HOH Top 60 Wingers of All Time

[seventieslord]

i was thinking playoffs now that peak is pretty even. i'm also impressed by kane becoming one of the league's premier goal scorers after many years as primarily a playmaker. we'll see about longevity, i guess i'm projecting there.

What longevity? MSL has 11 seasons with a VsX score 60 or higher, so does Kane, soon to be 12. If he finishes this season respectably at all, his 7-year score (the common shorthand) passes MSL. And he's been better in the playoffs: 33 more points in 20 more games. MSL probably had the easiest time putting up points of any star forward of his generation, playing in the southeast for so long - in case we were looking for any factors that tip a close case one way or the other.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Since 2013, Kane has been the best overall offensive player in the league after Crosby (and recently McDavid, but I said "overall" for the timeframe).He's a guy where when you look at him, you're just waiting for this soft, small player, who isn't even relying on speed, to finally break apart and stop being productive.It just never happens, he always comes back, and he had no weak season in his career.Up and downs sure, but his downs are pretty high, and his highs are also high.

And you trust him with your gut to score that big goal.

We saw him on a dynastic-level team.Recently we've seen him on a struggling team.He's right there putting up his points in both situations.

I see him in the St. Louis range and probably a little bit higher.Feel he's a bigger star.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Since 2013, Kane has been the best overall offensive player in the league after Crosby (and recently McDavid, but I said "overall" for the timeframe).He's a guy where when you look at him, you're just waiting for this soft, small player, who isn't even relying on speed, to finally break apart and stop being productive.It just never happens, he always comes back, and he had no weak season in his career.Up and downs sure, but his downs are pretty high, and his highs are also high.

And you trust him with your gut to score that big goal.

We saw him on a dynastic-level team.Recently we've seen him on a struggling team.He's right there putting up his points in both situations.

I see him in the St. Louis range and probably a little bit higher.Feel he's a bigger star.

not a winger, but he's passed denis savard by now right?

 

[BenchBrawl]

not a winger, but he's passed denis savard by now right?

Easily IMO.Especially if he keeps up his pace this year, that would cement it for sure.

Savard is one of the rare players who might be more exciting than Kane though.

 

[seventieslord]

not a winger, but he's passed denis savard by now right?

easily. He's well within the top 100 players of all time now. Is Savard top 200?

edit: well yeah, based on his position on the top centers list, I guess he is, but likely around 170 or 180.

 

[Say Hey Kid]

Without giving too much away, Neely is far enough down the round 1 list that he is suceptible to being overtaken in the round 2 voting by a handful of other guys - my honest prediction: he doesn't make it.

This turned off to be correct.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

On The Move

Biggest movers between the Wingers Project & Wingers in the recently-completed Top-100 Project:

UP!
1) Patrick Kane: +∞
Not even a nominee in the Wingers Project- but that was done about half-a-dozen years ago. Top-100 Project placed him at 24 among Wingers, which even less than one short year later feels like it's STILL too low.

2) Anatoli Firsov: +9... from 26 to 17

3) Ovechkin: +4... was 9- is now 5-- moved around Bossy/Cook/Makarov/Lafleur; who all dipped one on account of this move.

4) Dickie Moore: +3. Went from 18 to 15, mostly at the expense of Mahovlich (who will be mentioned again in short order)... although he went around Selänne, also.


DOWN!
1) Cy Denneny: -4. Before- 17/After- 21. As Frank Nighbor's fortunes have risen...

2) Boris Mikhailov: -3. His dip is from 20 to 23- and I'm struggling to see reasons behind it. It's not like Kane went around him (although I understand the case that he may have by now). Firsov's comet blew by him- suppose I can see that. Kurri, too- but don't get that Brett Hull nosed ahead of him. There it is, though.

.... (and, as promised)

3) Frank Mahovlich: -2. Was 16, now 18... and probably hasn't fallen far enough for my taste. The Kane meteor looms...

4) Jarome Iginla: -2. earlier positioned at slot 24- and fell to 26 (based on the final Vote in the top-100 Project) and finished Top-100 as our "bubble boy." [Position 101.] Not understanding the case for St Louis over him.

 

[bobholly39]

On The Move

Biggest movers between the Wingers Project & Wingers in the recently-completed Top-100 Project:

UP!
1) Patrick Kane: +∞
Not even a nominee in the Wingers Project- but that was done about half-a-dozen years ago. Top-100 Project placed him at 24 among Wingers, which even less than one short year later feels like it's STILL too low.

