HOH Top 60 Wingers of All Time

[TheDevilMadeMe]

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.

Kane, Firsov, and Ovechkin all deserved to move up. Kane and Ovechkin because of what they did in recent years; Firsov because of convincing information about him in the HOH Top non-NHL Europeans project.

Dickie Moore rose at least in part because of vote splitting and bad procedure. That round, there was a clear top 4, with nobody else getting a majority vote to be added, but we slavishly added 5 names anyway, and Moore had marginally more votes than the guy below him. We should have just added 4 guys that round and punted Moore to the next round for further discussion.

As for the fallers, Denneny and Mahovlich deserved it. Mikhailov kind of suffered from suddenly looking inferior to Firsov. I agree that Iginla finishing below St Louis is nonsensical - he should have finished in a similar range to Mikhailov, as he did in the earlier project.

 

[The Macho King]

Are we thinking about doing another project? Which is the one that's most stale that could use a refresh/new voices/new info?

Edit: Could have just looked myself. Looks like the Dman list is most stale at 8 years old.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Are we thinking about doing another project? Which is the one that's most stale that could use a refresh/new voices/new info?

Edit: Could have just looked myself. Looks like the Dman list is most stale at 8 years old.

At the risk of thread drift, I remember hearing something whispered behind the wizard-curtain about a "Top Teams" project. A "Top Coaches" project would be a nice resource, too.

 

[solidmotion]

top coaches would be really interesting.

not sure the dman list is ready for a refresh. the only new entries, unless i'm forgetting somebody, would be keith, karlsson, & doughty. chara would rise. other than that i think the consensus of 2011-12 is still the consensus now.

 

[The Macho King]

top coaches would be really interesting.

not sure the dman list is ready for a refresh. the only new entries, unless i'm forgetting somebody, would be keith, karlsson, & doughty. chara would rise. other than that i think the consensus of 2011-12 is still the consensus now.

Hedman would make the tail end of it.

At the risk of thread drift, I remember hearing something whispered behind the wizard-curtain about a "Top Teams" project. A "Top Coaches" project would be a nice resource, too.

Top coaches is tough because it's so subjective, but I'd be down for that too. Top teams is going to be a shitshow.

 

[Michael Farkas]

We do not have the resources or knowledge to do a top coaches list. Not top 10, not top 40...can't do it. Frankly, waste of time for this group...which is very talented and dedicated.

 

[The Macho King]

We do not have the resources or knowledge to do a top coaches list. Not top 10, not top 40...can't do it. Frankly, waste of time for this group...which is very talented and dedicated.

I dont think I'm quite so fatalistic, but it would be a challenge. I dont see why its insurmountable though? Instead of stats it would be based on team results, but I am struggling to find out why it would be an impossibility?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Team results depend on team composition too. If you're not a part of the practices, understanding the tactics that were attempted, understanding and considering the skill development, etc. you (royal you) won't have any idea of how it went down. Results are the tip of the iceberg. You can win in spite of a coach, you can win because of a coach...the best coaching job this year might not end up in the playoffs, for instance...or it could win the Cup...either way, it's immeasurable to us in my opinion...

It would require a ton of video work to find innovation (Soviet weave, left wing lock, 1-3-1 power play, etc.) and who did it first...and frankly, we don't do enough video work for the player things (which are infinitely easier to spot), so I can't imagine us pursuing it for a coaching thing...it's too abstract for those that didn't do it or at least played at a high level, in my opinion...

 

[The Macho King]

Team results depend on team composition too. If you're not a part of the practices, understanding the tactics that were attempted, understanding and considering the skill development, etc. you (royal you) won't have any idea of how it went down. Results are the tip of the iceberg. You can win in spite of a coach, you can win because of a coach...the best coaching job this year might not end up in the playoffs, for instance...or it could win the Cup...either way, it's immeasurable to us in my opinion...

It would require a ton of video work to find innovation (Soviet weave, left wing lock, 1-3-1 power play, etc.) and who did it first...and frankly, we don't do enough video work for the player things (which are infinitely easier to spot), so I can't imagine us pursuing it for a coaching thing...it's too abstract for those that didn't do it or at least played at a high level, in my opinion...

So I agree with all of the bolded, and additionally think other factors that could go into judging coaches is adaptability both in changing their systems as the game changes or changing the systems to suit their players, or adapting players to their systems, etc.

But I don't think the factors you outlined make the job overly difficult - those are subjective factors, yes, but they are factors that should be considered as we discuss the coaches as they come up for a vote.

