Petrov, Yakuhev, Bobrov ... its just funny how experts rank Kharlamov for his accomplishments outside of NHL or guys from 30's (absolutely different game) yet father of russian hockey, Bobrov not even mentioned. Call this "NHL hoh list", "list of players with best magical intangibilitys" but lets not pretend that this is actually list with best players from across the world.
Round 2, Vote 14
- Thread starter FissionFire
- Start date
Petrov, Yakuhev, Bobrov ... its just funny how experts rank Kharlamov for his accomplishments outside of NHL or guys from 30's (absolutely different game) yet father of russian hockey, Bobrov not even mentioned. Call this "NHL hoh list", "list of players with best magical intangibilitys" but lets not pretend that this is actually list with best players from across the world.
Stonefly
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2007
- 1,032
- 3
I'm not sure Mahovlich accomplished more. Fedorov has a few major awards. Mahovlich has all star selections.
To be fair there hasn't been anyone similar in stature to Bobrov in terms of being a star during a developmental. A player like Mike Grant or Dubbie Bowie for Canada, Hobey Baker for the US, Josef Malecek for the Czechs, etc. would be equivalent in terms of their impact on the early development of the game in their respective countries. Accounting for differences in the length of time that each country has played the game, the NHLers from the 30s would be more like a Ven Alexandrov or Vyacheslav Starshinov.
44 matches with canadian amatures, 2 draws and 15 losses (majority of losses was in first tourney). Even AHL team can win 10 matches against NHL team in 50 games series.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Thats not the point. It was clear that there is at least 50-60 NHL level players and few superstar level players playing in Europe in 70's and 80's... yet you don't punish Lefleur for that. Cut the list, make it only for NHL players cuz right now its not fair for truly great players from Europe.
FissionFire
Registered User
Bobrov was a pioneer for Russian hockey, but he really gets hurt when you realize he was basically one of the first people to play hockey in Russia so his competition at home was very poor. His international accomplishments are better, but again the worlds best players were Canadian and they didn't participate in the World Cup or the Olympics during the 1950s. Basically, Bobrov is very similar to the early American hockey pioneer Hobey Baker. Both dominated their competition but neither ever tested themselves against legitimate professional grade hockey players so it's difficult to evaluate them accurately. Was Hobey Baker playing Canadian and American amateurs better than Vsevolod Bobrov playing essentially Russian amateurs? Are either of them really one of the best hockey players in history? What about his linemates Yevgeny Ba***** and Viktor Suvalov? Bobrov scored 243 goals in 130 Russian league games but those other two scored 140 goals in 170 games (Ba*****) and 220 goals in 150 games (Suvalov). Were they nearly Bobrov's equal or were they simply AHL-level talent playing CHL-level talent? It's simply impossible to know. It doesn't help that I'm sure most of the primary source material on Bobrov is written in Cyrillic in books so few (if any) of the people who elected to participate in this list will be able to access that information.
The good news is that the Top 100 list isn't a static entity. Every year it will be reopened for debate, discussion, and revoting by anyone who wishs to participate. I sincerely hope that you elect to be part of the process next year and even encourage any of your countrymen who frequent the site to participate as well. It's only through input by multinational voters that the true impact of many non-NHL players can be realized. We're lucky to have some Swedish nationals electing to participate this time around, so hopefully you can spearhead a contingent of Russian nationals for the next vote.
FissionFire
Registered User
I agree that it's not fair to many of the Russian greats right now. Luckily, many of the voters have seen that they probably overrated/underrated many players and next season when this list is reopened and updated I expect quite a few changes with some players jumping 5-10 spots or more.
Dark Shadows
Registered User
Ok, Generally, I am with you when it comes to peak outweighing longevity and consistency, but in this case, no way.
Mahovlich was a top player for years and years, while Fedorov was more of a 2 year wonder.
