Joe Pelletier's Top 100 Hockey Players of All-Time

[Sentinel]

Even if Petrov is worse than these guys (debatable), one has to admit that the guy is quite underrated for someone who routinely outscored the big names in the Soviet league and international events.

Absolutely. He remains a very underrated player, not only among Western fans, but among Russians as well. To them, 70s Hockey = Kharlamov + Maltsev + Tretiak. Which is, of course, incorrect.

 

[Rhiessan71]

In 1972 (40 years ago), USSR was quite on the level of NHL stars. Do you really think that they developed their star power overnight? Well, they didn't. FYI, Soviets thoroughly dominated the 60s decade. Firsov and Starshinov were world class players. Just because they didn't have a chance to play against NHL stars, doesn't mean they weren't as good as the ones that came in the 70s.

Listen, I don't want to get into a whole debate about '72 or belittle it much out of respect because it certainly became apparent that the Russians belonged but 2 things have to be kept in mind.

1) Canada went into that tourny with players that hadn't played together much vs a Russian team that had played together for years in most cases.

2) Canada played without their 2 best players, both named Bobby. Orr alone would have completely changed the face of that tounry.

The bottom tiers are always bottom tiers. We are talking about top end talent.

Your league composition stats are meaningless, as the other poster noted. With KHL's emergence, all those people that otherwise would have filled NHL teams' bottom two lines are now playing in Russia (plus a star or two, like Jagr and Kovalchuk). And your last paragraph doesn't make any sense, I'm sorry.

Actually, not only does it make perfect sense but it's also REALLY simple.
Your argument is that the only Euro's playing are the top tier ones. That would mean that they should have large spikes in their share of points compared to their population. Quality over quantity right?
Well, that's not happening, at least not any where near the degree that's trying to be portrayed.

See, it's my opinion that Canadians tend to take more penalties and that the vast majority of the enforcers are Canadian. Now for my opinion to be supported, all that needs to happen is that when you switch the population chart to PIM shares, there should be a spike for Canada and ohh there it is. A clear spike from 50% population to 60% of the PIM shares.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Be nice and respect one another.

 

[thom]

Number 71 is right on this one for sure.The canadian players took it as a joke to play the soviets.Unlike the soviets players on canada were somewhat unfamilar and there were big egoes involved.Like 71 said 2 of our top players were not avaiable but the most important fact and it is a fact.The players thought playing the soviets was like playing an ahl club.The russians played together year round.

 

[jcbio11]

Last season, 12 of the top 20 were Canadian, that's 60% btw
30 years ago, 16 of the top 20 were Canadian, that's 80%. Wanna guess what the League's Canadian population was in 82/83? Yeah, that's right, 81.1%.

What does this have to do with anything?

You do realize there was the Iron curtain in the 80s? Hence 80 percent of the NHL were Canadian...

 

[Rhiessan71]

What does this have to do with anything?

You do realize there was the Iron curtain in the 80s? Hence 80 percent of the NHL were Canadian...

As of right now, the population of the League of former Iron curtain countries is 9.8% or about 1 in 10. The Finns and Swedes were already in the League in the 80's.
The country that has cut into Canada's share of League population the most is by far the USA, going from about 1 in 10 in the early 80's to almost 1 in 4 today.

BTW, I'm still waiting for some evidence to back up your claim that only the top tier Euro's come to the NHL.

Hell, I'll even throw you a bone and say that I agree with what you're saying in the context of the Russians. Why come over here in a 3rd or 4th line role when they can be 1rst or 2nd line players in the KHL right.
However, the Russians do not make up all of Europe last I checked. Swedes, Finns, Czechs and Slovaks are found throughout the League at all tiers, in all roles.

 

[Sentinel]

Listen, I don't want to get into a whole debate about '72

That's exactly what you're doing.

it certainly became apparent that the Russians belonged

Thank you, apology accepted.

1) Canada went into that tourny with players that hadn't played together much vs a Russian team that had played together for years in most cases.

This is a myth that has been debunked many times. USSR rotated their lineup and changed their lines from game to game. Kharlamov was centered by Maltsev, Starshinov, and Petrov. The famous Kh-P-M line played together for, I believe, ONE game.

2) Canada played without their 2 best players, both named Bobby. Orr alone would have completely changed the face of that tounry.

Firsov boycotted the tournament in solidarity with the fired coach Tarasov. But, really: who cares? I don't see you belittling the 1984 Canada Cup victory, although USSR was missing their entire second unit, and Fetisov on top of that. This is the roster Canada went with, and we know the outcome. More power to them. But CLEARLY Russians could compete and compete well against the crème of the Canadian crop. My original point was that this parity did not develop overnight. They developed their talent throughout 50s and 60s. To say that "Russia only produced high end talent for the past 30 years" (that is, post-1983) is just w-r-o-n-g.

