Name your top 10 players since 2005

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Any list without Giroux fails

Um, u f***in wot m8?

 

[GreatGonzo]

Question for OP, do you mean "best players who have played since 2005" or "best resume from 2005 to now"? A guy like Lidstrom would be higher in my list if it's the former instead of the latter. Assuming it's best resume since 2005, I'd go:

1. Crosby
2. Ovechkin
3. Lidstrom
4. Malkin
5. Datsyuk
6. Keith
7. McDavid (only this low because his career has been too short to be higher)
8. Karlsson
9. Kane
10. Thornton

Chara surprisingly only had 1 Norris trophy in his career. I was surprised to see it was that low.

Karlsson has a better resume than Thornton?

 

[fsanford]

You forgot Justin Williams then, 3 cups and a Smythe don’t lie.

Also, you don’t even have Ovechkin.....you have Toews and Bergeron over Ovechkin, basically contradicting your initial criteria. Let that sink in.

Not my list, I am simply asking why the guys on the list should not be considered as top 10, the guy mentioned it was a terrible list. Got it?
The limit of the list was 10, Toews has 3 cup. The Kings and Hawks did not win squat til they got Kopitar, Toews, Doughty, Keith, let that sink in.
Ovi probably should have been on the guys list, but it wasn't a terrible list.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Not my list, I am simply asking why the guys on the list should not be considered as top 10, the guy mentioned it was a terrible list. Got it?
The limit of the list was 10, Toews has 3 cup. The Kings and Hawks did not win squat til they got Kopitar, Toews, Doughty, Keith, let that sink in.
Ovi probably should have been on the guys list, but it wasn't a terrible list.

You defended the list regardless. Probably? The best goal scorer and one of the best players of this generation “probably” should be on the list? That alone makes it a terrible list.

Exactly, your a cup counter and everything in between doesn’t matter to you. You have a one track mind and that’s that. All I’m saying is your showing your true lack of how hockey actually works.

 

[fsanford]

You defended the list regardless. Probably? The best goal scorer and one of the best players of this generation “probably” should be on the list? That alone makes it a terrible list.

Exactly, your a cup counter and everything in between doesn’t matter to you. You have a one track mind and that’s that. All I’m saying is your showing your true lack of how hockey actually works.

You have to make the playoffs to win the cup. What was the Kings and Hawks track record before guys in question got there. Seems they played well during the season. Your a stats guy an I am how do they impact the success of the team guy.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

You have to make the playoffs to win the cup. What was the Kings and Hawks track record before guys in question got there. Seems they played well during the season. Your a stats guy an I am how do they impact the success of the team guy.

Why is Bergeron on his list but not Seabrook? When Seabrook joined the Hawks, they started to be good. Bergeron only won one cup to Seabrook’s 3. Can you explain that glaring omission?

 

[fsanford]

Why is Bergeron on his list but not Seabrook? When Seabrook joined the Hawks, they started to be good. Bergeron only won one cup to Seabrook’s 3. Can you explain that glaring omission?

Because it is a list of 10 not 15 not 20 point is it is not a terrible list. Also many on the list have awards for regular season performance. Who on there should not be considered and why? Because for it to be terrible the name of the player should not be even be considered if the list was say expanded to 20 or 25.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Because it is a list of 10 not 15 not 20 point is it is not a terrible list. Also many on the list have awards for regular season performance. Who on there should not be considered and why? Because for it to be terrible the name of the player should not be even be considered if the list was say expanded to 20 or 25.

Exactly, it’s a top 10 list, Toews should not make it at all, Bergeron and Keith are a stretch.

Like a poster said above, just the fact that Ovechkin wasn’t in it makes it terrible.

 

[fsanford]

Exactly, it’s a top 10 list, Toews should not make it at all, Bergeron and Keith are a stretch.

Like a poster said above, just the fact that Ovechkin wasn’t in it makes it terrible.

Why? Think those guys have won trophies for play in the regular season, won cups. Aside from Ovi, who else has that resume?

 

[GreatGonzo]

You have to make the playoffs to win the cup. What was the Kings and Hawks track record before guys in question got there. Seems they played well during the season. Your a stats guy an I am how do they impact the success of the team guy.

And again with your logic what does making the playoffs have to do with anything?

The fact that your holding one-two players as the most valuable to a cup proves my point. It’s a team effort and win, all while your calling Toews a top 10 player because HE won 3 cups....only you left out others like Hossa, Sharp, Quick, and Brown. Toews doesn’t have 3 cups without the team around him, same with Kopitar.

Stat watcher? Oh your one of those guys who thinks there is “more to hockey.” Even though there really isn’t, it’s just something fans like you like to boast about to make yourself seem superior.

Guys like Ovechkin, Thornton, and Lidstrom are HOFers and among the best of this generation. They have always been among the best players(at times THE best) since ‘06. Keep counting cups as individual achievements buddy, it looks good on you with everything you say.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Because it is a list of 10 not 15 not 20 point is it is not a terrible list. Also many on the list have awards for regular season performance. Who on there should not be considered and why? Because for it to be terrible the name of the player should not be even be considered if the list was say expanded to 20 or 25.

God your grammar is terrible....

Why? Think those guys have won trophies for play in the regular season, won cups. Aside from Ovi, who else has that resume?

Because your making your criteria about having cups over anything else. Thornton has a Hart and Art Ross, Lidstrom has 4 Norris trophies and a cup, but they take a back seat to a Selke? Might as well have Brown and Williams, they both have cups.

Fact is only 3 players have major season awards AND playoff success.

