Round 2, Vote 4 (2009 update)

[FissionFire]

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

Round 2

• The top 15 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 five (5) days
• Final voting will occur for two (2) days by private message
• Final results will be posted and the process repeated for the next 10 places with remaining players until a list of 100 players is obtained

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

Additionally, there are a couple guidelines I'd ask that everyone agree to abide by:
1. Please try to stay on-topic in the thread
2. 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" etc. when debating.
3. Please treat other debaters with respect
4. Please don't be a wallflower. All eligible voters are VERY HIGHLY encouraged to be active participants in the debate.
5. 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 (35):
BM67, Canadiens1958, Canadiens Fan, cottonking, DaveG, Dennis_Bonvie, God Bless Canada, Hockey Outsider, Jekyll, Jungosi, Kyle McMahon, lextune, MXD, Nalyd Psycho, NOTENOUGHBREWER, overpass, papershoes, pappyline, pitseleh, pnep, Pwnasaurus, quoipourquoi, Radovsky, raleh, reckoning, seventieslord, Shirtless Joe, Spitfire11, Sturminator, TheDevilMadeMe, TheGoldenJet, tommygunn, Triffy, ushvinder, Weztex

All posters are encouraged to participate in the debates and discussions, but only those listed above will be eligible for the final votes. Anyone wishing to participate who has not submitted a list yet will have until the start of Round 2, Vote 2 to get their list in. Once Vote 2 begins, no additional lists will be accepted.

On that note, I hope everyone is ready to wrack their brains and debate against some of the best hockey minds on the 'net! Have fun!

Click to read more...

 

[FissionFire]

*** PLEASE NOTE THE VOTING DEADLINE ***

Vote 3 will begin now and debates will run through Sunday 8/23. Any extension to this time frame will be annouced prior to the deadline. Votes must be submitted no later than midnight EST on Sunday 8/23, and voting will run until this time or until all voters have sent their vote in, whichever comes first. THESE DEADLINES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE SO PLEASE READ THROUGH THE ENTIRE THREAD.

I will be sending out confirmations when I receive ballots from the voters now. Any voter who does not get a confirmation within 24 hours of submitting a ballot should assume I never received it and should either resubmit it or contact me to arrange a different method to submit the ballots. Please submit all ballots via PM to FissionFire or email them to [email protected]

PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL VOTE FOR YOUR TOP 15 OUT OF THE POOL OF ELIGIBLE PLAYERS.

Vote 4 will be for places 31 through 40 on the Top 100 list.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:
Syl Apps Sr.
Martin Brodeur
Chris Chelios
Paul Coffey
Bill Cook
Ken Dryden
Viacheslav Fetisov
Bernard Geoffrion
Valeri Kharlamov
Brad Park
Larry Robinson
Joe Sakic
Milt Schmidt
Vladislav Tretiak
Steve Yzerman

 

[MXD]

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:
Syl Apps Sr.
Martin Brodeur
Chris Chelios
Paul Coffey
Bill Cook
Ken Dryden
Viacheslav Fetisov
Bernard Geoffrion
Valeri Kharlamov
Brad Park
Larry Robinson
Joe Sakic
Milt Schmidt
Vladislav Tretiak
Steve Yzerman

What I can say right away :

Paul Coffey isn't making it.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

My first reaction, we need to get the Russians in this round.

 

[MXD]

My first reaction, we need to get the Russians in this round.

Fetisov? Absolutely.
Tretiak? Bubble. Either way, gotta weigh options.
Kharlamov ? I probably won't rank him 45th, since a guy I expected in isn't and a guy I didn't expect in is.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Top 10 for this round (off the top of my head):

1. Larry Robinson: One of the most unique defencemen of all-time, a big, mobile defenceman who dominated all aspects of the game and delivered when it mattered most.

2. Milt Schmidt: One of the best all-round players to ever play the game. Has an Art Ross Trophy. Tremendous defensively and a physical presence. Carried a lot of bad Bruin teams on his back.

3. Martin Brodeur. Things he accomplished might never be met again. 10 straight seasons with at least 70 games. Seven seasons with at least 40 wins. With the exception of last season, the model of consistency, durability and reliability - everything you want in a goaltender.

4. Ken Dryden: He only played a little more than seven seasons, but it might have been the best seven-plus seasons in league history: six first-team all-star nods, six Stanley Cups and a Conn Smythe. Unprecedented.

5. Boom Boom Geoffrion. The best playoff performer to be considered in this round. Eight straight post-seasons with at least 10 points. Gretzky and Messier are the others to do it. Impressive company. Won some awards in the regular season, too.

6. Syl Apps Sr: He finished with about a point-per-game in his career. Playing mostly in the late 30s and early 40s. Had half a year to beat up on soft competition from the war. It’s incredible. Tremendous playmaker, an outstanding offensive weapon and one of hockey’s all-time class acts.

