Round 2 Voting Results (HOH Top Defensemen)

[tarheelhockey]

2) The "not top 10" votes for Leetch and Salming

Indeed. Not to call anyone out, but I'd like to hear the reasoning behind putting either of those guys at the bottom.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Indeed. Not to call anyone out, but I'd like to hear the reasoning behind putting either of those guys at the bottom.

At the end of the project the voting results will be put out there.

At the end of the day one or two voters, although I can't see someone leaving both of them off, thought that 10 guys were better.

When it shakes out hopefully they will give their reasoning then.

 

[MXD]

Indeed. Not to call anyone out, but I'd like to hear the reasoning behind putting either of those guys at the bottom.

Before you ask -- cause I've been pretty vocal on Leetch.
That's not me.

 

[Epsilon]

I had Quackenbush off my ballot which looking at the rest of the voting seems like a mistake, one I mostly chalk up to not having had the time to carefully read a lot of the debate last round. I suspect once I go back through the arguments he will jump over some people next time.

 

[reckoning]

I was the voter who didn't have Salming in their top 10. My two primary reasons being:

- Least impressive playoff record of the group.

- Arguably the least impressive performance outside of his peak in the group. He had a long career, but after 1980 he was merely the #1 defenceman on a team that was consistently the worst/near the worst defensive club in the league.

In the end it didn't really matter, as there was such a sizable cushion in points between Gadsby and Leetch that my vote didn't change Salming's final position.

I did have Salming ahead of Niedermayer, which means I'm not the one who didn't have Leetch in their top 10.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I was the voter who didn't have Salming in their top 10. My two primary reasons being:

- Least impressive playoff record of the group.

- Arguably the least impressive performance outside of his peak in the group. He had a long career, but after 1980 he was merely the #1 defenceman on a team that was consistently the worst/near the worst defensive club in the league.

In the end it didn't really matter, as there was such a sizable cushion in points between Gadsby and Leetch that my vote didn't change Salming's final position.

I did have Salming ahead of Niedermayer, which means I'm not the one who didn't have Leetch in their top 10.

It's funny the part in bold could very well be used to describe Gadsby as well.

Salming played for a pretty lousy team and actually lead the NHL in plus minus in the 86 playoffs so I guess we will agree to disagree.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Here are the results of Vote 6. Feel free to discuss them in this thread.

There were 20 of a possible 23 voters in this round.

Player | Total | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th | 10th | none Mark Howe |156|4|5|5|2|1|1|1|0|1|0|0
Bill Quackenbush |156|7|2|4|1|4|0|1|0|0|1|0
Serge Savard |136|4|3|3|3|1|1|1|2|1|1|0
Rod Langway |114|2|2|1|3|3|2|3|2|0|1|1
Eddie Gerard |104|0|1|3|3|5|1|2|1|2|0|2
Jack Stewart |94|1|4|0|0|2|4|0|2|4|2|1
Guy Lapointe |92|0|1|1|2|0|5|4|3|1|2|0
Scott Niedermayer |73|1|1|1|2|2|0|2|3|1|2|5
Lionel Conacher |55|1|1|1|0|1|1|1|3|0|4|7
Marcel Pronovost |50|0|0|1|2|0|3|1|0|4|1|8
Jacques Laperriere |33|0|0|0|1|0|2|1|1|4|1|10
J.C. Tremblay |23|0|0|0|0|0|0|3|2|1|3|11
Butch Bouchard |14|0|0|0|1|0|0|0|1|1|2|15

We have an official tie for 26th place on the list.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Notes on this round:


•Bill Quackenbush and Mark Howe were tied after last round. With a slightly different voter pool, they end up tied again after this round. Call it a tie for 26th place on the list.

•The two great post-expansion defensive defenseman finish back to back in 28th and 29th place. Something tells me this debate isn't settled.

•Eddie Gerard follows in the footsteps of his contemporary Sprague Cleghorn by being voted in as soon as he became available.

•Jack Stewart and Guy Lapointe finish in a dead heat but get there in different ways. Lapointe was the only player this round with no first or last place votes, while Stewart has an interesting spread.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Here are the results of Vote 6. Feel free to discuss them in this thread.

There were 20 of a possible 23 voters in this round.