Actually, not only does it make perfect sense but it's also REALLY simple.
Your argument is that the only Euro's playing are the top tier ones. That would mean that they should have large spikes in their share of points compared to their population. Quality over quantity right?
Well, that's not happening, at least not any where near the degree that's trying to be portrayed.

See, it's my opinion that Canadians tend to take more penalties and that the vast majority of the enforcers are Canadian. Now for my opinion to be supported, all that needs to happen is that when you switch the population chart to PIM shares, there should be a spike for Canada and ohh there it is. A clear spike from 50% population to 60% of the PIM shares.

I still have no idea what you're saying or how does it relate to the discussion.

 

[Peter9]

I see. Thats all is it? Borderliner? Yvon Cournoyer? Ok.

Put those eyes back in your head, Killion, and then please try to find mine.

 

[seventieslord]

Put those eyes back in your head, Killion, and then please try to find mine.

You can hold whatever opinion you want to. Whether any evidence supports it is a separate matter.

 

[Peter9]

Kharlamov at 28 (Top Russian player). Makarov at 54. Uhuh. Rrrright

It's just incredible how the face-to-face comparison between USSR/Russia and Canada doesn't seem to matter at all to many people. It's as if all the Summit and Super series never happened.

It would be cool if a list like this would be made by a Russian (as long as the Kharlamov nostalgia doesn't get in the way ). Just for comparison / perspectives sakes. Mikita would probably not crack the top 30 and Dionne the top 50.

Yes, if the history board and Joe have to rank players--a job I consider impossible--I think they should rank only players who played in Canada and the USA, in the NHL and its predecessor leagues.

It's inevitable the Europeans who did not play in the NHL are going to be slighted not only because of (first) natural innate bias to favor one's own, but mostly because of (second) lack of exposure to these Europeans in anything but international competitions, which were so few and far between.

And (third) we on this side of the ocean mostly saw those Europeans playing on the smaller NHL-size rinks they were unaccustomed to and hardly ever saw them playing on the international-size rinks they were used to.

Finally (fourth), because of disparities in the level of exposure and in the level of available information, we in North America simply are not in anything near the position to judge non-NHL European players that we are in to judge players who performed in the NHL, and that in itself makes one more ready to discount/disregard/overlook/even disrespect those non-NHL European players.

 

[Peter9]

You can hold whatever opinion you want to. Whether any evidence supports it is a separate matter.

Thank you for informing me of that. I didn't think I took issue with it, but what the heck, you're free to have your opinion on that, too, without quarrel from me. You could have said the same to Killion with his rolling his eyes comment, but you didn't, did you? (mod edit)

 

[Rhiessan71]

That's exactly what you're doing.

No, it wasn‘t. 72 was when the Russians showed they belonged. Canada took them for granted and paid for it. It was the last time the Russians were not taken seriously.

Thank you, apology accepted.

You seem to confused or at the very least you seem to be confusing the Russians with the phrase non-Canadians.
I said 30-40 years because that‘s what happened.
Russians 40 years ago and then the rest (USA, Sweden, Finland, Czechs) followed suit for the next decade or so after that.

This is a myth that has been debunked many times. USSR rotated their lineup and changed their lines from game to game. Kharlamov was centered by Maltsev, Starshinov, and Petrov. The famous Kh-P-M line played together for, I believe, ONE game.

How is this a myth???
The Canadians were brought together right before the tourny, barely even practiced together.
You seriously think that the Russians doing some line juggling is equal to what the Canadians were going through? Yeah right!

Firsov boycotted the tournament in solidarity with the fired coach Tarasov. But, really: who cares? I don't see you belittling the 1984 Canada Cup victory, although USSR was missing their entire second unit, and Fetisov on top of that. This is the roster Canada went with, and we know the outcome. More power to them. But CLEARLY Russians could compete and compete well against the crème of the Canadian crop. My original point was that this parity did not develop overnight. They developed their talent throughout 50s and 60s. To say that "Russia only produced high end talent for the past 30 years" (that is, post-1983) is just w-r-o-n-g.

Yeah, because the Russians missing Firsov equates to the Canadians missing the best player in the world and one of the very best to ever play the game. Yeah right!


MOD

 

[aloonda*]

great job, loved the links and digging through the history of this great game

 

[Zine]

Listen, I don't want to get into a whole debate about '72 or belittle it much out of respect because it certainly became apparent that the Russians belonged but 2 things have to be kept in mind.

1) Canada went into that tourny with players that hadn't played together much vs a Russian team that had played together for years in most cases.

2) Canada played without their 2 best players, both named Bobby. Orr alone would have completely changed the face of that tounry.

