HOH Top Centers - Round 2 Voting Results

[Hardyvan123]

Someone had Sakic 7th?

Didn't see that case being made at all.

Dionne and Apps are interesting, how much weight is the playoffs bringing Marcel down? He was a star player well before the Triple Crown line and with not the greatest support, Apps played on a really strong team, should be another interesting round.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Well, the vote matched up perfectly to mine except I had Trottier and Taylor switched.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I had the lowest vote for Cyclone Taylor...I didn't think that would be the case, as I didn't think I was uniquely "against" him...after reading more stories about him, he struck me as more of a one-man sideshow more than anything...but that's a cruel way of putting it. I don't know, the reports left a bad taste in my mouth for some reason...I didn't feel there was enough substance vs. the competition.

Espo was getting grilled for not being a complete center and product of Orr and all that...Taylor seems like Konstantin Koltsov vs. my beer league but on a larger level. I don't say that to sell the league he played in short (it was hyperbolic, at best), but it just seemed like he was faster than everyone in the half-league. I don't get the impression that he was an amazing playmaker, I don't get the impression he was great defensively...

I had him up there on my original list, and then as I learned more, a shroud of doubt settled over him for me...he's Michael Grabner in a league of Luke Schenn's...

AIUI, and really I have no intention of sullying a good name, but I feel compelled to challenge this wind-driven grandstander for my own education, it's the Patricks that are most often called singing his praises about how he's less of a switchblade and more of a Swiss Army Knife...aren't they the very people that bribed him over to the West? Are there any other notable names that praise his abilities beyond his speed and rushing ability?

I'm guessing it's me that's slow on the up-take, but the analysis on Cyclone seems somewhat incomplete to me, I was hoping another round would allow Taylor and Lalonde research to really go full-steam ahead...

 

[Canadiens1958]

Pcha

I had the lowest vote for Cyclone Taylor...I didn't think that would be the case, as I didn't think I was uniquely "against" him...after reading more stories about him, he struck me as more of a one-man sideshow more than anything...but that's a cruel way of putting it. I don't know, the reports left a bad taste in my mouth for some reason...I didn't feel there was enough substance vs. the competition.

Espo was getting grilled for not being a complete center and product of Orr and all that...Taylor seems like Konstantin Koltsov vs. my beer league but on a larger level. I don't say that to sell the league he played in short (it was hyperbolic, at best), but it just seemed like he was faster than everyone in the half-league. I don't get the impression that he was an amazing playmaker, I don't get the impression he was great defensively...

I had him up there on my original list, and then as I learned more, a shroud of doubt settled over him for me...he's Michael Grabner in a league of Luke Schenn's...

AIUI, and really I have no intention of sullying a good name, but I feel compelled to challenge this wind-driven grandstander for my own education, it's the Patricks that are most often called singing his praises about how he's less of a switchblade and more of a Swiss Army Knife...aren't they the very people that bribed him over to the West? Are there any other notable names that praise his abilities beyond his speed and rushing ability?

I'm guessing it's me that's slow on the up-take, but the analysis on Cyclone seems somewhat incomplete to me, I was hoping another round would allow Taylor and Lalonde research to really go full-steam ahead...

Touching the main issue about the PCHA. The balance between competition and entertainment. Seasons not being completed due to games being cancelled, schedule structure, critical evaluation vs promotion, etc.

 

[tony d]

Extremely close race between Sakic and Esposito. Surprised to see Trottier finishing 3rd, oh well at least he made it through this round.

 

[ted2019]

Someone had Sakic 7th?

Didn't see that case being made at all.

Dionne and Apps are interesting, how much weight is the playoffs bringing Marcel down? He was a star player well before the Triple Crown line and with not the greatest support, Apps played on a really strong team, should be another interesting round.

I had Dionne at #3.

 

[MXD]

Why? You think us voters are bitter Lalonde choose Montreal over Toronto? No one left him off the ballot. For all you Newsy fans though I'll give you some nice high resolution pics of him with the Vancouver Lacrosse Club. Here and here. Here and here you see Lalonde & Taylor on the same Vancouver Lacrosse team. On that team is also player and future PCHA & NHL referee Mickey Ion, trainer and future Seattle, Portland & Chicago coach Pete Muldoon and hockey player Sibby Nichols.

Nothing to do with voters.

 

[MXD]

Essentially a tie. Any one of 8 voters could have changed the result by swapping their 2/3 order.

Also, Trottier out completely impacts.