7. Steve Yzerman: This is where my list starts to get fuzzy. I know the next four are 7-10, but I’m not certain of the order. I’ll play a sentimental card and go with Yzerman at 7. One of hockey’s most beloved players was the captain of a very bad hockey team early in his career, then the captain of a great hockey team late in his career. Always a feared offensive threat who became one of the best defensive forwards in the game.

8. Chris Chelios: A polarizing player. I’m not a Chelios fan, but much like Messier, I have tremendous respect for him. A ferocious competitor who dominated all aspects of the game and a tremendous leader who could carry a team on his back for extender periods of time.

9. Slava Fetisov: The Russian equivalent of Chelios: a tenacious and feared defenceman who could dominate all aspects of the game. World Championship and pre-98 Olympic accomplishments mean little to me. Canada Cup accomplishments mean a lot. Fetisov was great in the Canada Cup.

10. Joe Sakic: After Trevor Linden retired, Sakic was my favourite player in the show. Like Yzerman, he was an offensive wizard on a bad team (in Sakic’s case, a really, really bad team) early in his career who became a great two-way player and leader on a great team. I give Yzerman the edge because you could have argued that Yzerman was the best player in 1989, when Mario and Wayne were still playing at such high levels.

11. Paul Coffey: Hard to leave him off the list. A gimmie for the next round. Best offensive defenceman ever who isn’t named Orr. Coffey doesn’t get credit for what he was: a dazzling offensive talent who is among the best skaters and most creative players ever.

12. Brad Park. Not yet. Merits consideration in the top 40, but isn’t a top 40 player. Tremendous all-round defenceman. Shouldn’t be slotted ahead of Robinson (who accomplished more and means more to the game), Fetisov (who was a better hockey player), Chelios (who was a better hockey player) or Coffey (who accomplished more and meant more to the game).

13. Valeri Kharlamov. Like Park, deserves consideration for the top 40. I don’t think he belongs in the top 40. Although I do expect he will be voted in this round, probably at Chelios’ expense. He’s one of hockey’s great “what if’s:†what if Kharlamov had played in the NHL? Dazzling offensive skill who delivered in a best-on-best.

14. Bill Cook: My type of player. A gritty, highly-skilled winger who dominated once the western league folded and the best players jumped to the NHL. One first post-consolidation scoring title. And he did it again in 33, after the forward pass was allowed in the offensive zone.

15. Vyacheslav Tretiak: First player out of my top 50 to be considered. It’s not a surprise he’s been added, but he is a polarizing guy. Some rate him very high. Others diminish his rating because he had minimal experience in best-on-bests, and his performance in the Miracle on Ice game. Wouldn’t surprise me if he’s a top five goalie and a top 20-25 player on some lists, and outside of the top 100 lists for others.

 

[Canadiens1958]

#'s 1 - 15 This Round

Just ranking the 15 eligible for this round with comments.

1.Martin Brodeur
All time wins leader, a steady 70 games a season netminder in a 55-60 game world who gets no love. Has produced all the requisite team and individual numbers. Should be much higher.

2.Milt Schmidt
Great two way center. Defined Boston Bruin hockey in the post Eddie Shore era.

3.Larry Robinson
The best of the Big 3, added element of toughness - see Dornhoefer, Schultz. 6 SCs as a player. Outstanding +/-.

4.Joe Sakic
Quiet leader. Managed to overcome horrific coaches to achieve greatness.

5.Steve Yzerman
Should thank Scotty Bowman.

6.Syl Apps Sr.
Very under appreciated. Defined the Leafs during his career.

7.Ken Dryden
Paved the way for the big goalie. Stepped up in the playoffs - 1971 as a rookie. Also in 1976,1977,1978 his playoff GAA average was significantly better than during the regular season. Struggled in international play.

8.Chris Chelios
Maintained high performance standards for a long time. Overly aggressive at times to his team's detriment - Chicago/Keenan.

9.Brad Park
Bridesmaid never the bride. Had the misfortune of playing for average or weak coaches.

10.Vladislav Tretiak
Defined Soviet goal tending. Many of his techniques are used by goaltenders today. Lingering question about how he would have done over the course of an NHL season.Impressed during the 1972 Summit by playing every minute.

11.Viacheslav Fetisov
Defined Soviet defensemen. By far the best player on the first unit of the 1980's. Adapted well to the NHL, More physical than people wish to admit. Leader with a great appreciation of the geometry of the game.

12.Bill Cook
Elite winger from the 1930's. Complete package.

13.Bernard Geoffrion
Sorry but not ahead of Dickie Moore.

14.Paul Coffey
After Bobby Orr the best skater for a defenseman but when other attributes are considered the gap widens very quickly. Not a top 50.

15.Valeri Kharlamov
The James Dean , Marilyn Monroe of hockey.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

My first reaction, we need to get the Russians in this round.

