Is Messier a top-5 All-Time player?

Status
Not open for further replies.

KOVALEV10*

Guest
Messier was a fantastic hockey player no doubt. But top 5? Dont think so...

I would put Messier 8th in the top forwards of all time list behind Lemieux Gretzky Richard Howe Beliveau Lafleur and Hull.

I would rank Messier 4th in the top centers of all time list behind only Lemieux Gretzky and Beliveau

I would rank Messier 4th in the best leaders of all time list after Beliveau Rocket and Yzerman.

I would rank Messier 4rd in the best overall players of all time list after Howe, Trottier and Gainey.

Finally I would rank Messier around 12th or 13th on the best players of all time list after Orr Lemieux Gretzky Howe Rocket Lafleur Beliveau Hasek Roy Hull, Harvey and Eddie Shore.
 

PRB

Registered User
Apr 29, 2005
297
0
Toronto, Canada
www.prbsports.com
I've read this all and still I put Mess in my top 5-6. Leadership, passion, physical ability, scoring ability, passing, and success. All equate to more than any other player ever in the game. Some players have had leadership without scoring ability, others scoring ability without physical side, some have had scoring and leadership but not a lot of passion. Messier had it all in abundance. 6 cups as well as his individual stats inc. 2nd all-time in points says it all to me.

Legend.
 

bigjags*

Guest
Belfast Giants said:
I've read this all and still I put Mess in my top 5-6. Leadership, passion, physical ability, scoring ability, passing, and success. All equate to more than any other player ever in the game. Some players have had leadership without scoring ability, others scoring ability without physical side, some have had scoring and leadership but not a lot of passion. Messier had it all in abundance. 6 cups as well as his individual stats inc. 2nd all-time in points says it all to me.

Legend.

Good post.

Richard? Beliveau? Lafleur? Harvey? Those guys aren't better than the Moose, not a chance. I think you've watched one to many old timer games and have gotten all horny over them. Those are old vets everyone loves, but the Moose did it all.

I can't help but laugh when I see people posting guys like that. Guys they've never seen play a game, but they know is better than Mark. Eddie Shore? Sawchuck? lol Those guys played in teh 1920s.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
bigjags said:
Good post.

Richard? Beliveau? Lafleur? Harvey? Those guys aren't better than the Moose, not a chance. I think you've watched one to many old timer games and have gotten all horny over them. Those are old vets everyone loves, but the Moose did it all.

I can't help but laugh when I see people posting guys like that. Guys they've never seen play a game, but they know is better than Mark. Eddie Shore? Sawchuck? lol Those guys played in teh 1920s.

As opposed to you never seeing them play and dismissing them? I'll take the opinions of sports writers and people involved in the game, thank you very much. Give me Maurice Richard, Jean Beliveau, Doug Harvey or Eddie Shore over Messier any day.
 

loadie

Official Beer Taster
Sponsor
Jan 1, 2003
7,833
238
New Brunswick
bigjags said:
Good post.

Richard? Beliveau? Lafleur? Harvey? Those guys aren't better than the Moose, not a chance. I think you've watched one to many old timer games and have gotten all horny over them. Those are old vets everyone loves, but the Moose did it all.

I can't help but laugh when I see people posting guys like that. Guys they've never seen play a game, but they know is better than Mark. Eddie Shore? Sawchuck? lol Those guys played in teh 1920s.

Well, thanks for bringing such a good argument to the thread. :shakehead All I have to do is look where you live to figure you would have all Hab players and a Bruin in your list of players that you would put behind Messier. Firstly, only Shore played in the 20's, he also played in the 30's and 40's. Richard played in the 40's - 50's and retired in 1959/60. Harvey played from the late 40's to the late 60's. Beliveau played from the 50's to the 70's, and Lafleur retired in 90/91....if you wanna laugh, at least get your facts right.
To dismiss what players did years ago, is to throw away the history of the game. In 20 years, will you dismiss what Messier did, because he started to play in the 70's? Comparing players from different eras is like comparing apples and oranges, it's very hard to do, and listing anyone in a particular order will always get different responses....but to say someone is better than someone else because he played a long time ago is showing a narrow minded view of the game of hockey and shows a lack of knowledge about the history of the game. Maybe you should get the NHL channel and watch a few games, or maybe a book on the history of hockey...then again, with the open mindedness your showing in your post, maybe you shouldn't bother.

PS: The Leafs won their last cup in 1967....I guess the fans of the team really shouldn't get all horny about their 13 cups, they were won a long time ago. :sarcasm:
 

LesCanadiens

Hardcore Curmudgeon
Feb 27, 2002
3,665
1,548
West Kelowna
bigjags said:
Good post.

