Peak: Messier, Howe, Lindros, Trottier, Clarke

[BraveCanadian]

Well this is (I assume) quality of player at peak performance, not statistics accumulated during peak performance..

Lindros when he was healthy would be easily 2nd on this list.

Agreed.

Lindros was a man among boys for a while until the injuries started piling up.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Well this is (I assume) quality of player at peak performance, not statistics accumulated during peak performance..

Lindros when he was healthy would be easily 2nd on this list.

This is my understanding as well, which leads me to consider Lindros at #2 (behind Howe, of course - and I have no qualms about that) in this comparison. 'Prime' implies sustained success over a time frame at least equal/similar to the span of Player X's prime (in the event of rankings discussion), whereas 'peak'... even more subjective, perhaps.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Well this is (I assume) quality of player at peak performance, not statistics accumulated during peak performance..

Lindros when he was healthy would be easily 2nd on this list.

If you want to put Lindros 2nd "when healthy" (big qualifier), I can understand. But there's no way it's "easy."

I watched all of Lindros's career and the second half of Messier's, and I'd take early 90s Messier on my team for a playoff series over healthy Lindros without a second thought.

 

[Trottier]

If you want to put Lindros 2nd "when healthy" (big qualifier), I can understand. But there's no way it's "easy."

Thank you. Anyone who would casually suggest "easily" simply did not watch Clarke, Trottier, etc.

I watched all of Lindros's career and the second half of Messier's, and I'd take early 90s Messier on my team for a playoff series over healthy Lindros without a second thought.

Likewise.

 

[VanIslander]

Very odd.

4 of the 5 were among the physically STRONGEST star forwards of NHL history.

remove: Bobby Clarke the guy who was nasty but let others fight his battles, really wasn't strong physically, just mean;
and add: Bobby Hull.

Howe
Lindros
Trottier
Hull
Messier

These five make sense to compare.

 

[Briere Up There*]

If you want to put Lindros 2nd "when healthy" (big qualifier), I can understand. But there's no way it's "easy."

I watched all of Lindros's career and the second half of Messier's, and I'd take early 90s Messier on my team for a playoff series over healthy Lindros without a second thought.

And I'll take Messier's teams over Lindros' without a second thought. Just saying.

 

[seventieslord]

You guesstimate which is to say... you don't.

Actually, it's not guesstimating at all. If you look at the team's GF/GA stats at the end of the season and compare it to ice time, the players with the most ice time are the ones with the most GF/GA (which makes perfect sense) - using this premise it is quite easy to reasonably approximate TOI going back to 1968.

You should be happy that the proper figures exist along with people with the wherewithal to do something with it, instead of criticizing it, presumably without knowing anything about it.

 

[Joe Sakic]

Either way, it goes:
Howe
Lindros
[Clarke/Trottier]
Messier

My picks as well.

 

[jkrx]

Howe
Messier
Clarke
Trottier
Lindros
Hull

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Well this is (I assume) quality of player at peak performance, not statistics accumulated during peak performance..

Lindros when he was healthy would be easily 2nd on this list.

If it's an "on their best day" type of thing, then yes you could justify Lindros at #2. But like Trottier (as in, the HF boards poster) suggests, it is hardly a no-brainer decision. Messier, Clarke, and Trottier (the player) on their best day were every bit as good as Lindros, despite the "man among boys" mythology that seems to grow larger with each passing day since Eric's retirement.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

If it's an "on their best day" type of thing, then yes you could justify Lindros at #2. But like Trottier (as in, the HF boards poster) suggests, it is hardly a no-brainer decision. Messier, Clarke, and Trottier (the player) on their best day were every bit as good as Lindros, despite the "man among boys" mythology that seems to grow larger with each passing day since Eric's retirement.

Agreed - I have a hard time putting "peak" at anything less than than one full season.
Lindros' Hart was half a season...

I would have him behind Trottier, Clarke and if we add playoffs into peak (which we should), Messier as well.

Howe
Trottier/Clarke
Messier
Lindros

At 'absolute best' Lindros jumps up, but he never sustained it for a full season.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Actually, it's not guesstimating at all. If you look at the team's GF/GA stats at the end of the season and compare it to ice time, the players with the most ice time are the ones with the most GF/GA (which makes perfect sense) - using this premise it is quite easy to reasonably approximate TOI going back to 1968.

You should be happy that the proper figures exist along with people with the wherewithal to do something with it, instead of criticizing it, presumably without knowing anything about it.

A while ago - maybe 7 or 8 years back - I applied the GF/GA method to a season where we had actual ice time data (I think 1998-99). I compared the results of the formula to the actual numbers from NHL.com, for each player in the league. (It just takes a couple of Excel formulae, it's surprisingly fast).

It turns out that the formula is extremely accurate. There was around a 0.95 correlation between predicted and actual ice time. Can I guarantee that's the case in every season? No, of course not. But at least for that one season, the formula was extremely accurate.