Agreed. I have the Russians, Brodeur, Dryden,and Robinson as must-adds this time. Brodeur and Dryden are not that far behind Hall and Sawchuk, and Robinson is definitely the best NHL dman left.

Love the new additions. Coffey is the only guy I probably won't consider this round, but he should be a lock to make it next round.

First impressions:

1. Kharlamov - should have gone last round. Might drop a few spots, but he'll still be in my Top 5.
2. Brodeur - has to be over Sakic and Yzerman, as he was more consistently the best of his position over the same time period. The 2nd best player of the last decade and there's a rational argument for 1st. Won a 2nd Vezina behind an average D since the last vote, so a rise of a couple of spots is justified.
3. Robinson - Best defenseman left. Surprised he didn't go last round.
4. Sakic - Likely, the best forward of the last decade. Most clutch goal scorer of the dead puck era.
5. Fetisov - barely behind Robinson
6. Tretiak - neck and neck with Fetisov
7. Dryden - hurt by lack of longevity, peak up their with anyone.
8. Geoffrion - I underestimated him in my initial list. Arguably the best forward on the 50s Habs in the playoffs.
9. Yzerman - Five spots behind Sakic seems right.
10. Schmidt - He has to go in this round. Willing to bump him up a bit.
11. Chelios - Tough to leave him off, but I can't see who I can put him over.
12. Park - right behind Chelios
13. Cook - Willing to hear arguments to raise him. 2nd best to Morenz of the time period.
14. Apps - Didn't accomplish quite enough in his short career to go over most of these guys.
15. Coffey - Quite simply, it's a round too early. Lock for next round.

 

[seventieslord]

Initial impressions:

Viacheslav Fetisov - Simply a complete, dominant, multi-dimensional defenseman. Should already be voted in.
Bill Cook - it's about time we recognize this guy for what he was - an offensively dominant, two-way force with excellent leadership skills. What he did after age 30 in the NHL was simply outstanding. Just a couple spots ahead of Charlie Conacher? Not this time!
Joe Sakic - He should be as close to Messier (#22) as possible. Which inclines me to vote him 1st. but two wrongs don't make a right. Burnaby Joe is no Fetisov or Cook.
Ken Dryden - the only goalie I'd truly consider at this moment. Not a team product. Earned a Smythe, stole a cup, and was voted the finest goalie in the league six times. Look what happened to the Habs when he didn't play. Dominant sv% in both the regular season and playoffs. Brodeur and Benedict have longevity edges on Dryden, but Dryden had too dominant a peak to ignore. Like Durnan but against top competition.
Brad Park - I don't see why Robinson is better, except that he played for the Habs and won cups.
Syl Apps Sr. - A brilliant offensive force who was always very high in MVP voting. Led the Leafs to multiple cups. A model of class and respect. A poor man's Jean Beliveau.
Milt Schmidt - Not as talented as Apps, but nearly bridges the gap with his two-way play.
Steve Yzerman - Sakic times 0.9 = yzerman.
Bernard Geoffrion - A dominant playoff performer and elite goalscorer.
Larry Robinson - I feel he's a tad overrated. Two Norrises? Canon tells us he's about 7th-8th among defensemen; are we sure Park and Fetisov shouldn't also be ahead?
Chris Chelios - 3 Norrises against tougher competition. But I don't feel he was as dominant as Robinson. Great longevity though.
Paul Coffey - I'll always have these two right after eachother. Both equally valuable, just for completely different reasons.
Martin Brodeur - I've never been convinced he was individually that good. The gap I see between Dryden and the rest of the pack needs to be appropriately reflected.
Vladislav Tretiak - I'm glad he's up for induction so early this time, but there are too many good names ahead of him. He, Brodeur, and Tretiak should all end up within 5 spots of eachother, perhaps around 43-48.
Valeri Kharlamov - Overrated. Maybe I have to watch him more to understand it, but it's true that the numbers don't really reflect him being that dominant compared to Petrov or Mikhailov or Makarov or Maltsev. MVP voting tends to agree. the true crime is probably not that kharlamov is already up for consideration, but that Mikhailov and Makarov aren't, and that Petrov and Maltsev likely will never be. I would feel much better if Kharlamov ended up as close to M&M as possible. By next round I will see some players I can't help but rank below him, but for now, Valeri is 15th to me.

 

[canucks4ever]

I agree that Larry Robinson is a bit overrated, he won cups and played good all around game. However he isn't a top 10 offensive defencemen of all times, niether is he top 10 shutdown d-man of all times. Therefore I have a hard time considering him as the 8th greatest d-man ever.

Chelios won 1 more norris against better comp and he was more consistent. I consider Paul Coffey better than robinson too.

 

[seventieslord]

If Bobby Orr did not exist, this is Brad Park's norris voting record:

1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 8th, 9th.