Richard? Beliveau? Lafleur? Harvey? Those guys aren't better than the Moose, not a chance. I think you've watched one to many old timer games and have gotten all horny over them. Those are old vets everyone loves, but the Moose did it all.

I can't help but laugh when I see people posting guys like that. Guys they've never seen play a game, but they know is better than Mark. Eddie Shore? Sawchuck? lol Those guys played in teh 1920s.

So what? Just because they aren't on TV now doesn't mean they don't exist. I watched Lafleur and Beliveau, and although I like Messier, he is not in their league. Beliveau was the Mario of his era and Lafleur was the top player of his era. Messier has never been the top player of his era. He was always second fiddle to Wayne, Mario, Yzerman, Forsberg, Sakic...etc.

Regarding then older players....is Babe Ruth any less a player because we didn't watch him play? Get off your high horse. There are many players much greater than Messier.

Besides, don't get all horny on Messier...he may actually take you up on it. ;)
 

PRB

Registered User
Apr 29, 2005
297
0
Toronto, Canada
www.prbsports.com
Messier, next to maybe Howe was the most well rounded player ever to play the game.

People tend to be very nostalgic, 'The good old days when men where men and sheep where scared', watching the world though the black and white specs, and the sports men then where better than those of today. In 20-30 years time people will praise Messier the way they are praising the guys of yester year that are all aparantly better.

Fast forward to 2030 (if crosby plays to Marks age he'll only be retiring), and allowing for any great players to come along between now and then, people, even those not raiting him to highly here, will remember Messier a lot more fondly than they are now because he'll be one from the 'good old days' by then.
 

bigjags*

Guest
Habdul said:
Besides, don't get all horny on Messier...he may actually take you up on it. ;)

lol that's funny..

But get real when people bring up Eddie Shore. That is strictey hear say. We can't really compare those types to the Moose.

And why do people on these boards go into a fit and call people closeminded if they dont' agree, Loadie? Don't tell me to watch the game, my family has seasons tickets and I've played hockey since I was kid.
 

bigjags*

Guest
Belfast Giants said:
Messier, next to maybe Howe was the most well rounded player ever to play the game.

People tend to be very nostalgic, 'The good old days when men where men and sheep where scared', watching the world though the black and white specs, and the sports men then where better than those of today. In 20-30 years time people will praise Messier the way they are praising the guys of yester year that are all aparantly better.

Fast forward to 2030 (if crosby plays to Marks age he'll only be retiring), and allowing for any great players to come along between now and then, people, even those not raiting him to highly here, will remember Messier a lot more fondly than they are now because he'll be one from the 'good old days' by then.

I couldn't agree more.

People talk of the Rocket like he was a god. He was a hockey player who scored 50 goals in 50 games. He didn't cure canceer. He was good, but I think people's perception of him is distorted because he played in the days where men where men and women didn't vote.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
Belfast Giants said:
Fast forward to 2030 (if crosby plays to Marks age he'll only be retiring), and allowing for any great players to come along between now and then, people, even those not raiting him to highly here, will remember Messier a lot more fondly than they are now because he'll be one from the 'good old days' by then.

Or he'll be laughed at for "playing in the 80s." Don't you see the irony of saying Messier will finally get his due in the year 2030 when guys like Richard and Shore are being laughed at when compared to Messier?
 

PRB

Registered User
Apr 29, 2005
297
0
Toronto, Canada
www.prbsports.com
The Albino said:
Or he'll be laughed at for "playing in the 80s." Don't you see the irony of saying Messier will finally get his due in the year 2030 when guys like Richard and Shore are being laughed at when compared to Messier?

They are not being laughed at hence my post. Most people are ranking a lot of them ahead of Messier through what seems to be a case of nostalgia. Now dont get me wrong, everyone has an opinion and that is fair enough and nor am I saying or 'laughing' at players like Richard and Shore, they are legends of the game.

But some people are rankin Messier below quite a few guys and I'm stating that I dont think he should be as I think he's top 5-6.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
bigjags said:
I couldn't agree more.

People talk of the Rocket like he was a god. He was a hockey player who scored 50 goals in 50 games. He didn't cure canceer. He was good, but I think people's perception of him is distorted because he played in the days where men where men and women didn't vote.

Considering women got to vote in most of Canada in 1918, in the US in 1920, and Quebec was the final province to enact it in 1940, Richard never played a game in the NHL when women couldn't vote.

