Zubov vs Gonchar

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,538
4,911
The two Russian defencemen who arguably had the best NHL careers. Both known as rather one-dimensional offensive blueliners earlier in their career, both became better defensively later on. Both are occasionally mentioned as potential HOFers. Who was the better player, Sergey Zubov or Sergey Gonchar?
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Alexei Zhitnik

The two Russian defencemen who arguably had the best NHL careers. Both known as rather one-dimensional offensive blueliners earlier in their career, both became better defensively later on. Both are occasionally mentioned as potential HOFers. Who was the better player, Sergey Zubov or Sergey Gonchar?

Toss -up. Zubov was a rare RHS during his era. Throw in Alexei Zhitnik who rarely played on strong teams but was more physical.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/z/zhitnal01.html

Or Eric Desjardins, another RHS:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/d/desjaer01.html

All four flirted with being the #1 d-man on their team but not one really took charge.

Back to the Zubov vs Gonchar question which comes down to how each fit on a team. Zubov brought a bit more diversity and flexibility, better at quarterbacking a PP, Gonchar, more of a shooter on the PP, less effective on the PK and ES, marginally which could be explained by Zubov being a RHS.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
am i misunderstanding or did you just say that desjardins only flirted with being a number one d and never really took charge?
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
am i misunderstanding or did you just say that desjardins only flirted with being a number one d and never really took charge?

Yes, reason why Montreal gave-up on him.

1995-96 Philadelphia defence was anchored around three former Montreal Canadiens, Desjardins, Svoboda and Haller. Late 1990s, turn of the century he was the #1 by default - Chris Therrien, Dan McGillis,and a casting call. Granted he did a good job under the circumstances, playing within himself but that does not make him better than he was.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
This is a good one. Now, I know there is someone on these boards that thinks Zubov is very close to that of Niedermayer. I think Niedermayer was better and had the better career, but it certainly is closer than people think especially when you take away the sainthood that Nieds has been given since he retired.

I think Zubov had more "good" seasons than Gonchar.

Norris voting:
Zubov - 3, 4, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 13, 17, 17
Gonchar - 4, 4, 4, 5, 7, 9, 14,

Zubov has the edge in the postseason as well. Very underrated postseason career. My goodness, is it ever! Had a better postseason career than Niedermayer by my count. The Pens should have never let him go after 1996, that was stupid. He won two Cups, played excellent in each of them but people seem to remember Leetch (1994) and Hatcher (1999) more. Maybe they should with Leetch, but he would be in my mind the best defenseman on that 1999 team and overall when he was with the Stars.

The only thing that stops him from getting into the HHOF is that he lacks "elite" seasons. He has plenty of "good" years but other than 1994 and 2006 with that big year he is nowhere near the Norris. Even in those years Leetch was ahead of him in people's minds although Leetch finished behind him - 5th - that year. He needed more seasons like that but as it stands is about as close to being in the HHOF as any defenseman this side of J-C Tremblay.

Gonchar has a few more gaps in his career. Seemed to round out well at the end and looked very comfortable in a #1 defenseman role in 2008 and 2009. The thing with Gonchar that Housley doesn't have is that when his team went deep (1998, 2008, 2009) he was their best defenseman. He stepped up. Remember how awful the 2009 Pens were in the middle of the season? Gonchar missed most of it, that's why. They were a completely different team with him on the back end, that should never be underrated.

But he has those gaffes in his career, Game 7 vs. Montreal in 2010 for instance, and he wasn't good defensively early on. So he falls short of the lofty standards of the HHOF defenseman, and just short of Zubov too.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
Yes, reason why Montreal gave-up on him.