A four-time Norris winner and three-time runner-up? That's what Lidstrom was just three years ago. At that time we were already calling him the #6 or 7 best defenseman of all-time. If Lidstrom had an Orr-caliber defenseman to compete against, he'd have had the same Norris record as Park, circa 2006.

Should the existence of Bobby Orr be the only thing preventing us from calling park what he truly is - the 8th or 9th-best defenseman of all-time?

He really had no flaws as a player. He was always one of the best offensive defensemen in the league, he was excellent defensively, dominant physically, dynamite in the playoffs despite never winning a cup, and he didn't experience the late career burnout that other 70s stars did - he was getting Norris and Hart votes well into the 1980s.

 

[canucks4ever]

If Bobby Orr did not exist, this is Brad Park's norris voting record:

1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 8th, 9th.

A fur-time Norris winner and three-time runner-up? That's what Lidstrom was just three years ago. At that time we were already calling him the #6 or 7 best defenseman of all-time. If Lidstrom had an Orr-caliber defenseman to compete against, he'd have had the same Norris record as Park, circa 2006.

Should the existence of Bobby Orr be the only thing preventing us from calling park what he truly is - the 8th or 9th-best defenseman of all-time?

He really had no flaws as a player. He was always one of the best offensive defensemen in the league, he was excellent defensively, dominant physically, dynamite in the playoffs despite never winning a cup, and he didn't experience the late career burnout that other 70s stars did - he was getting Norris and Hart votes well into the 1980s.

I actually agree with you man, he was better than Robinson on both ends of the ice. I have been watching some footage of park during his days with the bruins and he was the man on that team for sure.

What would impress you even more is King Clancy's hart trophy record, he was top 5 five times, and he has seasons where he was also top 10 in hart trophy voting. The voters really loved that guy. He was mainly competing against Shore, who is better than anyone Robinson competed against from 1976-1982, a green bourque doesnt really count because 1986-1994 was bourque's real prime.

 

[Triffy]

Schmidt vs. Apps

Anyone care to compare Schmidt and Apps? Their careers overlapped nicely. I had Schmidt a couple of spots higher than Apps but now that I look into it Apps wouldn't be a bad choice either. Both are known for their high level two-way game. Schmidt has the physical element Apps lacks which can't be overlooked.

I had them significantly higher than both Yzerman and Sakic.

If no one else steps up I might be willing to do the comparison, depending on how much I'll have time and energy.

 

[Howe Elbows 9]

My first reaction, we need to get the Russians in this round.

Agreed.

31. Viacheslav Fetisov
32. Bill Cook
33. Vladislav Tretiak
34. Joe Sakic
35. Valeri Kharlamov
36. Steve Yzerman
37. Larry Robinson
38. Syl Apps
39. Milt Schmidt
40. Chris Chelios

Brodeur/Coffey/Dryden/Geoffrion/Park

There's time to completely change my ranking, but I'm pretty sure about ranking Robinson ninth among defensemen.

 

[Canadiens1958]

If Bobby Orr Did Not Exist

If Bobby Orr did not exist, this is Brad Park's norris voting record:

1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 8th, 9th.

A fur-time Norris winner and three-time runner-up? That's what Lidstrom was just three years ago. At that time we were already calling him the #6 or 7 best defenseman of all-time. If Lidstrom had an Orr-caliber defenseman to compete against, he'd have had the same Norris record as Park, circa 2006.

Should the existence of Bobby Orr be the only thing preventing us from calling park what he truly is - the 8th or 9th-best defenseman of all-time?

He really had no flaws as a player. He was always one of the best offensive defensemen in the league, he was excellent defensively, dominant physically, dynamite in the playoffs despite never winning a cup, and he didn't experience the late career burnout that other 70s stars did - he was getting Norris and Hart votes well into the 1980s.

Classic. If Bobby Orr did not exist.

Then the way hockey was played and coached in the mid 1960's Brad Park gets moved to forward since in junior he was rather average. Seventeen year old junior d-men with 0 -15 - 15 scoring totals are far from NHL locks. See his first two junior seasons :

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/p/parkbr01.html

A growth spurt helped.

Likewise Larry Robinson played forward into junior - see the following:

http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/spot_oneononep199502.htm

See the part about Brockville and Barry Fraser.

As for the Norris voting.Bobby Orr changed the criteria in a fashion that benefitted Brad Park since the criteria for defensemen became "in comparison to Bobby Orr". Once this becomes the norm, as it was, from the late 1960's on then it becomes rather disingeneous to factor out Bobby Orr.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

As for the Norris voting.Bobby Orr changed the criteria in a fashion that benefitted Brad Park since the criteria for defensemen became "in comparison to Bobby Orr". Once this becomes the norm, as it was, from the late 1960's on then it becomes rather disingeneous to factor out Bobby Orr.