Mahovlich:
Honors
1960-61 NHL NHL All-Star Team (1st)
1961-62 NHL NHL All-Star Team (2nd)
1962-63 NHL NHL All-Star Team (1st)
1963-64 NHL NHL All-Star Team (2nd)
1964-65 NHL NHL All-Star Team (2nd)
1965-66 NHL NHL All-Star Team (2nd)
1968-69 NHL NHL All-Star Team (2nd)
1969-70 NHL NHL All-Star Team (2nd)
1972-73 NHL NHL All-Star Team (1st)
Goals Rank
1960-61 NHL 48 (2)
1961-62 NHL 33 (2)
1962-63 NHL 36 (3)
1963-64 NHL 26 (6)
1965-66 NHL 32 (2)
1968-69 NHL 49 (2)
1969-70 NHL 38 (4)
1971-72 NHL 43 (7)
Assists Rank
1961-62 NHL 38 (8)
1971-72 NHL 53 (7)
1972-73 NHL 55 (10)
Points Rank
1960-61 NHL 84 (3)
1961-62 NHL 71 (5)
1962-63 NHL 73 (4)
1968-69 NHL 78 (10)
1969-70 NHL 70 (10)
1971-72 NHL 96 (6)
1972-73 NHL 93 (7)
Awards
1957-58 NHL Calder Memorial Trophy
Key player in 6 Stanley cups
Fedorov:
Honors
1990-91 NHL NHL All-Rookie Team (1st)
1993-94 NHL NHL All-Star Team (1st)
Goals Rank
1993-94 NHL 56 (3)
Assists Rank
1995-96 NHL 68 (9)
Points Rank
1993-94 NHL 120 (2)
1995-96 NHL 107 (9)
Awards
1993-94 NHL Frank J. Selke Trophy
1993-94 NHL Hart Memorial Trophy
1993-94 NHL Lester B. Pearson Award
1995-96 NHL Frank J. Selke Trophy
Key Player in 3 Stanley cups
Now I love peak, but I would not sacrifice a player who will be around top of the league for 8 years for a guy who just barely did it 2 years.
First off, I would thank you not to demean the hard work of those who organized this HOH top 100 by calling it a "Mickey mouse" HOH list.
The old saying goes, if you don't vote, you can't *****. This was publically proclaimed to be open voting to all members who wanted to be a part of it. Instead of trashing it, jump into the discussion in a meaningful way and sway opinions on players.
Second, I have several Russian friends who are as old as I am, and they insist Firsov was one of the greatest Russian players of all time, surpassing Makarov and Mikhailov. Among other things, I went into the Russian forum itself to ask people's opinions on this, and the majority surprised me by rating Makarov best of the 3, and most also said Firsov was ahead of Mikhailov. I had Makarov dead last, and so did my Russian friends. I have only their opinion and my eyes to go on since I watched a ton and I mean ton of international hockey in my youth.
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=331192
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=517699
Bobrov played against far weaker competition and did not distinguish himself as the others mentioned IMHO. If it was a Russian greatest list, then yes of course he would be here, but in hockey History? His competition doesn't stack up to allow him to make this list.
This is pretty much what I meant to say.
Stonefly
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2007
- 1,032
- 3
Don't get me wrong I wasn't trying to say Fedorov was better than Mahovlich. I was just pointing out that another player got on the list already with those same knocks against him.
(I actually do think Fedorov is better though. There have been a few guys who have really stood out to me as special in the time I've been watching hockey and Fedorov was one of them. There was nothing he couldn't do at an elite level. I still can't decide if he's the best skater I've seen.)
Also comparing offensive output to make Mahovlich look better isn't really fair. If you compared them defensively as well that would be better, considering Mahovlich didn't play a lick of defense. It's why he struggled under Imlach. He didn't like playing the defensive side of the puck.
Wings4Life
Registered User
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
Johnny Bower-I must say, I'm simply ambivalent towards Bower.
Frank Brimsek-One thing that should be pointed out, of the big 3 forties goalies, Brimsek is the only one to play an extended time on a weak team. And he was still widely regarded as a top 2 goalie. He succeeded in multiple situations. And in good situations, he was the man. No doubt in my mind he's the best goalie on the list.
Johnny Bucyk-ambivalent towards Bucyk.
Sprague Cleghorn-As has already been said, he was the NHL's first great defenseman.
Sergei Fedorov-I don't know as much as others, so I don't want to sink my teeth into this debate. But, from what I saw, it was like this. When Fedorov was on, he was the 3rd best center ever. Unfortunately, his head was rarely in the game and he spent large portion of his career coasting on raw talent. But, how much is he punished for that?
Peter Forsberg-Healthy, I fail to see the difference between Forsberg and Apps. But that's the thing, how often was he healthy? How much should his fragility be punished?
George Hainsworth-He should not be punished for having Gardiner surpass him. That's like saying Hull is better than Howe because in the 60's Hull was better. Hainsworth was the best goalie of the 2nd half of the 20's, who cares if that was a weird era, he was still the best.
Aurele Joliat-Don't have anything to add on Joliat except that he's awesome.
Ted Kennedy-Nothing new here.