2) Anatoli Firsov: +9... from 26 to 17

3) Ovechkin: +4... was 9- is now 5-- moved around Bossy/Cook/Makarov/Lafleur; who all dipped one on account of this move.

4) Dickie Moore: +3. Went from 18 to 15, mostly at the expense of Mahovlich (who will be mentioned again in short order)... although he went around Selänne, also.


DOWN!
1) Cy Denneny: -4. Before- 17/After- 21. As Frank Nighbor's fortunes have risen...

2) Boris Mikhailov: -3. His dip is from 20 to 23- and I'm struggling to see reasons behind it. It's not like Kane went around him (although I understand the case that he may have by now). Firsov's comet blew by him- suppose I can see that. Kurri, too- but don't get that Brett Hull nosed ahead of him. There it is, though.

.... (and, as promised)

3) Frank Mahovlich: -2. Was 16, now 18... and probably hasn't fallen far enough for my taste. The Kane meteor looms...

4) Jarome Iginla: -2. earlier positioned at slot 24- and fell to 26 (based on the final Vote in the top-100 Project) and finished Top-100 as our "bubble boy." [Position 101.] Not understanding the case for St Louis over him.

I said during the top 100 project Kane might end up being the most hard player to rank, or at least the one most unjustly ranked. Unlike the other modern players who we've all known to be among the "best in the world" for over a decade (Crosby, Ovi, Malkin) - Kane just recently in the past 3-5 years has hit another level. I think it takes a bit of time for people to appreciate that and decide how he compares historically. So yes - he rises a lot here, and even in the top 100 i could see him rise considerably by career's end.

Ovechkin is an obvious one. He's ageing tremendously well. It's crazy the rates at which he's still producing at his age - and his playoffs have also been significantly better recently. Depending on how much he has left in the tank - he may not be done.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Saying Ovechkin aged well is one way to put it.

Another way to put it is that he aged badly, considering he regressed significantly and permanently after age 24.

If we mean he aged well as a pure sniper, then OK, he did. But as a player considering what he used to be? No way.

Another question to ask is: Assuming he aged well, did he matured well?

 

[The Macho King]

I said during the top 100 project Kane might end up being the most hard player to rank, or at least the one most unjustly ranked. Unlike the other modern players who we've all known to be among the "best in the world" for over a decade (Crosby, Ovi, Malkin) - Kane just recently in the past 3-5 years has hit another level. I think it takes a bit of time for people to appreciate that and decide how he compares historically. So yes - he rises a lot here, and even in the top 100 i could see him rise considerably by career's end.

Ovechkin is an obvious one. He's ageing tremendously well. It's crazy the rates at which he's still producing at his age - and his playoffs have also been significantly better recently. Depending on how much he has left in the tank - he may not be done.

Re: Kane - I think an interesting thing is happening with him where his current ability is being retroactively applied to his earlier career when it shouldn't be. Hard player to rank just because it's rare for a player's playoff success to precede their regular season dominance (normally it happens the other way around so you can create the "sacrificing RS for the PS" narrative).

 

[BenchBrawl]

Re: Kane - I think an interesting thing is happening with him where his current ability is being retroactively applied to his earlier career when it shouldn't be. Hard player to rank just because it's rare for a player's playoff success to precede their regular season dominance (normally it happens the other way around so you can create the "sacrificing RS for the PS" narrative).

Who is doing this though?

Kane has been dominant since 2013 in the RS. He missed games in 2013, 2014 and 2015, but his pace was very much up there (e.g. he was 4th in PPG in both 2013 and 2015). That's 8 years of RS prime (with a bit of a down year in 2018). Then you add the playoffs.

All that said the contributions of Jonathan Toews cannot be overstated. I think Toews was more valuable than Kane to the winning Blackhawks, but Kane was still very valuable (obviously).

At first glance I have him as Geoffrion's equal.

I agree with your last point, his career arc is weird in that his playoffs success came before his RS success.

 

[steve141]

Re: Kane - I think an interesting thing is happening with him where his current ability is being retroactively applied to his earlier career when it shouldn't be. Hard player to rank just because it's rare for a player's playoff success to precede their regular season dominance (normally it happens the other way around so you can create the "sacrificing RS for the PS" narrative).