Please clarify if I'm misunderstanding you, but your argument here seems to be that Brad Park had an unfair advantage in Norris voting because he was similar to the greatest defenceman of all-time?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Criteria Changed

Please clarify if I'm misunderstanding you, but your argument here seems to be that Brad Park had an unfair advantage in Norris voting because he was similar to the greatest defenceman of all-time?

Not at all.

If you look at the Norris Trophy Winners prior to Bobby Orr - Harry Howell,Jacques Laperriere, Pierre Pilote, Doug Harvey, Tom Johnson, Red Kelly the criteria was very different for being the best defenseman.

Basically defensive play in your own end was a consideration and offensive considerations were limited to a quarterbacking role which in the case of Harvey and to a degree Pilote meant getting the fast outlet pass to speedy forwards while slowing the pace of the game and acting as a counter-balance when necessary - setting-up the power play,etc.

Bobby Orr who was an outstanding skater, increased offense from the defensive position by bringing the element of speed from the back end to the game. The rush, the lateral movement, constant threat of attacking the other teams slot and crease. This changed the way defensemen were viewed and who played defense.

The net result was that Norris voting became a comparison to Bobby Orr's skills as opposed to overall defensive skills which take significant time to develop at the NHL level.

Brad Park had the advantage of being viewed as Bobby Orr Lite for a few years until the arrival of Denis Potvin, Larry Robinson and others in the mid-seventies. If we accept the no Bobby Orr position then the Norris criteria reverts back to pre Bobby Orr days.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Please clarify if I'm misunderstanding you, but your argument here seems to be that Brad Park had an unfair advantage in Norris voting because he was similar to the greatest defenceman of all-time?

I think his point was without Orr, Brad Park would have been lucky to make the NHL, let alone win any Norris votes, so ipso facto Park (or any defenseman, who became at all involved in the offense, to come after) must never be considered on his own merits, but only in relation to Bobby Orr.

Oh, and Park apparently grew in height as a teenager.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Brad Park

I think his point was without Orr, Brad Park would have been lucky to make the NHL, let alone win any Norris votes, so ipso facto Park (or any defenseman, who became at all involved in the offense, to come after) must never be considered on his own merits, but only in relation to Bobby Orr.

Oh, and Park apparently grew in height as a teenager.

On his own merits Brad Park makes the NHL but the balance between offense and defense when considering Norris Trophy merit was tilted significantly towards offense by the accomplishments of Bobby Orr.

How Brad Park would have fared under the pre Bobby Orr era Norris criteria is not a given as some pretend it to be by eliminating Bobby Orr from consideration.

 

[overpass]

Here's my plus-minus based analysis of the players up for voting who starred in the NHL since 1968. I've added some special teams numbers as well.

These don't include playoffs, intangibles, and others, and can't be taken as the final word, but can hopefully provide some information in certain areas.

Stat Glossary:

$ESGF/G - even-strength goals for per game, adjusted for scoring level. Higher is better.
$ESGA/G - even-strength goals against per game, adjusted for scoring level. Lower is better.
R-ON - Player's even-strength on-ice goal ratio (ESGF/ESGA). Should be higher than R-OFF.
R-OFF - Player's even-strength off-ice goal ratio (ESGF/ESGA).
XEV+/- - Players expected EV+/-, based on off-ice results.
EV+/- - Even-strength plus-minus, adjusted for scoring level.
AEV+/- - Adjusted even-strength plus-minus. =(EV+/-) - (XEV+/-). If you look at just one number, make it this one.
/82 - Adjusted even-strength plus-minus per season.
SH% - . Percentage of team's PPGA the player was on the ice for. Measures a players role in killing penalties, but not effectiveness.
PP% - Percentage of team's PPGF the player was on the ice for. Measures a players role on the power play, but not effectiveness.
$PPP - Scoring-adjusted power play points per game.
$ESP - Scoring-adjusted even-strength points per game.


Joe Sakic

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Joe Sakic | 89-94 | 5.67 | 0.88 | 1.02 | 0.86 | 0.74 | -92 | -65 | 26 | 5 | 30% | 82% | 0.40 | 0.73
Joe Sakic | 95-01 | 6.17 | 1.16 | 0.80 | 1.45 | 1.20 | 65 | 182 | 117 | 19 | 26% | 84% | 0.58 | 0.91
Joe Sakic | 02-09 | 5.41 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 1.21 | 1.11 | 30 | 77 | 48 | 9 | 19% | 70% | 0.45 | 0.81
Joe Sakic | 89-09 | 17.25 | 1.02 | 0.88 | 1.16 | 1.00 | 3 | 194 | 191 | 11 | 25% | 79% | 0.48 | 0.82

