Round 2, Vote 4 (Stanley Cup Playoff Performers)

[quoipourquoi]

Procedure

• You will be presented with an increasingly large number of players based on their ranking in the Round 1 aggregate list
• Players will be listed in alphabetical order to avoid creating bias
• You will submit ten names in a ranked order, #1 through #10, without ties
• Results of this vote will be posted after each voting cycle, but the individual ballots themselves will remain secret until the completion of this project
• The top-5 players will be added to The List, and the process will repeat itself for a total of eight voting cycles (#1-5 in Vote 1, #35-40 in Vote 8)

Eligible Voters
All voters are equal, but some voters are more equal than others

• Anyone is eligible to submit a ballot in any voting cycle, so long as it falls within the designated voting period and contains ten names in ranked order
• The results of the open voting will be posted after each voting cycle
• Ballots from voters who have submitted an approved Round 1 ranking of 60 players (which was used to shape the aggregate list) will have their votes tabulated both in the open ranking and in the History of Hockey ranking
• BenchBrawl, Black Gold Extractor, blogofmike, bobholly39, Canadiens1958, drmagg, Johnny Engine, Kyle McMahon, Mike Farkas, MXD, quoipourquoi, seventieslord, TheGeneral
• The History of Hockey ranking will be used to assemble The List
• You may continue to submit a ranked #1-60 list to quoipourquoi until further notice in order to be eligible for the History of Hockey ranking

Guidelines

• Respect each other. No horseplay or sophistry!
• Stay on topic and don't get caught up in talking about non-eligible players or non-Stanley Cup Playoff performance
• Participate, but retain an open mind throughout the discussion
• Do not speculate who cast any particular ballot. Do not make judgments about the mindset of whoever cast that particular ballot. All individual ballots will be revealed at the end of the project.

The actual voting period will open up on Friday, May 5th at midnight and continue through Sunday, May 7th at 11:59pm. Eastern time zone. Send PMs to quoipourquoi. I will release the results of the vote on Monday, May 8th.

Vote 4 Candidates

• Bernie Geoffrion
• Bobby Hull
• Bryan Trottier
• Frank Boucher
• Frank Nighbor
• Henri Richard
• Ken Dryden
• Larry Robinson
• Martin Brodeur
• Mike Bossy
• Nicklas Lidstrom
• Paul Coffey
• Peter Forsberg
• Phil Esposito
• Scott Stevens
• Sergei Fedorov
• Terry Sawchuk
• Turk Broda

Click to read more...

 

[MXD]

I'm happy that Frank Boucher and Phil Esposito made it. Boooohooo to the fact that Orr and Esposito aren't available at the same time.

I'm a wee bit surprised that no active player (mostly, one of Keith or Crosby) made it to this round, however.

And that's now at least two players I ranked REALLY high in Round 1 who aren't in the Top-33.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Glad to see Scott Stevens and Sergei Fedorov aa options.

But where are Marty Barry and Tim Horton?

 

[MXD]

Glad to see Scott Stevens and Sergei Fedorov aa options.

But where are Marty Barry and Tim Horton?

To be honest, I expected at least one of Savard or Horton to be up for voting.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If you believe Glenn Hall, Bobby Hull shouldn't be in the top 60 at all.

 

[MXD]

If you believe Glenn Hall, Bobby Hull shouldn't be in the top 60 at all.

What's the quote?
I mean... I gather that you're talking about a quote here.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I know he has a relatively limited amount of Cups...but is there a reason Espo is just coming up now...? Was he really what was holding Boston back...? Seems unlikely...I'd like to hear some thoughts on his playoff resume...

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Phil Esposito cracked the top 33? I've got his jersey hanging in my closet, but clearly have a lesser opinion of his playoff resume than most.

I'm glad Frank Boucher came up. Historically an underrated player IMO.

Turk Broda remains available. I think a third goalie probably ought to be in the top 20, and there are four candidates to compare now.

Geoffrion vs Hull could be an interesting discussion. Original Six wingers both with great numbers, but of course one lacks the Cup rings. Hull is the first candidate available that falls firmly into the "strong preformances in losing causes" category, or so I gather.

