Top 50 Flames In History - #3

[Wayne Primeau]

READ
Everyone is eligible. No more arbitrary cutoffs. No more ‘Gilmour Rule’. No more Backlund. Everyone happy? OK, let’s go. We start off with a pool of 10, because that makes it so much easier on me. You post who you want to replace Iginla, in this case, for the next 10. Please be happy with this.

Thanks.

The player pool has been reduced to 10, just to make everything simpler.

RULES
You get one vote.
You may vote for a new player to enter the ballot, but if no one votes, I pick.
No joke-voting.
Atlanta Flames are ineligible, unless, like in the case of Kent Nilsson, they came over to Calgary. You may judge them based on their career with the Calgary Flames franchise.


RANKINGS

62.86% - 22 / 35 votes
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1933573

21.95% - 9 / 41 votes
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1933935

CURRENT PLAYER POOL

PLEASE NOTE​

Please be serious. I am writing about this, and yes, I’d like the results to matter, so with all seriousness, voting for Dean McAmmond over Al MacInnis just won’t fly. No joke-voting.

I’m looking at you, II.​

Click to read more...

 

[Gritty]

Is this actually the last one?

I vote Loob.

 

[FLAMESFAN]

Gets tough here. I think a legit case could be made for any of Lanny, Theo or Kipper.
Nilsson, while one of the most talented Flames ever didn't have a long enough career as a Flame, and Loob has some kind of cult following, but neither should be top 5.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

I vote Loob.

I vote Makarov. The guy who finished 2nd in the last poll. Not that there's an agenda or anything...

 

[InfinityIggy]

Where is Makarov??

 

[Yung Rotini]

Welp, now he's skewing the results. Nice.

 

[tmurfin]

Makarov finished ties for 2nd and he's not even on this one



Anyways, Theo again.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Rejean Lemelin.

This poll is rigged. Worst. Top 50. Ever.

 

[Ynnek]

Makarov?

 

[Gritty]

Rejean Lemelin.

This poll is rigged. Worst. Top 50. Ever.

THIS!

 

[Wayne Primeau]

Rejean Lemelin.

This poll is rigged. Worst. Top 50. Ever.

I think it'd be more the worst if it went:

1. Iginla
2. Makarov
3. Loob
4. Backlund
5. Lemelin

Do any of you see how ridiculous that is?
I'm trying to be objective here, but it's hard when everyone else is being subjective. Last year, I made a subjective version of this that everybody ridiculed so I'm trying to find a middle ground.

 

[InfinityIggy]

I think it'd be more the worst if it went:

1. Iginla
2. Makarov
3. Loob
4. Backlund
5. Lemelin

Do any of you see how ridiculous that is?
I'm trying to be objective here, but it's hard when everyone else is being subjective. Last year, I made a subjective version of this that everybody ridiculed so I'm trying to find a middle ground.

Yes, who the hell would have Lemelin at 5?

 

[Skobel24]

The whole Backlund/Makarov thing was funny at first, but Scorp is trying to do a serious poll.

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

[Anglesmith]

Despite the banter, the poll results seem pretty genuine here.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Yes, who the hell would have Lemelin at 5?

Someone with the subjective opinion that he was a very good goalie.

Opinions not meshing with the OP's stated "objectivity" are not welcome, however.

So basically, the players with the best statistics are objectively better than those with worse statistics. Subjective opinions are not welcome. So your top ten will be: Iginla, Fleury, MacInnis, Niewendyk, Suter, Nilsson, Roberts, Reinhart, Loob & Otto, based on their point totals. There's an objective list. Add Vernon and Kiprusoff in there wherever you feel they fit.

If the list of players in the poll were objective, then Doug Gilmour and his 295 points with the Flames would be included yet Sergei Makarov and his 292 points with the Flames would also be included. (Never mind Conroy and Reichel, with more career points) The list is subjective, to specifically exclude Makarov, and therefore is flawed.

 

[InfinityIggy]

Someone with the subjective opinion that he was a very good goalie.

I was mostly joking.

Agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Wayne Primeau]

Someone with the subjective opinion that he was a very good goalie.

Opinions not meshing with the OP's stated "objectivity" are not welcome, however.

So basically, the players with the best statistics are objectively better than those with worse statistics. Subjective opinions are not welcome. So your top ten will be: Iginla, Fleury, MacInnis, Niewendyk, Suter, Nilsson, Roberts, Reinhart, Loob & Otto, based on their point totals. There's an objective list. Add Vernon and Kiprusoff in there wherever you feel they fit.

If the list of players in the poll were objective, then Doug Gilmour and his 295 points with the Flames would be included yet Sergei Makarov and his 292 points with the Flames would also be included. (Never mind Conroy and Reichel, with more career points) The list is subjective, to specifically exclude Makarov, and therefore is flawed.

You're welcome to start your own poll. This has become a mess that I no longer need to be a part of.

 

[Gritty]

You're welcome to start your own poll. This has become a mess that I no longer need to be a part of.

Well, why don't you just make your top 10 list and present it instead of complaining/changing polls when they don't go the direction you like? Might save some space, time, and headaches.

 

[Yung Rotini]

Well, why don't you just make your top 10 list and present it instead of complaining/changing polls when they don't go the direction you like? Might save some space, time, and headaches.

This.

 

[Master Bill]

 

[Gritty]

We still love you, Scorp!

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Guys, try and stay on topic please otherwise I'm locking this. Scorps, if you are indeed done with these polls, please let one of us MOD's know and we'll lock this thread so no more off topic posts are posted.

But for real, there are some good points being made here. You wanted a serious poll, the problem in my eyes is that you had an objective from the outset, so this was flawed before it started. Yes some posters should be more on topic, but you've attracted some of the responses by some of your outbursts in your threads. And surely you had to know that removing Markov was surely going to draw the response it did.

Either these polls need to go somewhere and fast, or I'm going to stop them all together. How you do that would be up to you.

Cheers!