HOH Top 60 Wingers of All Time

[quoipourquoi]

I don't know how anyone could find that this project has been unfair to Teemu Selanne, given several posters' willingness to re-evaluate opinions from five-six years ago. These are people that saw Selanne's prime, had an idea of where he ranked in history, but were open-minded enough to rank him significantly higher than where they previously believed him to be. The fact that he is on the list well before Johnny Bucyk and Pavel Bure are even eligible tells me that if you consistently present reasonable arguments instead of simply whining about nationality bias, people will listen.

It was good to see Selanne in the discussion with some of those #40-60 all-time players like Geoffrion and Kharlamov for once.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I don't know how anyone could find that this project has been unfair to Teemu Selanne, given several posters' willingness to re-evaluate opinions from five-six years ago. These are people that saw Selanne's prime, had an idea of where he ranked in history, but were open-minded enough to rank him significantly higher than where they previously believed him to be. The fact that he is on the list well before Johnny Bucyk and Pavel Bure are even eligible tells me that if you consistently present reasonable arguments instead of simply whining about nationality bias, people will listen.

It was good to see Selanne in the discussion with some of those #40-60 all-time players like Geoffrion and Kharlamov for once.

sad to have missed the opportunity for another selanne vs. bure bloodbath though, right QPQ?

 

[MXD]

sad to have missed the opportunity for another selanne vs. bure bloodbath though, right QPQ?

That one would've been about as close as an height measurement contest between Zdeno Chara and Roy Worters.

 

[quoipourquoi]

sad to have missed the opportunity for another selanne vs. bure bloodbath though, right QPQ?

It's all I live for... now I'll have to make a Sakic vs. Yzerman thread just to get my jollies.

 

[sr edler]

That one would've been about as close as an height measurement contest between Zdeno Chara and Roy Worters.

Selänne never outshone Bure head to head. Not in any Winnipeg vs Vancouver series, and not in the 98 Olympics semi finals. You 'member that game? Cause he couldn't game break at the same level. Simple as that. He was an awesome regular season point producer though, and that's what these lists are very much about... Not only, but very much.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Selänne never outshone Bure head to head. Not in any Winnipeg vs Vancouver series, and not in the 98 Olympics semi finals. You 'member that game? Cause he couldn't game break at the same level. Simple as that. He was an awesome regular season point producer though, and that's what these lists are very much about... Not only, but very much.

I really don't see how you can use international tournaments as something favoring Bure over Selanne. Selanne never had a playoff like Bure's amazing 1993-94, but that was only one year!

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

That one would've been about as close as an height measurement contest between Zdeno Chara and Roy Worters.

oh now look what you've done mxd

 

[sr edler]

I really don't see how you can use international tournaments as something favoring Bure over Selanne. Selanne never had a playoff like Bure's amazing 1993-94, but that was only one year!

Did Selänne even have single playoff series as good as Bure's first round in 94–95? No, probably not. And as for international tournaments I talked specifically about that game in 98 when the two were up head to head. And Koivu were better than Selänne internationally, too. I don't have any "hate" for Selänne though. I didn't vote him last on any of these lists.

 

[Elvis P]

I don't know how anyone could find that this project has been unfair to Teemu Selanne, given several posters' willingness to re-evaluate opinions from five-six years ago. These are people that saw Selanne's prime, had an idea of where he ranked in history, but were open-minded enough to rank him significantly higher than where they previously believed him to be. The fact that he is on the list well before Johnny Bucyk and Pavel Bure are even eligible tells me that if you consistently present reasonable arguments... . It was good to see Selanne in the discussion with some of those #40-60 all-time players like Geoffrion and Kharlamov for once.

66 4 Aurele Joliat LW 5'7" 136 1922-1938
67 5/16 Cy Denneny LW 5'7" 168 1914-1929
68 13 Boris Mikhailov RW 5'9" 170 1969-1981
69 17 Jari Kurri RW 6'0" 194 1977-1998

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1730019

This is an excellent post. As q points out all of these players made the HOH Top 70 Players of All Time (2009) - Part II, and Selanne didn't, but he is now being viewed with an open mind by this project.

 

[Barnum]

Provide some proof of this.

Here's one and it's 2014

http://ohlprospects.blogspot.com/2014/06/final-mediascout-top-10-for-2014.html

Here's some more pro scout using the comparison:

http://vansunsportsblogs.com/2014/06/30/tools-results-and-why-jake-virtanen-isnt-the-next-cam-neely/

I'll just throw this in with a quote:

http://canucks.nhl.com/club/news.ht...941M1M141025030924OYB&creative_details=8-4268


Here's the quote and I shall move on now because it is common knowledge that Neely is used a comparison for up and coming players, mostly hard nosed forwards, please notice it's not Lindros either but Neely.