Elmer Lach-Best playmaker on the list, but something about him rubs me as off...
Boris Mikhailov-Great to see him here. Deserves to be voted in now. That said, I agree that I'm not sure he should be ahead of some of his fellow Russians, but they should already be on the list. But also, quit insulting the process this is an open discussion and to come in after it's started and insult people who are putting effort into this is disgusting.
Bernie Parent-Hmmm. Maybe the goaltending equivalent of Sergei Fedorov.
Gilbert Perreault-Anyone want to sell me on him?
Peter Stastny-I'm ambivalent.
Scott Stevens-I don't think he belongs with the other names...
Frank Brimsek-One thing that should be pointed out, of the big 3 forties goalies, Brimsek is the only one to play an extended time on a weak team. And he was still widely regarded as a top 2 goalie. He succeeded in multiple situations. And in good situations, he was the man. No doubt in my mind he's the best goalie on the list.
Johnny Bucyk-ambivalent towards Bucyk.
Sprague Cleghorn-As has already been said, he was the NHL's first great defenseman.
Sergei Fedorov-I don't know as much as others, so I don't want to sink my teeth into this debate. But, from what I saw, it was like this. When Fedorov was on, he was the 3rd best center ever. Unfortunately, his head was rarely in the game and he spent large portion of his career coasting on raw talent. But, how much is he punished for that?
Peter Forsberg-Healthy, I fail to see the difference between Forsberg and Apps. But that's the thing, how often was he healthy? How much should his fragility be punished?
George Hainsworth-He should not be punished for having Gardiner surpass him. That's like saying Hull is better than Howe because in the 60's Hull was better. Hainsworth was the best goalie of the 2nd half of the 20's, who cares if that was a weird era, he was still the best.
Aurele Joliat-Don't have anything to add on Joliat except that he's awesome.
Ted Kennedy-Nothing new here.
Elmer Lach-Best playmaker on the list, but something about him rubs me as off...
Boris Mikhailov-Great to see him here. Deserves to be voted in now. That said, I agree that I'm not sure he should be ahead of some of his fellow Russians, but they should already be on the list. But also, quit insulting the process this is an open discussion and to come in after it's started and insult people who are putting effort into this is disgusting.
Bernie Parent-Hmmm. Maybe the goaltending equivalent of Sergei Fedorov.
Gilbert Perreault-Anyone want to sell me on him?
Peter Stastny-I'm ambivalent.
Scott Stevens-I don't think he belongs with the other names...
Howe Elbows 9
Registered User
I must say that out of all the names getting thrown around here, this is the one that confuses me the most. He's around 8th on my list right now, and I know that people have stated their arguments for him already, but I have to reiterate the information I have to share my perspective...
He played for 16 seasons, which seems like a long time in relation to the era he played in. That's a plus.
Seems to have been consistent throughout his career. Also a plus.
Looking at Cup-winning seasons...
Played with Morenz, S. Cleghorn and Vezina.
Played with Morenz and Hainsworth.
Obviously, if you're on the same team as Howie Morenz (for the majority of your career), it's not easy to be the star. Joliat won his Hart trophy during the 33-34 season, in which Morenz missed nine games and Joliat stepped up.
Considering his team, is it odd that I'm still undecided about him? And that I'm ready to vote for Lach instead?
Frank Brimsek should be higher than all of these goalies including broda. He has 2 first team all stars and 6 second team. This guy was elite his whole career and had to spend a couple of years serving in the army.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
I can see where your coming from, but, remember, Lach played most of his career on Maurice Richard's line.
To use my old method that is just too much work for this many names: (30 pts for 1st place, 21 for 10th)
Aurel Joliat|23/8, 24/3, 25/3, 26/5, 28/2, 31/10, 32/8, 33/6, 34/8|23/10, 24/5, 25/2, 26/9, 28/2, 33/9, 34/3, 37/10|23/5, 24/5, 25/4, 26/3, 28/5, 31/5, 32/5, 33/7|
633
Elmer Lach|43/9, 44/5, 45/1, 46/7, 48/1, 52/3|45/6, 48/2, 51/10|43/5, 44/2, 45/1, 46/1, 48/4, 50/5, 52/1|
433
Lack has a bit better peak and is a better playmaker. But Joliat has better longevity and a more well rounded offensive game.
I'd take Joliat ahead of Lach. I think the difference-maker for me is that Joliat brought a much more physical game. I loved the Joliat/Broadbent story that MXD posted in the previous thread; IMO, it's stuff like that which made Joliat such a special player, and the game misses that animosity. Players are too chummy now.