 

[sr edler]

Are there any other notable names that praise his abilities beyond his speed and rushing ability?

Center Herb Jordan, a teammate of Cyclone in the NHA with the Renfrew Creamery Kings and an earlier star with the Quebec Bulldogs, said

In point of stick-handling and speed, Fred Taylor was outstanding

Herb Jordan Recalls Renfrew "Millionaires"

So you have "stick-handling" there at least. And he did score 21 goals in 29 NHA games from cover point. He did score 17 goals in 8 Stanley Cup games in 1915 & 1918 against NHA & NHL competition. Didn't feast on a half league there. Portland & Seattle weren't poor on defense, had Moose Johnson & Jack Walker, and many more good players. If Portland & Seattle were so easy to feast on why did Lalonde "only" score 10 Stanley Cup goals on them in 13 games in 1916, 1917 & 1919? That's quite a drop from his league average.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Taylor over Lalonde appears very Toronto-centric.

I don't get it.

I had the lowest vote for Cyclone Taylor...I didn't think that would be the case, as I didn't think I was uniquely "against" him...after reading more stories about him, he struck me as more of a one-man sideshow more than anything...but that's a cruel way of putting it. I don't know, the reports left a bad taste in my mouth for some reason...I didn't feel there was enough substance vs. the competition.

Espo was getting grilled for not being a complete center and product of Orr and all that...Taylor seems like Konstantin Koltsov vs. my beer league but on a larger level. I don't say that to sell the league he played in short (it was hyperbolic, at best), but it just seemed like he was faster than everyone in the half-league. I don't get the impression that he was an amazing playmaker, I don't get the impression he was great defensively...

I had him up there on my original list, and then as I learned more, a shroud of doubt settled over him for me...he's Michael Grabner in a league of Luke Schenn's...

AIUI, and really I have no intention of sullying a good name, but I feel compelled to challenge this wind-driven grandstander for my own education, it's the Patricks that are most often called singing his praises about how he's less of a switchblade and more of a Swiss Army Knife...aren't they the very people that bribed him over to the West? Are there any other notable names that praise his abilities beyond his speed and rushing ability?

I'm guessing it's me that's slow on the up-take, but the analysis on Cyclone seems somewhat incomplete to me, I was hoping another round would allow Taylor and Lalonde research to really go full-steam ahead...

In the HOH goalies project, IIRC, you and C1958 were the two people who seriously questioned the quality of the PCHA.

Touching the main issue about the PCHA. The balance between competition and entertainment. Seasons not being completed due to games being cancelled, schedule structure, critical evaluation vs promotion, etc.

You could say all that about the NHA/early NHL too.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Also, Trottier out completely impacts.

I hadn't noticed that.. whoever that is had a very lonely opinion.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I hadn't noticed that.. whoever that is had a very lonely opinion.

Wasn't me - I had Trots 4th after Espo, Sakic, and Taylor

 

[BraveCanadian]

Wasn't me - I had Trots 4th after Espo, Sakic, and Taylor

It is ok I am sure by now Isles fans are used to their dynasty being overlooked in one fashion or another.

(un)Luckily, I am a Leafs fan so I am used to wallowing in self pity.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Trottier out completely impacts.

I hadn't noticed that.. whoever that is had a very lonely opinion.

... and 16 of the 20 had him in their upper three---

Relieved to know a provisional "ChiTownPhilly" ballot wouldn't have changed anything- would have been Esposito 137, Sakic 134, Trottier 130.

I had those four- just not quite in that order...

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Vote 4 - Lists received from 20 out of 23 possible voters

Player | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | None | Total Steve Yzerman | 9 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 145
Newsy Lalonde | 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 106
Syl Apps | 3 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 99
Frank Boucher | 2 | 2 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 94
Henri Richard | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 85
Milt Schmidt | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 60
Marcel Dionne | 0 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 57
Peter Forsberg | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 50
Joe Malone | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 11 | 24

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I had Henri Richard in and Lalonde out, but Lalonde was my 5th, so I'm not too disappointed.

 

[Hardyvan123]

3 guys had Schmidt 2nd?

Didn't see that case being made very effectively at all in that last round.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

3 guys had Schmidt 2nd?

Didn't see that case being made very effectively at all in that last round.

I definitely wish people who are planning to vote in a way that clearly has not been discussed and/or is contrary to to what the discussion has been would take at least a few minutes to briefly make a case for that vote. It happened to an even greater degree last vote when Trottier was left off one person's list...Vote however you want, but inform the rest of us why if that case hasn't been made...maybe you see something we are all missing.

