star (1983)

“It was his ability to find the open man, but it was his creativity – he was a very creativity player. He found ways that, even though there was no opening on the ice, he found ways to get that opening… He was a little guy that didn’t mind being in the corner or in front of the net. He got his nose dirty – he did what he had to do to get all the points. You don’t get all those points just by showing up. He showed up with a tremendous amount of intensity every game… There was criticism that he wasn’t a winner. That’s not true. He was a winner, but he played for teams that weren’t good enough to win the Cup. This guy came to play every night."

 

[amnesiac]

Should be a consensus: Espo, Sakic, Yzerman, Trottier. Probably in that order for me at this moment.

Uh,.. I had him 19th on my initial list. I'll have to pay attention to the arguments regarding him in this group of candidates.

well were up to 17 centres now including this list. Hes not so far off.

 

[MXD]

Should be a consensus: Espo, Sakic, Yzerman, Trottier. Probably in that order for me at this moment.

This doesn't make any sense, considering that last round went like this :

Phil Esposito 1 1 5 2 1 3 3 1 3 75
Joe Sakic 0 0 2 2 7 4 4 0 1 70
Bryan Trottier 0 2 1 4 1 5 1 5 1 66
Cyclone Taylor 0 1 0 1 1 1 5 5 6 34
Steve Yzerman 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 11 20
Newsy Lalonde 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 4 14 11

 

[MadArcand]

Starting out, it'd be Espo, Trottier, Taylor... and either Lalonde or Sakic for me right now.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Uh,.. I had him 19th on my initial list. I'll have to pay attention to the arguments regarding him in this group of candidates.

One argument that might be worth considering now that we're past the obvious-generational-talent stage... here's how the decades break down among our inductees and candidates so far:

1910s: Lalonde, Taylor, Nighbor
1920s: Taylor, Morenz, Nighbor
1930s: Apps, Morenz, Schmidt
1940s: Apps, Schmidt
1950s: Beliveau, Mikita
1960s: Beliveau, Clarke, Esposito, Mikita
1970s: Beliveau, Clarke, Dionne, Esposito, Gretzky, Messier, Mikita, Trottier
1980s: Clarke, Dionne, Esposito, Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, Sakic, Trottier, Yzerman
1990s: Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, Sakic, Trottier, Yzerman
2000s: Lemieux, Messier, Sakic, Yzerman


Given that Esposito, Sakic and Trottier are all well-positioned to go in this round, it's noteworthy that we're about to induct seven centers who played in the 1980s before we induct one who played between 1937 and 1950. This same phenomenon occurred during the goaltenders project, when something like a dozen of our inductees played during the 1970/71 seasons. In both cases it would appear that the rapid expansion of the league lengthened careers, inflated reputations and institutionalized dynasties.

IMO we should take a hard look at Apps and Schmidt to be absolutely sure that their generation doesn't deserve to be represented at all in the top 12.

 

[VanIslander]

1940s: Apps, Schmidt

A relatively weak decade, with the war and all.

2000s: Lemieux, Messier, Sakic, Yzerman

No one voted for Mess for anything he's done this century! Quite the contrary I'm sure. And Mario to some degree neither.

And what about pre-1910? I have two on my intial top-60 list and two more on the next twenty list. Will it be a barren desert pre-1910s?

Hopefully, when all is said and done each era will have its due, to some degree or other. But it's too soon to take decade distribution into consideration imo. The cream may or may not rise the the top relatively equally.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Given that Esposito, Sakic and Trottier are all well-positioned to go in this round, it's noteworthy that we're about to induct seven centers who played in the 1980s before we induct one who played between 1937 and 1950. This same phenomenon occurred during the goaltenders project, when something like a dozen of our inductees played during the 1970/71 seasons. In both cases it would appear that the rapid expansion of the league lengthened careers, inflated reputations and institutionalized dynasties.

IMO we should take a hard look at Apps and Schmidt to be absolutely sure that their generation doesn't deserve to be represented at all in the top 12.

How much of that is due to most of us downgrading the war years somewhat? As well as the influx of players in the post-war baby boom?

I don't think it is unfair to say that the boom coupled with more available infrastructure is the reason that there is a bit of a glut in the 70s-90s.

I do know that Apps and Schmidt both have some great credentials, though.. this should be interesting.

 

[tarheelhockey]

A relatively weak decade, with the war and all.

How much of that is due to most of us downgrading the war years somewhat?