 

[fsanford]

And again with your logic what does making the playoffs have to do with anything?

The fact that your holding one-two players as the most valuable to a cup proves my point. It’s a team effort and win, all while your calling Toews a top 10 player because HE won 3 cups....only you left out others like Hossa, Sharp, Quick, and Brown. Toews doesn’t have 3 cups without the team around him, same with Kopitar.

Stat watcher? Oh your one of those guys who thinks there is “more to hockey.” Even though there really isn’t, it’s just something fans like you like to boast about to make yourself seem superior.

Guys like Ovechkin, Thornton, and Lidstrom are HOFers and among the best of this generation. They have always been among the best players(at times THE best) since ‘06. Keep counting cups as individual achievements buddy, it looks good on you with everything you say.

Why is it that many pundits said Ovi's legacy would not be fulfilled unless he won the cup.?Which of the guys on the list did not win regular season awards? Sports is and always will be about winning. It is not about participation awards.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Why? Think those guys have won trophies for play in the regular season, won cups. Aside from Ovi, who else has that resume?

Thornton should be there. Getzlaf has a good case too.

Whats mostly terrible with this list is not only the fact that OV wasn’t on it. It’s the fact that the poster stated that playoff performances what his main criteria, yet leaves Ovechkin off even if he inarguably has a better playoff resume than AT LEAST half of the players on his list. Hes just contradicting himself.

 

[fsanford]

Thornton should be there. Getzlaf has a good case too.

Whats mostly terrible with this list is not only the fact that OV wasn’t on it. It’s the fact that the poster stated that playoff performances what his main criteria, yet leaves Ovechkin off even if he inarguably has a better playoff resume than AT LEAST half of the players on his list. Hes just contradicting himself.

I believe I just questioned why it was a terrible list and was the one who suggested that the original poster was looking at cup criteria. And maybe regular season awards.

I did agree that Ovi should have been on the list.

I simply asked the question why you would remove certain guys like Toews, to better understand why it is a terrible list.

That resulted in a pissing match (not with you)which still danced around the my original question.

Getzlaf most certainly could also be considered.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Why is it that many pundits said Ovi's legacy would not be fulfilled unless he won the cup.?Which of the guys on the list did not win regular season awards? Sports is and always will be about winning. It is not about participation awards.

Legacy and abilities as a player are two totally different things. This isn’t the top 10 player legacies, it’s talent. Whether or not Ovechkin won or cup, he’s still rightfully among the top 3 in terms of best players since ‘06 and that’s not debatable.

The Hart or Art Ross aren’t participation awards, if anything a cup is more of one than anything. How many games do you have to play in order to get your name on? How many points do you have to have in order to be a part of it? The cup isn’t reserved for the best of the best, some of the best players haven’t won it, while Chris Kunitz has 3.

Your obsessed with cups and using them as individual awards, doesn’t work that way.

 

[fsanford]

Legacy and abilities as a player are two totally different things. This isn’t the top 10 player legacies, it’s talent. Whether or not Ovechkin won or cup, he’s still rightfully among the top 3 in terms of best players since ‘06 and that’s not debatable.

The Hart or Art Ross aren’t participation awards, if anything a cup is more of one than anything. How many games do you have to play in order to get your name on? How many points do you have to have in order to be a part of it? The cup isn’t reserved for the best of the best, some of the best players haven’t won it, while Chris Kunitzhastas 3.

Your obsessed with cups and using them as individual awards, doesn’t work that way.

Why would you take Toews off? Why would you not consider him? I guess you could say he has faded last couple of years.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Legacy and abilities as a player are two totally different things. This isn’t the top 10 player legacies, it’s talent. Whether or not Ovechkin won or cup, he’s still rightfully among the top 3 in terms of best players since ‘06 and that’s not debatable.

The Hart or Art Ross aren’t participation awards, if anything a cup is more of one than anything. How many games do you have to play in order to get your name on? How many points do you have to have in order to be a part of it? The cup isn’t reserved for the best of the best, some of the best players haven’t won it, while Chris Kunitz has 3.

Your obsessed with cups and using them as individual awards, doesn’t work that way.

Did Kunitz get one of his Cups taken away from him?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Sedins getting underrated here.

 

[Midnight Judges]

1. Ovechkin
2. Crosby
3. Malkin
4. Thornton
5. Lundqvist
6. Lidstrom
7. Keith
8. Kane
9. Getzlaf
10. Daniel Sedin

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

1. Ovechkin
2. Crosby
3. Malkin
4. Thornton
5. Lundqvist
6. Lidstrom
7. Keith
8. Kane
9. Getzlaf
10. Daniel Sedin

Swap Crosby and Ovechkin and add Mcdavid

 

[GreatGonzo]

Why would you take Toews off? Why would you not consider him? I guess you could say he has faded last couple of years.

Because captaining a team to 3 stanley cups doesn’t make him a “top player.” Other players have been more dominant and more consistent since ‘06. Sure Toews was still a great player, but top 10? The only reason anyone would have him a top ten player is because of his team success.

Toews wasn’t the only one on that list that was an eye sore. People just look at cups as way of judging who is and isn’t better instead of their play as a whole. There are two parts of the past 12 years, 06-11, and 12-18. Many here are listing players who have been Great only since the second half. It’s not unusual, just puzzling.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Did Kunitz get one of his Cups taken away from him?

4, even better

 

[Fire Sweeney]

McDavid
Ovechkin
Barzal
Crosby
Malkin
Chara
Thornton
Matthews
Backstrom
Doughty