Forsberg vs Fedorov will be a good debate, though I'm mildly surprised that Sakic is already on the final list and won't be part of that discussion.

 

[MXD]

Phil Esposito cracked the top 33? I've got his jersey hanging in my closet, but clearly have a lesser opinion of his playoff resume than most.

I'm glad Frank Boucher came up. Historically an underrated player IMO.

Turk Broda remains available. I think a third goalie probably ought to be in the top 20, and there are four candidates to compare now.

Geoffrion vs Hull could be an interesting discussion. Original Six wingers both with great numbers, but of course one lacks the Cup rings. Hull is the first candidate available that falls firmly into the "strong preformances in losing causes" category, or so I gather.

Forsberg vs Fedorov will be a good debate, though I'm mildly surprised that Sakic is already on the final list and won't be part of that discussion.

In re Espo : He's probably in the Top-33 of players, all things considered, or very close to it if he isn't.

Having in his playoffs ranking below his "overall" ranking would... well, I don't think it really computes to be honest. And putting Bobby Orr in before Esposito is even a possibility... I don't know, that's a little puzzling to me. Orr probably deserved to go ahead anyways, but I don't see a 10+ spots gap, at all.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

All data has been compiled in good faith. Let me know if you see any errors.

Here's some raw data to (hopefully) start the discussion:

MOST TIMES LEADING TEAM IN GOALS IN PLAYOFFS

Player | Times
Bobby Hull* | 8
Mike Bossy* | 6
Phil Esposito* | 5
Peter Forsberg* | 5
Bernie Geoffrion* | 4
Sergei Fedorov* | 3
Bryan Trottier* | 3
Frank Boucher* | 1
Paul Coffey* | 1
Nicklas Lidstrom* | 1
Scott Stevens* | 1
Henri Richard* | 0
Larry Robinson* | 0

MOST TIMES LEADING TEAM IN ASSISTS IN PLAYOFFS

Player | Times
Sergei Fedorov* | 7
Peter Forsberg* | 6
Nicklas Lidstrom* | 5
Bryan Trottier* | 5
Frank Boucher* | 4
Phil Esposito* | 4
Larry Robinson* | 4
Mike Bossy* | 3
Scott Stevens* | 3
Bobby Hull* | 2
Bernie Geoffrion* | 2
Paul Coffey* | 2
Henri Richard* | 1

MOST TIMES LEADING TEAM IN POINTS IN PLAYOFFS

Player | Times
Sergei Fedorov* | 8
Peter Forsberg* | 6
Phil Esposito* | 5
Bobby Hull* | 5
Bernie Geoffrion* | 4
Bryan Trottier* | 3
Mike Bossy* | 3
Frank Boucher* | 2
Nicklas Lidstrom* | 2
Larry Robinson* | 2
Henri Richard* | 2
Paul Coffey* | 2
Scott Stevens* | 1

MOST TIMES PLACING IN TOP FIVE IN PLAYOFFS - GOALS

Player|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|Total
Bernie Geoffrion* | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 8
Bobby Hull* | 3 | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 6
Phil Esposito* | 3 | | 2 | | | 5
Mike Bossy* | 3 | | 1 | | | 4
Peter Forsberg* | | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 3
Henri Richard* | | | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3
Bryan Trottier* | 1 | | | 1 | | 2
Frank Boucher* | 1 | | | 1 | | 2
Sergei Fedorov* | 1 | | | | | 1
Paul Coffey* | | | 1 | | | 1
Larry Robinson* | | | | | | 0
Nicklas Lidstrom* | | | | | | 0
Scott Stevens* | | | | | | 0

MOST TIMES PLACING IN TOP FIVE IN PLAYOFFS - ASSISTS

Player|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|Total
Bernie Geoffrion* | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | | 5
Phil Esposito* | 2 | 1 | 1 | | | 4
Frank Boucher* | 2 | 1 | | | 1 | 4
Sergei Fedorov* | 2 | | 1 | | 1 | 4
Larry Robinson* | 1 | | 2 | | 1 | 4
Bryan Trottier* | 2 | 1 | | | | 3
Peter Forsberg* | 1 | 1 | | | 1 | 3
Bobby Hull* | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 3
Henri Richard* | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 3
Paul Coffey* | | 1 | 1 | | 1 | 3
Mike Bossy* | 1 | | 1 | | | 2
Nicklas Lidstrom* | | 1 | 1 | | | 2
Scott Stevens* | | | | | | 0