1995-96 Philadelphia defence was anchored around three former Montreal Canadiens, Desjardins, Svoboda and Haller. Late 1990s, turn of the century he was the #1 by default - Chris Therrien, Dan McGillis,and a casting call. Granted he did a good job under the circumstances, playing within himself but that does not make him better than he was.

i don't think it's especially fair to say mtl "gave up" on rico, or at least use that as an argument against him, when he was the centerpiece in a trade for a 25 year old hall of famer who had already scored 500 points (in 400 games) and finished top 5 in scoring twice, especially when that trade is considered one of the most lopsided of its time (yes yes leclair) even though that hall of famer would go on to win two more cups, score 1,000 more points, peaking with a third place scoring finish, and play 1,200 more games.

and on the topic of leclair, looking back i think rico had the better career even though leclair had the all-star nods at LW. neither is in my hall of fame but if i had to choose one, it's not leclair.

not a true number one? i just don't see it. to me he was a top ten defenseman for at least a five year stretch, peaking as a top five guy for two or three years. in the late 90s prime, you would say he was the fourth best defenseman of his generation, after blake, lidstrom, and pronger. onviously niedermayer and chara would pass him later, and konstantinov's injury is a mitigating factor but desjardins had a hall of fame peak; it just was relatively brief and the highs weren't freakishly high (like niedermayer's was).

to me, he was extremely good at everything you'd want from a number one defenseman, though not superstar level at any one thing. i mean, he peaked as a second team all-star in back-to-back years and by default or otherwise he was good enough that two teams he was by far the best defenseman on went to the finals.

among best d-men on cup winners, i'd take rico over letang, gonchar, any of the hurricanes obviously, boyle, hatcher/zubov, and murphy without thinking too hard about it. probably ozolinsh too.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
on topic, it's zubov. if he hadn't been on dallas during the hitch years, we would have seen some more gonchar-esque offensive years from him, to go along with the ones he before the first lockout and after the second.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Coach

i don't think it's especially fair to say mtl "gave up" on rico, or at least use that as an argument against him, when he was the centerpiece in a trade for a 25 year old hall of famer who had already scored 500 points (in 400 games) and finished top 5 in scoring twice, especially when that trade is considered one of the most lopsided of its time (yes yes leclair) even though that hall of famer would go on to win two more cups, score 1,000 more points, peaking with a third place scoring finish, and play 1,200 more games.

and on the topic of leclair, looking back i think rico had the better career even though leclair had the all-star nods at LW. neither is in my hall of fame but if i had to choose one, it's not leclair.

not a true number one? i just don't see it. to me he was a top ten defenseman for at least a five year stretch, peaking as a top five guy for two or three years. in the late 90s prime, you would say he was the fourth best defenseman of his generation, after blake, lidstrom, and pronger. onviously niedermayer and chara would pass him later, and konstantinov's injury is a mitigating factor but desjardins had a hall of fame peak; it just was relatively brief and the highs weren't freakishly high (like niedermayer's was).

to me, he was extremely good at everything you'd want from a number one defenseman, though not superstar level at any one thing. i mean, he peaked as a second team all-star in back-to-back years and by default or otherwise he was good enough that two teams he was by far the best defenseman on went to the finals.

among best d-men on cup winners, i'd take rico over letang, gonchar, any of the hurricanes obviously, boyle, hatcher/zubov, and murphy without thinking too hard about it. probably ozolinsh too.

Still, when all is said and done you are looking at the relationship between a coach and a player. Desjardins best two years 2nd AST coincided with Roger Neilson's Philadelphia two full seasons.

Zhitnik with Nolan, Zubov despite other posters protests benefited from Hitchcock, Gonchar with Therrien in Pittsburgh then tried again with the Canadiens but age had caught up to him.

Sort of the definition of a tweener, closer to #2, hints of a #1 given the right system/circumstances.

Back to Gonchar vs Zubov. More or less equal. question of circumstances. Zubov getting certain opportunities because he was a RHS.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
Still, when all is said and done you are looking at the relationship between a coach and a player. Desjardins best two years 2nd AST coincided with Roger Neilson's Philadelphia two full seasons.

Zhitnik with Nolan, Zubov despite other posters protests benefited from Hitchcock, Gonchar with Therrien in Pittsburgh then tried again with the Canadiens but age had caught up to him.

Sort of the definition of a tweener, closer to #2, hints of a #1 given the right system/circumstances.