I have Joliat and Lach on my list for this round. And no argument would push them off. There's no reason for me not to vote for Joliat. He's the best available at his position (unarguably, sorry Bucyk), he played an outstanding all-round game, he was fearless, and he won Cups.
The one thing that might hurt Lach is the number of outstanding two-way centres for this round (Lach, Kennedy, Forsberg), and the abundance of two-way centres yet to be added. (Keon, Abel, Delvecchio, Ullman, Primeau, etc.)
My top seven not added yet (according to the master list):
1. Dave Keon (Had him too high in hindsight, but he should be added in the next round).
2. Toe Blake
3. Doug Bentley
4. Busher Jackson
5. Yvon Cournoyer (Again, should have had him lower. But he deserves consideration at this point).
6. Bill Cowley
7. Alex Delvecchio
The hindsight list:
1. Jackson
2. Blake
3. Bentley
4. Delvecchio
5. Keon
6. Bill Gadsby
7. Cowley
1. Dave Keon (Had him too high in hindsight, but he should be added in the next round).
2. Toe Blake
3. Doug Bentley
4. Busher Jackson
5. Yvon Cournoyer (Again, should have had him lower. But he deserves consideration at this point).
6. Bill Cowley
7. Alex Delvecchio
The hindsight list:
1. Jackson
2. Blake
3. Bentley
4. Delvecchio
5. Keon
6. Bill Gadsby
7. Cowley
Wings4Life
Registered User
Here is my case for Sergei Fedorov:
In his prime, Fedorov was extremely dominant, putting up 4 straight 20 point playoffs, an NHL record shared with Mike Bossy and Brian Trottier...Fedorov alone did it without going to the finals every year. Fedorov is also a member of the 5 goals in one game club. Less than 40 players have accomplished this feat in the 100+ years of the NHL's existance (complete list: http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com/2007/12/five-goal-games-in-nhl-history.html ). Impressively, only Fedorov managed to do it during the dead puck era. If you watched a 23-27 year old Fedorov dominate, you would know you're watching an all-time calibre hockey player.
Fedorov strung 4 consecutive dominant regular seasons together, from 92/93 (on pace for 100+ pts as a 22 year old) to 95/96; in this stretch, he was elite offensively, as in top 10 in PPG, from 1993 - 1996. So I still don't know where people get this 2 season junk from.
On top of that, he had 5 consecutive playoffs where he was elite offensively, from 92/93 through to 96/97, scoring at a PPG or much higher. His 94/95 playoffs were the peak of his dominance, where he lead the league in points and assists (Red Wings record 24 Pts in 17 games). In the 6th year, he had 20 pts in 22 games and lead the league in playoff goals with 10.
In terms of awards and voting at his peak, he had a 2nd place Selke finish in '92, 4th in Selke voting in '93, won the Hart/Selke/Pearson combo in '94, 4th in Selke voting in '95, another Selke and top 5 Hart finish in '96, and 9th in Selke voting in 97. Furthermore, due to the different voting process, there were only 6 eligible candidates for Hart voting in 1995...odds are Fedorov would have cracked the top 7-10 that year.
Most people also feel Fedorov was robbed of the Conn Smythe in '97, despite leading Detroit in playoff scoring, and leading the league in playoff GWGs...and playing half a series on defence, where his stats took a hit.
So, he had an all-time great peak, but why was it only 4 or so seasons long? Imo, one obvious yet often overlooked factor was the layoff he experienced in '97/98. I'll explain this fully in my next post. The significance of this is that his peak years ended largely due to off-ice contract problems, which should not be punished in the same way as a simple "lack of effort".
Moving on, Fedorov is the consensus #1 two-way forward of the 1990's, one of the best of all-time in this regard. Bowman used him on defence frequently:
'95-96, '96-97, '01-02, '06-07 are regular seasons that I know of where Fedorov played defence, sometimes for 10-15 games at a time. He also played defence in the '95-96, '96-97, and '07-'08 playoffs (I can post links later if anyone is interested)...naturally, his offensive stats took a hit while he played defence.
Versatility is something that is rewarded in these type of lists, not punished.
In terms of career achievements and post '98 play: Fedorov did post several stellar seasons post 1998, his best one in '03 when he put up 83 pts in 80 games and finished 9th in Hart voting and 8th in Selke voting. In '04 he led the non-playoff bound Ducks in scoring with 31 goals and 65 points. Fedorov was the first Russian to score 1,000 points and is the current all-time Russian NHL scoring leader, as well as the all-time leader in playoff assists among active players.