Steve Yzerman

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Steve Yzerman | 84-87 | 3.64 | 0.80 | 0.90 | 0.89 | 0.83 | -33 | -29 | 3 | 1 | 9% | 73% | 0.36 | 0.58
Steve Yzerman | 88-94 | 6.47 | 1.20 | 1.03 | 1.17 | 1.08 | 33 | 93 | 60 | 9 | 47% | 75% | 0.40 | 0.98
Steve Yzerman | 95-02 | 7.08 | 0.95 | 0.70 | 1.35 | 1.24 | 71 | 142 | 71 | 10 | 42% | 69% | 0.44 | 0.70
Steve Yzerman | 03-06 | 1.85 | 0.74 | 0.56 | 1.32 | 1.34 | 21 | 28 | 7 | 4 | 23% | 34% | 0.23 | 0.53
Steve Yzerman | 84-06 | 19.03 | 0.99 | 0.84 | 1.18 | 1.10 | 92 | 233 | 141 | 7 | 35% | 69% | 0.39 | 0.75

Brief Sakic-Yzerman comparison

During Yzerman's 1988-1994 years, he was a huge even-strength scorer, better than Sakic ever was. However, he was also on the ice for far more goals allowed than Sakic was at his peak, even after adjusting for scoring level and teammates. This suggests that either Yzerman was a worse defensive player or he was getting a ton of ice time to put up those points. I suspect both are true to some degree.

Anyway, 1988-1994 Yzerman was a great offensive player, 1995-2002 Yzerman was a great defensive player, but there wasn't any overlap. In comparison, Sakic was able to be a top scorer and get Selke consideration at the same time. Sakic was also a significantly better power play scorer. Yzerman played a bigger role on the penalty kill. Both had playoff success.

I have Sakic ahead, as he was a more dominant even-strength player at his best, and has a special-teams edge also.


Larry Robinson

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Larry Robinson | 73-76 | 3.46 | 1.21 | 0.71 | 1.69 | 1.52 | 80 | 140 | 60 | 17 | 31% | 15% | 0.06 | 0.40
Larry Robinson | 77-82 | 5.40 | 1.67 | 0.86 | 1.93 | 1.60 | 184 | 356 | 172 | 32 | 59% | 65% | 0.30 | 0.58
Larry Robinson | 83-89 | 6.20 | 1.16 | 0.82 | 1.41 | 1.08 | 29 | 170 | 142 | 23 | 42% | 63% | 0.28 | 0.36
Larry Robinson | 90-92 | 2.28 | 1.04 | 0.87 | 1.19 | 1.13 | 15 | 30 | 15 | 7 | 40% | 27% | 0.10 | 0.29
Larry Robinson | 73-92 | 17.34 | 1.31 | 0.82 | 1.60 | 1.34 | 307 | 696 | 389 | 22 | 45% | 49% | 0.22 | 0.43

Larry Robinson was a dominant even-strength player, as evidenced by his great plus-minuses. Even on great teams he stood out in this regard.

He wasn't a highly productive power play quarterback like all the defencemen who have already been voted in have been. Most of his scoring came at even-strength.

Brad Park

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Brad Park | 69-71 | 2.37 | 1.21 | 0.82 | 1.47 | 1.22 | 28 | 76 | 48 | 20 | 30% | 64% | 0.28 | 0.38
Brad Park | 72-79 | 6.63 | 1.48 | 0.94 | 1.58 | 1.24 | 100 | 294 | 194 | 29 | 51% | 89% | 0.43 | 0.59
Brad Park | 80-85 | 5.10 | 0.86 | 0.78 | 1.09 | 1.12 | 27 | 30 | 3 | 1 | 38% | 77% | 0.34 | 0.28
Brad Park | 78-87 | 14.10 | 1.21 | 0.86 | 1.40 | 1.20 | 155 | 400 | 245 | 17 | 43% | 81% | 0.37 | 0.44

Brad Park was just a terrific all-around defenceman for the better part of a decade. He was a real impact player at even-strength, played big minutes on the penalty kill, and was very productive on the power play. He probably wasn't the best in any area, even in the non-Orr division - Robinson was better at even-strength, Potvin better on the PP, Serge Savard probably better on the PK - but few could match the total package. The only drawback is that he starred in a diluted era.

The last few years of his career were similar to the last few years of Ray Bourque's - still playing a major role on special teams, but no longer a dominant force at even-strength.

Chris Chelios

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Chris Chelios | 84-87 | 2.48 | 0.92 | 0.89 | 1.03 | 1.14 | 17 | 5 | -12 | -5 | 45% | 61% | 0.34 | 0.29
Chris Chelios | 88-97 | 9.28 | 1.09 | 0.78 | 1.40 | 1.22 | 99 | 236 | 137 | 15 | 60% | 79% | 0.37 | 0.38
Chris Chelios | 98-02 | 4.15 | 1.15 | 0.89 | 1.28 | 1.00 | 1 | 86 | 86 | 21 | 61% | 42% | 0.18 | 0.37
Chris Chelios | 03-09 | 4.68 | 0.69 | 0.60 | 1.15 | 1.39 | 57 | 35 | -22 | -5 | 56% | 6% | 0.01 | 0.21
Chris Chelios | 84-09 | 20.59 | 0.99 | 0.78 | 1.28 | 1.18 | 173 | 362 | 189 | 9 | 58% | 52% | 0.24 | 0.33

Chelios was a very good defender for about 15 years. For the first 10 of those he was very good at even-strength and on the power play, if not at the level of a Ray Bourque. His power play contributions dropped off later in his career, but he was still very good at even-strength until his 40s.