Ever since he was prematurely forced into retirement in the late 1990s, NHL teams have been searching high and low for the next Neely. Jarome Iginla came the closest to replicating Neely’s dominant style of play during his peak years with Calgary, but there have been few other players who have been able to impact the game with a combination of skill and intimidation that matches what Neely brought to the table with the Canucks and (mostly) the Bruins. Neely could skate around guys with his skill, but he preferred to bulldoze through them with brute force.

Rest my case.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Except scouts actively search for the next Cam Neely when judging a winger.not anyone else.

So why is he so low on this board? Probably the same reason people kept claiming Crosby is the greatest. Lack of knowledge.

Provide some proof of this.

Here's one and it's 2014

http://ohlprospects.blogspot.com/2014/06/final-mediascout-top-10-for-2014.html

Here's some more pro scout using the comparison:

http://vansunsportsblogs.com/2014/06/30/tools-results-and-why-jake-virtanen-isnt-the-next-cam-neely/

I'll just throw this in with a quote:

http://canucks.nhl.com/club/news.ht...941M1M141025030924OYB&creative_details=8-4268


Here's the quote and I shall move on now because it is common knowledge that Neely is used a comparison for up and coming players, mostly hard nosed forwards, please notice it's not Lindros either but Neely.




Rest my case.

I don't think anyone has a problem believing an NHL scout would love would love to find another Cam Neely, it's the "not anyone else" part that's hard to believe. NHL scouts are searching for and would be happy finding any player that will be on this list.

 

[Johnny Engine]

I'm just going to throw it out there that scouts looked so hard for "the next Cam Neely" because he wasn't all that special.

I mean, sure, he had a recognizable style of play that you could always name-drop to the media, but there was still a chance that you could find a guy like him.
When teams in the 90s were drafting all those big, tough guys, they were partially doing it to find someone who could take faceoffs and go into the corners with Eric Lindros, right? But nobody, was trying to find the next Eric Lindros, because that would be impossible, right? Just like you can find the next Sergei Zubov, but you're not going to find the next Bobby Orr. In fact, I would say the hype around various "next Neely" types devalues what Cam brought to the table. Compare him enough times to a 25-goal scorer like Milan Lucic, and you start to forget how dangerous he actually was.

 

[Barnum]

I'm just going to throw it out there that scouts looked so hard for "the next Cam Neely" because he wasn't all that special.

I mean, sure, he had a recognizable style of play that you could always name-drop to the media, but there was still a chance that you could find a guy like him.
When teams in the 90s were drafting all those big, tough guys, they were partially doing it to find someone who could take faceoffs and go into the corners with Eric Lindros, right? But nobody, was trying to find the next Eric Lindros, because that would be impossible, right? Just like you can find the next Sergei Zubov, but you're not going to find the next Bobby Orr. In fact, I would say the hype around various "next Neely" types devalues what Cam brought to the table. Compare him enough times to a 25-goal scorer like Milan Lucic, and you start to forget how dangerous he actually was.

And this is all fairly inaccurate analysis of Neely. What coaches, GMs, scouts and everyone else including the talking heads and players, that is in the NHL, except of course the haters of HF Boards is; Neely was probably the one of most well rounded players that has played. Yes, I am old enough to have watched Hull, Orr, Clarke and even saw Howe live on the ice for the Whalers. In baseball there is an expression about a 5 tool player, in Neely's case, he was not the best in any one thing, he was extremely above average in every single aspect of the game. He could shoot, skate, back check, fore check, stick handle, pass, IQ, defence, offence and whatever else you could think of that a hockey player is supposed to be. He didn't have any holes in his game, not one.

The criticism that HF Boarders have and at times it seems sensible, he wasn't the best, number 1 in the league at any one thing. Neely is in the Hall to alot of you folk's chagrin but then again none of you are employed by the NHL that I am aware of.

Someone brought up the TSN top 60 players since 1967, guess what Neely was 42. Think of all the players that played during that span and he is still 42. The people that wrote that have a lot more knowledge than any of us, alot of you should rethink what you believe instead of stick with grudges. I don't do that against ex-Hab players.

 

[Barnum]

I don't think anyone has a problem believing an NHL scout would love would love to find another Cam Neely, it's the "not anyone else" part that's hard to believe. NHL scouts are searching for and would be happy finding any player that will be on this list.

