DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
Really? That's pure conjecture considering the scope of competition Fetisov played the bulk of his games against.
Defensemen who were the greatest players in the world when they played
- Thread starter Cloned
- Start date
He was 23 and already marching from victory to another, including demolishing the best Canada had to offer 8:1 in their own final. Additionally no one in Europe followed the NHL much anyway so it was only natural to consider Fetisov the consensus choice, at most challenged by his own teammates.
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
If you're going by one game versus Canada, then we can say that a bunch of American college kids actually were the best hockey team in the world in 1980 (insert laugh track here). And Canada handily beat Fetisov and the rest of the Soviets earlier in that tournament... but I digress.
We're saying the best player in the world., right? He "may" have been best defenseman for a year or two, if I'm being generous (although I'd take prime Potvin and prime Bourque ahead of him... although you could counter that it was a couple years past prime Potvin and a few years before prime Bourque). There's no way Fetisov was better than Gretzky or Trottier in the early 80's.
Potvin never had much fame in Europe at all, not even compared to Salming. Bourque rather in the 1990s when the NHL became more of a thing. Trottier was likewise never in the equation at all, Gretzky only some years later when the Oilers got their dynasty going. In the early 1980s there was nothing in North America that could have challenged the Soviet achievements in hockey from a European perspective, certainly not the Islanders.
Why can't both statements be true?
It's not like the 30's was littered with examples of great players have long streaks of greatness.
I think in part the chaos of the 30's is what adds to the mythical status of the 06 era being so great.
Not saying that the 06 era wasn't great but it certainly helped that the preceding time periods were chaotic to say the least, including Shore's time.
What is the cutoff then?
Sittler's 10 point night?
Gagner having the best night ever for an Oiler?
Ron Tugnutt having the most saves ever in a game?
I guess that's true if people in Europe were only looking at the World championships which would make it a limited view to say the least.
Even the most Euro centric hockey fans would have acknowledged that the NHL was the best league in the world then right?
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
As a professional league sure, but not necessarily as individual teams. Results between European and North American sides were fairly mixed at the time.
TomasHertlsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
The thing is, those were all flukes that nobody would have predicted. From early December through mid January, Karlsson was just dominating everybody, and you knew it would happen no matter who he played against. Kucherov and McDavid came into San Jose, right in the middle of hot streaks, and both got wrecked by Karlsson who ended their hot streaks. It really only stopped once he got injured
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
If Trottier or Lafleur didn't exist.
Before Gretzky joined the NHL, the 3-year-older Fetisov had been top defenseman at the 1978 world championships over the 3-time winning quality Czechoslovakians. Then in 1979 Fetisov was a point per game in the Soviet league and his play so impressive he would be named captain of the national team by year's end.
In 1979 the greatest player may have been Fetisov.
Yeah, Trottier won the Hart, but Bossy scored ten more goals than anyone else with 69 whereas Trotts had just 4 more points than Dionne. In the 1979 playoffs young Trotts had just 2 goals and 4 assists on a conference finals run, bounced by the Rangers.
In 1979 Lafleur had his lowest goal total in five years, his 52 was 3rd in the league. Led the playoffs in points, though Gainey got the Conn Smythe (Robinson had won it in 1978).
So,... perhaps the 1978-79 period could have been one where Fetisov was the greatest, which North America had yet to learn, and Fetisov's 1980-1982 period one where Europeans thought Fetisov the greatest because they had yet to learn how great Gretzky was.
It was pre-Internet, pre-cable TV. You either watched a game live on a network carrying it or else you missed it and had to settle for highlights during the news hour. So, comparing greatness between Russia and North America back then was difficult outside of international tourneys like the Summit Series and Canada Cups.
Last edited:
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
The 30s were quite good. Far less chaotic than the periods just before and after them. Plenty of great players put together long streaks of greatness - Shore, Morenz, Cook, Boucher, Seibert, Clancy...
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 30,880
- 13,671
I think Chris Pronger was the most valuable player in the world after the lockout.
If you asked GMs at the time to pick one player for a Stanley Cup run, with the life of their family on the line, I would be very curious to see the result. Whatever result would turn out would be the actual best player in the eyes of GMs. My family? I pick Pronger.