Player | Total | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th | 10th | none Mark Howe |156|4|5|5|2|1|1|1|0|1|0|0
Bill Quackenbush |156|7|2|4|1|4|0|1|0|0|1|0
Serge Savard |136|4|3|3|3|1|1|1|2|1|1|0
Rod Langway |114|2|2|1|3|3|2|3|2|0|1|1
Eddie Gerard |104|0|1|3|3|5|1|2|1|2|0|2
Jack Stewart |94|1|4|0|0|2|4|0|2|4|2|1
Guy Lapointe |92|0|1|1|2|0|5|4|3|1|2|0
Scott Niedermayer |73|1|1|1|2|2|0|2|3|1|2|5
Lionel Conacher |55|1|1|1|0|1|1|1|3|0|4|7
Marcel Pronovost |50|0|0|1|2|0|3|1|0|4|1|8
Jacques Laperriere |33|0|0|0|1|0|2|1|1|4|1|10
J.C. Tremblay |23|0|0|0|0|0|0|3|2|1|3|11
Butch Bouchard |14|0|0|0|1|0|0|0|1|1|2|15

We have an official tie for 26th place on the list.

Wow Howe had a 9th, really and Nieds being totally left off of 5 list is amazing as is Quackenbush's 10th place vote.

I was surprised to see Lapointe so low overall as well even with the Habs having 3 top guys at the same time.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

For the record, while I was highly critical of Nieds last time and left him out of my top 5, I was not one of the ones who left him out of my top 10.

 

[pappyline]

Wow Howe had a 9th, really and Nieds being totally left off of 5 list is amazing as is Quackenbush's 10th place vote.

I was surprised to see Lapointe so low overall as well even with the Habs having 3 top guys at the same time.

What amazed me was Stewart getting 5 top 2 votes (which I agree with) and seven 9th or worse (which I disagree with).

 

[Hardyvan123]

What amazed me was Stewart getting 5 top 2 votes (which I agree with) and seven 9th or worse (which I disagree with).

Yes that was kind of surprising too, i had him in a mix with 2 other players in the 6-8 range myself.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Here are the results of Vote 7. Feel free to discuss them in this thread.

There were 19 of a possible 23 voters in this round.

Player | Total | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th | 10th | none Jack Stewart |159|8|4|2|0|3|1|1|0|0|0|0
Guy Lapointe |148|0|7|3|4|3|1|1|0|0|0|0
Scott Niedermayer |120|4|2|1|2|2|0|4|4|0|0|0
Marcel Pronovost |111|3|1|2|1|3|3|2|2|1|0|1
Lionel Conacher |85|3|0|2|2|1|2|1|0|2|1|5
Zdeno Chara |73|0|0|3|1|2|2|3|2|0|2|4
Alexei Kasatonov |68|1|0|2|2|1|3|0|0|3|1|6
J.C. Tremblay |67|0|1|2|1|0|3|4|1|0|1|6
Jacques Laperriere |63|0|2|0|1|3|0|1|4|1|2|5
Butch Bouchard |43|0|1|1|2|0|1|0|0|3|2|9
Rob Blake |40|0|0|0|2|1|0|1|3|2|3|7
Larry Murphy |32|0|1|0|1|0|1|1|0|1|4|10
Carl Brewer |24|0|0|1|0|0|1|0|2|2|1|12
Ebbie Goodfellow |18|0|0|0|0|0|1|0|1|4|2|11

 

[overpass]

Looks like we had a solid consensus on the top four this time, and Conacher was the best of the rest.

Almost everyone had Stewart and Lapointe in their top five, and a substantial minority of voters had Niedermayer in seventh or eighth.

Those who finished in spots 6-9 are well positioned going into the next round, but at least one spot is completely up for grabs. And further discussion could certainly move some players around.

 

[plusandminus]

Here are the results of Vote 7. Feel free to discuss them in this thread.

There were 19 of a possible 23 voters in this round.

Player | Total | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th | 10th | none Jack Stewart |159|8|4|2|0|3|1|1|0|0|0|0
Guy Lapointe |148|0|7|3|4|3|1|1|0|0|0|0
Scott Niedermayer |120|4|2|1|2|2|0|4|4|0|0|0
Marcel Pronovost |111|3|1|2|1|3|3|2|2|1|0|1
Lionel Conacher |85|3|0|2|2|1|2|1|0|2|1|5
Zdeno Chara |73|0|0|3|1|2|2|3|2|0|2|4
Alexei Kasatonov |68|1|0|2|2|1|3|0|0|3|1|6
J.C. Tremblay |67|0|1|2|1|0|3|4|1|0|1|6
Jacques Laperriere |63|0|2|0|1|3|0|1|4|1|2|5
Butch Bouchard |43|0|1|1|2|0|1|0|0|3|2|9
Rob Blake |40|0|0|0|2|1|0|1|3|2|3|7
Larry Murphy |32|0|1|0|1|0|1|1|0|1|4|10
Carl Brewer |24|0|0|1|0|0|1|0|2|2|1|12
Ebbie Goodfellow |18|0|0|0|0|0|1|0|1|4|2|11

In my opinion a sad and disappointing result. I was aware that Europeans (with peak outside of NHL) would likely be regarded lowly. I didn't have much hope when this thread started, but decided to at least give it an attempt by writing a little about Kasatonov. There seemed to be some interest, and I wrote some more. But still 6 persons out of 19 don't even consider him top-10, and a majority don't think of him as top-8.

