Round 2, Vote 5 (2009 update)

[Stonefly]

I saw Dionne play.
I didn't think he was playing halfheartedly in the playoffs. He seemed to play as hard as he ever did.
Which was sort of the problem.
Right or wrong, NHL fans expect players to play a notch above their "regular" effort in the playoffs.

Indeed, but how many have actually done that who were big production types in the regular season? Even of the players voted to the list already? It's easy to spot some players who "step up " there game in the playoffs. The C Lemieux's, Drury's, Fedorovs. That's because they coast most of the season. So in actual fact the "stepping up" is merely them playing to their potential whereas players like Dionne played to their potential all season. It always makes me laugh when people "punish" players who they don't think stepped up in the playoffs but played as hard as they could straight through to their last game but the players who up their game but are actually just playing the way they could have all season are looked on in a more favourable light.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The Dick Irvin Canadiens

Can anybody elaborate of Bill Durnan's supposed playoff shortcomings? Because I'm having a little trouble understanding how he came to have that reputation.

In his six playoff appearances, his GAA dropped considerably three times, stayed about the same twice, and rose dramatically in his final playoff season. In terms of career playoff GAA, Durnan ranks second in the 1944-1950 span (his entire career) just behind Broda, ahead of Lumley, and well ahead of Rayner, and Brimsek. If you remove his final year, he is the leader. Obviously the GAA stat has its limitations as it can be largely team influenced, but I don't believe Montreal was a great defensive team during his career, unlike Toronto.

So what am I missing here? Based on numbers alone, Durnan looks like he at least carried his weight in the playoffs, even if he wasn't spectacular. Are there stories of him letting in bad goals at bad times, etc.?

During the Bill Durnan era the Canadiens were coached by Dick Irvin
who joined the Canadiens with Frank Selke Sr when both left the Toronto Maple Leafs where Dick Irvin had caoched the great leaf teams of the thirties.

The Leaf coaches after Irvin were Hap Day, Joe Primeau, King Clancy. All had been coached by Irvin. One of the flaws that Dick Irvin had as a coach was that he was a bit of a dinosaur. His former players new his habits and tendencies and regularly outcoached him - notably Hap Day in 1945.

This reflects on Bill Durnan's record.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Balancing Views

Indeed, but how many have actually done that who were big production types in the regular season? Even of the players voted to the list already? It's easy to spot some players who "step up " there game in the playoffs. The C Lemieux's, Drury's, Fedorovs. That's because they coast most of the season. So in actual fact the "stepping up" is merely them playing to their potential whereas players like Dionne played to their potential all season. It always makes me laugh when people "punish" players who they don't think stepped up in the playoffs but played as hard as they could straight through to their last game but the players who up their game but are actually just playing the way they could have all season are looked on in a more favourable light.

Your point and lextune's have to be balanced against playoff hockey. During the regular season it is very rare that a team plays another two games in a row. Playoffs may see two teams play each other seven straight games.

During the regular season it is rather hard to design a specific defense to stop a specific team or player. On the other hand come playoff time it becomes imperative do so. If the player in question has certain predictable tendencies then it becomes much easier to stop him regardless of the increased effort he may apply.

 

[Canadiens Fan]

I am a fan of Bathgate but do remember reading some quotes from his Leaf team mates that Andy wasn't a team player. I think it was in carl Brewer's book.

Funny ... was Carl Brewer much of a team player ??

 

[Canadiens1958]

Interesting Point

Funny ... was Carl Brewer much of a team player ??

Actually your are pointing towards a distinction between a player who is a good teammate and a player who is a management player.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Dionne lacking effort in playoffs is a myth that is perpetuated in this section.

The Toronto Star (April 14, 1978) stated that "Dionne wasn’t just inconspicuous… he was downright invisible. It would have taken a high-powered telescope to detect his presence" after Dionne was contained by Jimmy Jones in an elimination game. I readily admit that this comment pertains to a single game but it shows that at least some people who watched Dionne play in the playoffs, at least sometimes, thought he vanished.

In fairness to Dionne, I'm pretty sure I could find similar quotes about many star players given enough time/motivation.