MOST TIMES PLACING IN TOP FIVE IN PLAYOFFS - POINTS

Player|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|Total
Bernie Geoffrion* | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 | | 7
Bobby Hull* | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | | 5
Phil Esposito* | 3 | | 1 | | | 4
Mike Bossy* | 1 | 2 | | | 1 | 4
Bryan Trottier* | 2 | 1 | | | | 3
Peter Forsberg* | 2 | | | | 1 | 3
Sergei Fedorov* | 1 | 1 | 1 | | | 3
Henri Richard* | 1 | | | | 2 | 3
Paul Coffey* | | 1 | | 1 | 1 | 3
Frank Boucher* | 2 | | | | | 2
Nicklas Lidstrom* | | | 1 | 1 | | 2
Larry Robinson* | 1 | | | | | 1
Scott Stevens* | | | | | | 0

PLAYERS WHO SCORED LARGEST PERCENTAGE OF THEIR TEAMS' GOALS (MIN 50 GAMES)

Player|GP|Goals|TMG|Percentage
Bobby Hull* | 119 | 62 | 332 | 18.7%
Mike Bossy* | 129 | 85 | 530 | 16%
Bernie Geoffrion* | 132 | 58 | 391 | 14.8%
Frank Boucher* | 55 | 16 | 118 | 13.6%
Phil Esposito* | 130 | 61 | 457 | 13.3%
Peter Forsberg* | 151 | 64 | 493 | 13%
Sergei Fedorov* | 183 | 52 | 568 | 9.2%
Bryan Trottier* | 221 | 71 | 830 | 8.6%
Henri Richard* | 180 | 49 | 634 | 7.7%
Paul Coffey* | 194 | 59 | 867 | 6.8%
Nicklas Lidstrom* | 263 | 54 | 812 | 6.7%
Scott Stevens* | 233 | 26 | 686 | 3.8%
Larry Robinson* | 227 | 28 | 832 | 3.4%

PLAYERS WHO ASSISTED ON LARGEST PERCENTAGE OF THEIR TEAMS' GOALS (MIN 50 GAMES)

Player|GP|Assists|TMG|Percentage
Sergei Fedorov* | 183 | 124 | 568 | 21.8%
Peter Forsberg* | 151 | 107 | 493 | 21.7%
Bobby Hull* | 119 | 67 | 332 | 20.2%
Frank Boucher* | 55 | 20 | 118 | 16.9%
Phil Esposito* | 130 | 76 | 457 | 16.6%
Nicklas Lidstrom* | 263 | 129 | 812 | 15.9%
Paul Coffey* | 194 | 137 | 867 | 15.8%
Bernie Geoffrion* | 132 | 60 | 391 | 15.3%
Mike Bossy* | 129 | 75 | 530 | 14.2%
Larry Robinson* | 227 | 116 | 832 | 13.9%
Bryan Trottier* | 221 | 113 | 830 | 13.6%
Scott Stevens* | 233 | 92 | 686 | 13.4%
Henri Richard* | 180 | 80 | 634 | 12.6%

PLAYERS WHO SCORED OR ASSISTED ON LARGEST PERCENTAGE OF THEIR TEAMS' GOALS (MIN 50 GAMES)

Player|GP|Points|TMG|Percentage
Bobby Hull* | 119 | 129 | 332 | 38.9%
Peter Forsberg* | 151 | 171 | 493 | 34.7%
Sergei Fedorov* | 183 | 176 | 568 | 31%
Frank Boucher* | 55 | 36 | 118 | 30.5%
Mike Bossy* | 129 | 160 | 530 | 30.2%
Bernie Geoffrion* | 132 | 118 | 391 | 30.2%
Phil Esposito* | 130 | 137 | 457 | 30%
Paul Coffey* | 194 | 196 | 867 | 22.6%
Nicklas Lidstrom* | 263 | 183 | 812 | 22.5%
Bryan Trottier* | 221 | 184 | 830 | 22.2%
Henri Richard* | 180 | 129 | 634 | 20.3%
Larry Robinson* | 227 | 144 | 832 | 17.3%
Scott Stevens* | 233 | 118 | 686 | 17.2%

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Phil Esposito cracked the top 33? I've got his jersey hanging in my closet, but clearly have a lesser opinion of his playoff resume than most.