Some people just seem to disregard non-NHL hockey very much. (At least, that is how it seems.)

A bit sad to see Chara ahead of him too. Having seen both play many times, I definitely think Kasatonov was the better one. (And why on earth such a large gap between Vasiliev and Kasatonov?)

I think Kasatonov probably had the highest peak among the players up here, and he was a top-2 defencemen in USSR during 10+ years.
And following a way of reasoning here about other players. Well, if Fetisov hadn't been around, Kasatonov might have had as many individual trophies/etc. as Fetisov.

---
Otherwise a fairly spread out (?) voting. 1st, 2nd and the last three seem like there was concensus about.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

In my opinion a sad and disappointing result. I was aware that Europeans (with peak outside of NHL) would likely be regarded lowly. I didn't have much hope when this thread started, but decided to at least give it an attempt by writing a little about Kasatonov. There seemed to be some interest, and I wrote some more. But still 6 persons out of 19 don't even consider him top-10, and a majority don't think of him as top-8.

Some people just seem to disregard non-NHL hockey very much. (At least, that is how it seems.)

A bit sad to see Chara ahead of him too. Having seen both play many times, I definitely think Kasatonov was the better one. (And why on earth such a large gap between Vasiliev and Kasatonov?)

I think Kasatonov probably had the highest peak among the players up here, and he was a top-2 defencemen in USSR during 10+ years.
And following a way of reasoning here about other players. Well, if Fetisov hadn't been around, Kasatonov might have had as many individual trophies/etc. as Fetisov.

---
Otherwise a fairly spread out (?) voting. 1st, 2nd and the last three seem like there was concensus about.

Agree about Kasatonov, the argument I liked the best was Lapointe is to Robinson as Kasatonov is to Fetisov. That seems reasonable to me, and should put those two close to each other.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm also very surprised to see Kasatonov left off 6 ballots. Ranking him low is one thing, but IMO he was pretty clearly ahead of at least 3 guys in this round.

I have an uneasy feeling that we are going to see a couple of players who were under-ranked in the first round pop up and Kasatonov will be knocked back another round.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

In my opinion a sad and disappointing result. I was aware that Europeans (with peak outside of NHL) would likely be regarded lowly. I didn't have much hope when this thread started, but decided to at least give it an attempt by writing a little about Kasatonov. There seemed to be some interest, and I wrote some more. But still 6 persons out of 19 don't even consider him top-10, and a majority don't think of him as top-8.

Some people just seem to disregard non-NHL hockey very much. (At least, that is how it seems.)

A bit sad to see Chara ahead of him too. Having seen both play many times, I definitely think Kasatonov was the better one. (And why on earth such a large gap between Vasiliev and Kasatonov?)

I think Kasatonov probably had the highest peak among the players up here, and he was a top-2 defencemen in USSR during 10+ years.
And following a way of reasoning here about other players. Well, if Fetisov hadn't been around, Kasatonov might have had as many individual trophies/etc. as Fetisov.

---
Otherwise a fairly spread out (?) voting. 1st, 2nd and the last three seem like there was concensus about.

Well, there is a good argument that Chara has been the best defenseman in the league for a few years now. You couldn't say the same about Kasatonov.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Looks like we had a solid consensus on the top four this time, and Conacher was the best of the rest.

Almost everyone had Stewart and Lapointe in their top five, and a substantial minority of voters had Niedermayer in seventh or eighth.

Those who finished in spots 6-9 are well positioned going into the next round, but at least one spot is completely up for grabs. And further discussion could certainly move some players around.

There are some very strong first time candidates for Round 8 - I wouldn't be surprised if more than one was voted in during his first round of elligibility. I'm planning on doing just that myself.

 

[VanIslander]

Almost everyone had Stewart and Lapointe in their top five, and a substantial minority of voters had Niedermayer in seventh or eighth.