In fairness to Dionne (again), I specifically highlighted a few games where he displayed considerable effort. One highly was 1981 - Round 1, game 2, where Dionne drops gloves against the massive Ed Hospodar, motivating his team, and scoring a goal and an assist after the fight. Another highlight would be 1976 - Round 2 - game 3, where Don Cherry praises Dionne for scoring a hat trick and shutting down the Bruins on the penalty kill.

Between 1978 and 1981 the Kings gave up 64 goals in 12 playoff games. Wonder why they lost each year.

Please read the link again. I never once blamed Dionne for the Kings losing. Considering how poor the Kings were, they almost never had a reasonable chance of winning. What I can (and do) hold Dionne accountable for is the fact that his offense dropped by such a huge margin in the playoffs.

And you seem to have completely ignored the fact that his teams were virtually always over matched in these games. I'm not sure, but I'd imagine anyone would be hard pressed to find any outstanding players that consistently had to play in the playoffs against teams that were so much better than the teams Dionne played for.
Perhaps the fact that Dionne had to carry the Kings just to get to the playoffs should also be considered.

Please read the link again. I think I was quite fair to Dionne -- I even point out games where he scored important goals, made key passes, and even fought for his teammates. There are some real highlights in Dionne's playoff resume, but there are some serious gaps too. I just don't think that his staggering drop in production (43%) can be explained by the fact that he was on bad teams -- there have been many players post--WWII who were on bad teams, even for the majority of their careers, and I don't think any other star player has had such a large drop in production, ever.

 

[Stonefly]

Your point and lextune's have to be balanced against playoff hockey. During the regular season it is very rare that a team plays another two games in a row. Playoffs may see two teams play each other seven straight games.

During the regular season it is rather hard to design a specific defense to stop a specific team or player. On the other hand come playoff time it becomes imperative do so. If the player in question has certain predictable tendencies then it becomes much easier to stop him regardless of the increased effort he may apply.

Absolutely agree. Sort of the point I was getting at was that Dionne's production fell because of the other teams game plan to stop him. Not a lack of effort on his part which some have expressed it being. If a team can limit Crosby like they did they could certainly limit Dionne. The difference being that the Penguins had another fantastic player on another line to keep scoring.

 

[Stonefly]

The Toronto Star (April 14, 1978) stated that "Dionne wasn’t just inconspicuous… he was downright invisible. It would have taken a high-powered telescope to detect his presence" after Dionne was contained by Jimmy Jones in an elimination game. I readily admit that this comment pertains to a single game but it shows that at least some people who watched Dionne play in the playoffs, at least sometimes, thought he vanished.

Jarome Iginla was invisible in 3 of the 5 playoff games he played this year. You could certainly find similar quotes about the way he played in those games. He is certainly not a playoff no show for his career though. It happens.
Gretzky I believe didn't score a goal against the Islanders in the finals one playoffs.

Find quotes like that for every series Dionne played and you may have a case.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

During the Bill Durnan era the Canadiens were coached by Dick Irvin
who joined the Canadiens with Frank Selke Sr when both left the Toronto Maple Leafs where Dick Irvin had caoched the great leaf teams of the thirties.

The Leaf coaches after Irvin were Hap Day, Joe Primeau, King Clancy. All had been coached by Irvin. One of the flaws that Dick Irvin had as a coach was that he was a bit of a dinosaur. His former players new his habits and tendencies and regularly outcoached him - notably Hap Day in 1945.

This reflects on Bill Durnan's record.

Alright...but I'm not sure how Dick Irvin's coaching ties into Bill Durnan's performance on the ice. I guess if somebody is just counting wins and Cups, then yes it would be reflected in his record, quite literally in fact, but I'm talking about how the man actually performed.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Team Game

Alright...but I'm not sure how Dick Irvin's coaching ties into Bill Durnan's performance on the ice. I guess if somebody is just counting wins and Cups, then yes it would be reflected in his record, quite literally in fact, but I'm talking about how the man actually performed.

Hockey is a team game. If you can force changes in the way a team plays then you impact on individual performance by getting players out of their comfort zone.

