The Hockey News - Top 50 Players of All-Time By Franchise

[seventieslord]

Roberto Luongo in No. 7 for the Canucks? Really? He should be above that.

Look at the names above him.

But I get it. 3-7 were very difficult to rank. They could go in almost any order.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Look at the names above him.

But I get it. 2-7 were very difficult to rank. They could go in almost any order.

Yeah, the Sedin twins deserve the 1 and 2 spot, but I'm not sure about the rest.

 

[Thenameless]

If I hadn't seen those playoffs, yeah. Trophy counting seems a bit tarnished when one disagreed with the awarding of it in the first place.

True enough. Could have easily gone to different players the past two years, but his contributions were still better than Jagr's in a playoff environment for the Penguins.

 

[daver]

If I hadn't seen those playoffs, yeah. Trophy counting seems a bit tarnished when one disagreed with the awarding of it in the first place.

He has two other playoffs runs, one that indisputably and another that is arguably, better than his two Conn Smythe runs.

 

[daver]

Jagr as just a Penguin has scored MORE points (1079 to 1036) at a better points per game average (1.33 to 1.31) but the margin of difference is incredibly small.

Of course, in the playoffs, Crosby has 164 pts in 148 playoff games whereas in Pittsburgh only, Jagr has 145 points in just 140 playoff games.

So, ignoring Jagr's 12+ seasons elsewhere, their careers are remarkably similar!

Crosby's PPG is clearly more impressive when compared to his peers. Obviously Jagr has the better peak in offensive production but prime is Crosby. This also doesn't consider 2-way play.

Yes, their regular season offensive production as Pens is remarkably similar but then Crosby jumps ahead with 2-way play and widens that gap with a superior playoff resume.

If the rating is based on what they did outside their teams too then it is arguable that Jagr should be ranked ahead.

 

[Thenameless]

Plus, I'm pretty sure that Sidney Crosby is going to retire a Penguin.

 

[MXD]

If the rating is based on what they did outside their teams too then it is arguable that Jagr should be ranked ahead.

...And it's obviously not what they're based on.

 

[ESH]

I'm a bit late to the discussion, but does anyone else feel like defensemen are being underrated in these lists? Montreal has 3 defensemen in their top-20. Toronto has 4. There's lots of little specific rankings I could voice my distaste for, but my main harp is that forwards seem to get a lot more credit than defensemen do.

 

[Gundee1114]

Finally got my copy today! Been waiting to do a deep dive into it for two weeks!

 

[Regal]

Doing the sporcle lists are interesting because it makes you think about some of the surprises. Was just doing St. Louis, and Gilmour seemed high to me. He had 5 years there, which is actually pretty decent considering they've had a lot of top forward turnover over the years, but wasn't a big scorer his first three, partly due to lower PP time, and while a good defensive player from the start, I don't see why that would push him above someone like Turgeon, who, although a little injury prone, had 5 years as the top line center during a period where the team was better overall.

Surprised by Plante not being there either. Lack of games obviously, but I'd put backstopping the team to a cup finals with he's a numbers, even in the expansion division is more valuable than a couple years of a rather uninspiring top 6 forward like Perron.

Was just looking at Edmonton, and Salo over Joseph doesn't seem to jive for me either. Both have three good years, but despite slightly better stats for Salo, he just wasn't the goalie to win you big games like Joseph, who was great in the playoffs. Salo has 2 more years as a starter but was pretty mediocre in them.

For Jersey, Rolston seems high too for someone who had basically all his prime years elsewhere, whereas Arnott was part of one of the best lines in hockey for 3 years and 2 finals runs.

 

[tjcurrie]

Everything else aside, Crosby's been the face of the Penguins and their leader for over a decade now, a decade in which he captained them to 3 Cups, can't say the same for Jagr during his tenure there. That makes Crosby more significant to the franchise. Take that into account.

 

[tjcurrie]

I would say Choosing Benn screams "we recognize that this guy has the two best offensive seasons ever posted in franchise history and another that would be in the top-10".

Stars with multiple seasons in the top-20 in scoring:

Modano 7
Benn 4 (including the two best ever)
Seguin 4
Ciccarelli 3
Richards 2
Broten 2
Smith 2
Hextall 2

He's already played longer than Smith with the team, and has almost the same number of points in a 30% lower scoring era. Three postseason all-star teams. So I see no problem with Benn 8th at all. (do you still??)

Hartsburg shouldn't be in the top-10 in points for the franchise; he's a defenseman. He's the kind of player good enough to make it on peak value. Forget point scoring stats - he was their runaway #1 defenseman the whole time he was there. Most of that time he was considered just shy of the elite guys (which explains his multiple all-star games and lack of postseason honours). He's very fondly remembered by fans.

I'm actually kinda surprised you'd have a forward with 554 points over a defenseman with 413 in the same number of games. Not that they're really that far apart, mind you - they're #10 and 11.

