Overrated And Underrated Hockey Players

[Midnight Judges]

I can't find a link for it, but Clarke himself was quoted saying "if it went to the best player, Bobby Orr would win it every year hands down." One guy's opinion of course, and an opportunity to show some grace and humility in public, but it at least shows that the idea of Clarke's Hart being a "most valuable, not best" award isn't something we made up on HFBoards 45 years later.

Wayne Gretzky has tainted how much I value those sorts of quotes lol.

I find the distinction between most valuable, greatest, and best to be...not particularly salient. The whole point of being the best is to be the most valuable - to provide the most help in making your team win. In other words, I do not think a player who misses half the season can be the best because being the best necessarily means maintaining your health. It's a distinction proliferated by homers who wish to extrapolate and pretend.

Sometimes voters may vote against a player because the rest of their team sucks so bad that they missed the playoffs (McDavid), or the rest of the team is so good that they were a lock for the playoffs regardless, or simply because they have fatigue in voting for the same guy (Ovechkin in 2010).

Clearly there are voters using arbitrary criteria at times. Maybe this happened to Orr. I don't know.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Well, there's that too (along with the more general point I was making about Hart voting being generally biased against D-Men).

Don't you think the fact that the voters chose Bobby Orr 3 consecutive times undermines this to a substantial degree? Did the bias get worse after the third time?

 

[MXD]

Don't you think the fact that the voters chose Bobby Orr 3 consecutive times undermines this to a substantial degree? Did the bias get worse after the third time?

I'd rather see this as "Bobby Orr has beaten biases three times" as opposed to "He only won 3 times".

 

[daver]

Right, and that is Sakic's peak, and that is the time I am referring to.

But is wasn't Jagr's peak.

 

[The Panther]

Overrated- For me it’s Mark Messier and Joe Thornton. To clarify, 1984-1996 Messier was elite, a force offensively and physically. But the last 8 years of his career were really average and I know it’s super in vogue to say this right now, but I think his status as “the game’s greatest leader” is kinda absurd. I think Yzerman and Sakic alone are both superior leaders.

Thornton is an extremely gifted playmaker inside a power forward’s body but I always thought they hyped him to be something far greater than he was. He’s a hall of famer just like Messier, but Thornton’s poor playoff performances of the past and inability to live up to his full potential make him overrated in my opinion.

I understand that being a Canuck fan might give you a certain anti-Messier bias, but there's no way on earth Mark Messier and Joe Thornton should ever be mentioned together. Messier won 2 Hart trophies during Gretzky/Lemieux's prime, and is a playoff legend (Conn Smythe winner in Edmonton, icon in New York). Full marks to Thornton for his one Hart trophy / scoring title season, but he is largely a playoff bust in his career and didn't finish higher than 4th but that one season.

I think what you mean is the final '7' seasons of Messier's career (not 8 -- his 1996-97 was outstanding). I've made the case before that Messier's final 7 seasons aren't really bad at all considering his age (barring, maybe 2002-03 and his ES numbers in 2001-02). In any case, I'm not really bothered by what a player did or didn't do when they were old. It's not like Stan Mikita's or Steve Yzerman's numbers are any better than Messier's past the age of 36.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I'd rather see this as "Bobby Orr has beaten biases three times" as opposed to "He only won 3 times".

What other defensemen were victimized by this bias?

 

[MXD]

What other defensemen were victimized by this bias?

Erik Karlsson is a VERY obvious one.

 

[Midnight Judges]

But is wasn't Jagr's peak.

You think 2001 was not part of Jagr's peak?

 

[Midnight Judges]

Erik Karlsson is a VERY obvious one.

What year should Karlsson have won?

Offensively he is amazing. Defensively he is not among the league's best (to put it mildly).

 

[daver]

You think 2001 was not part of Jagr's peak?

If you are defining Sakic's peak using one season, then Jagr's peak season is his 98/99 season. His 95/96 season was equalling dominating statistically but is generally viewed as being influenced by Mario as is his 00/01 season.

Jagr play from 98/99 and 99/00 was at a higher level offensively than Sakic's.

 

[Pominville Knows]

What year should Karlsson have won?

Offensively he is amazing. Defensively he is not among the league's best (to put it mildly).

If you count the winners of the award you will see a trend where it is only Orr and then the odd guy once every two or three or more decades.

 

[MXD]

What year should Karlsson have won?

Offensively he is amazing. Defensively he is not among the league's best (to put it mildly).

It's not even about winning.
It's about votes not adding up to where the player stands in the pecking order in a given year.

I mean, his Hart record is the following : 5, 8, 9, 9.

That's extremely harsh if we go by the "best player" criteria, and it's completely ridiculous if we go by the "most valuable to team" criteria.

Oh, and only ONE out of 165 voters thought Victor Hedman was amongst the five move valuable players last season (a 5th place, actually).