I'm glad Frank Boucher came up. Historically an underrated player IMO.

Turk Broda remains available. I think a third goalie probably ought to be in the top 20, and there are four candidates to compare now.

Geoffrion vs Hull could be an interesting discussion. Original Six wingers both with great numbers, but of course one lacks the Cup rings. Hull is the first candidate available that falls firmly into the "strong preformances in losing causes" category, or so I gather.

Forsberg vs Fedorov will be a good debate, though I'm mildly surprised that Sakic is already on the final list and won't be part of that discussion.

I thought Broda would have been in by now.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Phil Esposito

I know he has a relatively limited amount of Cups...but is there a reason Espo is just coming up now...? Was he really what was holding Boston back...? Seems unlikely...I'd like to hear some thoughts on his playoff resume...

Question of his non-Boston playoffs. Chicago 1965 to 1967 very weak. Rangers so-so.
1965 finals 1G 1A, sut-out in Montreal:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/e/esposph01.html

Basic issue is that despite playing with two of the greatest skaters from his era - Bobby Hull and Bobby Orr he never played on a team that beat the Montreal Canadiens - a skating team or an intelligent team like the 1967 Leafs.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Scott Stevens

Glad to see Scott Stevens and Sergei Fedorov aa options.

But where are Marty Barry and Tim Horton?

Scott Stevens, interesting additions. Stevens vs Lidstrom discussion would be interesting from the standpoint that if the attributes of both were combined you would have a top 5 playoff candidate. As is you have two attractive defencemen who basically fall into the narrow, lacking diversity group of players.

Tim Horton. Allan Stanley shares more than a fair amount of the credit. Played LD in the pairing and was the first line of defence against the power RW - Howe, or the scorers, Geoffrion, Bathgate, or speed Wharram, Cournoyer.

Marty Barry. Benefits from the original NHL salary cap since he was moved from Boston to Detroit. Also enjoys a GP advantage since the 1930s did not feature balanced playoffs. Another one who was not a great skater.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

In re Espo : He's probably in the Top-33 of players, all things considered, or very close to it if he isn't.

Having in his playoffs ranking below his "overall" ranking would... well, I don't think it really computes to be honest. And putting Bobby Orr in before Esposito is even a possibility... I don't know, that's a little puzzling to me. Orr probably deserved to go ahead anyways, but I don't see a 10+ spots gap, at all.

Espo seemingly got traded out of Chicago precisely due to weak playoff performances, so that's a bit of a negative in my books. '71, '74, '75...Boston got upset a little too often for my liking. Orr was there too of course, but the plethora of Sport's Illustrated excerpts posted in previous threads really painted Orr in a positive light. He really seems to have been responsible for the success that Boston did have.

I thought Broda would have been in by now.

The results are mixed for Broda before Kennedy entered the fray. For as highly as he ranked on the initial list, I haven't seen a really strong case laid out for him yet. But there's a few goalies up in this vote, so I think some good comparisons can be made in this discussion.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If you believe Glenn Hall, Bobby Hull shouldn't be in the top 60 at all.

It's from Sports Illustrated's puff piece on Glenn Hall that overpass originally posted and that I've quoted a few times.

Those Hull-Mikita-Hall-led Hawks were a thrilling team to watch, but despite their great talent, they only won the one Stanley Cup, in 1961. Hall believes that the Black Hawks' penchant for the offensive game—and a lust for goal scoring—may have been a factor. "They sacrificed passing the puck for the shot," he says. "Bobby just loved to shoot the puck more than anything."