Hatcher was my biggest concern - I actually wanted to see him ahead of the three forwards ahead of him. Here's what I said:

Derian Hatcher deserves better than this. THN ranked him 7, 8, 6, 8, 7, 12, 18, 8 among defensemen in the NHL during his prime, which is an outstanding stretch. You could say he was probably about the 8th best defenseman of the 90s. Could you, with a straight face, say Bellows was about the 8th best forward of the 80s? What about top-20 even? Considering he was only a top-20 scorer once, I think not. Ciccarelli was better than Bellows, but where would he have ranked among league forwards when he was 6th, 10th, 20th and 25th in league scoring as a North star? I don't think this is close to Hatcher, plus he was not captain like Hatcher was for a long time, had much less team success, and is three seasons short in longevity. Lehtinen was an elite role player, but still just a role player. You astutely recognized him for his skills and abilities, placing him on the LW and RW lists almost every year for a decade: 16th, 10th, 18th, 12th, 18th, 16th, 7th, 4th, 6th, 12th. Keep in mind that these winger lists are at least twice as easy to get on as the defensemen lists, so his four top-10s are noteworthy, if I'm being generous, and that does not compare to the level of eliteness assigned to Hatcher almost annually for 8 straight years. Hatcher should go right up behind Zubov and ahead of these forwards.

So it's you. I was wondering which "Member of the Society of International Hockey Research and an active participant and moderator on hfboards" they were referring to. Bravo.

I like your assessment above regarding my Stars, especially regarding Hatcher. I posted our (Stars) top 50 on my Facebook and there was a bit of a discussion where he was concerned, with myself and another agreeing he should at least be bumped up and swapped with Lehtinen. I mean honestly, I often bring up Derian's deserving of having his #2 retired by the franchise just as much as #26 & #56 and I actually get flack from some other Stars fans, which is a major injustice to the man's importance and contributions to the franchise. Actually disgusts me.

No real MAJOR gripes with the top 50 here, but I likely would have had Turco and Belfour swap positions, then bump Belfour down a couple spots in favor of Benn and Hartsburg to have him at #10. That said, I get the Turco position given his games played, wins, etc.

Aside from that, I can't help but notice the omission of Mark Tinordi. Curious as to what, if any, was the discussion on him and reasoning for having other defensemen in the bottom half ahead of him. Lastly, I place Shane Churla in at #50 instead of Steve Ott. One of the top likely 3 heavyweights in franchise history, all-time leader in PIMs, part of that core that helped popularize the sport upon arriving in 1993, and even wore the captain's 'C' briefly after Mark Tinordi went down. Just last night they had Shane Churla night at the AAC, celebrating him as per their 25th Anniversary season.

Just minor "gripes", if you want to call them that from a long time Stars fan, but overall well done.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Finally got my copy today! Been waiting to do a deep dive into it for two weeks!

Where is Pominville on Buffalo, and what is the names above him?
I suppose he is not on the Wild's? Possibly could be though, come to think of it.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Where is Pominville on Buffalo, and what is the names above him?
I suppose he is not on the Wild's? Possibly could be though, come to think of it.

Yes, he's a Top 10 on the Wild page, I think.

 

[frisco]

A twist but what about best player/career not to make a team's Top 50? I was thinking probably a Hab. Noticed Stephane Richer, two fifty-goal seasons, didn't crack the list. He did make it for New Jersey though. That's some stiff competition when 225 goals doesn't make top 50.

My Best-Carey

 

[Nocashstyle]

Pretty cool concept for an issue

A little off topic, but is a subscription to THN worth it? I miss getting physical print magazines

 

[seventieslord]

Doing the sporcle lists are interesting because it makes you think about some of the surprises. Was just doing St. Louis, and Gilmour seemed high to me. He had 5 years there, which is actually pretty decent considering they've had a lot of top forward turnover over the years, but wasn't a big scorer his first three, partly due to lower PP time, and while a good defensive player from the start, I don't see why that would push him above someone like Turgeon, who, although a little injury prone, had 5 years as the top line center during a period where the team was better overall.

If turgeon could have played a full 1998 or 2000, maybe it'd be different, but Gilmour had a season better than anything turgeon did there: 1987, when he was even top-5 I'm Hart voting. And of course his 1986 playoffs was better than anything turgeon did there too. And, as you said, there's two-way play.

Surprised by Plante not being there either. Lack of games obviously, but I'd put backstopping the team to a cup finals with he's a numbers, even in the expansion division is more valuable than a couple years of a rather uninspiring top 6 forward like Perron.

Plante's average level of play was certainly higher, but he played just 85 total games (rs and p.o.). Perron is by no means special but he was am above average player for six seasons.

Was just looking at Edmonton, and Salo over Joseph doesn't seem to jive for me either. Both have three good years, but despite slightly better stats for Salo, he just wasn't the goalie to win you big games like Joseph, who was great in the playoffs. Salo has 2 more years as a starter but was pretty mediocre in them.

Joseph had good moments but also the worst regular season of his prime while there. I could even be convinced his average level of play was slightly higher than Tommy's, but Salo had nearly double the games played for the team. I think their rankings fairly reflect those factors.

For Jersey, Rolston seems high too for someone who had basically all his prime years elsewhere, whereas Arnott was part of one of the best lines in hockey for 3 years and 2 finals runs.

Looking at Pandolfo and Brylin right above and below him, i think it's fair. Lower GP, but he was better on the ice, to the point that it evens out.