Back to Gonchar vs Zubov. More or less equal. question of circumstances. Zubov getting certain opportunities because he was a RHS.

if gonchar, rico, zubov, and those guys are all tweeners to you, how many #1 defensemen do you think are in the league at any given time? surely not 20-30 right?

and if your definition if #1 dman is lidstrom, pronger, blake, niedermayer, and chara, then yes i agree desjardins even at his best wasn't quite at their level. but that leaves 25 teams without a #1 d.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
21 to 30 Teams

if gonchar, rico, zubov, and those guys are all tweeners to you, how many #1 defensemen do you think are in the league at any given time? surely not 20-30 right?

and if your definition if #1 dman is lidstrom, pronger, blake, niedermayer, and chara, then yes i agree desjardins even at his best wasn't quite at their level. but that leaves 25 teams without a #1 d.

Presently,18 - 22 but some teams have/had 2 like Nashville with Josi and Weber while others like Vancouver have none. High total includes Young ones on the cusp.

From the above, 1999-2000, you are short Bourque, Chelios, Leetch, Stevens, MacInnis, Foote, drop Chara who was a project with the Islanders. 1995 - 2005 was not deep in quality defensemen.
 

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,265
12,891
Toronto, Ontario
Toss -up. Zubov was a rare RHS during his era. Throw in Alexei Zhitnik who rarely played on strong teams but was more physical.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/z/zhitnal01.html

Or Eric Desjardins, another RHS:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/d/desjaer01.html

All four flirted with being the #1 d-man on their team but not one really took charge.

Eric Desjardins did a lot more than "flirt" with being the #1 defensemen on the Philadelphia Flyers.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
Presently,18 - 22 but some teams have/had 2 like Nashville with Josi and Weber while others like Vancouver have none. High total includes Young ones on the cusp.

From the above, 1999-2000, you are short Bourque, Chelios, Leetch, Stevens, MacInnis, Foote, drop Chara who was a project with the Islanders. 1995 - 2005 was not deep in quality defensemen.

i guess we disagree on desjardins then.

in '99-'00, by your high standard, i have lidstrom, blake, and pronger as true #1s among younger guys; bourque, stevens, chopper, chelios, and leetch for older guys still playing at elite levels; and desjardins in the next tier with ozolinsh. after them we could argue nomenclature about whether gonchar, zubov, hatcher, numminen, and svehla qualify (the first three guys not being real all-situations guys at that point in their careers, the last two sub-elite but very very good at everything). i have foote as a #1/2 tweener and niedermayer is certainly a few years away from being a #1 in '00.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
i guess we disagree on desjardins then.

in '99-'00, by your high standard, i have lidstrom, blake, and pronger as true #1s among younger guys; bourque, stevens, chopper, chelios, and leetch for older guys still playing at elite levels; and desjardins in the next tier with ozolinsh. after them we could argue nomenclature about whether gonchar, zubov, hatcher, numminen, and svehla qualify (the first three guys not being real all-situations guys at that point in their careers, the last two sub-elite but very very good at everything). i have foote as a #1/2 tweener and niedermayer is certainly a few years away from being a #1 in '00.

It wasn't the strongest time for defensemen. Heck, this is the argument we use when talking about Lidstrom against Bourque. He had a bit clearer of a path to the Norris. I would say mid 1990s all the way up until 2008 or 2009 was pretty weak. Similar to the 1960s before Orr arrived. Not to take anything away from anyone that's ever won a Norris of course but in almost any other era Ray Bourque wins more than just 5.

But back to the original topic. Either way, Zubov is the winner here. Still hard to argue against him vs. Gonchar. Still had more "good" seasons under his belt and was put in some tougher situations from his coach. If Ken Hitchcock trusts you, you probably did something right.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
A quite simplistic argument, but two more minutes a game for a whole career, for far superior teams is a huuuuge gap. This was from the preliminary discussion in the d-man project

Zubov averaged 25.55 minutes per game in his career, for teams that were 17% better than average.

