According to numbers, Kharlamov does not stand out

[Triffy]

I would like to compare Kharlamov to his peers: Petrov, Mikhailov and Maltsev.

The 1969 WCH was the first tournament Kharlamov, Petrov and Mikhailov and Maltsev took part in. Here’s how they performed at the WCH level from 1969 until 1975, a time frame during which all of them played every single tournament which makes the comparison as fair as possible.

Note that the italicized numbers at the GP section indicates it is an educated guess which is concluded from other players’ number of games.

Year | Kharlamov | Petrov | Mikhailov | Maltsev
1969 WCH|10 6+7=13|10 6+2=8|9 9+5=14|10 5+6=11
1970 WCH|9 7+3=10|10 5+3=8|10 7+3=10|10 15+6=21
1971 WCH|10 5+12=17|9 8+3=11|9 7+3=10|10 10+6=16
1972 WCH|9 8+6=14|10 6+6=12|10 11+2=13|10 10+12=22
1973 WCH|10 9+14=23|10 18+16=34|10 16+13=29|9 7+6=13
1974 WCH|10 5+5=10|8 4+7=11|10 8+8=16|10 6+4=10
1975 WCH|9 10+6=16| 9 6+12=18| 9 7+8=15|10 8+6=14

Combined their stats look like this:

Player | GP | G | A | P
Kharlamov|67|50|53|103
Petrov| 66 |53|49|102
Mikhailov| 67 |65|42|107
Maltsev|69|61|46|107

No need to count point per game averages. They scored at similar pace during the time frame. The selected time frame probably favors Kharlamov as he was selected the Soviet MVP twice (tied with Maltsev in ’72 and won in ’73) during it and besides the 1976’s all-star selection had little success afterwards.

Here’s some more data:

Soviet MVP Top 5 Finishes

Mikhailov, Maltsev and Kharlamov very similar again.

Soviet League Scoring Top-3 Finishes

Kharlamov is the worst of the players mentioned.

Next metric is (likely) the one BM67 has used on the forum. The idea is to compare player's total points to the player who finished 2nd in scoring race that season. The number at the first column of the table is 1,266 - meaning that Makarov, by average, outscored the #2 in scoring race by 26,6% during his 5 best years.

Vs. #2 Numbers

Player | H5AVG | H3AVG | AVGXCLW
Makarov |1,266| 1,303 |1,195|
Alexandrov| 1,185| 1,321| 1,185
Petrov |1,154 |1,237 |1,034
Starshinov |1,094 |1,180 |1,005
Balderis |1,005 |1,040 |0,923
Krutov |0,986 |1 |0,969
Firsov |0,985 |1,097 |0,881
Mikhailov |0,974 |1 |0,927
Almetov |0,969 |1,009 |0,969
Maltsev |0,955 |1,018 |0,952
Kharlamov |0,927 |1,001 |0,957
Larionov |0,907 |0,973 |0,879

H5AVG tells the average of the five best seasons the player had.
H3AVG tells the average of the three best seasons the player had.
AVGXCLW tells the average of the seasons the player had in top 10 (or top 5, depending on the information available), except that the worst season is not taken into account.

According to this table which tells about the relative dominance the player had compared to the player who finished second in the scoring race, Petrov was easily the best scorer of his line. You could make a conclusion from these numbers that Kharlamov had both a short (only 5 times in top 5) and relatively weak peak (see latest table). The fact that Kharlamov missed more games than the players he's being compared to must be considered.

So here's Soviet league scoring, excluding everyone else except Troika Petrov and Maltsev, from 1969 until 1975 (the same time frame which was used in the international stats table):

Player | GP | G | A | P | PPG
Kharlamov|224|190|97|287|1,28
Petrov|243|183|133|316|1,30
Mikhailov|253|210|90|300|1,19
Maltsev|238|177|85*|262*|1,1*

*For the first two seasons, no assist info was found. He likely had about 10 assists each season, these ghost assists would give him a PPG avg 1,18 - similar to Mikhailov. It's worth mentioning that unlike the others, Maltsev did not play for CSKA Moscow.

Again, after taking into account the number of games Kharlamov lost due to injuries/whatever, Kharlamov does not stand out (PPG avg).

It seems that regardless of the metric used, Kharlamov does not stand out above his peers.

Discuss.

Click to read more...

 

[McOvechking]

It's true. He wasn't much better than those guys you compared him to.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Alexander Yakushev

I would like to compare Kharlamov to his peers: Petrov, Mikhailov and Maltsev.

The 1969 WCH was the first tournament Kharlamov, Petrov and Mikhailov and Maltsev took part in. Here’s how they performed at the WCH level from 1969 until 1975, a time frame during which all of them played every single tournament which makes the comparison as fair as possible.

Note that the italicized numbers at the GP section indicates it is an educated guess which is concluded from other players’ number of games.