I have interpreted that quote as Glenn Hall calling Bobby Hull a puck hog to the detriment of his team in the playoffs, at times.

https://www.si.com/vault/1992/10/27...--perhaps-the-safest-record-in-all-of-sports=

For what it's worth, Pierre Pilote blamed the Hawks lack of depth for their playoff woes.

Here's a previous hfboards thread on the subject: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1911463&highlight=hall+hull

But safe to say, the 60s/early 70s Black Hawks are one of history's all-time underachieving teams when it comes to playoff success. How much of that (if any) is Bobby Hull's fault?

I know he has a relatively limited amount of Cups...but is there a reason Espo is just coming up now...? Was he really what was holding Boston back...? Seems unlikely...I'd like to hear some thoughts on his playoff resume...

Basically, Orr's best in the playoffs was better than Espo's best (Conn Smythes during both Boston Cups).

And Espo's worst in the playoffs was worse than Orr's worst - A few years back, I looked at their stats in series the Bruins lost, and while Orr's stats looked acceptable, Espo's looked significantly lower than in the regular season or in series the Bruins won. Perhaps someone else can do the work of looking into this in detail.

Were Espo and Bobby Hull comparable to Jagr in the playoffs? Offensive stars who generally played well ... though not quite as well as you would have hoped.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Individual round scoring for the post-expansion forwards adjusted to a 200 GA environment.

Career

Player | GP | G | A | PTS | +/- | GWG | GWA | GWP | Opp-GA | Adj PTS | Adj P/GP
Mario Lemieux | 107 | 76 | 96 | 172 | 20 | 11 | 15 | 26 | 251.6 | 135.4 | 1.27
Peter Forsberg | 151 | 64 | 107 | 171 | 54 | 14 | 23 | 37 | 208.1 | 165.1 | 1.09
Joe Sakic | 172 | 84 | 104 | 188 | -2 | 19 | 16 | 35 | 207.8 | 182.3 | 1.06
Phil Esposito | 130 | 61 | 76 | 137 | | 12 | 12 | 24 | 222.3 | 127.2 | 0.98
Mike Bossy | 129 | 85 | 75 | 160 | | 17 | 8 | 25 | 285.6 | 113.7 | 0.88
Sergei Fedorov | 183 | 52 | 124 | 176 | 38 | 12 | 23 | 35 | 225.6 | 155.1 | 0.85
Guy Lafleur | 128 | 58 | 76 | 134 | | 14 | 12 | 26 | 256.9 | 106.7 | 0.83
Bryan Trottier | 221 | 71 | 113 | 184 | | 12 | 16 | 28 | 273.9 | 134.4 | 0.61

Top-5 Playoffs (Minimum Two Rounds)

Player | GP | G | A | PTS | +/- | GWG | GWA | GWP | Opp-GA | Adj PTS | Adj P/GP | Years Included
Mario Lemieux | 78 | 63 | 79 | 142 | 24 | 8 | 13 | 21 | 266.2 | 107.1 | 1.37 | 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996
Phil Esposito | 73 | 47 | 56 | 103 | | 11 | 11 | 22 | 213.3 | 97.2 | 1.33 | 1969, 1970, 1972, 1974, 1979
Joe Sakic | 90 | 52 | 64 | 116 | 19 | 12 | 13 | 25 | 207.0 | 112.7 | 1.25 | 1996, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2004
Peter Forsberg | 75 | 30 | 63 | 93 | 20 | 7 | 15 | 22 | 198.4 | 93.3 | 1.24 | 1997, 1999, 2001, 2002, 2004
Guy Lafleur | 69 | 48 | 58 | 106 | | 13 | 9 | 22 | 248.2 | 85.1 | 1.23 | 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979
Mike Bossy | 82 | 66 | 56 | 122 | | 12 | 6 | 18 | 288.6 | 85.9 | 1.05 | 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985
Bryan Trottier | 87 | 39 | 78 | 117 | | 6 | 10 | 16 | 282.4 | 84.0 | 0.97 | 1977, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983
Sergei Fedorov | 92 | 31 | 61 | 92 | 25 | 5 | 11 | 16 | 209.3 | 85.9| 0.93 | 1995, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2002

Sergei Fedorov compares pretty well to Bryan Trottier, but is stronger outside his five-best runs.

