Geez Vagrant, I'm probably one of the biggest Francis supporters around here, and argued about him with Thornton numerous times, but even though he's exaggerating a bit again (Gilmour? Oates?), he's mostly right. If you take a look at the names in the top 50, Francis just can't crack it no matter what (no, he's not even better than Sakic). Brett Hull is 67th, Stastny 73rd. I'd put Ronnie somewhere in between them.
Which is completely reasonable, even though I disagree.
Between the 70-110 spot, everyone is going to be very close, and then it comes down to opinion on what is more important based on preference.
I was just sitting back and watching the dog pile mentality that occurs when you run a quick checklist of all the tired and cliche points that people make about Francis and the fact that they're off base and without merit. I didn't offer to debunk them because I don't have to in order to have an opinion. That's what these boards are for, correct?
No where in the user agreement does it say, if you post an opinion you have to post seventy lines of useless rhetoric to back it up but reading through this board in particular sometimes you'd think it was a mandate.
I think Francis is so underrated it's criminal. I think a lot of those points I mentioned above were baseless. I don't have the burden of proof to defend those points because they're subjective in nature.
I also raised some points in my initial post that I think points could be made in opposition against in regards to Francis, as it was only a list of what to prepare to hear, and didn't so much intend to call those in particular baseless as much as those who hold fast to those reasons and those reasons alone.
I would break out the list and start moving names around, but it's obvious that kind of thing isn't looked upon very highly here and is issued as more of a challenge than a reasonable consideration. Not many have the objectivity to reevaluate the work they've compiled and the opinions that contradict their findings.
No, you did not offer to because you are incapable of putting up an argument. All the points you cited that get brought up against Francis are not baseless. They are LEGITIMATE points that if you contest, should provide an explanation why because they are sound points.
With all due respect, these boards would be pretty boring if everyone just posted their beliefs without giving explanations...no one would learn anything that way...and to be honest, I come to the history boards in particular to learn things about the history of hockey and to hear different opinions than mine.
Quite frankly, I'm interested in why you believe Francis is a top 10 offensive player of all time. I agree with you that he's underrated, but not to that extent...I generally put him around 50-70 in the all-time player ranking (as opposed to top 30).
Exactly
I sort of picked and chose certain quotes from here without referencing them properly, sorry.
Ugh. This is going to be messy. Please learn the proper use of the multi quote function so that we can keep this clean.
Now if it was a list of the most consistently good players in history, he'd probably be top 10.
Isn't that exactly what an all time list should be, people who got it done over and over irregardless of circumstance?
The top 10 is a list using several criteria. Prime, peak, consistency, Longevity, Regular season and playoff value, among others. Consistency is only 1 part of it.
Another thing to remember is this. Scoring 77-90 points in the 80's is akin to scoring 60-83 points now. Its not eye popping. Merely "Star" caliber.
His top 20 point finishes are as follows. 17th, 11th, 12th, 20th, 20th, 15th, 5th, 4th, 8th, 5th, 17th, 9th.
Probably, I didn't see a lot of the greats play unfortunately.
which is a shame. but you are in the right section to see clips of them
Please do, there may be 30 or even 50 better defensive forwards but how many of them put up the points Francis did. Let's say he's 50th, isn't being the 50th best defensive forward and the 5th best scoring forward reason alone for a higher placing on the list.
If you mean "Two way forwards" instead of "Defensive forwards, then I can name a fair deal of excellent two way forwards as well.
There is a very subtle change in the way they started awarding the Selke in the 90's, as they stopped giving it to the best Defensive forward and started giving it to the highest scoring forwards who backchecked well for a short burst. Gilmour and Francis were never the best defensive players in the league, but they were good and scored in bunches, so they got the Trophy. Fedorov is an exception because he actually WAS the best defensive forward while scoring a bunch, short as his prime was.
However, if you start going only by "Two way forward", then dozens of stars from the early days of Hockey fall into the mix because you could not play in the league back then if you could not play both ends of the ice well. Howe, Mikita, Hull, Morenz, Lemaire, Lindsay, Trottier, Kurri, Beliveau, Henri Richard, Clapper, etc etc
Wow, not me, Francis was a better player in every way possible.
In longevity and Consistency Francis wins. Gilmour was a guy who went to the next level in the playoffs in a way Francis never did, and he absolutely carried that leaf team on his back. Gilmour managed 95 assists when nobody on his team even had more than 34 goals. 127 points when his next 2 closest teammates had 74 and 65 points.
His playoffs were spectacular and he was every bit as good a backchecker as Francis. Gilmour was one of the best clutch players in the league. Francis was not. Francis stats took a downslide in the playoffs, while Gilmour's went up.
Jagr, like I said in my opening post, I didn't go back and look at the list but I'm sure there are a lot more who I wouild put behind Francis, maybe I'll go back and pick out the names when I have a little more time.
What???? Why in the heck would Francis be ahead of Jagr?
I am among the biggest Jagr downplayers on this board, but even I would not think of dropping Francis within 30 spots of Jagr. Jagr was THE best player in the world for a good stretch, and was a country mile ahead of Francis. No amount of Defensive play or leadership closes the enormous gap between them offensively. Jagr is a 7 time 1st team all star, and a 1 time second teamer.
Jagr consistently stayed the leagues best scorers, even after Francis left to go back to the Canes, and Francis scoring dipped below what it was without Jagr, although he stayed "consistent"
He played on some pretty poor teams for most of his career, he didn't have much help in Hartford or Carolina and he didn't play on Jagr/Lemiuex's line in Pitt. No matter what you think he is the 5th greatest scorer of all time, look at the stats, I don't think he's one of the 5 most talented offensive players but you can't dispute the stats.
Uh, heck yes you can dispute the stats. We are doing it now. Playing a long time and scoring a lot does not equal being the best scorer. In order to be great, you need to be great, not just good.
Second. Barring special circumstances(Lemieux/Gretzky), Teams and Linemates only have a marginal impact on personal scoring.
He's better than Sakic imo, not as much of a goal scorer but a petter passer and better in his own end. And Francis is worlds better than Hull. No matter how well he could put the puck in the net, he was nowhere near the all around player Francis was, and didn't do it for nearly as long.
Hull is one of the Great Debates around here, but Sakic is not. Sakic is better than Francis by a large amount. Bigger game breaker, scorer, nearly equal defensively, and better leader.
Yzerman was not a good defensive player for a lot of his career, he learned that towards the end, and Sakic (though good in his own end) isn't in the same league as Francis.
Francis was not a good defensive player until the late 80's either.
And Yes, Sakic and Yzerman stand well beside Francis defensively. Offensively and regarding playoff play and Clutch leadership, they are far and above Francis.