Year | Kharlamov | Petrov | Mikhailov | Maltsev
1969 WCH|10 6+7=13|10 6+2=8|9 9+5=14|10 5+6=11
1970 WCH|9 7+3=10|10 5+3=8|10 7+3=10|10 15+6=21
1971 WCH|10 5+12=17|9 8+3=11|9 7+3=10|10 10+6=16
1972 WCH|9 8+6=14|10 6+6=12|10 11+2=13|10 10+12=22
1973 WCH|10 9+14=23|10 18+16=34|10 16+13=29|9 7+6=13
1974 WCH|10 5+5=10|8 4+7=11|10 8+8=16|10 6+4=10
1975 WCH|9 10+6=16| 9 6+12=18| 9 7+8=15|10 8+6=14

Combined their stats look like this:

Player | GP | G | A | P
Kharlamov|67|50|53|103
Petrov| 66 |53|49|102
Mikhailov| 67 |65|42|107
Maltsev|69|61|46|107

No need to count point per game averages. They scored at similar pace during the time frame. The selected time frame probably favors Kharlamov as he was selected the Soviet MVP twice (tied with Maltsev in ’72 and won in ’73) during it and besides the 1976’s all-star selection had little success afterwards.

Here’s some more data:

Soviet MVP Top 5 Finishes

Mikhailov, Maltsev and Kharlamov very similar again.

Soviet League Scoring Top-3 Finishes

Kharlamov is the worst of the players mentioned.

Next metric is (likely) the one BM67 has used on the forum. The idea is to compare player's total points to the player who finished 2nd in scoring race that season. The number at the first column of the table is 1,266 - meaning that Makarov, by average, outscored the #2 in scoring race by 26,6% during his 5 best years.

Vs. #2 Numbers

Player | H5AVG | H3AVG | AVGXCLW
Makarov |1,266| 1,303 |1,195|
Alexandrov| 1,185| 1,321| 1,185
Petrov |1,154 |1,237 |1,034
Starshinov |1,094 |1,180 |1,005
Balderis |1,005 |1,040 |0,923
Krutov |0,986 |1 |0,969
Firsov |0,985 |1,097 |0,881
Mikhailov |0,974 |1 |0,927
Almetov |0,969 |1,009 |0,969
Maltsev |0,955 |1,018 |0,952
Kharlamov |0,927 |1,001 |0,957
Larionov |0,907 |0,973 |0,879

H5AVG tells the average of the five best seasons the player had.
H3AVG tells the average of the three best seasons the player had.
AVGXCLW tells the average of the seasons the player had in top 10 (or top 5, depending on the information available), except that the worst season is not taken into account.

According to this table which tells about the relative dominance the player had compared to the player who finished second in the scoring race, Petrov was easily the best scorer of his line. You could make a conclusion from these numbers that Kharlamov had both a short (only 5 times in top 5) and relatively weak peak (see latest table). The fact that Kharlamov missed more games than the players he's being compared to must be considered.

So here's Soviet league scoring, excluding everyone else except Troika Petrov and Maltsev, from 1969 until 1975 (the same time frame which was used in the international stats table):

Player | GP | G | A | P | PPG
Kharlamov|224|190|97|287|1,28
Petrov|243|183|133|316|1,30
Mikhailov|253|210|90|300|1,19
Maltsev|238|177|85*|262*|1,1*

*For the first two seasons, no assist info was found. He likely had about 10 assists each season, these ghost assists would give him a PPG avg 1,18 - similar to Mikhailov. It's worth mentioning that unlike the others, Maltsev did not play for CSKA Moscow.

Again, after taking into account the number of games Kharlamov lost due to injuries/whatever, Kharlamov does not stand out (PPG avg).

It seems that regardless of the metric used, Kharlamov does not stand out above his peers.

Discuss.

What about Alexander Yakushev? Always played well against Canada.

 

[Triffy]

What about Alexander Yakushev? Always played well against Canada.

I never consider him to be at the same level as Troika Petrov and Maltsev. In Finland people always talk about Troika Petrov and possibly Maltsev, rarely anything about Yakushev. I don't think he'd do very well in the comparison and right now I'm too sick of all the table playing. If I feel like it, I'll add him tomorrow.

 

[MS]

Simple answer : all of these guys should probably be in the HHOF, but Kharlamov was lucky enough to stand out the most against NHL competition.

The comparision you're making doesn't show Kharlamov as being over-rated, it just highlights how under-rated the rest of that group is (and I do include Yakushev in that group - IIRC his numbers stack up very comparatively, and perhaps his style or lack thereof is why he isn't considered on the same level as his flashier peers).

The fact that Mikhailov especially isn't in the HHOF is a travesty.

 

[Triffy]

The comparision you're making doesn't show Kharlamov as being over-rated, it just highlights how under-rated the rest of that group is --.

I did not mean to say Kharlamov's overrated. I tried to choose my words carefully. That's why I said, numerous times, that "he did not stand out" when looking at the stats. That suggests his linemates are likely quite close to him, and as you said, are definitely underrated here. I had them all in my top 100.

 

[duck]

Yeah, I've been having this ongoing discussion for a while on another forum. The stats simply don't suggest Kharlamov is that much of a better player than his peers; when you factor in other non-statistical claims, such as leadership, defensive play, and other things, it appears as though rating Kharlamov over Mikhailov and maybe Petrov is just plain wrong.