 

[MXD]

The results are mixed for Broda before Kennedy entered the fray. For as highly as he ranked on the initial list, I haven't seen a really strong case laid out for him yet. But there's a few goalies up in this vote, so I think some good comparisons can be made in this discussion.

That's exactly the kind of line of thought, and Kennedy ahead of Broda and Kelly, that incited me to not really bother convincing anyone for this project because it was a completely lost cause.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

That's exactly the kind of line of thought, and Kennedy ahead of Broda and Kelly, that incited me to not really bother convincing anyone for this project because it was a completely lost cause.

So you felt Broda should be ahead of Kennedy but neglected to present a convincing argument? The boat has sailed on Broda vs Kennedy but this seems like an opportunity to compare him to Sawchuk, Dryden, and Brodeur.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Player | Year | Opponent | GP | G | A | PTS | +/- | GWG | GWA | GWP | Opp-GA | GA-82 | Adj PTS | Adj P/GP
Phil Esposito | 1964 | Detroit | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 204 | 238.97 | 0.00 | 0.00
Phil Esposito | 1965 | Detroit | 7 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 175 | 205.00 | 3.90 | 0.56
Phil Esposito | 1965 | Montreal | 7 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 185 | 216.71 | 1.85 | 0.26
Phil Esposito | 1966 | Detroit | 6 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 194 | 227.26 | 1.76 | 0.29
Phil Esposito | 1967 | Toronto | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 211 | 247.17 | 0.00 | 0.00
Phil Esposito | 1968 | Montreal | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 167 | 185.05 | 3.24 | 0.81
Phil Esposito | 1969 | Toronto | 4 | 6 | 4 | 10 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 217 | 234.13 | 8.54 | 2.14
Phil Esposito | 1969 | Montreal | 6 | 2 | 6 | 8 | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 202 | 217.95 | 7.34 | 1.22
Phil Esposito | 1970 | New York | 6 | 6 | 4 | 10 | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 189 | 203.92 | 9.81 | 1.63
Phil Esposito | 1970 | Chicago | 4 | 5 | 4 | 9 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 170 | 183.42 | 9.81 | 2.45
Phil Esposito | 1970 | St. Louis | 4 | 2 | 6 | 8 | | 0 | 1 | 1 | 179 | 193.13 | 8.28 | 2.07
Phil Esposito | 1971 | Montreal | 7 | 3 | 7 | 10 | | 0 | 1 | 1 | 216 | 227.08 | 8.81 | 1.26
Phil Esposito | 1972 | Toronto | 5 | 4 | 5 | 9 | | 1 | 3 | 4 | 208 | 218.67 | 8.23 | 1.65
Phil Esposito | 1972 | St. Louis | 4 | 5 | 2 | 7 | | 2 | 0 | 2 | 247 | 259.67 | 5.39 | 1.35
Phil Esposito | 1972 | New York | 6 | 0 | 8 | 8 | | 0 | 1 | 1 | 192 | 201.85 | 7.93 | 1.32
Phil Esposito | 1973 | New York | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 208 | 218.67 | 0.91 | 0.46
Phil Esposito | 1974 | Toronto | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | 0 | 1 | 1 | 230 | 241.79 | 2.48 | 0.62
Phil Esposito | 1974 | Chicago | 6 | 6 | 2 | 8 | | 2 | 0 | 2 | 164 | 172.41 | 9.28 | 1.55
Phil Esposito | 1974 | Philadelphia | 6 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 164 | 172.41 | 3.48 | 0.58
Phil Esposito | 1975 | Chicago | 3 | 4 | 1 | 5 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 241 | 247.03 | 4.05 | 1.35
Phil Esposito | 1978 | Buffalo | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 215 | 220.38 | 0.91 | 0.30
Phil Esposito | 1979 | Los Angeles | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 286 | 293.15 | 1.36 | 0.68
Phil Esposito | 1979 | Philadelphia | 5 | 2 | 8 | 10 | | 0 | 2 | 2 | 248 | 254.20 | 7.87 | 1.57
Phil Esposito | 1979 | New York | 6 | 2 | 3 | 5 | | 1 | 1 | 2 | 214 | 219.35 | 4.56 | 0.76
Phil Esposito | 1979 | Montreal | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 204 | 209.10 | 2.87 | 0.57
Phil Esposito | 1980 | Atlanta | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | 0 | 0 | 0 | 269 | 275.73 | 1.45 | 0.36
