Round 2, Vote 8 (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, June 30th at midnight and continue through Sunday, July 2nd at 11:59pm. Eastern time zone. Send PMs to quoipourquoi. I will release the results of the vote on Monday, July 3rd.

Vote 8 Candidates

• Al MacInnis
• Allan Stanley
• Bernie Parent
• Billy Smith
• Bobby Clarke
• Chris Chelios
• Clint Benedict
• Cy Denneny
• Dickie Moore
• Duncan Keith
• Frank Foyston
• Frank Mahovlich
• Frank McGee
• Howie Morenz
• Jacques Lemaire
• JC Tremblay
• Patrick Kane
• Paul Coffey
• Ray Bourque
• Steve Yzerman
• Ted Lindsay
• Terry Sawchuk
• Tim Horton

Since we added six players in the last round due to a tie, only four more names will make the final list.

Click to read more...

 

[seventieslord]

7 guys I had top-10 last round are still here... I guess that's pretty par for the course, though.

No one in the new candidates excites me, though. Except for Patrick Kane, that is. Wish Malkin was here to compare to him.

The three oldest candidates will once again have my support, and not just for the purposes of era balancing. Their resumes merit it.

 

[MXD]

The three oldest candidates will once again have my support, and not just for the purposes of era balancing. Their resumes merit it.

This is probably the ultimate nitpicking post in the entire project, but the three oldest candidates aren't the same as they were last round.

*ducks and covers*

 

[VMBM]

Still no Brad Park? (Even as a candidate.)

No cups, I know, but still pretty good performer...

 

[seventieslord]

This is probably the ultimate nitpicking post in the entire project, but the three oldest candidates aren't the same as they were last round.

*ducks and covers*

whoops, I looked way too quickly at the list. I was referring to Foyston, Mcgee, Morenz. But Benedict also got a top-10 vote from me and probably will again.

 

[MXD]

whoops, I looked way too quickly at the list. I was referring to Foyston, Mcgee, Morenz. But Benedict also got a top-10 vote from me and probably will again.

I really don't understand the Benedict support (snatching defeat from jaws of victory, way too much), but I'd say I'd understand even less support for... ehh... the "new" member of the "oldest 3" group.

(You can call this Ultimate nitpicking Pt. II if you want)

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I really don't understand the Benedict support (snatching defeat from jaws of victory, way too much), but I'd say I'd understand even less support for... ehh... the "new" member of the "oldest 3" group.

(You can call this Ultimate nitpicking Pt. II if you want)

I don't think Benedict deserves any less consideration than Terry Sawchuk. Sure he had some down years, but find a goalie who didn't who played that many playoff seasons. Overall, this project has seemed to emphasize great performances while being fairly forgiving of poor ones. Benedict should get serious consideration at this point under that criteria. He has three playoff runs where it appears he would have been a leading candidate for a Conn Smythe.

 

[MXD]

I don't think Benedict deserves any less consideration than Terry Sawchuk. Sure he had some down years, but find a goalie who didn't who played that many playoff seasons. Overall, this project has seemed to emphasize great performances while being fairly forgiving of poor ones. Benedict should get serious consideration at this point under that criteria. He has three playoff runs where it appears he would have been a leading candidate for a Conn Smythe.

That sounds like an argument against Benedict more than anything....

 

[seventieslord]

(snatching defeat from jaws of victory, way too much),

when was this? I'm just wondering what level of evidence exists to really call it that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

whoops, I looked way too quickly at the list. I was referring to Foyston, Mcgee, Morenz. But Benedict also got a top-10 vote from me and probably will again.

Kind of surprised to see you so high on McGee, since you were the first to point out that his scoring record is inflated by Cup Challenges from pathetic competion, and that Tommy Phillips's record is just as good against real competition.

I really don't understand the Benedict support (snatching defeat from jaws of victory, way too much), but I'd say I'd understand even less support for... ehh... the "new" member of the "oldest 3" group.

(You can call this Ultimate nitpicking Pt. II if you want)

I'm not a fan of Stevens and Broduer going back to back when Stevens should very obviously be ahead.