For instance - Bowman found success pretty much everywhere he went (Buffalo excepted), so we can analyze why. Is the answer as simple as he was surrounded with talent everywhere he went? Certainly an argument to be had there. Toe Blake - yeah he can win five Cups with Beliveau, Harvey, Plante, Richardx2, etc., but he also did it with a less talented squad, so that's something to consider.

What about Tarasov? Lots of elements to look at there. Impact on the game. Impact on systems. Shero? That Philly team was not the most talented, but he got a lot out of his players, so maybe we find a way to factor that in?

I don't think video work is necessary (and for instance in the case of Gorman just wouldn't exist). I think this is a plausible project. Maybe flawed in some way? Sure, but I don't think moreso than the top players projects are.

 

[ImporterExporter]

The D list really needs updated.

Not only are there numerous new entries to be sure, I think some tinkering with the rankings as they were is in order. It's been almost 9 years.

 

[Michael Farkas]

So I agree with all of the bolded, and additionally think other factors that could go into judging coaches is adaptability both in changing their systems as the game changes or changing the systems to suit their players, or adapting players to their systems, etc.

But I don't think the factors you outlined make the job overly difficult - those are subjective factors, yes, but they are factors that should be considered as we discuss the coaches as they come up for a vote.

For instance - Bowman found success pretty much everywhere he went (Buffalo excepted), so we can analyze why. Is the answer as simple as he was surrounded with talent everywhere he went? Certainly an argument to be had there. Toe Blake - yeah he can win five Cups with Beliveau, Harvey, Plante, Richardx2, etc., but he also did it with a less talented squad, so that's something to consider.

What about Tarasov? Lots of elements to look at there. Impact on the game. Impact on systems. Shero? That Philly team was not the most talented, but he got a lot out of his players, so maybe we find a way to factor that in?

I don't think video work is necessary (and for instance in the case of Gorman just wouldn't exist). I think this is a plausible project. Maybe flawed in some way? Sure, but I don't think moreso than the top players projects are.

Fair. I guess maybe there's a factor of: I think we can direct our resources elsewhere and be more productive to my reasoning as well. But you make some valid points...

 

[The Macho King]

Fair. I guess maybe there's a factor of: I think we can direct our resources elsewhere and be more productive to my reasoning as well. But you make some valid points...

There's a whole "define productivity" aspect to this - but I see what you're saying. It's a tricky project and probably more subjective than most - my fear would be that it would devolve into Cup counting and that isn't very interesting to me (although that happens during the players projects as well, so...).

I do think there's a value add, here, and a lot of the ATD guys have probably done a lot of research as a jumping off point. I'd like to participate and do some research.

The D list really needs updated.

Not only are there numerous new entries to be sure, I think some tinkering with the rankings as they were is in order. It's been almost 9 years.

I also agree with this. I think the D list kinda sucks.

 

[Theokritos]

I always thought a "best players of the season" project would be interesting where we would look into one season after the other, starting in - let's say - the 1950s. It would require a lot of research and reading, but no preliminary lists and basically anyone who's interested could vote.

 

[MXD]

I personally think the preliminary lists are a must to make sure that, hummm, we get the people who are actually interesting in researching and reading, instead of simply harping on the same three points or players.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Maybe do a list specific for a certain country. Canada would be boring to start with but what about top 25 Americans or Russians of all time? Or top 25 international performers of all time (as in Olympics, WHC, CC and so on)?

 

[The Macho King]

Maybe do a list specific for a certain country. Canada would be boring to start with but what about top 25 Americans or Russians of all time? Or top 25 international performers of all time (as in Olympics, WHC, CC and so on)?

Eh... I mean I guess, but it is kinda.... meh? I dont think that adds a lot that a top player list sorted by country doesn't.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Eh... I mean I guess, but it is kinda.... meh? I dont think that adds a lot that a top player list sorted by country doesn't.

I dare you to do a top 100 Canadians of all time and do it worse than Scotty Bowman did....

Scotty Bowman's Top 100 Canadian Players

 

[BenchBrawl]

We do not have the resources or knowledge to do a top coaches list. Not top 10, not top 40...can't do it. Frankly, waste of time for this group...which is very talented and dedicated.

I agree. Would be too hard for me anyway, can't speak for others.

It does have the potential to be very informative, and I'd like to take a deep dive into the coaching strategies and match-ups. But personally I'd refrain from voting in such a project.