What that has to do with him not being as good as Messier is beyond me, but just to clear things up.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
Belfast Giants said:
They are not being laughed at hence my post. Most people are ranking a lot of them ahead of Messier through what seems to be a case of nostalgia. Now dont get me wrong, everyone has an opinion and that is fair enough and nor am I saying or 'laughing' at players like Richard and Shore, they are legends of the game.

The laughing comment was in reference to bigjags.

bigjags said:
Eddie Shore? Sawchuck? lol Those guys played in teh 1920s.

bigjags said:
Richard? Beliveau? Lafleur? Harvey? Those guys aren't better than the Moose, not a chance.

I can respect your posts BG, as you have a respect for the history of the game and honestly place Messier among the legends. bigjags, on the other hand, dismisses their careers saying they aren't even comparable to the Moose.
 

bigjags*

Guest
The Albino said:
Considering women got to vote in most of Canada in 1918, in the US in 1920, and Quebec was the final province to enact it in 1940, Richard never played a game in the NHL when women couldn't vote.

What that has to do with him not being as good as Messier is beyond me, but just to clear things up.

It was a joke, just like your Riberio there. You're either young (like 15) or dumb.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
bigjags said:
It was a joke, just like your Riberio there. You're either young (like 15) or dumb.

I know it was used to make a point, although your point is so flawed I thought it appropriate to point out that not only do you have no grasp of hockey history, your knowledge of suffrage is also pathetic.

Secondly, great shot at me with the Ribeiro comment. Except, I'm not a fan of Ribeiro. I found his appearance in the pic funny, and actually telling of his attitude towards the game. It's a joke, in other words. "You're either young (like 15) or dumb."

Thirdly, I'm 21, but my age is irrelevant. According to your profile, you're a Rangers fan. And Messier is apparently better than "Richard, Beliveau, Lafleur, Harvey, Shore and Sawchuk." I'd make a comment about YOUR age, but that's also irrelevant.
 

bigjags*

Guest
The Albino said:
I know it was used to make a point, although your point is so flawed I thought it appropriate to point out that not only do you have no grasp of hockey history, your knowledge of suffrage is also pathetic.

Secondly, great shot at me with the Ribeiro comment. Except, I'm not a fan of Ribeiro. I found his appearance in the pic funny, and actually telling of his attitude towards the game. It's a joke, in other words. "You're either young (like 15) or dumb."

Thirdly, I'm 21, but my age is irrelevant. According to your profile, you're a Rangers fan. And Messier is apparently better than "Richard, Beliveau, Lafleur, Harvey, Shore and Sawchuk." I'd make a comment about YOUR age, but that's also irrelevant.

Messier flat out hammers those old tools.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
bigjags said:
Messier flat out hammers those old tools.

Game. Set. Match. It was fun debating with you but you clearly defeated me. I tip my hat to you.

Now you can sit back, open up a nice bag of Lays potato chips, and ponder if you should shave your head again because it's not up to Moose-standards.

As for my opinion on where Messier ranks, which I just realized I never gave because I was too busy defending people whose merits should speak for themselves, I agree with where he was placed in The Hockey News' list from 98 but not really on the order.

IMO

1. Orr
2. Gretzky
3. Lemieux
4. Howe
5. Richard
6. Beliveau
7. Sawchuk
8. Harvey
9. Shore
10. Hull
11. Messier
12. Lafleur

Patrick Roy should be thrown in there, possibly right before Sawchuk. Everyone after 6 though is in the same bracket, the greats who didn't transcend the game. The top 5, whatever order you give it, is set in stone IMO.
 

loadie

Official Beer Taster
Sponsor
Jan 1, 2003
7,833
238
New Brunswick
bigjags said:
lol that's funny..

But get real when people bring up Eddie Shore. That is strictey hear say. We can't really compare those types to the Moose.

And why do people on these boards go into a fit and call people closeminded if they dont' agree, Loadie? Don't tell me to watch the game, my family has seasons tickets and I've played hockey since I was kid.

I didn't call you closed minded because you didn't agree with me, I couldn't care less if you agree with me or not. I called you closed minded because you automatically place Messier ahead of guys just because they played a long time ago. Where did I tell you to watch a hockey game? Again, I couldn't care less if you have season tickets and played hockey since you were a kid. I said you should watch games from the past, not games of today. I don't think you should get the book on the history of hockey, apparently you can't read anyways. I love the part about Eddie Shore being strictly hearsay, do you think TV and newspapers and books were just invented? I also love some of the other things in your posts about Richard and women not being allowed to vote...where are you getting that stuff from? Then again, Richard played in the 20's. Priceless. :shakehead
 

bigjags*

Guest
The Albino said:
Game. Set. Match. It was fun debating with you but you clearly defeated me. I tip my hat to you.