Phil Esposito | 1980 | Philadelphia | 5 | 1 | 3 | 4 | | 1 | 0 | 1 | 254 | 260.35 | 3.07 | 0.61
Sergei Fedorov | 1991 | St. Louis | 7 | 1 | 5 | 6 | -1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 250 | 256.3 | 4.68 | 0.67
Sergei Fedorov | 1992 | Minnesota | 7 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 278 | 285 | 5.62 | 0.8
Sergei Fedorov | 1992 | Chicago | 4 | 0 | 2 | 2 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 236 | 241.9 | 1.65 | 0.41
Sergei Fedorov | 1993 | Toronto | 7 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 241 | 235.3 | 7.65 | 1.09
Sergei Fedorov | 1994 | San Jose | 7 | 1 | 7 | 8 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 265 | 258.7 | 6.18 | 0.88
Sergei Fedorov | 1995 | Dallas | 5 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 135 | 230.6 | 4.34 | 0.87
Sergei Fedorov | 1995 | San Jose | 4 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 8 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 161 | 275 | 8 | 2
Sergei Fedorov | 1995 | Chicago | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 115 | 196.5 | 3.05 | 0.76
Sergei Fedorov | 1995 | New Jersey | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 121 | 206.7 | 4.84 | 1.21
Sergei Fedorov | 1996 | Winnipeg | 6 | 0 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 291 | 291 | 4.81 | 0.8
Sergei Fedorov | 1996 | St. Louis | 7 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 248 | 248 | 3.23 | 0.46
Sergei Fedorov | 1996 | Colorado | 6 | 1 | 8 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 240 | 240 | 7.5 | 1.25
Sergei Fedorov | 1997 | St. Louis | 6 | 0 | 2 | 2 | -2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 239 | 239 | 1.67 | 0.28
Sergei Fedorov | 1997 | Anaheim | 4 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 233 | 233 | 4.29 | 1.07
Sergei Fedorov | 1997 | Colorado | 6 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 205 | 205 | 6.83 | 1.14
Sergei Fedorov | 1997 | Philadelphia | 4 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 217 | 217 | 5.53 | 1.38
Sergei Fedorov | 1998 | Phoenix | 6 | 6 | 3 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 227 | 227 | 7.93 | 1.32
Sergei Fedorov | 1998 | St. Louis | 6 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 204 | 204 | 5.88 | 0.98
Sergei Fedorov | 1998 | Dallas | 6 | 1 | 1 | 2 | -3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 167 | 167 | 2.4 | 0.4
Sergei Fedorov | 1998 | Washington | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 202 | 202 | 2.97 | 0.74
Sergei Fedorov | 1999 | Anaheim | 4 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 206 | 206 | 5.83 | 1.46
Sergei Fedorov | 1999 | Colorado | 6 | 0 | 3 | 3 | -2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 205 | 205 | 2.93 | 0.49
Sergei Fedorov | 2000 | Los Angeles | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 228 | 228 | 4.39 | 1.1
Sergei Fedorov | 2000 | Colorado | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 201 | 201 | 2.99 | 0.6
Sergei Fedorov | 2001 | Los Angeles | 6 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 228 | 228 | 6.14 | 1.02
Sergei Fedorov | 2002 | Vancouver | 6 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 211 | 211 | 5.69 | 0.95
Sergei Fedorov | 2002 | St. Louis | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 188 | 188 | 3.19 | 0.64
Sergei Fedorov | 2002 | Colorado | 7 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 169 | 169 | 5.92 | 0.85
Sergei Fedorov | 2002 | Carolina | 5 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 217 | 217 | 4.61 | 0.92
Sergei Fedorov | 2003 | Anaheim | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 193 | 193 | 3.11 | 0.78
Sergei Fedorov | 2008 | Philadelphia | 7 | 1 | 4 | 5 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 233 | 233 | 4.29 | 0.61
Sergei Fedorov | 2009 | New York | 7 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 218 | 218 | 3.67 | 0.52
Sergei Fedorov | 2009 | Pittsburgh | 7 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 239 | 239 | 3.35 | 0.48