I feel pretty certain that this is a big factor. And it may very well be that there was a period of roughly 20 years (between the peaks of Morenz and Beliveau) where there wasn't a single top-12 center at the top of his form. It's kind of depressing to imagine, but it could simply be the way the cookie crumbled for that generation.

Probably the bigger thing, which I should have pointed out first, is that we would be saying that Beliveau was the only top-12 center during a roughly 30-year period from Morenz's decline until Mikita's emergence. One guy in 30 years, compared to FIVE in the 1984 season alone? That seems a little skewed...

 

[MXD]

I think Apps, Schmidt and Dionne came up for voting at the eight time. Which logically means they're last on my rankings until proven otherwise.

TDDM, just for curiosity... 3 new candidates only. Natural break ?

Other observations later on Brave's point.

 

[tarheelhockey]

TDDM, just for curiosity... 3 new candidates only. Natural break ?

I don't think TDMM's in the forum right now, so I'll jump in and answer -- yes, it's based on a natural break after this group.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Defensive Centers

How much of that is due to most of us downgrading the war years somewhat? As well as the influx of players in the post-war baby boom?

I don't think it is unfair to say that the boom coupled with more available infrastructure is the reason that there is a bit of a glut in the 70s-90s.

I do know that Apps and Schmidt both have some great credentials, though.. this should be interesting.

Failure to recognize the era for its emphasis on defensive qualities be it defensemen, centers or wingers. War is an easy way out. Prime example being the attitude towards the late 1940s Blackhawks. League leaders in GF, failed to make the playoffs. Similarities to Marcel Dionne but the Hawks get no love while Marcel Dionne is praised well beyond his talents.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't think TDMM's in the forum right now, so I'll jump in and answer -- yes, it's based on a natural break after this group.

It's not actually a natural break this round (there wasn't a clean natural break this round), but going to 9 candidates for the next few rounds leads us to a massive natural break later on (no, I won't tell you when it is ).

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Preliminary Thoughts

Not particularly excited by the new candidates (Marcel Dionne coming up before Henri Richard or Frank Boucher? UGH). I guess Schmidt and Apps can compete with Lalonde at least.

As hard as last round was, I think the remainder of my top 8 is a pretty clear step above the rest for my top 4:

1) Phil Esposito - I voted him a lot higher last round than I had in previous rounds. His offensive stats are just out of this world. It is not hyberbole to compare his statistical dominance over his peers with Mario Lemieux or Gordie Howe. Yes, some of that is Bobby Orr, but still, Espo was the one breaking records, not any of his teammates. And for me, Esposito is the one guy the THN Top 100 really says a lot about - every single member of the panel saw Esposito play and they actually ranked him back to back with Mikita and ahead of Bobby Clarke, so at least they didn't think he was totally a product of Orr.

2) Joe Sakic - underrated peak, fantastic playoffs, legendary longevity as an elite player. I have him closer to Messier than to Yzerman as a player. Open to arguments to flip Esposito and Sakic, but going into this round, I have Phil slightly ahead.

3/4) Cyclone Taylor and Bryan Trottier. I actually had Taylor over Trottier last round, though I realize there is no real direct way to compare them. Wanted to have a small gap between Esposito/Sakic and Trottier and Taylor is the on natural guy to slot in.

I'm always open to arguments, but I see those 4 as a clear step above everyone else right now.

 

[ted2019]

Uh,.. I had him 19th on my initial list. I'll have to pay attention to the arguments regarding him in this group of candidates.


A polarizing figure given the knock on his lack of postseason team accomplishments and questionable work ethic (at times considered a cherry picker, though at other times a hard-working whirlwind).

I had Apps at #30.

 

[tarheelhockey]

It's not actually a natural break this round (there wasn't a clean natural break this round), but going to 9 candidates for the next few rounds leads us to a massive natural break later on (no, I won't tell you when it is ).

Oops... I knew there was a break involved somewhere. Should have just left it alone since you'd be along soon enough to set us straight

 

[tarheelhockey]

Failure to recognize the era for its emphasis on defensive qualities be it defensemen, centers or wingers. War is an easy way out. Prime example being the attitude towards the late 1940s Blackhawks. League leaders in GF, failed to make the playoffs. Similarities to Marcel Dionne but the Hawks get no love while Marcel Dionne is praised well beyond his talents.

This is an intriguing take on the 1940s generation, and points to a possible viable explanation for the lack of star-power during that period. I'd be interested to see some more detailed commentary on what distinguished centers of that generation from their counterparts both before and after that period. And for the purposes of this project, we still need to determine just how greatly Apps and Schmidt separated themselves from the pack.