Also, on another side note, Yakushev probably doesn't have the Russian League stats to compare with Mikhailov, Kharlamov, and Petrov, but keep in mind he didn't play on CSKA. He always seemed to be one of the top-3 forwards on Team Russia in international games. It would be unfair to compare him (or Maltsev) to the aforementioned three. Also, I believe Balderis was probably more skilled than most of these guys, but I believe he had problems with being forced to play on CSKA and was generally one of the lazier players (kind of like a modern day Yashin), but when he was on his game, he was one of the best in the league as well.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Best Forward Line

Yeah, I've been having this ongoing discussion for a while on another forum. The stats simply don't suggest Kharlamov is that much of a better player than his peers; when you factor in other non-statistical claims, such as leadership, defensive play, and other things, it appears as though rating Kharlamov over Mikhailov and maybe Petrov is just plain wrong.

Also, on another side note, Yakushev probably doesn't have the Russian League stats to compare with Mikhailov, Kharlamov, and Petrov, but keep in mind he didn't play on CSKA. He always seemed to be one of the top-3 forwards on Team Russia in international games. It would be unfair to compare him (or Maltsev) to the aforementioned three. Also, I believe Balderis was probably more skilled than most of these guys, but I believe he had problems with being forced to play on CSKA and was generally one of the lazier players (kind of like a modern day Yashin), but when he was on his game, he was one of the best in the league as well.

There is a bit of a logical misdirect going on in this thread.

Effectively the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov could be considered as one of or perhaps the best forward lines of all time in terms of longevity, production and balance - all three were very close in terms of their contribution to the line's success. All three played as a unit for CSKA and the Soviet National team whereas Alexander Yakushev and Maltsev were non CSKA players on the National team who did not have the benefit of playing with the majority of their league teammates in international competition. Since CSKA used to dominate the Russian League - best goalie and best defense then the league stats of players like Alexander Yakushev and Maltsev have to be viewed accordingly.

 

[poise]

Simple answer : all of these guys should probably be in the HHOF, but Kharlamov was lucky enough to stand out the most against NHL competition.

The comparision you're making doesn't show Kharlamov as being over-rated, it just highlights how under-rated the rest of that group is (and I do include Yakushev in that group - IIRC his numbers stack up very comparatively, and perhaps his style or lack thereof is why he isn't considered on the same level as his flashier peers).

The fact that Mikhailov especially isn't in the HHOF is a travesty.

Completely agree with this. Attention that is given to Valery Kharlamov is well deserved, and the seeming gap in attention for the other Soviet greats has to do more with perception for whatever reason than of actual discrepancy in ranking.

Valery Kharlamov is certainly one of the greatest Soviet players ever (I wouldn't say he was the greatest, I would put Sergei Makarov ahead of him) but there's a reason those Russian teams were so good and it's because they had several players basically at the level of Kharlamov.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Alexander Yakushev vs Kharlamov and the Rest

I never consider him to be at the same level as Troika Petrov and Maltsev. In Finland people always talk about Troika Petrov and possibly Maltsev, rarely anything about Yakushev. I don't think he'd do very well in the comparison and right now I'm too sick of all the table playing. If I feel like it, I'll add him tomorrow.

No need to do another table.

Alexander Yakushev
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=y001

Vladimir Petrov
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=p007

Valeri Kharlamov
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=k011

Boris Mikhailov
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=m018

Anatoli Firsov
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=f010

Sergei Makarov
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=m003

Aleaxander Maltsev
http://www.chidlovski.net/1954/54_player_info.asp?p_id=m005

Will look at some of the data in future posts.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov a Summit Perspective

It could be argued that the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov were one of the greatest lines in hockey history. certainly they dominated the REL and had longevity,productivity and balance in their favour BUT how good were they?

1974 Summit Series:
http://www.chidlovski.net/1974/74_statsform.asp

Well the Canadian geriatrics - Bobby Hull, Gordie Howe, Ralph Backstrom certainly gave them a run for their money scoring wise.
Also notice who led the Soviets in scoring despite playing one fewer game - Alexander Yakushev.

1972 Summit Series
http://www.1972summitseries.com/sovietroster.html

Again Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring with Shadrin second - after catching the attention of Canadian fans in Canada the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov line faded at home.

During the two summit series the Soviet scoring was not led by the expected leaders.

 

[duck]

It could be argued that the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov were one of the greatest lines in hockey history. certainly they dominated the REL and had longevity,productivity and balance in their favour BUT how good were they?

1974 Summit Series:
http://www.chidlovski.net/1974/74_statsform.asp

Well the Canadian geriatrics - Bobby Hull, Gordie Howe, Ralph Backstrom certainly gave them a run for their money scoring wise.
Also notice who led the Soviets in scoring despite playing one fewer game - Alexander Yakushev.

1972 Summit Series
http://www.1972summitseries.com/sovietroster.html

Again Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring with Shadrin second - after catching the attention of Canadian fans in Canada the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov line faded at home.

During the two summit series the Soviet scoring was not led by the expected leaders.

My understanding was in 72, Kharlamov - Maltsev - Vikulov played together for most of the series. Also, it's important to keep in mind that Kharlamov's line in 72 and 74 played against the best defensive forwards majority of the time.