 

[MadArcand]

Two people had Forsberg - a player strictly inferior to Schmidt - 2nd. Hell, Apps is actually already in because of... war years? And no one finds that strange.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Two people had Forsberg - a player strictly inferior to Schmidt - 2nd. Hell, Apps is actually already in because of... war years? And no one finds that strange.

Forsberg vs Schmidt for 6 and 7 was a tough decision for me

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

I definitely wish people who are planning to vote in a way that clearly has not been discussed and/or is contrary to to what the discussion has been would take at least a few minutes to briefly make a case for that vote.

Well- I'm not a voter... but the general desire for me to see more-involved discussion doesn't keep me from seeing the reasons why someone would be mute from time-to-time. 1) You're convinced you're not going to persuade anyone. If the person who nerfed Trottier did so based on "career-value-is-everything," he's probably right- it's unlikely anyone would have been persuaded. [If the claim is that he was more Bossy's and Potvin's elevée than we recognized... well, that would have been worth hearing.] 2) Contrary-effect fears. To be honest, I muted some Henri Richard deconstruction this round- feeling that it was more strategically viable for me to say little, and hope that he's de-emphasized in the shuffle. 3) General reluctance to be confrontational. This is less of a factor for me that it once was- especially now as it seems I've survived the hazing-period... but a few of us are still on the end of little personal barbs like "your vote here reflects badly on us as a group," or "you didn't feel that way last time we discussed this" [Hey, maybe they learned since that last time].

To cite a specific, though, my big regret is that Schmidt advocacy wasn't taken up more than it was- and I'm as guilty as anyone for not doing so. This was a player where the more I looked, the more I saw. I had him fourth. [1. Yzerman, 2. Apps, 3. Lalonde, 4. Schmidt.]

 

[MXD]

Well- I'm not a voter... but the general desire for me to see more-involved discussion doesn't keep me from seeing the reasons why someone would be mute from time-to-time. 1) You're convinced you're not going to persuade anyone. If the person who nerfed Trottier did so based on "career-value-is-everything," he's probably right- it's unlikely anyone would have been persuaded. [If the claim is that he was more Bossy's and Potvin's elevée than we recognized... well, that would have been worth hearing.] 2) Contrary-effect fears. To be honest, I muted some Henri Richard deconstruction this round- feeling that it was more strategically viable for me to say little, and hope that he's de-emphasized in the shuffle. 3) General reluctance to be confrontational. This is less of a factor for me that it once was- especially now as it seems I've survived the hazing-period... but a few of us are still on the end of little personal barbs like "your vote here reflects badly on us as a group," or "you didn't feel that way last time we discussed this" [Hey, maybe they learned since that last time].

To cite a specific, though, my big regret is that Schmidt advocacy wasn't taken up more than it was- and I'm as guilty as anyone for not doing so. This was a player where the more I looked, the more I saw. I had him fourth. [1. Yzerman, 2. Apps, 3. Lalonde, 4. Schmidt.]

This is the 5th project like this.

I've been part of all of them.

So, when I see a reasoning that was once dimissed brought here as a argument, I can't help but thinking that what's good for one is good for another.

If you think my behaviour is inappropriate, by all means, report me. Until then, if you're to basically DIRECTLY quote my words, can you at least use the "wrap quote" function, or mention my name, or both...

 

[MXD]

I definitely wish people who are planning to vote in a way that clearly has not been discussed and/or is contrary to to what the discussion has been would take at least a few minutes to briefly make a case for that vote. It happened to an even greater degree last vote when Trottier was left off one person's list...Vote however you want, but inform the rest of us why if that case hasn't been made...maybe you see something we are all missing.

While I totally understand what you mean...

Bringing this point in regards to a comment made regarding Schmidt, when it could certainly apply to at least another player from last round...

I don't know...

What I'm about to write might appears mean, but it's not because writes something that a point has been successfully made.

 

[seventieslord]

[COLOR="DarkSlateBlue" To be honest, I muted some Henri Richard deconstruction this round- feeling that it was more strategically viable for me to say little, and hope that he's de-emphasized in the shuffle. [/COLOR]

There's "strategy" in this??

 

[tarheelhockey]

There's "strategy" in this??

There shouldn't be. The whole idea here is to share as much information as possible so we can make an informed decision.

Detailed discussion of Forsberg didn't do anything to advance him in this round.