Evidenced by the Red Wings in the sixties against the Blackhawks when an excellent but smallish Pierre Pilote would have problems handling Gordie Howe over a seven game series. Result some weak games by Glenn Hall, increased GAA and unexpected Red Wing upsets. Conversely a bigger Tim Horton was able to handle Gordie Howe over a seven game series. Result steady performance by the Leaf goalies, namely Johnny Bower and Toronto Stanley Cups.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Jimmy Jones

Jarome Iginla was invisible in 3 of the 5 playoff games he played this year. You could certainly find similar quotes about the way he played in those games. He is certainly not a playoff no show for his career though. It happens.
Gretzky I believe didn't score a goal against the Islanders in the finals one playoffs.

Find quotes like that for every series Dionne played and you may have a case.

Jimmy Jones and Roger Neilson went back to junior days in Peterborough where Jones was somewhat of a defensive specialist. If ever there was a coach who could shut down a team centered on a star player it was Neilson. Factor in that he had a player he was familiar with and who could skate well enough to cover Dionne and you have the net result.

Throw in that most reporters are not aware of the deep nuances of the game and you have the citation.

In the same light Detroit did not have enough bigger physical, defensively responsible forwards to stop Malkin.

 

[BM67]

Here are some various adjusted stats comparisons for some of the players.

Player|Years|Pts|Hockey Reference|pnep
Andy Bathgate|17|973|1113|1078
Max Bentley|12|544|734|698
Frank Boucher|14|423|1155|1040
Chris Chelios|25/22*|948/925*|908/884*|904*
Paul Coffey|21|1531|1347|1374
Charlie Conacher|12|398|792|740
Marcel Dionne|18|1771|1493|1498
Bernard Geoffrion|16|822|982|949
Tim Horton|24|518|575|567
Frank Mahovlich|18|1103|1146|1135
Joe Malone|7|175|331|287
Brad Park|17|896|788|789
Pierre Pilote|14|498|553|545

*through 2006

For the Boucher and Malone here's their whole career, 09-10 season not included for Malone, not just the NHL part.

Player|Years|Pts|Idealized Pts
Frank Boucher|18|513|1370
Joe Malone|15|389*|884*

*No assists awarded for the first 5 years of Malone's career, given career average assists for those years in final total.

 

[overpass]

There hasn't been much discussion about Charlie Conacher this round. He dominated his era the most of any forward up for discussion. Here are the numbers.

Top points-per-game, 1930-31 to 1935-36, minimum 150 GP

Player | GP | G | A | Pts | Pts/G
Charlie Conacher | 254 | 170 | 101 | 271 | 1.07
Busher Jackson | 266 | 126 | 106 | 232 | 0.87
Joe Primeau | 259 | 61 | 155 | 216 | 0.83
Howie Morenz | 262 | 88 | 123 | 211 | 0.81
Nels Stewart | 270 | 122 | 93 | 215 | 0.80

Conacher was head and shoulders above anyone else as a scorer during this time. You could argue that his linemates boosted his totals, which may be true, but he was clearly the best of the three.

While he had a short career because of injury, hockey players in general had shorter careers at the time. Dit Clapper aside, twenty year careers were not the norm for stars as they are today.

Here are the same numbers for other forwards up for voting. As with Conacher, I've picked their best years. I didn't include Malone because of the multiple leagues issue.

Top points-per-game, 1927-28 to 1934-35, minimum 200 GP

Charlie Conacher | 248 | 167 | 95 | 262 | 1.06
Busher Jackson | 250 | 127 | 101 | 228 | 0.91
Howie Morenz | 349 | 172 | 146 | 318 | 0.91
Frank Boucher | 364 | 117 | 204 | 321 | 0.88
Nels Stewart | 351 | 195 | 109 | 304 | 0.87

Boucher is in a group with Morenz and two players not up for voting yet, and well behind Conacher.

Top points-per-game, 1942-43 and 1945-46 to 1950-51, minimum 200 GP

Doug Bentley | 364 | 145 | 231 | 376 | 1.03
Max Bentley | 409 | 175 | 226 | 401 | 0.98
Maurice Richard | 373 | 210 | 142 | 352 | 0.94
Elmer Lach | 351 | 122 | 196 | 318 | 0.91
Roy Conacher | 316 | 131 | 149 | 280 | 0.89

This period of years is difficult to evaluate, because of the war. I've cut the two years that Max missed out of the comparison, removing the Punch Line's war-inflated stats from those years. Even after this adjustment, his brother Doug is still the better scorer per game. True, Max scored 25 more points, but took 43 more games to do so.