Yakushev is good, certainly, but he's never faced international defense in the same manor as Mikhailov, Kharlamov, and Petrov, as well as despite playing well in these two series, they were probably his best set of games, or at least, thats what stats suggest. Certainly not a knock against Yakushev, but I think it's a little bit of a reach to compare him to some of the elite players. He's certainly better than most suggest, and I'm one of his biggest fans, but I don't think he was on par with any of the aforementioned players. And unfortunately, when judging him, there comes a lot of what ifs that requires us to predict how good he would have been had he played on CSKA.

I'd say if you were to consider Russian forwards who found most of their success in the Russian League, a fair way to break it down would be a top tier of Makarov, Mikhailov, and Kharlamov, a second tier of Larionov, Firsov, Starshinov, Yakushev, Maltsev, and Petrov, and a third tier of Shadrin, Krutov, Bobrov, Loktev, and Almetov, with various order within the tiers, but probably not any cross-over in overall skill.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The REL & International Comparison

Going to look at career goals in the REL. The assists issue was addressed previously


REL
PLAYER
Boris Mikhailov 572 Games 428 Goals .748 GPG
Vladimir Petrov 585 Games 370 Goals .632 GPG
Anatoli Firsov 474 Games 344 Goals .726 GPG
A. Yakushev* 568 Games 339 Goals .597 GPG
A. Maltsev* 529 Games 329 Goals .622 GPG
Sergei Makarov 519 Games 322 Goals .620 GPG
V. Kharlamov 438 Games 293 Goals .669 GPG

* = non CSKA players who played against the stronger CSKA teams.

International
A. Maltsev 321 Games 213 Goals .663 GPG (.417)
Boris Mikhailov 288 Games 207 Goals .719 GPG (.652)
V. Kharlamov 292 Games 193 Goals .661 GPG (.543)
Vladimir Petrov 281 Games 189 Goals .673 GPG (.532)
Sergei Makarov 315 Games 189 Goals .600 GPG (.500)
Anatoli Firsov 166 Games 134 Goals .807 GPG (.743)
A. Yakushev 221 Games 145 Goals .656 GPG (.756)

( .XYZ) = GPG against Canada.

Comparing within the K/P/M trio it is rather obvious that Boris Mikhailov was the most productive of the three within the REL and Internationally.

What is also interesting is that outside the REL, meaning internationally, Mikhailov and Kharlamov saw their GPG drop slightly while Petrov improved his GPG. Conversely the two non-CSKA players(Maltsev and Yakushev) saw their GPG rise internationally.

As illustrated previously Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring in the first two series against the Canadien pros - 1972 & 1974 Summit Series.

Unfortunately,Anatoli Firsov never played against Canadian NHL professionals so it is hard to comment about what he might have done.

Sergei Makarov is interesting. Weakest GPG internationally probably is a testament to the improvement of the international game in a very short period of time. On the other hand of all the Soviet players considered he is the one who stood to benefit the most from strong back end support as the others played in an era before the Soviet defensemen offered offensive support.

 

[duck]

Going to look at career goals in the REL. The assists issue was addressed previously


REL
PLAYER
Boris Mikhailov 572 Games 428 Goals .748 GPG
Vladimir Petrov 585 Games 370 Goals .632 GPG
Anatoli Firsov 474 Games 344 Goals .726 GPG
A. Yakushev* 568 Games 339 Goals .597 GPG
A. Maltsev* 529 Games 329 Goals .622 GPG
Sergei Makarov 519 Games 322 Goals .620 GPG
V. Kharlamov 438 Games 293 Goals .669 GPG

* = non CSKA players who played against the stronger CSKA teams.

International
A. Maltsev 321 Games 213 Goals .663 GPG (.417)
Boris Mikhailov 288 Games 207 Goals .719 GPG (.652)
V. Kharlamov 292 Games 193 Goals .661 GPG (.543)
Vladimir Petrov 281 Games 189 Goals .673 GPG (.532)
Sergei Makarov 315 Games 189 Goals .600 GPG (.500)
Anatoli Firsov 166 Games 134 Goals .807 GPG (.743)
A. Yakushev 221 Games 145 Goals .656 GPG (.756)

( .XYZ) = GPG against Canada.

Comparing within the K/P/M trio it is rather obvious that Boris Mikhailov was the most productive of the three within the REL and Internationally.

What is also interesting is that outside the REL, meaning internationally, Mikhailov and Kharlamov saw their GPG drop slightly while Petrov improved his GPG. Conversely the two non-CSKA players(Maltsev and Yakushev) saw their GPG rise internationally.

As illustrated previously Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring in the first two series against the Canadien pros - 1972 & 1974 Summit Series.

Unfortunately,Anatoli Firsov never played against Canadian NHL professionals so it is hard to comment about what he might have done.

Sergei Makarov is interesting. Weakest GPG internationally probably is a testament to the improvement of the international game in a very short period of time. On the other hand of all the Soviet players considered he is the one who stood to benefit the most from strong back end support as the others played in an era before the Soviet defensemen offered offensive support.

I'm the biggest Mikhailov fan and I think he's probably better than Kharlamov and Petrov, but it's unfair to only compare goals; it comes as no surprise that Mikhailov was the best goalscorer on that line when you consider the style of game he played. Similarly, Yakushev, iirc, played a similar game where he crashed to the front of the net and scored garbage goals (though he had a pretty good shot as well). I think you'd find different trends if you include assists as well, but that's off of assumption rather than actually computing the data.