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Espo seemingly got traded out of Chicago precisely due to weak playoff performances, so that's a bit of a negative in my books. '71, '74, '75...Boston got upset a little too often for my liking. Orr was there too of course, but the plethora of Sport's Illustrated excerpts posted in previous threads really painted Orr in a positive light. He really seems to have been responsible for the success that Boston did have.



The results are mixed for Broda before Kennedy entered the fray. For as highly as he ranked on the initial list, I haven't seen a really strong case laid out for him yet. But there's a few goalies up in this vote, so I think some good comparisons can be made in this discussion.

Plante is already in playing with Beliveau, Harvey, Richard, Richard, Boom Boom, etc.

But Broda was only great because of Kennedy? That's pretty weak.

Broda won 5 Cups with much less distinguished teams than Plante. His playoff goals against is under 2.00 (10th all-time). Almost all of the goalies with a better GA are from the 1920s and 1930s. 13 shutouts is 8th all-time, everyone with more played more games. Seems like he's at the very least a top 20 player.

 

[MXD]

So you felt Broda should be ahead of Kennedy but neglected to present a convincing argument? The boat has sailed on Broda vs Kennedy but this seems like an opportunity to compare him to Sawchuk, Dryden, and Brodeur.

The boat has also sailed for the relevance of the idea of "making one's case", because frankly, there should've been NO NEED to make a case there, roughly for the same reasons why there was no need to make a case for Wayne Gretzky over Mario Lemieux, or something to that effect.

 

[danincanada]

Scott Stevens, interesting additions. Stevens vs Lidstrom discussion would be interesting from the standpoint that if the attributes of both were combined you would have a top 5 playoff candidate. As is you have two attractive defencemen who basically fall into the narrow, lacking diversity group of players.

How are either of them "lacking diversity"? If Harvey, for instance, is being rated at the top D in this then isn't his lack of goal scoring a "lack of diversity"? 8 playoff goals in 137 games means if his team was looking for a goal it probably wasn't coming from him. Stevens had 8 and Lidstrom had 11 GWG's alone in the playoffs, and 26 and 54 overall.

Lidstrom's goal scoring prowess went from 0.169 GPG in the regular season to 0.205 GPG in the playoffs for a 0.036 increase.

Harvey's goal scoring prowess went from 0.079 GPG in the regular season to 0.058 GPG in the playoffs for a 0.021 decrease.

Just to put things into perspective.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Ironically, that post explicitly and materially lacks perspective...it does not provide it.

 

[danincanada]

Ironically, that post explicitly and materially lacks perspective...it does not provide it.

Care to back that up?

Lidstrom scored at a much higher rate than Harvey during the regular season already and it gets even more exaggerated come playoff time. A poster was extremely vague with this "lack of diversity" claim and the lack of goal scoring from Harvey should stand out more than anything that can be held against Lidstrom.

Frankly, the amount of discussion going on for this "project" is really lacking so it seems like everyone already had their favourites chosen anyways so this point would have been moot even if it was brought up early on. It's very disappointing.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Plante is already in playing with Beliveau, Harvey, Richard, Richard, Boom Boom, etc.

But Broda was only great because of Kennedy? That's pretty weak.

Broda won 5 Cups with much less distinguished teams than Plante. His playoff goals against is under 2.00 (10th all-time). Almost all of the goalies with a better GA are from the 1920s and 1930s. 13 shutouts is 8th all-time, everyone with more played more games. Seems like he's at the very least a top 20 player.

I had a pretty in depth look at Broda's pre-Kennedy career, and he seemed to be neither hero nor goat for the most part, while his performances tended to start out strong in earlier rounds before fading later on. Kennedy's influence on both offense and defense was apparent. The floor was open to counter-arguments, I don't recall seeing them, so if people felt Broda was being sold short they kept it to themselves until now.