Top points-per-game, 1954-55 to 1960-61, minimum 300 GP

Jean Beliveau | 457 | 255 | 304 | 559 | 1.22
Bernie Geoffrion | 394 | 215 | 244 | 459 | 1.16
Gordie Howe | 472 | 227 | 303 | 530 | 1.12
Andy Bathgate | 485 | 191 | 309 | 500 | 1.03
Maurice Richard | 321 | 160 | 154 | 314 | 0.98

Only teammate Beliveau finished ahead of Geoffrion in this time period, and three of the five are already on this list.

Top points-per-game, 1956-57 to 1962-63, minimum 300 GP

Jean Beliveau | 429 | 207 | 299 | 506 | 1.18
Gordie Howe | 478 | 231 | 321 | 552 | 1.15
Andy Bathgate | 485 | 215 | 344 | 559 | 1.15
Bernie Geoffrion | 378 | 194 | 228 | 422 | 1.12
Dickie Moore | 453 | 206 | 256 | 462 | 1.02

Two top 10 players, Beliveau and Howe, edge Bathgate over his prime. Geoffrion is close behind.

Top points-per-game, 1960-61 to 1969-70, minimum 500 GP

Stan Mikita | 701 | 316 | 511 | 827 | 1.18
Bobby Hull | 670 | 440 | 346 | 786 | 1.17
Gordie Howe | 708 | 317 | 463 | 780 | 1.10
Jean Beliveau | 618 | 240 | 393 | 633 | 1.02
Norm Ullman | 699 | 288 | 387 | 675 | 0.97
Frank Mahovlich | 680 | 329 | 307 | 636 | 0.94

Mahovlich doesn't really have a strong consecutive prime, as a result of his mid-to-late-60s downturn in his prime years, so I picked a longer period for him. He finishes well behind the top 3, although he can't be faulted for finishing behind 3 top 10 players. But Norm Ullman? And now that I think of it, I'm not sure that Mahovlich was better than Ullman.

Top points-per-game, 1976-77 to 1984-85, minimum 500 GP

Wayne Gretzky | 473 | 429 | 693 | 1122 | 2.37
Mike Bossy | 609 | 474 | 454 | 928 | 1.52
Marcel Dionne | 694 | 450 | 595 | 1045 | 1.51
Guy Lafleur | 596 | 331 | 496 | 827 | 1.39
Bryan Trottier | 676 | 348 | 576 | 924 | 1.37

Dionne is in good company here. Gretzky's far and away the best, of course, but he's essentially equal with Bossy and is solidly ahead of Lafleur and Trottier. The other four have all been named to the list in the top 30.

Of this group of forwards, I see Conacher and Dionne as the best regular season performers. Geoffrion and Bathgate are next. I'd give Bathgate an edge in the regular season since he missed fewer games and didn't get the benefit of playing on the excellent Montreal power play. On the other hand, Geoffrion probably got less ice time than Bathgate at even strength, and was a far better playoff perfomer. I have Boucher and Bentley next, with Mahovlich bringing up the rear.

Putting it all together and adding Joe Malone, here's how I have the forwards:

1. Charlie Conacher
2. Marcel Dionne
3. Bernard Geoffrion
4. Joe Malone
5. Andy Bathgate
6. Frank Boucher
7. Max Bentley
8. Frank Mahovlich

 

[Howe Elbows 9]

Lately there has been some discussion about Durnan and other goalies. Well, if it were up to you, who would the next five goalies on the list (including those up for voting this round) be?

Here's my top 5:

Tretiak
Durnan
Broda
Holecek
Benedict

 

[seventieslord]

- I'm not sure Mahovlich is that much greater than Ullman either. Ullman's consistency and longevity in offensive categories (i.e. placing top-10 and top-20 in goals and assists) are exceeded by very few players.

- My top-5 goalies left:

Clint Benedict
Vladislav Tretiak
Johnny Bower

(Frank Brimsek
Turk Broda
Bill Durnan
Bernie Parent) - all very close.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Can anybody elaborate of Bill Durnan's supposed playoff shortcomings? Because I'm having a little trouble understanding how he came to have that reputation.