Also, when considering Makarov, it's important to consider who he was playing against. I believe the 70s players still played against some Canadian Olympic teams who were filled with Canadian amateurs while KLM line always played against, mostly, the toughest opponents.

 

[Steveorama]

Again Alexander Yakushev led the Soviets in scoring with Shadrin second - after catching the attention of Canadian fans in Canada the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov line faded at home.
During the two summit series the Soviet scoring was not led by the expected leaders.

Part of the credit for Kharlamov's (and, therefore, his linemates') less impressive play at home goes to Bobby Clarke's timely slash. Kharlamov was missing or ineffective for the last 3 games with a bad ankle.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Yakushev

I'm the biggest Mikhailov fan and I think he's probably better than Kharlamov and Petrov, but it's unfair to only compare goals; it comes as no surprise that Mikhailov was the best goalscorer on that line when you consider the style of game he played. Similarly, Yakushev, iirc, played a similar game where he crashed to the front of the net and scored garbage goals (though he had a pretty good shot as well). I think you'd find different trends if you include assists as well, but that's off of assumption rather than actually computing the data.

Also, when considering Makarov, it's important to consider who he was playing against. I believe the 70s players still played against some Canadian Olympic teams who were filled with Canadian amateurs while KLM line always played against, mostly, the toughest opponents.

Yakushev's game had similarities to Frank Mahovlich.

Hard to include assists as in European or International Hockey from the 1960's into the seventies a second assist was rarely given. Also the perception of an unassisted goal was not the same as the NHL perception. More rigid interpretation.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Makorov

Also, when considering Makarov, it's important to consider who he was playing against. I believe the 70s players still played against some Canadian Olympic teams who were filled with Canadian amateurs while KLM line always played against, mostly, the toughest opponents.

Balanced by the fact that Makorov in the 1980's was playing international games against weakend national teams from Finland,Sweden who had most of their better players playing in the NHL and the Czech's minus the Stastny's.

 

[VMBM]

There is a bit of a logical misdirect going on in this thread.

Effectively the Kharlamov / Petrov / Mikhailov could be considered as one of or perhaps the best forward lines of all time in terms of longevity, production and balance - all three were very close in terms of their contribution to the line's success. All three played as a unit for CSKA and the Soviet National team whereas Alexander Yakushev and Maltsev were non CSKA players on the National team who did not have the benefit of playing with the majority of their league teammates in international competition. Since CSKA used to dominate the Russian League - best goalie and best defense then the league stats of players like Alexander Yakushev and Maltsev have to be viewed accordingly.

Would you PLEASE stop giving the impression that Yakushev played with some no-good strangers on the national team; he played with Center Vladimir Shadrin for the most of his career - BOTH ON THE NATIONAL TEAM AND MOSCOW SPARTAK. As seen by many experts (and non-experts like me ), Shadrin was very important to Yakushev's success in the Summit series and beyond. The best version of that Spartak line had Victor Shalimov as RW (http://www.chidlovski.com/personal/1974/liners/index.htm). They certainly 'challenged' and maybe even outshined Troika Petrova at the 1975 WC and 1976 Winter Olympics, just like Shalimov-Shepelev-Kapustin and Khomutov-Bykov-Kamensky sometimes managed to do to KLM in the 80s. I don't think it mattered much that (most of) Yakushev's other teammates didn't play for Spartak, just as long as his LINEmates did (not to mention Yuri Lyapkin on defense).

And some things you mentioned in your other posts...

Mikhailov, Petrov and Kharlamov played something like 5 minutes together in the 1972 Summit Series; the lines were mostly Vikulov-Maltsev-Kharlamov and Mikhailov-Petrov-Blinov (and Yakushev-Shadrin-Zimin/Anisin). Yakushev was the best player in the last 3 games, no arguments from me, but considering what happened to Kharlamov, well...

In the 1974 Summit series, Troika Petrova wasn't devastating per se, but still undoubtedly the best Soviet line, who were largely responsible for their success (Kharlamov 8, Petrov 7 and Mikhailov 6 points). And don't forget that Vasiliev (4 points) and Gusev (also 4 points) played behind them, so their points sort of count too. And just like Yakushev; Mikhailov and Petrov played 'only' 7 games, whereas Kharlamov played all 8.

BTW, in the 1975-76 Super series, CSKA's top line (Maltsev replacing Petrov in the last 2 games vs. Bruins and Flyers) scored 9 out of the 16 goals they managed in that series. Obviously, on the national team it was slightly different, but that is just a little example of how important they were.

 

[VMBM]

I would like to compare Kharlamov to his peers: Petrov, Mikhailov and Maltsev.

The 1969 WCH was the first tournament Kharlamov, Petrov and Mikhailov and Maltsev took part in. Here’s how they performed at the WCH level from 1969 until 1975, a time frame during which all of them played every single tournament which makes the comparison as fair as possible.

Note that the italicized numbers at the GP section indicates it is an educated guess which is concluded from other players’ number of games.