Now you can sit back, open up a nice bag of Lays potato chips, and ponder if you should shave your head again because it's not up to Moose-standards.


Patrick Roy should be thrown in there, possibly right before Sawchuk. Everyone after 6 though is in the same bracket, the greats who didn't transcend the game. The top 5, whatever order you give it, is set in stone IMO.

hah thats actually funny..the Lays thing.

Roy is not bad, but I think Broduer is already better. If not now at least when he retires.
 

KOVALEV10*

Guest
bigjags said:
Good post.

Richard? Beliveau? Lafleur? Harvey? Those guys aren't better than the Moose, not a chance. I think you've watched one to many old timer games and have gotten all horny over them. Those are old vets everyone loves, but the Moose did it all.

I can't help but laugh when I see people posting guys like that. Guys they've never seen play a game, but they know is better than Mark. Eddie Shore? Sawchuck? lol Those guys played in teh 1920s.

Saying Rocket Richard isn't better then Moose is pretty ignorant to say the very least. Both great leaders but Rocket was the best player of a decade which Moose never was as well as the best goal scorer before Bossy came along. Both great leaders but I'd take Rocket's clutch play over Moose's anyday of the week.

Beliveau was better then Messier as well. Dont let the stats fool you kid. Beliveau was a class act, a smooth stride with great stickhandling and incredible play making skill certainly better then Messier in that respect. Both great Leaders but Beliveau was slightly better. Also hard to argue against Beliveau's 10 cups.

Lafleur is the one people get the wrong impression of the most if they have never watched him play in his prime. Yeah 1353 points is not that impressive but 6 straight 50 goal seasons (which only Gretzky, Bossy and Esposito have done) and 6 straight 120 or more points seasons, 3 pearson trophies, 3 art ross trophies, 2 hart trophies, a conn smythe, leading his team to 5 stanley cups is something Messier could dream of. How many 50 or more goal seasons this moose have? 1? What about 120 or more point seasons? Here we go again only once! So get your facts straight kid. Oh and let's not forget how Lafleur got 1000 points in only 720 games a record at that time.

Oh and dont think for one second that saying he's the second most points getter of all time means he's top 5 or else Ron Francis and Marcel Dionne would be as well.
 

Crosbyfan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2003
12,633
2,442
The Albino said:
Game. Set. Match. It was fun debating with you but you clearly defeated me. I tip my hat to you.

Now you can sit back, open up a nice bag of Lays potato chips, and ponder if you should shave your head again because it's not up to Moose-standards.

As for my opinion on where Messier ranks, which I just realized I never gave because I was too busy defending people whose merits should speak for themselves, I agree with where he was placed in The Hockey News' list from 98 but not really on the order.

IMO

1. Orr
2. Gretzky
3. Lemieux
4. Howe
5. Richard
6. Beliveau
7. Sawchuk
8. Harvey
9. Shore
10. Hull
11. Messier
12. Lafleur

Patrick Roy should be thrown in there, possibly right before Sawchuk. Everyone after 6 though is in the same bracket, the greats who didn't transcend the game. The top 5, whatever order you give it, is set in stone IMO.

Except Beliveau was better all around than Richard. Just nobody can fathom that the Rocket wasn't the best Canadien ever. 50 in 50 in 1944 had a lot to do with the war but the legend had started and Richard's clutch goal scoring, quiet but fiery leadership, and the Richard Riot kept it going.
 

Bill McNeal

Registered User
Jul 19, 2003
12,845
225
Montreal
Crosbyfan said:
Except Beliveau was better all around than Richard. Just nobody can fathom that the Rocket wasn't the best Canadien ever. 50 in 50 in 1944 had a lot to do with the war but the legend had started and Richard's clutch goal scoring, quiet but fiery leadership, and the Richard Riot kept it going.

I've heard arguments for both on the basis of skill level but it's Richard's legend that pushes him into the fab-five over Beliveau IMO. Is that fair? Probably not, but Richard will most likely always be remembered as the greatest Hab.
 

arrbez

bad chi
Jun 2, 2004
13,352
261
Toronto
felixd said:
No love for Bossy?

I think he was the purest goal scorer ever

He's certainly one of the best goal scorers ever, although you could make an argument for Gretz, Lemiuex, and a few others as well to be #1. Being top-5 in one specific part of the game does not necessarily make you a top-5 player ever.

No doubt he'd be on everyone's top-5 scorers list, but I doubt you'd find anyone putting him on their top-5 players list
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->