In his six playoff appearances, his GAA dropped considerably three times, stayed about the same twice, and rose dramatically in his final playoff season. In terms of career playoff GAA, Durnan ranks second in the 1944-1950 span (his entire career) just behind Broda, ahead of Lumley, and well ahead of Rayner, and Brimsek. If you remove his final year, he is the leader. Obviously the GAA stat has its limitations as it can be largely team influenced, but I don't believe Montreal was a great defensive team during his career, unlike Toronto.

So what am I missing here? Based on numbers alone, Durnan looks like he at least carried his weight in the playoffs, even if he wasn't spectacular. Are there stories of him letting in bad goals at bad times, etc.?

I don't know if it's so much playoff shortcomings as it is he had a peer who constantly outperformed him in the post-season in Turk Broda. That's why I have Broda higher on my list. Durnan was better in the regular season, but Broda was better in the playoffs. Durnan: two Cups. One when most of the best were at war. Broda: five Cups. And magnificent in every one of them.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Having not watched Marcel Dionne much, I would love to understand why he is hurt so badly by the playoffs. Was the guy ever on a team expected to make a good run? Outside of '81 I have trouble seeing it.

As noted above, he was often surrounded by little talent, ensuring he would be swarmed come playoff time. Despite being on teams that never once made it past the 2nd round in the playoffs, I have a tough time understanding how someone with 6 120+ point seasons falls so much.

Not saying his drop is not justified, but it does seem extreme.

He had some good talent around him. Dave Taylor? Excellent player. Charlie Simmer? Fine goal scorer.

When I look at Dionne, I see that he didn't put up points against teams he could have put up points. It wasn't like he was playing against the late 70s Habs every year, or the early 80s Islanders. 70s Bruins were a tremendous team, but like the Oilers of the 80s, they were a team you could put up points on. Toronto in 78, Rangers in 79, Rangers in 81, Canucks in 82 - not powerhouse teams. Oilers in 85 - again, a powerhouse, but a team that could surrender a lot of goals.

And with the exception of a few games in 87 with the Rangers, he played all his playoff games at his peak. It wasn't like he had a couple of extended runs early or late in his career that diminished his point-per-game clip. At his peak, 43 points in 43 games in the post-season. A player who was so dazzling and fearless in the regular season should do better.

He's on my list for this round, because, at the end of the day, a top 50 without Marcel Dionne is an incomplete top 50. But his inability to produce in the post-season puts him behind superb playoff players like Max Bentley and Bernie Geoffrion.

 

[God Bless Canada]

There hasn't been much discussion about Charlie Conacher this round. He dominated his era the most of any forward up for discussion. Here are the numbers.

Top points-per-game, 1930-31 to 1935-36, minimum 150 GP

Player | GP | G | A | Pts | Pts/G
Charlie Conacher | 254 | 170 | 101 | 271 | 1.07
Busher Jackson | 266 | 126 | 106 | 232 | 0.87
Joe Primeau | 259 | 61 | 155 | 216 | 0.83
Howie Morenz | 262 | 88 | 123 | 211 | 0.81
Nels Stewart | 270 | 122 | 93 | 215 | 0.80

Conacher was head and shoulders above anyone else as a scorer during this time. You could argue that his linemates boosted his totals, which may be true, but he was clearly the best of the three.

While he had a short career because of injury, hockey players in general had shorter careers at the time. Dit Clapper aside, twenty year careers were not the norm for stars as they are today.

Here are the same numbers for other forwards up for voting. As with Conacher, I've picked their best years. I didn't include Malone because of the multiple leagues issue.

Top points-per-game, 1927-28 to 1934-35, minimum 200 GP

Charlie Conacher | 248 | 167 | 95 | 262 | 1.06
Busher Jackson | 250 | 127 | 101 | 228 | 0.91
Howie Morenz | 349 | 172 | 146 | 318 | 0.91
Frank Boucher | 364 | 117 | 204 | 321 | 0.88
Nels Stewart | 351 | 195 | 109 | 304 | 0.87

Boucher is in a group with Morenz and two players not up for voting yet, and well behind Conacher.