 

[tony d]

Yeah, Espo and Trottier are heads and shoulders above the rest of these guys IMO. I'm interested to see what people will say about Marcel Dionne. I've always liked the guy but he gets unfairly shunned because of the quality of the teams he played on.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah, Espo and Trottier are heads and shoulders above the rest of these guys IMO. I'm interested to see what people will say about Marcel Dionne. I've always liked the guy but he gets unfairly shunned because of the quality of the teams he played on.

Why do you rank Trottier over Sakic?

As for Dionne, in a project full of good to excellent playoff performers, he sticks out like a sore thumb as a relatively poor one. Well, maybe Milt Schmidt can join him. Hard to know what to make of Schmidt in the playoffs - his stats took a nosedive, but he did win 2 Cups and maybe he was playing a defensive role in the playoffs, while the Bill Cowley line went for the offense.

 

[sr edler]

Why did the Wings trade Dionne after his breakout season?

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm interested to see what people will say about Marcel Dionne. I've always liked the guy but he gets unfairly shunned because of the quality of the teams he played on.

I'm hesitant to overlook Dionne for that exact reason, but I just don't feel that he quite belongs at this level.

Assuming we are ok with using hockey-reference's point adjustments:

Sakic - 1.22 Appg
Esposito - 1.18 Appg
Dionne - 1.11 Appg
Yzerman - 1.09 Appg
Trottier - 0.92 Appg

I'm probably more willing than most voters to be flexible with Dionne based on his team situation, and I don't really buy into the idea of players being "winners" and "losers" based on where they were drafted. But even if you just look at his regular seasons... he doesn't match Esposito's scoring power, let alone Sakic's. His defensive game doesn't match Sakic's, Yzerman's or Trottier's. His 2-3 year period of peak dominance (when he won his only major awards) coincided with an extremely brief generational transition where Clarke/Mikita/Esposito were finished and Gretzky/Messier/Lemieux hadn't yet fully arrived... and even at that, Trottier took a Hart from him in '79. Really, Dionne's biggest argument is that he was in the same scoring range as Trottier, and Trottier was pretty clearly the more complete player in every other facet of the game.

THEN you pile on the playoff profiles, and the distance between Dionne and Sakic/Yzerman/Trottier gets to the point where there's not much of an argument left for Marcel. I see him as a guy who should wait at least one more round and possibly two.

 

[MXD]

One argument that might be worth considering now that we're past the obvious-generational-talent stage... here's how the decades break down among our inductees and candidates so far:

Given that Esposito, Sakic and Trottier are all well-positioned to go in this round, it's noteworthy that we're about to induct seven centers who played in the 1980s before we induct one who played between 1937 and 1950. This same phenomenon occurred during the goaltenders project, when something like a dozen of our inductees played during the 1970/71 seasons. In both cases it would appear that the rapid expansion of the league lengthened careers, inflated reputations and institutionalized dynasties.

IMO we should take a hard look at Apps and Schmidt to be absolutely sure that their generation doesn't deserve to be represented at all in the top 12.

I'm not totally against that line of thinking.

This said, Apps and Schmidt contemporaries would have to receive the exact same treatment, or else the gap between Apps, Schmidt and the said contemporaries wouldn't be indicative of the "accomplishments" gap in between them.

Now, I'd be able to express my point a little more clearly if I could "name" those contemporaries.

Suffice to say this : I can think of one player who might even not be eligible for voting in the whole project, and regarding whom being completely out, while Apps/Schmidt being so high, wouldn't make much "internal sense".

And there's probably an even more egregious problem than the one of this player... that we'll probably have to tackle in three rounds or so.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm not totally against that line of thinking.

This said, Apps and Schmidt contemporaries would have to receive the exact same treatment, or else the gap between Apps, Schmidt and the said contemporaries wouldn't be indicative of the "accomplishments" gap in between them.

Yes, definitely. It's plausible that Apps/Schmidt were just part of a generation that lacked great centers altogether. I feel like we ran into this problem a bit in the goalies project, where one slight over-rating led to a domino effect down the line.

I think it's worth pursuing C58's concept of changing expectations at the position (as well as any other interpretations that might be out there) at this stage of the voting, before we push these guys too far down the ladder. Maybe it turns out that they just aren't all that impressive, and their generation goes down as a low point in the history of centers.