Year | Kharlamov | Petrov | Mikhailov | Maltsev
1969 WCH|10 6+7=13|10 6+2=8|9 9+5=14|10 5+6=11
1970 WCH|9 7+3=10|10 5+3=8|10 7+3=10|10 15+6=21
1971 WCH|10 5+12=17|9 8+3=11|9 7+3=10|10 10+6=16
1972 WCH|9 8+6=14|10 6+6=12|10 11+2=13|10 10+12=22
1973 WCH|10 9+14=23|10 18+16=34|10 16+13=29|9 7+6=13
1974 WCH|10 5+5=10|8 4+7=11|10 8+8=16|10 6+4=10
1975 WCH|9 10+6=16| 9 6+12=18| 9 7+8=15|10 8+6=14

Combined their stats look like this:

Player | GP | G | A | P
Kharlamov|67|50|53|103
Petrov| 66 |53|49|102
Mikhailov| 67 |65|42|107
Maltsev|69|61|46|107

No need to count point per game averages. They scored at similar pace during the time frame. The selected time frame probably favors Kharlamov as he was selected the Soviet MVP twice (tied with Maltsev in ’72 and won in ’73) during it and besides the 1976’s all-star selection had little success afterwards.

Here’s some more data:

Soviet MVP Top 5 Finishes

Mikhailov, Maltsev and Kharlamov very similar again.

Soviet League Scoring Top-3 Finishes

Kharlamov is the worst of the players mentioned.

Next metric is (likely) the one BM67 has used on the forum. The idea is to compare player's total points to the player who finished 2nd in scoring race that season. The number at the first column of the table is 1,266 - meaning that Makarov, by average, outscored the #2 in scoring race by 26,6% during his 5 best years.

Vs. #2 Numbers

Player | H5AVG | H3AVG | AVGXCLW
Makarov |1,266| 1,303 |1,195|
Alexandrov| 1,185| 1,321| 1,185
Petrov |1,154 |1,237 |1,034
Starshinov |1,094 |1,180 |1,005
Balderis |1,005 |1,040 |0,923
Krutov |0,986 |1 |0,969
Firsov |0,985 |1,097 |0,881
Mikhailov |0,974 |1 |0,927
Almetov |0,969 |1,009 |0,969
Maltsev |0,955 |1,018 |0,952
Kharlamov |0,927 |1,001 |0,957
Larionov |0,907 |0,973 |0,879

H5AVG tells the average of the five best seasons the player had.
H3AVG tells the average of the three best seasons the player had.
AVGXCLW tells the average of the seasons the player had in top 10 (or top 5, depending on the information available), except that the worst season is not taken into account.

According to this table which tells about the relative dominance the player had compared to the player who finished second in the scoring race, Petrov was easily the best scorer of his line. You could make a conclusion from these numbers that Kharlamov had both a short (only 5 times in top 5) and relatively weak peak (see latest table). The fact that Kharlamov missed more games than the players he's being compared to must be considered.

So here's Soviet league scoring, excluding everyone else except Troika Petrov and Maltsev, from 1969 until 1975 (the same time frame which was used in the international stats table):

Player | GP | G | A | P | PPG
Kharlamov|224|190|97|287|1,28
Petrov|243|183|133|316|1,30
Mikhailov|253|210|90|300|1,19
Maltsev|238|177|85*|262*|1,1*

*For the first two seasons, no assist info was found. He likely had about 10 assists each season, these ghost assists would give him a PPG avg 1,18 - similar to Mikhailov. It's worth mentioning that unlike the others, Maltsev did not play for CSKA Moscow.

Again, after taking into account the number of games Kharlamov lost due to injuries/whatever, Kharlamov does not stand out (PPG avg).

It seems that regardless of the metric used, Kharlamov does not stand out above his peers.

Discuss.

No, Kharlamov didn't stand out (statistically) in his prime, let alone after the car accident in 1976, after which Mikhailov and Petrov were definitely more important players on the top line (Kharlamov only 1-time all-star - and nothing else - in the Soviet league after 1976).

IMO he was 1969-1976 still better than Mikhailov and certainly better than Petrov (and 1971/2-76 he was the best Soviet player). He could do things that neither Mikhailov or Petrov could. Statistically, it didn't maybe show, but it showed on the ice.

When we consider careers AND individual skills, forwards like Firsov and Makarov (and MAYBE even Maltsev) might have been just as good or even better than Kharlamov, but Mikhailov and Petrov were not... not in my opinion, anyway.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Clarification

Would you PLEASE stop giving the impression that Yakushev played with some no-good strangers on the national team; he played with Center Vladimir Shadrin for the most of his career - BOTH ON THE NATIONAL TEAM AND MOSCOW SPARTAK. As seen by many experts (and non-experts like me ), Shadrin was very important to Yakushev's success in the Summit series and beyond. The best version of that Spartak line had Victor Shalimov as RW (http://www.chidlovski.com/personal/1974/liners/index.htm). They certainly 'challenged' and maybe even outshined Troika Petrova at the 1975 WC and 1976 Winter Olympics, just like Shalimov-Shepelev-Kapustin and Khomutov-Bykov-Kamensky sometimes managed to do to KLM in the 80s. I don't think it mattered much that (most of) Yakushev's other teammates didn't play for Spartak, just as long as his LINEmates did (not to mention Yuri Lyapkin on defense).