But at least Brodeur is over Benedict. Considering they have similar strengths and weaknesses and Brodeur did it in a stronger era.

 

[BenchBrawl]

On a gut feeling level, and even considering he's "only" the 3rd best forward of his generation in the playoffs, I really want to make place for Patrick Kane.He's the clutchiest player of his generation.I know some disagree with that, or even with the concept of clutchness itself, but I cannot agree.Kane was a consistent money player year in year out.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

As for the new candidates, about damn time Tim Horton came up. The Horton - Stanley pair was key to matching up against Gordie Howe in the playoffs (along with checking LW Bob Pulford). Why is that important? Toronto owned Detroit through the 1960s, the main reason that Howe won no more Cups after the 50s dynasty.

I'm a little surprised Stanley and Horton appeared at the same time, considering Horton's offense was so much stronger.

A real shame that defensmen I see as comparable to Horton - Savard, Stevens, Pronger - were added before Horton even became a candidate.

 

[seventieslord]

Kind of surprised to see you so high on McGee, since you were the first to point out that his scoring record is inflated by Cup Challenges from pathetic competion, and that Tommy Phillips's record is just as good against real competition.

That is true, I did say that, and I think that is fair about Tommy Phillips, too. However, during your sabbatical I said this:

- Frank McGee was a bloody dominant scorer. In the type of playoffs that he participated in, his competition was mostly crap, so his raw numbers overrate him. But, he's compared in this system to the next highest scoring member of his own team, and that should be good competition, and he still looks excellent.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=127908853&postcount=53

Basically I think you can hold both ideas in your head at the same time. He's greatly overrated by those who just look at raw playoff numbers, and still, if we are making this an all-time list and we want to get a pre-merger name in there, it should probably be his name.

 

[seventieslord]

On a gut feeling level, and even considering he's "only" the 3rd best forward of his generation in the playoffs, I really want to make place for Patrick Kane.He's the clutchiest player of his generation.I know some disagree with that, or even with the concept of clutchness itself, but I cannot agree.Kane was a consistent money player year in year out.

I, for one, do not disagree. And is he even 3rd? Or is he 2nd?

 

[MXD]

I'm not a fan of Stevens and Broduer going back to back when Stevens should very obviously be ahead.

But at least Brodeur is over Benedict. Considering they have similar strengths and weaknesses and Brodeur did it in a stronger era.

(This is where I must point out that things would've been different if I had no couch.)

I'd frankly have Brodeur and Benedict about on par, but I know I'd have put at least one of Brodeur's contemporary ahead of him (if he would've been available for voting, that is)... Actually I might have done the same with Benedict's as well, come to think of it. Both strikes me as having made the list/being candidates on the strength of their "overall" resume, while "lesser" goalies who, to me, played better in the playoffs missed the cut.

And I don't think you can apply to goalies the reasoning you can apply to someone like Doug Harvey or Red Kelly.

I do have some strong reservations about Patrick Kane for the exact same reason.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Horton - Stanley

As for the new candidates, about damn time Tim Horton came up. The Horton - Stanley pair was key to matching up against Gordie Howe in the playoffs (along with checking LW Bob Pulford). Why is that important? Toronto owned Detroit through the 1960s, the main reason that Howe won no more Cups after the 50s dynasty.

I'm a little surprised Stanley and Horton appeared at the same time, considering Horton's offense was so much stronger.

A real shame that defensmen I see as comparable to Horton - Savard, Stevens, Pronger - were added before Horton even became a candidate.

Horton and Stanley as a duo were vastly superior than the individual talents might suggest. In the playoffs their offensive talents were nearly equal. Stanley 43 points in 109 games while Horton registered 50 points in 126 games. Very marginal edge to Horton. Mainly due to 1962. .

Two key considerations.

From 1957 to 1967 Stanley`s teams made the SC finals 8 out of 11 seasons. Hurt , missed the 1957 playoffs. 1958 Bruins with Stanley gave the Canadiens their strongest opposition between 1956 and 1960.