Probably Chelios's biggest plus is his penalty killing. He played huge minutes killing penalties on Montreal, Chicago, and Detroit, all of which had top penalty kills. From 1987-88 to 1992-93. his team was top-3 on the penalty kill in 5 out of 6 years.

Paul Coffey

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Paul Coffey | 81 | 0.93 | 0.90 | 0.84 | 1.07 | 0.99 | -1 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 8% | 29% | 0.10 | 0.27
Paul Coffey | 82-87 | 5.73 | 1.52 | 1.03 | 1.47 | 1.39 | 137 | 228 | 90 | 16 | 34% | 83% | 0.43 | 0.73
Paul Coffey | 88-95 | 7.10 | 1.32 | 1.16 | 1.14 | 1.10 | 47 | 94 | 46 | 7 | 29% | 87% | 0.51 | 0.55
Paul Coffey | 96-01 | 4.04 | 1.00 | 0.91 | 1.10 | 1.19 | 38 | 31 | -7 | -2 | 21% | 68% | 0.32 | 0.37
Paul Coffey | 81-01 | 17.79 | 1.29 | 1.04 | 1.23 | 1.21 | 222 | 357 | 135 | 8 | 28% | 79% | 0.42 | 0.55

Paul Coffey's best attribute was undoubtedly his even-strength scoring. However, he traded off defensive play to achieve that, so his net even-strength results were never great. Also, when you consider that unlike the other defensemen on this list, he was not the top option for a defensive-zone faceoff, his even-strength results are less impressive.

He was a great PP quarterback, to his credit. However, he wasn't as dominant here as he was an even-strength scorer - his PP scoring was no better than Al MacInnis, Denis Potvin, Brian Leetch, or Ray Bourque.

He also played a smaller role on the penalty kill than any other defender up for voting to this point has.

Vyacheslav Fetisov

Player | Year | Seasons | $ESGF/G | $ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AEV+/- | /82 | SH% | PP% | $PPP/G | $ESP/G
Vyacheslav Fetisov | 90-94 | 4.14 | 0.85 | 0.72 | 1.19 | 1.16 | 27 | 46 | 18 | 4 | 38% | 28% | 0.08 | 0.28
Vyacheslav Fetisov | 95-98 | 2.70 | 1.01 | 0.63 | 1.59 | 1.30 | 33 | 83 | 50 | 18 | 10% | 25% | 0.14 | 0.42
Vyacheslav Fetisov | 90-98 | 6.84 | 0.91 | 0.69 | 1.34 | 1.21 | 61 | 129 | 68 | 10 | 27% | 27% | 0.10 | 0.34

These numbers are here mostly for completeness sake. His case rests on his Soviet league years.

Unlike the other defensemen here, he was not a #1 defenseman in his 30s.

 

[seventieslord]

Not at all.

If you look at the Norris Trophy Winners prior to Bobby Orr - Harry Howell,Jacques Laperriere, Pierre Pilote, Doug Harvey, Tom Johnson, Red Kelly the criteria was very different for being the best defenseman.

Basically defensive play in your own end was a consideration and offensive considerations were limited to a quarterbacking role which in the case of Harvey and to a degree Pilote meant getting the fast outlet pass to speedy forwards while slowing the pace of the game and acting as a counter-balance when necessary - setting-up the power play,etc.

Bobby Orr who was an outstanding skater, increased offense from the defensive position by bringing the element of speed from the back end to the game. The rush, the lateral movement, constant threat of attacking the other teams slot and crease. This changed the way defensemen were viewed and who played defense.

The net result was that Norris voting became a comparison to Bobby Orr's skills as opposed to overall defensive skills which take significant time to develop at the NHL level.

Brad Park had the advantage of being viewed as Bobby Orr Lite for a few years until the arrival of Denis Potvin, Larry Robinson and others in the mid-seventies. If we accept the no Bobby Orr position then the Norris criteria reverts back to pre Bobby Orr days.

That's a rather interesting way to look at it; however, don't hold your break expecting others to buy into it, because I suspect the most important criteria with most of us is the degree to which the player dominated his peers... not how another player changed how he was perceived.

Fact is, he was named the second-best all-around defenseman numerous times, behind the best per-game player in the history of hockey.

 

[ck26]

15.Valeri Kharlamov
The Marilyn Monroe of hockey.

I think you're wildly overrating how sexy Valeri Kharlamov was.

This part of the list is where this exercise gets very challenging because the transcendent players are gone and what we're left with is varying degrees of very, very good.