Arnott was better still, but for just 60% as long. Keep in mind, too, that 245 in 364 is not exactly stellar.

Thanks for the comments!

So it's you. I was wondering which "Member of the Society of International Hockey Research and an active participant and moderator on hfboards" they were referring to. Bravo.

Thank you sir.

No real MAJOR gripes with the top 50 here, but I likely would have had Turco and Belfour swap positions, then bump Belfour down a couple spots in favor of Benn and Hartsburg to have him at #10. That said, I get the Turco position given his games played, wins, etc.

Belfour has the cup and arguably even the higher level of play, but Turco has about 170 more decisions, which is pretty significant. 2nd, 3rd, 4th in all-star voting, not a peak to sneeze at.

Aside from that, I can't help but notice the omission of Mark Tinordi. Curious as to what, if any, was the discussion on him and reasoning for having other defensemen in the bottom half ahead of him.

No major discussion - they had him barely on, i had him barely off, he landed off, perhaps because I pointed out guys like Gibbs and Reid to them.

I wish I could have seen him in there, but try as I might, i could not remove one of those defensemen for him. Robidas, Ludwig, Reid, Daley, Barrett, and Nanne all have longevity advantages (most significant), Gibbs has a peak advantage (quite significant too, he was a massive minute muncher and anchored them to a top 5 defensive record twice, earning all-star votes and playing in the ASG), and Maxwell has both.

Lastly, I place Shane Churla in at #50 instead of Steve Ott. One of the top likely 3 heavyweights in franchise history, all-time leader in PIMs, part of that core that helped popularize the sport upon arriving in 1993, and even wore the captain's 'C' briefly after Mark Tinordi went down. Just last night they had Shane Churla night at the AAC, celebrating him as per their 25th Anniversary season.

Who's to say they won't have a Steve Ott night in 15 years?

If there was any advantage for Churla besides fighting ability I'd agree with you here. Not an Ott fan? He brought a lot to the table. He was a pretty underrated secondary scorer at ES, a good and frequent penalty killer, arguably the best agitator in the league, excellent on faceoffs, and he was willing to fight. 109 as a star, which is only about 20 fewer than Churla. He scored about 2.5x as many points per game, in a lower scoring era, over a much longer sample size. I don't need to tell you this, but he was just a much better player. If you say Churla was more popular, then I believe you, but in this case it wasn't enough to get him on.

Just minor "gripes", if you want to call them that from a long time Stars fan, but overall well done.

if that's as bad as it gets, then we did pretty well!

Thanks man.

Yes, he's a Top 10 on the Wild page, I think.

13th.

Much easier list to crack than the buffalo one.

A twist but what about best player/career not to make a team's Top 50? I was thinking probably a Hab. Noticed Stephane Richer, two fifty-goal seasons, didn't crack the list. He did make it for New Jersey though. That's some stiff competition when 225 goals doesn't make top 50.

My Best-Carey

We were talking about this earlier. Someone suggested J.G. Talbot and I haven't seen a better answer than that yet.

Pretty cool concept for an issue

A little off topic, but is a subscription to THN worth it? I miss getting physical print magazines

What does it cost, like $55 a year? I think for anyone who likes to be plugged into the hockey world it's a no brainer. There are people who spend that much on coffee in a single week. What's $55 nowadays really?

 

[frisco]

Where is Pominville on Buffalo, and what is the names above him?

Pominville is #25 on the Sabres. Right behind Bodger, Korab, Hawerchuk.

My Best-Carey

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Pretty cool concept for an issue

A little off topic, but is a subscription to THN worth it? I miss getting physical print magazines

If you want analysis on players both current and historical, then THN is the magazine for you.

 

[Habsfan18]

Just a heads up, THN only publishes 16 issues or so per year now. I think subscription costs have lowered.

 

[Neutrinos]

Yeah, the Sedin twins deserve the 1 and 2 spot, but I'm not sure about the rest.

To me, Bure is clearly the best player in franchise history

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

To me, Bure is clearly the best player in franchise history

He had contract issues, so I'd put him below top 2 but in top 5 or so.

 

[Nocashstyle]

Just a heads up, THN only publishes 16 issues or so per year now. I think subscription costs have lowered.

I just subscribed...it was 33 CAD so about 26 USD. It says it's 18 issues a year, but even if it's 16, it's still insanely well priced. I'm pretty excited.

 

[Habsfan18]

I just subscribed...it was 33 CAD so about 26 USD. It says it's 18 issues a year, but even if it's 16, it's still insanely well priced. I'm pretty excited.

It likely is 18 if you include the Yearbook and annual special magazine.

 

[decma]

I picked up the issue over the weekend. First time I have read THN since I had a subscription in the early to mid 80s.

Great issue. My kids and I have been having a lot of fun debating the picks.

Definitely considering getting a subscription. So it is down from 40+ issues a year to 16? Are the regular issues still in tabloid newspaper format? Or magazine format like this special issue? Any notable columnists? Bob McKenzie was fantastic in the 80s, and his pieces alone were worth the subscription. As I recall, Steve Simmons and Al Strachan were also regulars then.