Gordie Howe. Was Stanley`s main responsibility coming down the RW.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I, for one, do not disagree. And is he even 3rd? Or is he 2nd?

My phrasing was a bit confusing.With what do you not disagree?

As for whether Kane is 2nd or 3rd.

Playoffs scoring since the lockout

Rk | Player | GP | PTS | PPG
1 | Sidney Crosby | 148 | 164 | 1.11
2 | Evgeni Malkin | 149 | 157 | 1.05
3 | Patrick Kane | 127 | 123 | 0.97
4 | Ryan Getzlaf | 121 | 118 | 0.98
5 | Marian Hossa | 154 | 115 | 0.75
6 | Henrik Zetterberg | 121 | 115 | 0.95
7 | Daniel Briere | 118 | 113 | 0.96
8 | Jonathan Toews | 128 | 110 | 0.86
9 | Joe Thornton | 125 | 105 | 0.84
10 | Pavel Datsyuk | 120 | 101 | 0.84

- Getzlaf looks damn good but he amassed most of his points without reaching the Finals, which he only did one time when Anaheim won the cup in 2007.Won 1 cup, no Smythe.

- Kane was the best offensive player on his team and has 3 Smythe-caliber runs, and 2 other good runs where Chicago didn't reach the Finals.Won 3 cups, 1 Smythe.

- Malkin has 2 very strong Smythe-caliber runs, 2 very good and deep runs and 2 other decent semi-runs.Won 3 cups, 1 Smythe.

Kane vs. Malkin is an interesting case.Too bad Malkin isn't eligible.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Omissions

Sad to see no mention of Hap Holmes - goalie 4SC championship teams and the only goalie to win with an eastern and western team.

Also would have been interesting to include Babe Seibert & Sylvio Mantha in the discussion. Usually overlooked but they matched up against some of the leading stars and usually wound up on the winning side.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Mantha a D in the 50s of the HOH list making the top 40 players of all time?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Playoffs

Mantha a D in the 50s of the HOH list making the top 40 players of all time?

Top 40 playoffs.

 

[MXD]

Sad to see no mention of Hap Holmes - goalie 4SC championship teams and the only goalie to win with an eastern and western team.

Also would have been interesting to include Babe Seibert & Sylvio Mantha in the discussion. Usually overlooked but they matched up against some of the leading stars and usually wound up on the winning side.

And that I why I just cannot consider Benedict here. I just... Cannot. And Benedict also had the benefit of a very strong team, too.

Mantha a D in the 50s of the HOH list making the top 40 players of all time?

Well, Doug Gilmour made this list higher than his "spot" on the Centers list as well. Same thing for Ted Kennedy. Turk Broda nearly made, and should've made, this list higher than his spot on the Top Goaltenders list (because playoffs are mostly the reason why he made it so high on the Goalies list). I really care about Mantha here, but that's totally unrelated reasons.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Top 40 playoffs.

Sorry that's what I meant

And that I why I just cannot consider Benedict here. I just... Cannot. And Benedict also had the benefit of a very strong team, too.



Well, Doug Gilmour made this list higher than his "spot" on the Centers list as well. Same thing for Ted Kennedy. Turk Broda nearly made, and should've made, this list higher than his spot on the Top Goaltenders list (because playoffs are mostly the reason why he made it so high on the Goalies list). I really care about Mantha here, but that's totally unrelated reasons.

I was just surprised I had him in ATD this year and trust me if he was a stellar playoff performer I would've found and pushed that really hard

 

[MXD]

(I meant "I don't really care about Mantha", obviously).

 

[Canadiens1958]

Hap Holmes

Sorry that's what I meant



I was just surprised I had him in ATD this year and trust me if he was a stellar playoff performer I would've found and pushed that really hard

Do not follow the ATD.

The objection to Hap Holmes seems to stem from him being the first mercenary goalie.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Unfortunately I don't think I'll have time to post the data which I've been posting for the last few rounds this time.

Most of the data is now available in this thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2356309

If there's any specific info that anybody wants, which isn't included above, let me know in this thread or by PM.