I know Jagr, Thornton, Ovechkin and Crosby, plus Lidstrom, were all playing great hockey. But Pronger seemed more valuable in a robust way (meaning, thrown in any situation).
If you asked GMs at the time to pick one player for a Stanley Cup run, with the life of their family on the line, I would be very curious to see the result. Whatever result would turn out would be the actual best player in the eyes of GMs. My family? I pick Pronger.
I know Jagr, Thornton, Ovechkin and Crosby, plus Lidstrom, were all playing great hockey. But Pronger seemed more valuable in a robust way (meaning, thrown in any situation).
Perhaps that's true the 20's and war years were probably more chaotic.
still the 06 era had 5 of the top 10 in the top 100 players project and only 2 of the top 19 players were from the 30's, Morenz at 11 and Shore at 14.
Nighbor at 20 makes 3 players before the 06 era to be reflected in the top 100 players of all time.
Perhaps it's that baby boomers have dominated the hockey history narrative for the most part and players from the 30's as good as they were have been somewhat forgotten.
Part of the "over exaggeration" of post war eras, specifically 06 to the early 80's has been the team dynamic of dynasties and this has been transferred somewhat to individual performance when it was really a team thing.
Hardy to say but to me that's part of it and our culture and sports more specifically overemphasizes wining over greatness in and of itself.
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
And it wasn’t unusual for Karlsson either.
The 23-4-4 streak for the Senators in 2014-15 to close out the season during which Karlsson was a point-per-game player.
The 2015-16 season in its entirety - or the 47 points in 39 games run that had people asking if a non-playoff player should still win the Hart Trophy.
The 2017 playoffs.
Karlsson’s 14-game scoring streak in 2018-19 (25 points) is just part of a pattern of him being able to turn on the jets.
I think there’s a window there between 2014 Crosby and 2017 McDavid where either Patrick Kane or Erik Karlsson have claim to the title of best player in the world.
If this is true then perhaps people in Europe weren't paying very close attention to the entirety of the hockey world.
As much as I love Salming, and I think he gets under rate at times, Potvin was clearly the more dominant force.
Of course not, no one followed the NHL closely back then. And the same goes for European hockey in North America. You needed international success to be noteworthy, and players like Potvin or Trottier didn't have enough of that.
The problem with Karlsson is 2 fold.
One often the spurts mentioned above is followed or preceded by very meh overall play, although his situation keeps him producing points.
Second he rarely "tilts the ice" for any prolonged period of time.
He is a high event player meaning goals are scored for both teams when he is on the ice.
Heck in 15-16 mentioned above he doesn't even win the Norris, how could he be the best player in the world?
I guess people in Europe didn't follow either Canada Cup were Potvin excelled in then?
I mean why would they only 4 of the 6 teams in the 76 and 81 versions were from Europe.
Not much, the Canada Cup was perceived as more of a Canadian than an international event. It did not get anywhere near the same exposure in Europe as the Olympics or the World Championships. In 1976 when Potvin won it that was even more severely so than in 1991.
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
You say that as though Erik Karlsson not winning the Norris Trophy went without controversy. It’s an award, not an objective measure of their performance.
Even when Karlsson won his Norris trophies it was with controversy though right?
Look Karlsson has been an amazing offensive talent in his career but it has also been marked by circumstances which aided that offense and periods of amazing play and then periods of really meh play as well.
Even in his best 3 year stretch 14-15 to 16-17 is it really even debatable that he was as good as Crosby?
I don't think so.
Well then that perception was based on a lesser picture and not on a best on best one which has been my entire point.
Best-on-best is a HFBoards meme and hardly relevant in a 1980s hockey culture context.
no it's not it's a factual statement.
The rosters for the 76 and 81 Canada Cups were clearly more in line with all nations having their best players.
The WC and Olympics you speak of clearly didn't have that same standard due to players playing in the NHL plain and simple.
One only has to look at the rosters for the 76 and 81 Canada cups and compare them to the WC in the same year.
It's not a HFboards meme it's a fact.