Larry Robinson stands out to me as the clear #1 on this list. I rate him at the bottom end of the Clarke/Trottier/Potvin tier, to group him with some of his contemporaries. I've loved the description since I read it in an ATD thread (GBC I think?) and I'll love it till I die, but Robinson is one of the most "uniquely wonderful players of all time." Nobody quite had the tools he had.

I always have trouble slotting Paul Coffey into these lists. I just don't like the guy's game at all, but he did win Norris and he was a vital cog in a number of very good-to-great teams throughout his career, so I'm fighting the urge to not let him drop too far. I'm not sure how many Norris trophies Fetisov would have won in North America (Ray Bourque would have been a problem for him), but it's not a stretch to suggest he would have been a finalist or better 3-4 times. Chelios of course actually got his 3 Norrises, so I have my defensive ranking set.

Robinson
Chelios
Fetisov
Coffey
Park

Dryden and Brodeur are both two of my favorites; echoing GBC's sentiments that Dryden's peak (ie: his whole career) was unprecedented. I give tremendous respect to Dryden the citizen of the republic ... there's something very commendable about using sports to pay the bills and as a platform to get where you really want to go in life, but since we're voting on hockey players not the hundred greatest Canadian citizens, it's impossible to not rate Brodeur's longevity ahead of Dryden's supernova of a career. And count me among the guys who thinks it's too soon for Tretiak.

Brodeur
Dryden
Tretiak

Re: Tretiak and Kharlamov ... when we knock players for having a limited "best-on-best" track record, I think the lack of exposure helps goalies more than forwards. You never quite "solve" a super-skilled forward, but an expanded scouting report helps tons against goalies, so the more-limited exposure helps Tretiak disproportionately vis-a-vis Kharlamov.

I have no feel on the forwards yet, other than "Milt Schmidt is first." I don't like the idea of Kharlamov slipping into the 50's, but I can't rate him ahead of Schmidt, Sakic or Yzerman, and I don't want to rate him ahead of Cook. The only bad thing I can say about Cook is that he wasn't even the best player from Brantford, Ontario. Hmm ...

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

On his own merits Brad Park makes the NHL but the balance between offense and defense when considering Norris Trophy merit was tilted significantly towards offense by the accomplishments of Bobby Orr.

How Brad Park would have fared under the pre Bobby Orr era Norris criteria is not a given as some pretend it to be by eliminating Bobby Orr from consideration.

Sure it is. Just look at what actually happened. Brad Park did not hit the NHL as a star offensive player. He wasn't a great scoring defenceman until 1972. How did he do earlier on, when he wasn't putting up big scoring numbers? First Team All-Star in 1970, Second Team All-Star in 1971.

Let's look at 1970. Park got prime power play minutes on the Rangers, but was just 6th in the league in points. Not only that, but he wasn't much of an even strength player - he was 4th among defencemen on his own team in even strength goals for while he was on the ice, and he was 4th among defencemen on his own team in shots. All the evidence suggests a good power play quarterback who was also good defensively, yet certainly not a dynamo rushing defenceman at 5 on 5.

What did the voters do? They voted him as the #2 defenceman in the league behind Bobby Orr.

I agree that it is possible that certain players have benefitted in awards voting because of the way specific skills were viewed at the time. I just disagree with this particular example. It doesn't make any sense to say that for an all-arounder like Brad Park, who was pretty much good at everything and did get voting recognition even before he had fully developed his offensive game. No matter what criteria you use, Park was one of the top defencemen of his era.

 

[NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS]

That's a rather interesting way to look at it; however, don't hold your break expecting others to buy into it, because I suspect the most important criteria with most of us is the degree to which the player dominated his peers... not how another player changed how he was perceived.

Fact is, he was named the second-best all-around defenseman numerous times, behind the best per-game player in the history of hockey.

The same thing you see with the guys who theoretically would've won Hart's without Gretzky and Lemieux being in the mix. I often see being runner up to Gretzky being a much lesser offensive player. A guy such as Langway, a goalie, or a good offensive player with two-way presence. But take away Gretzky/Lemieux and the bulk of the votes probably just shift to the next highest scorer.

Without Orr how did Park finish in terms of defenseman scoring? I would think he did place quite highly, but the voting may have been skewed towards someone else without Orr there.


The thing about the argument in Park's favour is that you assume by dropping Orr the rest of the votes all stay the same.

 

[DaveG]

Glad to see Taylor and Lalonde go. Won't say I'm shocked to see Kharlamov still out there. I am shocked to see Coffey up for voting this early.

Early look at this round:
1 - Kharlamov
2 - Fetisov
3 - Tretiak
4 - Dryden
5 - Robinson
6 - Brodeur
7 - Sakic
8 - Yzerman
9 - Chelios
10 - Schmidt
11 - Apps
12 - Park
13 - Cook
14 - Geoffrion
15 - Coffey