Top points-per-game, 1942-43 and 1945-46 to 1950-51, minimum 200 GP

Doug Bentley | 364 | 145 | 231 | 376 | 1.03
Max Bentley | 409 | 175 | 226 | 401 | 0.98
Maurice Richard | 373 | 210 | 142 | 352 | 0.94
Elmer Lach | 351 | 122 | 196 | 318 | 0.91
Roy Conacher | 316 | 131 | 149 | 280 | 0.89

This period of years is difficult to evaluate, because of the war. I've cut the two years that Max missed out of the comparison, removing the Punch Line's war-inflated stats from those years. Even after this adjustment, his brother Doug is still the better scorer per game. True, Max scored 25 more points, but took 43 more games to do so.

Top points-per-game, 1954-55 to 1960-61, minimum 300 GP

Jean Beliveau | 457 | 255 | 304 | 559 | 1.22
Bernie Geoffrion | 394 | 215 | 244 | 459 | 1.16
Gordie Howe | 472 | 227 | 303 | 530 | 1.12
Andy Bathgate | 485 | 191 | 309 | 500 | 1.03
Maurice Richard | 321 | 160 | 154 | 314 | 0.98

Only teammate Beliveau finished ahead of Geoffrion in this time period, and three of the five are already on this list.

Top points-per-game, 1956-57 to 1962-63, minimum 300 GP

Jean Beliveau | 429 | 207 | 299 | 506 | 1.18
Gordie Howe | 478 | 231 | 321 | 552 | 1.15
Andy Bathgate | 485 | 215 | 344 | 559 | 1.15
Bernie Geoffrion | 378 | 194 | 228 | 422 | 1.12
Dickie Moore | 453 | 206 | 256 | 462 | 1.02

Two top 10 players, Beliveau and Howe, edge Bathgate over his prime. Geoffrion is close behind.

Top points-per-game, 1960-61 to 1969-70, minimum 500 GP

Stan Mikita | 701 | 316 | 511 | 827 | 1.18
Bobby Hull | 670 | 440 | 346 | 786 | 1.17
Gordie Howe | 708 | 317 | 463 | 780 | 1.10
Jean Beliveau | 618 | 240 | 393 | 633 | 1.02
Norm Ullman | 699 | 288 | 387 | 675 | 0.97
Frank Mahovlich | 680 | 329 | 307 | 636 | 0.94

Mahovlich doesn't really have a strong consecutive prime, as a result of his mid-to-late-60s downturn in his prime years, so I picked a longer period for him. He finishes well behind the top 3, although he can't be faulted for finishing behind 3 top 10 players. But Norm Ullman? And now that I think of it, I'm not sure that Mahovlich was better than Ullman.

Top points-per-game, 1976-77 to 1984-85, minimum 500 GP

Wayne Gretzky | 473 | 429 | 693 | 1122 | 2.37
Mike Bossy | 609 | 474 | 454 | 928 | 1.52
Marcel Dionne | 694 | 450 | 595 | 1045 | 1.51
Guy Lafleur | 596 | 331 | 496 | 827 | 1.39
Bryan Trottier | 676 | 348 | 576 | 924 | 1.37

Dionne is in good company here. Gretzky's far and away the best, of course, but he's essentially equal with Bossy and is solidly ahead of Lafleur and Trottier. The other four have all been named to the list in the top 30.

Of this group of forwards, I see Conacher and Dionne as the best regular season performers. Geoffrion and Bathgate are next. I'd give Bathgate an edge in the regular season since he missed fewer games and didn't get the benefit of playing on the excellent Montreal power play. On the other hand, Geoffrion probably got less ice time than Bathgate at even strength, and was a far better playoff perfomer. I have Boucher and Bentley next, with Mahovlich bringing up the rear.

Putting it all together and adding Joe Malone, here's how I have the forwards:

1. Charlie Conacher
2. Marcel Dionne
3. Bernard Geoffrion
4. Joe Malone
5. Andy Bathgate
6. Frank Boucher
7. Max Bentley
8. Frank Mahovlich

While there is far too much statistical smoke in that post (let's focus on how they actually play the game), the reason there hasn't been much discussion on Charlie Conacher is I believe most guys view it as a foregone conclusion that he will be voted in this round. And if you don't think he belongs, just think of how he actually played the game. Then remember that he led the league in goals five times, and points twice. He was a five-time all-star against two of the top RWs against (Bill Cook and Dit Clapper). And someone's going to say he isn't one of the top 50 players to ever play the game?