4 for 7th and 4 for 8th is indeed significant given the total number of voters was 19. Niedermayer was voted in with 42% of eligible voters thinking him clearly not top-5.

Maybe there ought to be a rule requiring a degree of support to have LESS THAN FIVE inductees in such cases. A look at the voting this round suggests that just two are deserving of induction.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

4 for 7th and 4 for 8th is indeed significant given the total number of voters was 19. Niedermayer was voted in with 42% of eligible voters thinking him clearly not top-5.

I was criticial of Niedermayer in previous rounds, but I'd really like to see an argument for him out of the top 5. If Lionel Conacher got added and Niedermayer didn't (despite Niedermayer having as many 1st Team All Stars as Conacher had 1st + 2nd Team All Stars... and yes, I'm aware Conacher was a good player before the official All Star Teams), then perhaps the people claiming an anti-modern bias on our list would have legs to stand on.

Maybe there ought to be a rule requiring a degree of support to have LESS THAN FIVE inductees in such cases. A look at the voting this round suggests that just two are deserving of induction.

Overpass and I discussed something like this in Round 3, when their was a huge seperation between the top 4 (Park, Clancy, Coffey, Pilote) and the rest. Ultimately, we decided not to change the induction procedure as we went along and Sprague Cleghorn was added at 15th overall.

From a pragmatic standpoint, imagine how long this thing would take if we only added 2-3 guys per round?

 

[tarheelhockey]

I was criticial of Niedermayer in previous rounds, but I'd really like to see an argument for him out of the top 5. If Lionel Conacher got added and Niedermayer didn't (despite Niedermayer having as many 1st Team All Stars as Conacher had 1st + 2nd Team All Stars... and yes, I'm aware Conacher was a good player before the official All Star Teams), then perhaps the people claiming an anti-modern bias on our list would have legs to stand on.

Niedermayer was out of my top 5, so I'll take a shot... his case basically rests on a 3-season peak that was extremely high, but also represented the mass retirements of a generation of star players (including MacInnis, Stevens and Leetch) and a dramatic transition during the lockout which threw the standards of "elite defenseman" into flux. During that window of generational transition, Niedermayer improbably rose up and entered the elite tier among a very weak cohort. Then he came right back to earth and retired as pretty much the same level of player he had always been before.

Outside of that, Niedermayer got a huge amount of press attention for winning team championships while playing with guys who are ranked much higher on our list. I don't put a whole lot of stock into team awards, so the wins themselves already seem a bit trivial to me even before I factor in that he wasn't the only elite defenseman on those teams. His playoff performances also have to be taken in that context.

So on balance, I see Niedermayer as a player who was very solid but benefitted tremendously from his circumstances. I don't see him as having anywhere near the elite longetivity of a Pronovost, Kasatonov, Stewart or in the near future Chara. I don't rank him as good of a second-tier star as Conacher or Lapointe, outside of a 3-year window in which IMO he was disproportionately praised. Coming into the project I had him ranked 29th (ironically right next to Conacher) so I had slight misgivings about bumping him to the 35-40 range -- not because I think my first list was right, but because he seems like a 30-ish guy. I think 33rd is a very fair spot for him.

From a pragmatic standpoint, imagine how long this thing would take if we only added 2-3 guys per round?

This would be a problem especially in the later rounds when the players are much more closely matched. Cleghorn, Pronger, Vasiliev, Langway, Gerard, Niedermayer, Pronovost and Conacher have all been added with at least 6 votes at 7th place or lower. That's the last-place guy from votes 3, 4 and 5, and then the last 3 guys each from votes 6 and 7. Presumably this pattern will continue as the choices get harder.

I agree that it would give us a more defensible final list, but we would already be a round and a half behind schedule and growing rapidly.

 

[plusandminus]

Well, there is a good argument that Chara has been the best defenseman in the league for a few years now. You couldn't say the same about Kasatonov.

Using that comparison, Kasatonov was perhaps more like Brad Park. Both were during a time 2nd best behind a dominant generational player. Both excelled internationally (Kasatonov for example in 1981 Canada Cup, while Park did it in the 1972 Summit Series.) But I suppose the "2nd best" comparison somewhat fails, as Kasatonov accomplished that during a 10 year period, while Park did it for fewer years.

I would be surprised if it is being taken for granted that NHL during Bobby Orr's prime (I mean the years before guys like Potvin, Robinson started to be Norris caliber), was stronger than the Soviet league during the 1980s. The Soviets had a huge amount of great players who could step into the national team and perform very well. And internationally, I would think the World Championships of the 1980s featured about as good players as the NHL during Park's prime. So, similar strength of competition.