And some things you mentioned in your other posts...

Mikhailov, Petrov and Kharlamov played something like 5 minutes together in the 1972 Summit Series; the lines were mostly Vikulov-Maltsev-Kharlamov and Mikhailov-Petrov-Blinov (and Yakushev-Shadrin-Zimin/Anisin). Yakushev was the best player in the last 3 games, no arguments from me, but considering what happened to Kharlamov, well...

In the 1974 Summit series, Troika Petrova wasn't devastating per se, but still undoubtedly the best Soviet line, who were largely responsible for their success (Kharlamov 8, Petrov 7 and Mikhailov 6 points). And don't forget that Vasiliev (4 points) and Gusev (also 4 points) played behind them, so their points sort of count too. And just like Yakushev; Mikhailov and Petrov played 'only' 7 games, whereas Kharlamov played all 8.

BTW, in the 1975-76 Super series, CSKA's top line (Maltsev replacing Petrov in the last 2 games vs. Bruins and Flyers) scored 9 out of the 16 goals they managed in that series. Obviously, on the national team it was slightly different, but that is just a little example of how important they were.

Mentioned Shadrin as the second leading Soviet scorer in 1972. Fact remains that the majority of the Soviet National Team came from CSKA.

How long the Kharlamov / Petrov /Mikhailov unit played together during the 1972 Summit Series is interesting. Taking your estimate at face value leads to asking the obvious question - Why? What flaw or weakness did the Soviets see in the K/P/M unit to separate them?

As for the 1974 Summit Series. K / P / M scored a total of 7 goals or
2 / 1 / 4 respectively which is significantly below their GPG in the REL while Yakushev scored 6 goals in 7 games or significantly above his REL, GPG numbers. Same was true in 1972 K / P / M each scored 3 goals or significantly below their GPG in the REL while Yakushev was above his REL, GPG.

 

[VMBM]

Mentioned Shadrin as the second leading Soviet scorer in 1972. Fact remains that the majority of the Soviet National Team came from CSKA.

Like I just added there, IMO that doesn't matter (much), just as long as your own linemates and at least one defenseman play for the same (club) team. And I think the cooperation between CSKA and non-CSKA players was pretty close anyway, as far as the Soviet national team goes. Some other opinions???

How long the Kharlamov / Petrov /Mikhailov unit played together during the 1972 Summit Series is interesting. Taking your estimate at face value leads to asking the obvious question - Why? What flaw or weakness did the Soviets see in the K/P/M unit to separate them?

Ask Anatoli Tarasov (hmm, too late!). I think he broke up the line somewhere before the 1972 Winter Olympics, where USSR's top line was Vikulov-Firsov-Kharlamov. Then in the 1972 WC it was Vikulov-Maltsev-Kharlamov, just like in the Summit series. Only after the Summit series, M-P-K became the top line, and at the 1973 WC they REALLY started kicking some major butt and it was the top line right until 1980.

As for the 1974 Summit Series. K / P / M scored a total of 7 goals or
2 / 1 / 4 respectively which is significantly below their GPG in the REL while Yakushev scored 6 goals in 7 games or significantly above his REL, GPG numbers. Same was true in 1972 K / P / M each scored 3 goals or significantly below their GPG in the REL while Yakushev was above his REL, GPG.

They scored 8 goals... For some reason, Vasiliev got the credit for Petrov's goal in game 3 (and Petrov getting the assist)... no, actually they scored 9 goals, since Petrov's goal was disallowed by the blind ref in game 2; there is nothing to debate - it WAS a goal. And again, if we count the defensemen too, the #1 five man unit scored 13 goals, which is easily more than any other unit, I think.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Going Nowhere

Like I just added there, IMO that doesn't matter (much), just as long as your own linemates and at least one defenseman play for the same (club) team. And I think the cooperation between CSKA and non-CSKA players was pretty close anyway, as far as the Soviet national team goes. Some other opinions???



Ask Anatoli Tarasov (hmm, too late!). I think he broke up the line somewhere before the 1972 Winter Olympics, where USSR's top line was Vikulov-Firsov-Kharlamov. Then in the 1972 WC it was Vikulov-Maltsev-Kharlamov, just like in the Summit series. Only after the Summit series, M-P-K became the top line, and at the 1973 WC they REALLY started kicking some major butt and it was the top line right until 1980.



They scored 8 goals... For some reason, Vasiliev got the credit for Petrov's goal in game 3 (and Petrov getting the assist)... no, actually they scored 9 goals, since Petrov's goal was disallowed by the blind ref in game 2; there is nothing to debate - it WAS a goal. And again, if we count the defensemen too, the #1 five man unit scored 13 goals, which is easily more than any other unit, I think.

The Dynamo players were outsiders due to perceived KGB links.

The minute you start re-writing history, trying to change scoring plays, overturning referee's decisions then discussing with you is no longer worth the keystrokes.

Good luck.

 

[VMBM]

The Dynamo players were outsiders due to perceived KGB links.

The minute you start re-writing history, trying to change scoring plays, overturning referee's decisions then discussing with you is no longer worth the keystrokes.