 

[seventieslord]

He's on my list for this round, because, at the end of the day, a top 50 without Marcel Dionne is an incomplete top 50. But his inability to produce in the post-season puts him behind superb playoff players like Max Bentley and Bernie Geoffrion.

Every player should be on your list, because we're supposed to be ranking all of them from 1 to 15.

 

[God Bless Canada]

- I'm not sure Mahovlich is that much greater than Ullman either. Ullman's consistency and longevity in offensive categories (i.e. placing top-10 and top-20 in goals and assists) are exceeded by very few players.

- My top-5 goalies left:

Clint Benedict
Vladislav Tretiak
Johnny Bower

(Frank Brimsek
Turk Broda
Bill Durnan
Bernie Parent) - all very close.

Actually, Mahovlich is that much greater than Ullman. Mahovlich was a goal-scorer, so he won't have the top 10s in assists (obviously) or even points that Ullman had. Mahovlich was top two in goals four times. With the exception of the year he led the league in goals, Ullman had two other top five finishes in goals.

Mahovlich's playoff record is better. Six Cups. A key player on five of them. Top scorer on two of them. With the exception of the great four-year run in the mid-60s with Detroit, his playoff record is underwhelming. In his first four playoff appearances with Toronto, when he was still playing at a high level, he had nine points in 19 games.

And keep in mind Mahovlich was hamstrung offensively a lot of years in Toronto playing for Punch Imlach. It wasn't a favourable situation for him, and Imlach was very demanding on his players to play a defence-first game. It definitely impacted Mahovlich's production.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Lately there has been some discussion about Durnan and other goalies. Well, if it were up to you, who would the next five goalies on the list (including those up for voting this round) be?

Here's my top 5:

Tretiak
Durnan
Broda
Holecek
Benedict

Tretiak
Broda
Durnan
Benedict
Holecek

Nice to see someone else list Holocek. I had him too high on my initial list (I think he was ahead of Broda and Durnan), but he should definitely be included somewhere in the Top 100.

 

[seventieslord]

Actually, Mahovlich is that much greater than Ullman. Mahovlich was a goal-scorer, so he won't have the top 10s in assists (obviously) or even points that Ullman had. Mahovlich was top two in goals four times. With the exception of the year he led the league in goals, Ullman had two other top five finishes in goals.

Mahovlich does have a definite edge in goal scoring. He was top-2 three more times than Ullman, and top-5 three more times as well. Ullman begins to bridge the gap further down though, as he was actually in the top-10 and top-15 one more time than Mahovlich.

In playmaking, Ullman has an even more sizeable edge. He leads in top-5 seasons, 2-0. He leads in top-10 seasons, 9-3.

I'm not sure Mahovlich's .86 to .78 playoff PPG gap indicates much of a discrepancy in their individual playoff performances, and it does little to explain why one has six cups and one has none.

Ullman was better in all other non-offensive areas, too. He was a great faceoff man. He was good defensively. He was excellent along the boards. He had a contagious work ethic. He did it all.

You know I am all about the pure talent. And Mahovlich is as "pure talent" as they come. He should be voted in now, and fairly high. But ultimately, the gap that we put between him and Ullman is going to be downright criminal.

 

[MXD]

Top-5 Goalies, including this round ones?

Durnan
Broda
Benedict
Brimsek
Bower


Tretiak would joint this list though

 

[MXD]

Top-10 not available for voting

- Turk Broda
- Dickie Moore
- King Clancy
- Earl Seibert
- Sprague Cleghorn
- Clint Benedict
- Peter Forsberg
- Frank Brimsek
- Al McInnis
- Peter Stastny

The first four would have made the Top-10, and Cleghorn was a bubble candidate. Benedict might have been as well.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Top 10 not eligible yet:

Dickie Moore
Henri Richard
Dit Clapper (Moore and Richard were in my top 50; Clapper was 51)
King Clancy
Teeder Kennedy
Earl Seibert
Turk Broda
Jari Kurri
Nels Stewart
Aurel Joliat