Scott Niedermayer Syndrome.

 

[seventieslord]

Scott Niedermayer Syndrome.

While that is a perfectly accurate description of Scott Niedermayer Syndrome, I don't think Kane has the same syndrome.

 

[Staniowski]

While that is a perfectly accurate description of Scott Niedermayer Syndrome, I don't think Kane has the same syndrome.

Scott Niedermayer didn't really suffer from Scott Niedermayer Syndrome either.

 

[seventieslord]

Scott Niedermayer didn't really suffer from Scott Niedermayer Syndrome either.

Sure he did. He didn't really put it all together until around 2003, was elite for about 5 seasons, ended up with a great career and suddenly it was like he had this incredible 15 years of elite play. It was all quickly forgotten how had been a very good, but underwhelming/disappointing player for nearly a decade before that.

 

[Staniowski]

Sure he did. He didn't really put it all together until around 2003, was elite for about 5 seasons, ended up with a great career and suddenly it was like he had this incredible 15 years of elite play. It was all quickly forgotten how had been a very good, but underwhelming/disappointing player for nearly a decade before that.

I know what you are saying is the common story, but there is little truth to it. There was relatively little difference in his actual play. He was just about the same quality, for example, at the 2002 Olympics as he was at the 2004 World Cup, even though supposedly there was a major change in his game between these 2 events.

The main difference in the NHL was his PP ice-time and PP points. He was taken off New Jersey's top PP unit, and they generally went with 4 forwards. If he were on any other NHL team this wouldn't have happened, and he would've gotten lots of PP points, and lots of all-star and Norris votes, etc, and nobody would have noticed any difference.

His ES offense was strong (just about the best in the NHL among defensemen) through the DPE, his defensive game was generally strong.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I know what you are saying is the common story, but there is little truth to it. There was relatively little difference in his actual play. He was just about the same quality, for example, at the 2002 Olympics as he was at the 2004 World Cup, even though supposedly there was a major change in his game between these 2 events.

The main difference in the NHL was his PP ice-time and PP points. He was taken off New Jersey's top PP unit, and they generally went with 4 forwards. If he were on any other NHL team this wouldn't have happened, and he would've gotten lots of PP points, and lots of all-star and Norris votes, etc, and nobody would have noticed any difference.

His ES offense was strong (just about the best in the NHL among defensemen) through the DPE, his defensive game was generally strong.

How many Niedermayer games did you watch per season during those years?

 

[Staniowski]

How many Niedermayer games did you watch per season during those years?

I watched Niedermayer lots throughout his career, from Kamloops to Anaheim.

The biggest issue with Niedermayer is that New Jersey wasnt a great fit for his strengths. Scott Stevens was the opposite. But during the early 2000s (and late 1990s), put them both on Team Canada and there is no doubt who is the better player.

If you look at the periods '99 - '03 and '04 - '07, there is little difference in the quality of Niedermayer's play (whatever you happen to think the level of that quality). He was close to being the best offensive defenseman in the NHL in both periods. The biggest difference is that he was getting lots of PP time in the latter (including 5th and 9th among all NHL defensemen in '06 and '07), and very little in the former ( including 58th, 72nd, 77th among all NHL defensemen in '00, '01 and '02).

No offensive defenseman is going to win the Norris if they are 77th in PP icetime (probably mostly 2nd unit time).

In '01, Lidstrom had 43 PP points, more than Niedermayer had in '00, '01, '02, '03 combined. At ES Niedermayer was as good offensively as Lidstrom.

In '02, Niedermayer was 8th on New Jersey in PP ice-time.

The other power-play issue, of course, is that the Devils finished dead last in PP opportunities in most of those early 2000s seasons.

If Niedermayer had similar PP ice time as the other top offensive defensemen in the league, he very likely would've been a 1st or 2nd team all-star (or close to it) every one of those seasons in the late '90s and early '00s.

If he had played for almost any other team it would've been even more likely.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I watched Niedermayer lots throughout his career, from Kamloops to Anaheim.

The biggest issue with Niedermayer is that New Jersey wasnt a great fit for his strengths. Scott Stevens was the opposite. But during the early 2000s (and late 1990s), put them both on Team Canada and there is no doubt who is the better player.