Good luck.

No need to re-write anything, when you have the games on DVD and pair of eyes and you know thing or two.

But if you need some more convincing, there is a good read for you (written by a Canadian journalist):

Game 2:

http://www.chidlovski.com/personal/1974/recaps/rec02mga.htm

Game 3:

http://www.chidlovski.com/personal/1974/recaps/rec03mga.htm


But yeah, I'm beginning to feel the same thing about you; no longer worth to do this ---->

 

[duck]

No, Kharlamov didn't stand out (statistically) in his prime, let alone after the car accident in 1976, after which Mikhailov and Petrov were definitely more important players on the top line (Kharlamov only 1-time all-star - and nothing else - in the Soviet league after 1976).

IMO he was 1969-1976 still better than Mikhailov and certainly better than Petrov (and 1971/2-76 he was the best Soviet player). He could do things that neither Mikhailov or Petrov could. Statistically, it didn't maybe show, but it showed on the ice.

When we consider careers AND individual skills, forwards like Firsov and Makarov (and MAYBE even Maltsev) might have been just as good or even better than Kharlamov, but Mikhailov and Petrov were not... not in my opinion, anyway.

The problem I have is that were all those accolades well-deserved? We all know of Kharlamov's speed and gamebreaking ability, but that all reflects within the stats. A few of those seasons, I believe 73-onward, IIRC, Mikhailov and/or Petrov outscored him offensively. So what other skills does Kharlamov have that earned him his MVPs? We all know about Mikhailov's intangibles, and my understanding was Kharlamov was really one-dimensional. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you here, but I simply don't understand why they would give him the MVP if the offensive stats don't show it, and he has no other game (as far as I know).

It's also a little ridiculous to suggest that Mikhailov wouldn't have won his MVPs if Kharlamov wasn't in an accident -- it requires too much postulation, and with the way his career was working out, it looked like he was losing his dominance over the league in the last few years before the car accident. I'm simply not convinced by the argument that the car injury was a factor in his loss of skill; I think it was simply a transition to a more physical hockey, and it wasn't like Kharlamov was completely ineffective post-accident anyway.

Also, as a little digression, I'm surprised you mentioned Firsov and not Starshinov; didn't Starshinov regularly outscore Firsov?

 

[VMBM]

The problem I have is that were all those accolades well-deserved? We all know of Kharlamov's speed and gamebreaking ability, but that all reflects within the stats. A few of those seasons, I believe 73-onward, IIRC, Mikhailov and/or Petrov outscored him offensively. So what other skills does Kharlamov have that earned him his MVPs? We all know about Mikhailov's intangibles, and my understanding was Kharlamov was really one-dimensional. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you here, but I simply don't understand why they would give him the MVP if the offensive stats don't show it, and he has no other game (as far as I know).

I don't think Kharlamov was that much of a 2-way player, as sometimes claimed, but offensively he wasn't one-dimentional at all IMO. I mean, Mikhailov was the one-dimentional one, at least in the early Seventies. He was a bit of a Russian Espo, who had almost always more goals than assists, whereas Kharlamov and Petrov were playmakers as well as goal-scorers. Maybe Petrov was quite one-dimentional too in the beginning, since he didn't seemed to be very appreciated in the early years. Petrov himself said that he became a more versatile player after 1972, though I don't truly know about that.

What other skills? Hmm, I don't know, dangling skills, speed, 'beautiful game'??? He had clearly more of those than his linemates. But this question should go to those voters...

It's also a little ridiculous to suggest that Mikhailov wouldn't have won his MVPs if Kharlamov wasn't in an accident -- it requires too much postulation, and with the way his career was working out, it looked like he was losing his dominance over the league in the last few years before the car accident. I'm simply not convinced by the argument that the car injury was a factor in his loss of skill; I think it was simply a transition to a more physical hockey, and it wasn't like Kharlamov was completely ineffective post-accident anyway.

I don't think I suggested that (or did I?). Mikhailov seemed to play his best hockey in 1977-79, and he might have very well gotten MVP(s) anyway. It's not as if Petrov and Mikhailov only began to shine when Kharlamov faded, but it's just something that seemed to happen; Petrov and Mikhailov were playing probably their best hockey around the same time or after Kharlamov had his accident. I don't know about Soviet league, but Kharlamov was the best CSKA player in the Super Series 1976 (my opinion, I have seen all the games), he was very much a top Soviet player in the 1976 Winter Olympics and 1976 World Championships, so I doubt that he was in any decline... I do believe that it was the accident that really hurt the rest of his career. No, that shouldn't take anything away from Mikhailov and Petrov, and I'm sorry if I have given that impression. Okay?

Also, as a little digression, I'm surprised you mentioned Firsov and not Starshinov; didn't Starshinov regularly outscore Firsov?

Well, I haven't heard anyone ever suggesting that Starshinov was a better player than Firsov, though especially when looking at the Soviet league numbers, Starshinov seems like a seriously underrated player. Internationally, at least, Firsov was easily the best USSR player 1966-1971. Statistically, Firsov's Soviet league career is strangely unsatisfactory, and yet he got 3 MVP's... that is something that I would like to find about more