It's like that every single season. D-Men get extremely low support in Hart voting.

 

[Midnight Judges]

It's not even about winning.
It's about votes not adding up to where the player stands in the pecking order in a given year.

I mean, his Hart record is the following : 5, 8, 9, 9.

That's extremely harsh if we go by the "best player" criteria, and it's completely ridiculous if we go by the "most valuable to team" criteria.

Oh, and only ONE out of 165 voters thought Victor Hedman was amongst the five move valuable players last season (a 5th place, actually).

It's like that every single season. D-Men get extremely low support in Hart voting.

I don't see anything inherently wrong with that.

When you are a kid, don't most of the best players want to be forwards? They did where I was anyway.

The talent pool for defensemen is inherently smaller, so it is natural that they make fewer MVPs - even after adjusting for the scarcity of defensemen in the NHL (half as many D's as F's).

Hedman was great but does anyone think he had a better season than Kucherov?

 

[Midnight Judges]

If you are defining Sakic's peak using one season, then Jagr's peak season is his 98/99 season.

No, Jagr had a longer peak. Not all peaks are of equal length.

 

[Midnight Judges]

If you count the winners of the award you will see a trend where it is only Orr and then the odd guy once every two or three or more decades.

That is not necessarily indicative of fairness.

The most talented players are more likely to want to play forward.

 

[daver]

No, Jagr had a longer peak. Not all peaks are of equal length.

Sakic did not match Jagr's offensive peak season in 00/01. Jagr was better in two or three other season. So to say Sakic matched Jagr's peak is inaccurate.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Sakic did not match Jagr's offensive peak season in 00/01. Jagr was better in two or three other season. So to say Sakic matched Jagr's peak is inaccurate.

When you factor in league scoring averages, it is pretty close. I agree that Jagr has a clear edge (not a huge margin) in terms of peak offensive production.

Sakic put up Jagr-like offensive numbers in 2001, while also being great defensively. It was a great peak season. That is all I am saying.

 

[MXD]

Hedman was great but does anyone think he had a better season than Kucherov?

Euh... yes?

 

[Pominville Knows]

That is not necessarily indicative of fairness.

The most talented players are more likely to want to play forward.

Most talented? How about talented as in the talents needed to defend?
The average defenseman spends much more of their effort on defending, and they are better at it. Even Erik Karlsson.
Regarding the Hart Trophy and the history of its winners we can see that before the creation of the Norris Trophy defensemen did actually win the Hart considerably more often than after. There is a bias which also goalies suffers from although they have won it more often than defensemen.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Euh... yes?

OK fair enough but that means the bias extends well beyond Hart voters and well into the fans, and even the way general managers pay players.

Right?

I mean if we compare pay, without even looking I can tell you out of the top 10 contracts, probably 8 of them are forwards.

 

[MXD]

Or else, we'd end up in a situation where the list of the Top-200 players would be comprised of about 160 forwards, 20D's and 20G.

Which seems extremely wrong to me.

 

[MXD]

I mean if we compare pay, without even looking I can tell you out of the top 10 contracts, probably 8 of them are forwards.

9, actually. No D-Men in the Top-10 (but PK Subban 11th). That's gonna change with Karlsson and Doughty on their last year.

 

[GlitchMarner]

Thornton is an extremely gifted playmaker inside a power forward’s body but I always thought they hyped him to be something far greater than he was. He’s a hall of famer just like Messier, but Thornton’s poor playoff performances of the past and inability to live up to his full potential make him overrated in my opinion.


Underrated- I agree completely with anyone who says Dale Hawerchuk. Very consistent, just flew under the radar in Winnipeg. I’d also say Steve Duchesne. 4 seasons of 20+ goals from the blue line and although he played for a lot of teams...he was a consistent offensive contributor. Never finished higher than 5th in Norris voting but was always pretty consistent.

You don't think Hawerchuk is actually better than Thornton, though, do you? He's not.

 

[GlitchMarner]

Sakic put up Jagr-like offensive numbers in 2001, while also being great defensively. It was a great peak season. That is all I am saying.

It's a top five season in this century... for a forward at least.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Try not to attack players. Simply present your reasoning for why you find players overrated or underrated.

All right- just viewing it sort-of holistically:

Some categories of overrated players (not a comprehensive list):
* 'Compiler' high 'counting stat' scorers playing in high-scoring eras.
* Players praised for "grit/leadership" while playing on teams with first-ballot Hall-of-Fame megastar teammates.
* "Good enough" high winning percentage goaltenders who played on offensive juggernaut teams.

Some categories of underrated players (similarly limited):
* Non-North American players who flourished before c. 1990.
* Players with reputations for playoff underperformance on teams where lack-of-depth issues placed onerous burdens on them.
* Two-way players who have as much or more value suppressing opposition scoring as adding to their own team's scoring.