Someone else can try the formula on some other season and see if it still holds.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

If it's an "on their best day" type of thing, then yes you could justify Lindros at #2. But like Trottier (as in, the HF boards poster) suggests, it is hardly a no-brainer decision. Messier, Clarke, and Trottier (the player) on their best day were every bit as good as Lindros, despite the "man among boys" mythology that seems to grow larger with each passing day since Eric's retirement.

i agree with this. lindros, when healthy, may have been a man among boys against a really top-heavy buffalo team that the flyers were doing just fine against without him, but he sure wasn't a man among boys against scott stevens.

even in his very best year, lindros missed three playoff games. and the playoff games he did play, while nothing to scoff at, are not in the same league as clarke, messier, and especially trottier.

as for the best day thing, i still think that on his best day lindros, while possibly more dominant against average competition in a regular pressure setting, couldn't elevate his play to the degree of the other three.

trottier
clarke
messier
lindros

to me, trots was as complete as clarke, and had a higher offensive ceiling. messier is behind trots in terms of goal scoring, playmaking, and defensive play. my only question would be what we would count as trottier's peak: his hart season, smythe season, or '82?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

as for the best day thing, i still think that on his best day lindros, while possibly more dominant against average competition in a regular pressure setting, couldn't elevate his play to the degree of the other three.

trottier
clarke
messier
lindros

to me, trots was as complete as clarke, and had a higher offensive ceiling. messier is behind trots in terms of goal scoring, playmaking, and defensive play. my only question would be what we would count as trottier's peak: his hart season, smythe season, or '82?

You know what? For this kind of discussion/comparison I think it's fair enough to take whatever combination of parts of all three you think best describes him (or any of these guys) on his "best day". As such, you're right - it gets hard to NOT like Trottier ahead of the rest if you do.

 

[seventieslord]

aside from Howe, I've declined to comment on this group of players because I can see the pros and cons of all four.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Actually, it's not guesstimating at all. If you look at the team's GF/GA stats at the end of the season and compare it to ice time, the players with the most ice time are the ones with the most GF/GA (which makes perfect sense) - using this premise it is quite easy to reasonably approximate TOI going back to 1968.

You should be happy that the proper figures exist along with people with the wherewithal to do something with it, instead of criticizing it, presumably without knowing anything about it.

Yes, what I said.

I understand its an educated guess and reasonably accurate. But it isn't fact.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

i agree with this. lindros, when healthy, may have been a man among boys against a really top-heavy buffalo team that the flyers were doing just fine against without him, but he sure wasn't a man among boys against scott stevens.

even in his very best year, lindros missed three playoff games. and the playoff games he did play, while nothing to scoff at, are not in the same league as clarke, messier, and especially trottier.

as for the best day thing, i still think that on his best day lindros, while possibly more dominant against average competition in a regular pressure setting, couldn't elevate his play to the degree of the other three.

trottier
clarke
messier
lindros

to me, trots was as complete as clarke, and had a higher offensive ceiling. messier is behind trots in terms of goal scoring, playmaking, and defensive play. my only question would be what we would count as trottier's peak: his hart season, smythe season, or '82?

Clarke was better defensively, but if I had to put one on top of the other I agree with Trottier behind only Howe for peak - despite Clarke's 3 Harts. Trottier was also a much better playoff performer.

 

[lextune]

Peak: Messier, Howe, Lindros, Trottier, Clarke

Seriously...? Howe. By a lot. A real lot.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Clarke was better defensively, but if I had to put one on top of the other I agree with Trottier behind only Howe for peak - despite Clarke's 3 Harts. Trottier was also a much better playoff performer.

Trottier was a beast. I'd take him any day over Clarke.

Especially if we're talking about a time in the NHL where referees actually enforced the rules.. because that would hinder Clarke's effectiveness a lot more than Trottier.

 

[seventieslord]

Yes, what I said.

I understand its an educated guess and reasonably accurate. But it isn't fact.

and by using the word "guesstimate", you are selling the method short, big time. It's dismissive.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

as for the best day thing, i still think that on his best day lindros, while possibly more dominant against average competition in a regular pressure setting, couldn't elevate his play to the degree of the other three.

Agree 100%. Lindros' game was incredibly powerful, but very predictable. Teams dedicated to stopping Lindros in the playoffs found success. Whereas Messier, when he was on, was basically unstoppable. Maybe it's the Devils fan in me that would pick Messier over Lindros every time, but Messier really is the only player in the mid 90s who the Devils smothering defense consistently couldn't stop when it mattered.

 

[Trottier]

my only question would be what we would count as trottier's peak: his hart season, smythe season, or '82?

Well, that entire timespan was his peak! Circa 1978-1982.

Peakwise (only), I have very hard time deciding between Trottier, Messier or Clarke as #2 behind Howe.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Messier from 1990-1996 won two Harts ('90 and '92) and finished 2nd in another ('96). Then in 1994, he made Adam Graves of all people a 50-goal scorer. He captained two different teams to Stanley Cups with Smythe-worthy postseasons.

I loved Lindros' game and it's a shame how injuries cut his career short, but I can't rate his peak above Messier's (if you consider Messier's peak to be post-30)

Howe

Trottier
Clarke
Messier
Lindros

 

[revolverjgw]

Howe first, of course

Then Messier. Messier's peak play is right up there with the rest of them, and he had a run of about 16 years where he was a top-tier player. Easily the best playoff resume, too, and he was dominant there well into his 30's. Best combination of quality and quantity

Then... Trottier or Clarke... kind of interchangeable. Trottier slightly higher offensive peak, Clarke slightly better defensively and took a little longer to start tailing off... about the same amount of high-caliber playoff runs... hard to choose.

Lindros last, though at his best he was as good as anybody here sans Howe. Just too injury prone and never got a chance to demonstrate the same killer instinct in the playoffs. A lot of it was bad luck and circumstances, getting hurt, playing on a flaky Philly team with no goaltending, etc.

 

[VMBM]

Clarke was better defensively, but if I had to put one on top of the other I agree with Trottier behind only Howe for peak - despite Clarke's 3 Harts. Trottier was also a much better playoff performer.

It's a bit old, but had to comment anyway. Better? Probably. Much better? No friggin' way.