If you look at the periods '99 - '03 and '04 - '07, there is little difference in the quality of Niedermayer's play (whatever you happen to think the level of that quality). He was close to being the best offensive defenseman in the NHL in both periods. The biggest difference is that he was getting lots of PP time in the latter (including 5th and 9th among all NHL defensemen in '06 and '07), and very little in the former ( including 58th, 72nd, 77th among all NHL defensemen in '00, '01 and '02).

No offensive defenseman is going to win the Norris if they are 77th in PP icetime (probably mostly 2nd unit time).

In '01, Lidstrom had 43 PP points, more than Niedermayer had in '00, '01, '02, '03 combined. At ES Niedermayer was as good offensively as Lidstrom.

In '02, Niedermayer was 8th on New Jersey in PP ice-time.

The other power-play issue, of course, is that the Devils finished dead last in PP opportunities in most of those early 2000s seasons.

If Niedermayer had similar PP ice time as the other top offensive defensemen in the league, he very likely would've been a 1st or 2nd team all-star (or close to it) every one of those seasons in the late '90s and early '00s.

If he had played for almost any other team it would've been even more likely.

So approximately how many Devils games did you watch per season in that era? I probably averaged about 60 per season.

Niedermayer improved tremendously in the defensive end around 2002 or 2003. From "pretty good but inconsistent" to "one of the best in the league."

If relative Corsi and the like were stats back then, Niedermayer's ratings would have likely skyrocketed around this time.

 

[daver]

Saying Ovechkin aged well is one way to put it.

Another way to put it is that he aged badly, considering he regressed significantly and permanently after age 24.

If we mean he aged well as a pure sniper, then OK, he did. But as a player considering what he used to be? No way.

Another question to ask is: Assuming he aged well, did he matured well?

I think he needed some maturing early in his career and seems to have found it.

Could you say that OV is turning into the Gordie Howe of Goalscorers? Others have arguably higher peak season (s) /goalscoring ability (Wayne/Hull/Mario) and players in his era may have arguably matched his peak in a season or two (Stamkos/Crosby) but his longevity of prime may turn out to be the greatest if it isn't already.

There will always likely be some contention as to how much value you place on his goalscoring totals in relation to his overall offensive impact. His earlier Rocket wins were definitely Hart/Lindsay worthy; his last few are Top 5 - 10 player in the league worthy.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I just learned that on planet Canada Crosby has matched Ovechkin's goal scoring peak, Ovie is immature, and winning 5 of 6 Rockets into your 30s while having top 3 all time goal scoring seasons for his age in a relatively low scoring era = "aged badly."

Never change history forum.

 

[MXD]

I just learned that on planet Canada Crosby has matched Ovechkin's goal scoring peak, Ovie is immature, and winning 5 of 6 Rockets into your 30s while having top 3 all time goal scoring seasons for his age in a relatively low scoring era = "aged badly."

Never change history forum.

Never change Midnight Judges.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I just learned that on planet Canada Crosby has matched Ovechkin's goal scoring peak, Ovie is immature, and winning 5 of 6 Rockets into your 30s while having top 3 all time goal scoring seasons for his age in a relatively low scoring era = "aged badly."

Never change history forum.

When your game is completely transformed for the worst before age 25, I call that ageing badly, or not maturing.

If he had been Luc Robitaille or even Brett Hull from 18-25, I'd say he aged very well. Still wouldn't say he matured well though.

I'll posit a simple rule: If you're not defensively responsible by the time you're in your 30's, you haven't matured as a player.

 

[Midnight Judges]

When your game is completely transformed for the worst before age 25, I call that ageing badly, or not maturing.

If he had been Luc Robitaille or even Brett Hull from 18-25, I'd say he aged very well. Still wouldn't say he matured well though.

I'll posit a simple rule: If you're not defensively responsible by the time you're in your 30's, you haven't matured as a player.

Crosby has been on the ice for a higher goals against per 60 at even strength than Ovechkin over the past ten years, and significantly worse on the powerplay:

A look back at Sidney Crosby's defense over the past decade

 

[wetcoast]

Crosby has been on the ice for a higher goals against per 60 at even strength than Ovechkin over the past ten years, and significantly worse on the powerplay:

A look back at Sidney Crosby's defense over the past decade

You really need to save that link for April 1st, it's the only day in the year when it's really valid.