Skillwise, one might perhaps compare Kasatonov to Scott Stevens. Combine Stevens' offensive prime with Stevens' defensive prime, and I think we have Kasatonov's level of play during his best 10 years.

Going back to Chara. No matter if Chara is approximately at his "correct" position or not (ranking wise), I still think of Kasatonov as significantly better.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Using that comparison, Kasatonov was perhaps more like Brad Park. Both was during a time 2nd best behind a dominant generational player. Both excelled internationally (Kasatonov for example in 1981 Canada Cup, while Park did it in the 1972 Summit Series.) But I suppose the "2nd best" comparison somewhat fails, as Kasatonov accomplished that during a 10 year period, while Park did it for fewer years.

I would be surprised if it is being taken for granted that NHL during Bobby Orr's prime (I mean the years before guys like Potvin, Robinson started to be Norris caliber), was stronger than the Soviet league during the 1980s. The Soviets had a huge amount of great players who could step into the national team and perform very well. And internationally, I would think the World Championships of the 1980s featured about as good players as the NHL during Park's prime. So, similar strength of competition.

I think you'll find that you are in the small minority in that view.

The Soviet League was excellent at the top in the 1980s, but they were already starting to bleed talent as Tikhonov basically cannibalized the rest of the league to make CSKA stronger and then banished talented players he didn't like (such Nikolai Drozdetsky) from hockey all together.

As for the 1981 Canada Cup thing, have you even heard of the guy who was the other All Star during that tournament? Consistent international excellence is important (and is something Kasatonov showed unlike that other guy), but I wouldn't put too much stock into a single tournament.

I had Kasatonov ranked 6th, and it was a strong 6th (I had 4-6 as basically a tossup), but let's not get carried away.

Skillwise, one might perhaps compare Kasatonov to Scott Stevens. Combine Stevens' offensive prime with Stevens' defensive prime, and I think we have Kasatonov's level of play during his best 10 years.

Disagree. Scott Stevens was the best defensive defenseman in hockey for at least several years. Kasatonov was reportedly a step down from Vasiliev defensively.

 

[plusandminus]

I think you'll find that you are in the small minority in that view.

The Soviet League was excellent at the top in the 1980s, but they were already starting to bleed talent as Tikhonov basically cannibalized the rest of the league to make CSKA stronger and then banished talented players he didn't like (such Nikolai Drozdetsky) from hockey all together.

I meant the top.

Regarding strength of competition. One might wonder where Bobby Orr might have ended up on the ranking if he had played in a Soviet environment - but still being as good as he was. Maybe he too would hear that he excellened in an "easy" environment. And when shownig up internationally, he would have been "favoured" by having teammates he had played a lot with.
Or Brad Park, if playing in Soviet.

I am in a minority here, but if this had been an international project instead of a North American project (with a Swede participating), I'm pretty sure Kasatonov would end up higher than here.

As for the 1981 Canada Cup thing, have you even heard of the guy who was the other All Star during that tournament? Consistent international excellence is important (and is something Kasatonov showed unlike that other guy), but I wouldn't put too much stock into a single tournament.

Yes, of course I have heard about Kadlec, and of course I saw him play many times. We also used him in our fictous tournaments where we had our World Championships and similar. Kadlec was a good player, but some kind of "one tournament wonder" or how to say. Not top-60 all-time.
You surprise me here, as I though you were/are one of those here that actually do show an interest in European hockey.
Did you use Kadlec in order to to downgrade Kasatonov's accomplishment during the 1981 Canada Cup?

I had Kasatonov ranked 6th, and it was a strong 6th (I had 4-6 as basically a tossup), but let's not get carried away.

Why didn't you put him higher (like number one)? Did/Do you think he just looked like a worse player than the ones you have above him?

Disagree. Scott Stevens was the best defensive defenseman in hockey for at least several years. Kasatonov was reportedly a step down from Vasiliev defensively.

It can be argued that Stevens was favoured by a great goaltender, and by playing under a great defensive system, in an environment of defensively skilled teammates, during an era that at least partly favoured his style of play. (I write this mostly as a counter argument (?) to all the talk here about how favoured the Soviets were. Stevens was in a similar position in New Jersey.)

But anyway, what I meant was that Kasatonov had both the offensive and defensive play simultanously. He could be a great penalty killer, great to position himself,
and a great physical player, who could also contribute offensively. Overall, that may put him - even if one would rate Stevens (during Stevens' defensive peak) ahead of him defensively - near Stevens.