Gonchar averaged 23.54 minutes per game in his career (so far) for teams that were 1% better than average.

In other words, Zubov was much more important to significantly better teams.

Zubov contributed more to better powerplays:

82% to PPs 14% better than average as opposed to 76% and 8% better.

Zubov also contributed more to better penalty kills:

33% to PKs 14% better than average as opposed to 21% for average PKs.

Heck, Gonchar is only really in the conversation for top-80 because he has a ton of points. But Zubov scored more points in less games, so......

Zubov also had 37 more points in 46 more playoff games.

Just more all-around contribution to success.

I already said Zubov was a lock not to make it this round. I don't think he and Gonchar should even be within 15 spots of eachother.

They both had a lot of points, but there are different kinds of point scoring defensemen. Gonchar was good in a Mike Green sort of way. Opportunistic, big shot, PP reliant, not always a catalyst. Zubov was more cut from the Karlsson cloth - smooth, outstanding skater, great on the rush, an outstanding possession player, a catalyst.
 

One Winged Angel

You Can't Escape
May 3, 2006
16,531
3,454
Long Island
Zubov and it's not even close.

Arguably the most underrated player ever. Guy gets no recognition for how good he actually was. One of the smartest and most smooth defensemen I've ever seen. Underrated defensively as well.

Gonchar was never a good defender, had a big shot and put up some good points because of it.
 

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
Presently,18 - 22 but some teams have/had 2 like Nashville with Josi and Weber while others like Vancouver have none. High total includes Young ones on the cusp.

From the above, 1999-2000, you are short Bourque, Chelios, Leetch, Stevens, MacInnis, Foote, drop Chara who was a project with the Islanders. 1995 - 2005 was not deep in quality defensemen.

What is your criteria for a #1D? In other words, what does it take for a D to be considered a #1 in your eyes?
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Criteria

What is your criteria for a #1D? In other words, what does it take for a D to be considered a #1 in your eyes?

Main criteria is the ability to skate - well above average,at least excellent, plus possess all the defensive tools including at least some physicality, excellent transition game, shot and passing skills, appreciate on ice geometry, take charge on the ice.
 

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
Main criteria is the ability to skate - well above average,at least excellent, plus possess all the defensive tools including at least some physicality, excellent transition game, shot and passing skills, appreciate on ice geometry, take charge on the ice.

If we look at Shea Weber for example: definitely never was an excellent skater, not even above average.
Yet I think you suggested he was a #1 in a previous post.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Your Interpretation

If we look at Shea Weber for example: definitely never was an excellent skater, not even above average.
Yet I think you suggested he was a #1 in a previous post.

Your interpretaion not mine.

Shea Weber:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/w/webersh01.html

Double Olympic Gold, played ahead of P.K. Subban in 2014 even though not as fast in terms of straight ahead forward speed. 2010 NHL surface, 2014 International surface made no difference.

Skating is not a question of straight ahead speed only for defensemen. Backward skating,skating in harmony with his partner, turns to both sides - smallest possible radius, efficient lateral movement, movement in tight quarters,and more.

Hockey smart skating as opposed to entertaining skating.
 

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
95,345
59,251
Ottawa, ON
Your interpretaion not mine.

Shea Weber:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/w/webersh01.html

Double Olympic Gold, played ahead of P.K. Subban in 2014 even though not as fast in terms of straight ahead forward speed. 2010 NHL surface, 2014 International surface made no difference.

Skating is not a question of straight ahead speed only for defensemen. Backward skating,skating in harmony with his partner, turns to both sides - smallest possible radius, efficient lateral movement, movement in tight quarters,and more.

Hockey smart skating as opposed to entertaining skating.

Weber has had his fair share of elite defensive partners, both on Nashville and on Team Canada.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,668
16,394
Weber has had his fair share of elite defensive partners, both on Nashville and on Team Canada.

...And a fair share of Nashville 1st pairing D-Men, along with a total share of Team Canada D-Men, got elite defensive partners, so I don't exactly know where you're going, or why you're trying to go somewhere...
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->