Like I said earlier and I was asked to prove it, so I did. Scouts actively look for that. I am sure they look for the Orrs, Gretz's or Roy's but when it comes to hard nose players they are compared to Neely, not Lindros or Howe. Neely. That should carry alot of weight with most people but on HF Boards, it's a different planet.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Like I said earlier and I was asked to prove it, so I did. Scouts actively look for that. I am sure they look for the Orrs, Gretz's or Roy's but when it comes to hard nose players they are compared to Neely, not Lindros or Howe. Neely. That should carry alot of weight with most people but on HF Boards, it's a different planet.

Clarification please. You didn't just imply Neely >>>>> Howe as a hard nosed player did you?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Recent

Clarification please. You didn't just imply Neely >>>>> Howe as a hard nosed player did you?

Scouts use recent or contemporary comparables.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

And this is all fairly inaccurate analysis of Neely. What coaches, GMs, scouts and everyone else including the talking heads and players, that is in the NHL, except of course the haters of HF Boards is; Neely was probably the one of most well rounded players that has played. Yes, I am old enough to have watched Hull, Orr, Clarke and even saw Howe live on the ice for the Whalers. In baseball there is an expression about a 5 tool player, in Neely's case, he was not the best in any one thing, he was extremely above average in every single aspect of the game. He could shoot, skate, back check, fore check, stick handle, pass, IQ, defence, offence and whatever else you could think of that a hockey player is supposed to be. He didn't have any holes in his game, not one.

The criticism that HF Boarders have and at times it seems sensible, he wasn't the best, number 1 in the league at any one thing. Neely is in the Hall to alot of you folk's chagrin but then again none of you are employed by the NHL that I am aware of.

Ignoring defensive ability for a second (where I never saw anything about Neely in a mainstream profile or scouting report), he most decidedly was not above average as a passer. The statistics bear that out.

And of course the ability to stay healthy.

Someone brought up the TSN top 60 players since 1967, guess what Neely was 42. Think of all the players that played during that span and he is still 42. The people that wrote that have a lot more knowledge than any of us, alot of you should rethink what you believe instead of stick with grudges. I don't do that against ex-Hab players.

The 1998 THN Top 100 list was done by an elite group of hockey insiders who had been part of the game for decades. Neely was not on that list.

The top 60 since 1967 was done by mainstream hockey media types and active NHL GMs who really don't know much about hockey history.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Scouts use recent or contemporary comparables.

Thank you for the clarification. However I'm not sure Neely could be considered a recent or contemporary comparable given how long it's been now since he retired (18 years).

 

[Canadiens1958]

Management

Thank you for the clarification. However I'm not sure Neely could be considered a recent or contemporary comparable given how long it's been now since he retired (18 years).

Contemporary to the coaches and management types reading the reports.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Contemporary to the coaches and management types reading the reports.

Ok, that at least makes sense.

 

[seventieslord]

Someone brought up the TSN top 60 players since 1967, guess what Neely was 42. Think of all the players that played during that span and he is still 42. The people that wrote that have a lot more knowledge than any of us, alot of you should rethink what you believe instead of stick with grudges. I don't do that against ex-Hab players.

Yeah, actually I don't think they do.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah, actually I don't think they do.

While it should be obvious that Jim Rutherford and Brian Burke know a lot more about running NHL teams than any of us, I think there are probably quite a few members of this forum who know more about hockey history than they do.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Out of curiosity, I googled "prospect + power forward + cam neely" (about 16,700 results), and "prospect + butterfly + patrick roy" (about 58,600 results).

This definitely doesn't say anything about the quality of the players involved and their careers, but it give an idea about what large swaths of people are talking about.

Other results:

prospect + playmaker + wayne gretzky - 90,000
prospect + hybrid + martin brodeur - 78,500
prospect + power forward + brendan shanahan - 24,300
prospect + sniper + brett hull - 19,900
prospect + sniper + pavel bure - 19,500
prospect + playmaker + adam oates - 12,600

I realize that Shanahan might be a bit higher than some due to the fact that he's an active team executive.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yeah, actually I don't think they do.

My, aren't we an arrogant bunch?

 

[Killion]

My, aren't we an arrogant bunch?

... were talking Lil Jimmy Rutherford & Brian Burke here amongst others Mr.Bonvie. A less than stellar goaltender (and God Bless him, I had him as a Goalie Coach one summer ere' long long ago) and Brian Frikin Burke..... Mr.Trapezoid.... brain dead when its comes to Goaltenders, the entire game as far as Im concerned.... and Im shocked.... SHOCKED!.... good Irish boy from New England like that? C'mon.