He likes to point out that his system isn't perfect, but gets very defensive every time he's criticized for this.
There's absolutely no reason why Bill Taylor, for example should be on this list. My own 'research' tells me his numbers were unremarkable, played only 7 NHL seasons adnd led his team in scoring just once, and participated in two Stanley Cups with zero NHL awards. Yet he is in the top 200, which is in the very elite of the NHL. I would suspect that this guy's career is comparable to a guy like Ray Whitney or a Cory Stillman at the absolute best, yet this ranking has him ahead of contemporary guys like Brendan Shanahan who was one of the NHL's most dominant left wingers, Mats Sundin, the Toronto Maple Leafs' second career scoring leader, Mike Gartner, who has over 700 NHL goals, Glenn Anderson, a member of 6 Stanley Cups and a prolific scorer, Tim Kerr, who at least was a leading scorer on his own team more than a few times and led the Flyers to Cup finals appearances, as well as Cam Neely, one of the greatest power forwards of all time, and a guy who scored 50 in 49 games. It grossly undervalues recent times and inflates the value of pre-1950s hockey, which conveniently, nobody here today has seen play to make subjective observations and judgements about. Ogopogo wouldn't even be able to say whether or not Billy Taylor was a clutch player late in the game, or a defensive liability, or a strong skater, or good along the boards without referring to a book. It's just ridiculous that totally unremarkable players from previous eras are rated so highly when you have nothing to go by.