North Americans created this myth that Soviets were a well oiled machine, played together for years, all on the same page, etc.

Early 1970s it wasn't uncommon for players to be omitted from the NT (see Kuzkin), or coaches strong-arming the Federation into forcing line-up changes that ran counter team strategy.
In short, this time period is highlighted by rival national team coaches (Tarasov v Bobrov/Kulagin) attempting to settle scores with each other rather than icing the best, most cohesive team possible.
It's wasn't until Bobrov was fired from NT for drunk behavior at 1974 WC celebration dinner did this period end.


The Canadian 'disadvantages' were not as significant as North Americans make them out to be.

 

[Rhiessan71]

North Americans created this myth that Soviets were a well oiled machine, played together for years, all on the same page, etc.

Early 1970s it wasn't uncommon for players to be omitted from the NT (see Kuzkin), or coaches strong-arming the Federation into forcing line-up changes that ran counter team strategy.
In short, this time period is highlighted by rival national team coaches (Tarasov v Bobrov/Kulagin) attempting to settle scores with each other rather than icing the best, most cohesive team possible.
It's wasn't until Bobrov was fired from NT for drunk behavior at 1974 WC celebration dinner did this period end.


The Canadian 'disadvantages' were not as significant as North Americans make them out to be.

The biggest disadvantage of all for the Canadains was their arrogance and inability to take the Russians seriously.
There is no down playing how much that hurt Canada.
They/we didn‘t go into that tourny with wide eyes innosence, we went in wide eyed stupid.

And you can attempt to downplay the Russian teamwork and familiarity all you want but it was still miles ahead of what Canada came in with.

 

[seventieslord]

Thank you for informing me of that. I didn't think I took issue with it, but what the heck, you're free to have your opinion on that, too, without quarrel from me. You could have said the same to Killion with his rolling his eyes comment, but you didn't, did you? (mod edit)

I see you didn't read post 41. You should.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I see you didn't read post 41. You should.

I see you should read your PMs to start. Then read post #42 which is right after post #41.

 

[Killion]

Put those eyes back in your head, Killion, and then please try to find mine.

... well, a funny thing happened on the way to the old Montreal Forum Peter.

You can hold whatever opinion you want to. Whether any evidence supports it is a separate matter.

Thank you for informing me of that. I didn't think I took issue with it, but what the heck, you're free to have your opinion on that, too, without quarrel from me. You could have said the same to Killion with his rolling his eyes comment, but you didn't, did you?

He didnt need to because I'd qualified it with an admission of subjective bias.

I see you didn't read post 41. You should.

Post 41: (in response to my rolling eyes emoticom)

Likely not, but still, one of my all time favorites. Being subjective I suppose.

So "Lists" aside, Yvon? Still tops in my book. Gimme Cournoyer every day & twice on Sundays. Absolutely loved The Roadrunner. Smythe Trophy Winner, 10 Stanley Cups, 4X 2nd Team All Star. Just an exciting player to watch period, a fore-runner in many respects to Lafleur, to Pavel Bure'. Yvon could yank you right out of your seat with his speed, stickhandling, style, grace & elan. To me always one of the greatest.

 

[Hardyvan123]

The biggest disadvantage of all for the Canadains was their arrogance and inability to take the Russians seriously.
There is no down playing how much that hurt Canada.
They/we didn‘t go into that tourny with wide eyes innosence, we went in wide eyed stupid.

And you can attempt to downplay the Russian teamwork and familiarity all you want but it was still miles ahead of what Canada came in with.

No doubt that Canada underestimated how good the Russians were.

There is also no doubt that the Russians played better "systematic" hockey than did the Canadians, their styles and mentality were entirely different.

That being said the whole 72 thing is really vastly over rated as a focal point by a Canadian generation slightly older than me.

Proof of that is the yearly Paul Henderson HHOF thing being brought out.

I understand the emotions around the Cold War and that generation but it really was just another series of games in the long continuum of hockey history.

Observers everywhere have some sort of bias or POV, that's why these types of lists can be so difficult when they are so expansive over time and space.

Heck most observers can't even pick the same 3 stars on most given nights, it's part of the joy of these lists but also why there will never be any sort of consensus.

 

[Hardyvan123]

... well, a funny thing happened on the way to the old Montreal Forum Peter.





He didnt need to because I'd qualified it with an admission of subjective bias.



Post 41: (in response to my rolling eyes emoticom)



So "Lists" aside, Yvon? Still tops in my book. Gimme Cournoyer every day & twice on Sundays. Absolutely loved The Roadrunner. Smythe Trophy Winner, 10 Stanley Cups, 4X 2nd Team All Star. Just an exciting player to watch period, a fore-runner in many respects to Lafleur, to Pavel Bure'. Yvon could yank you right out of your seat with his speed, stickhandling, style, grace & elan. To me always one of the greatest.

Everyone has their own personal favorites, mine is Trevor Linden, but calling Yvon one of the greatest and trying to equate him in any way to Guy or Pavel just is a huge stretch, what's next Tiger Williams riding his stick after one of his many goals (for a guy with limited skills).

 

[thom]

123 what made it a series was the passion that developed in series.Also imagine 3-4000 fans going to Soviet Union to follow Canada.The arena was guarded by armed soldiers and police.There was even a near riot.The ratings were of the charts.Theres been better hockey thats for sure but not the hatred and passion thats what made the series

 

[Killion]

Everyone has their own personal favorites, mine is Trevor Linden, but calling Yvon one of the greatest and trying to equate him in any way to Guy or Pavel just is a huge stretch, what's next Tiger Williams riding his stick after one of his many goals (for a guy with limited skills).

... David Williams? No, not so much Hv. Wasnt real big on Tiger in so far as his possible rankings as a skilled playmaker would go, but an invaluable, gritty player none the less. Tad bit too headstrong for my liking, taking dumb penalties & whatnot but still... As your personal favorite is Trevor Linden (mine too in terms of all-time Canucks) when I remember the Habs of the mid-to-late 60's & into the 70's Cournoyer always stands out in my minds eye. He along with Beliveau & Henri Richard. And my friend, you are very wrong in suggesting Yvon couldnt be equated or compared to a Lafleur or Bure', and thats really kind of a shame. That so artistic a player would be one that to you is simply not one worth considering amongst the all time greats. He was, he is. Simple fact of life to anyone who ever watched him play throughout his entire career as I did along with all that followed. He's up there in my book, and if its prejudiced or jaded by some sense of misguided overarching subjectivity on my part then I make no apologies for being so inclined, holding steadfast to my opinions.

 

[Sentinel]

That being said the whole 72 thing is really vastly over rated as a focal point by a Canadian generation slightly older than me.

I understand the emotions around the Cold War and that generation but it really was just another series of games in the long continuum of hockey history.

It's not overrated at all. Other than the great level of play and the passion that went into these games, it's one of a very few ways we can compare Soviet players to Canadian superstars. I say they compared quite nicely. Not tit-for-tat (especially on defense), but quite closely.

Someone summed up Joe's (perhaps subconscious) bias perfectly:

In 1972 Canada and USSR played eight very tight games. Joe's list has 10 Canadian and 2 Soviet players from those rosters.
In 1976 Canada and CSSR played three tight games. 11 Canadian players from that roster on Joe's list, 1 Czech.
In 1981 Soviets defeated Canada 8:1 in the finals. 11 Canadian players from that roster on the list, 3 Soviets.

 

[Hardyvan123]

... David Williams? No, not so much Hv. Wasnt real big on Tiger in so far as his possible rankings as a skilled playmaker would go, but an invaluable, gritty player none the less. Tad bit too headstrong for my liking, taking dumb penalties & whatnot but still... As your personal favorite is Trevor Linden (mine too in terms of all-time Canucks) when I remember the Habs of the mid-to-late 60's & into the 70's Cournoyer always stands out in my minds eye. He along with Beliveau & Henri Richard. And my friend, you are very wrong in suggesting Yvon couldnt be equated or compared to a Lafleur or Bure', and thats really kind of a shame. That so artistic a player would be one that to you is simply not one worth considering amongst the all time greats. He was, he is. Simple fact of life to anyone who ever watched him play throughout his entire career as I did along with all that followed. He's up there in my book, and if its prejudiced or jaded by some sense of misguided overarching subjectivity on my part then I make no apologies for being so inclined, holding steadfast to my opinions.

We will agree to disagree on Yvon, he was basically (and I hate comps as they never are close enough really and I should really stop using them) a flashier version of Glenn Anderson.

It will be extremely interesting on how these 2 guys rank when it comes to the best wingers project, especially with the Russian wingers as well.

Both no doubt will be well behind Pavel and guy though.

 

[jcbio11]

It's not overrated at all. Other than the great level of play and the passion that went into these games, it's one of a very few ways we can compare Soviet players to Canadian superstars. I say they compared quite nicely. Not tit-for-tat (especially on defense), but quite closely.

Someone summed up Joe's (perhaps subconscious) bias perfectly:

In 1972 Canada and USSR played eight very tight games. Joe's list has 10 Canadian and 2 Soviet players from those rosters.
In 1976 Canada and CSSR played three tight games. 11 Canadian players from that roster on Joe's list, 1 Czech.
In 1981 Soviets defeated Canada 8:1 in the finals. 11 Canadian players from that roster on the list, 3 Soviets.

He has no Czechs on his list from that roster. Peter Stastny is a Slovak.