Unlike his regular season inconsistencies, Fedorov was always a consistent playoff performer throughout his entire career.
Fedorov has 3 Stanley Cups (key contributor) and 3 World championship gold medals (in 3 attempts!) in addition to his multiple awards and 7 All-star game appearances. He will likely join the 1,200 point club and possibly the 500 goal club before he hangs 'em up for good.
In his prime, Fedorov was extremely dominant, putting up 4 straight 20 point playoffs, an NHL record shared with Mike Bossy and Brian Trottier...Fedorov alone did it without going to the finals every year. Fedorov is also a member of the 5 goals in one game club. Less than 40 players have accomplished this feat in the 100+ years of the NHL's existance (complete list: http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com/2007/12/five-goal-games-in-nhl-history.html ). Impressively, only Fedorov managed to do it during the dead puck era. If you watched a 23-27 year old Fedorov dominate, you would know you're watching an all-time calibre hockey player.
Fedorov strung 4 consecutive dominant regular seasons together, from 92/93 (on pace for 100+ pts as a 22 year old) to 95/96; in this stretch, he was elite offensively, as in top 10 in PPG, from 1993 - 1996. So I still don't know where people get this 2 season junk from.
On top of that, he had 5 consecutive playoffs where he was elite offensively, from 92/93 through to 96/97, scoring at a PPG or much higher. His 94/95 playoffs were the peak of his dominance, where he lead the league in points and assists (Red Wings record 24 Pts in 17 games). In the 6th year, he had 20 pts in 22 games and lead the league in playoff goals with 10.
In terms of awards and voting at his peak, he had a 2nd place Selke finish in '92, 4th in Selke voting in '93, won the Hart/Selke/Pearson combo in '94, 4th in Selke voting in '95, another Selke and top 5 Hart finish in '96, and 9th in Selke voting in 97. Furthermore, due to the different voting process, there were only 6 eligible candidates for Hart voting in 1995...odds are Fedorov would have cracked the top 7-10 that year.
Most people also feel Fedorov was robbed of the Conn Smythe in '97, despite leading Detroit in playoff scoring, and leading the league in playoff GWGs...and playing half a series on defence, where his stats took a hit.
So, he had an all-time great peak, but why was it only 4 or so seasons long? Imo, one obvious yet often overlooked factor was the layoff he experienced in '97/98. I'll explain this fully in my next post. The significance of this is that his peak years ended largely due to off-ice contract problems, which should not be punished in the same way as a simple "lack of effort".
Moving on, Fedorov is the consensus #1 two-way forward of the 1990's, one of the best of all-time in this regard. Bowman used him on defence frequently:
'95-96, '96-97, '01-02, '06-07 are regular seasons that I know of where Fedorov played defence, sometimes for 10-15 games at a time. He also played defence in the '95-96, '96-97, and '07-'08 playoffs (I can post links later if anyone is interested)...naturally, his offensive stats took a hit while he played defence.
Versatility is something that is rewarded in these type of lists, not punished.
In terms of career achievements and post '98 play: Fedorov did post several stellar seasons post 1998, his best one in '03 when he put up 83 pts in 80 games and finished 9th in Hart voting and 8th in Selke voting. In '04 he led the non-playoff bound Ducks in scoring with 31 goals and 65 points. Fedorov was the first Russian to score 1,000 points and is the current all-time Russian NHL scoring leader, as well as the all-time leader in playoff assists among active players.
Unlike his regular season inconsistencies, Fedorov was always a consistent playoff performer throughout his entire career.
Fedorov has 3 Stanley Cups (key contributor) and 3 World championship gold medals (in 3 attempts!) in addition to his multiple awards and 7 All-star game appearances. He will likely join the 1,200 point club and possibly the 500 goal club before he hangs 'em up for good.
Wings4Life
Registered User
Regarding the cause of Fedorov's drop in production:
It is no coincidence that Fedorov's offensive numbers (playoff and regular season), and even his Selke voting rankings dropped off after he was locked in a contract battle with Detroit and sat out 60+ regular season games (as well as training camp and the preseason)...so perhaps blaming this on his "effort" is a little misguided.
Problem: Sure he lit up the 97 playoffs, but the argument--that the layoff ended his prime years--fails to take into accout the 96/97 regular season (which was before his layoff), where his stats were down, and league-wide scoring dropped. Perhaps it was the trap, or effort, etc that dropped his scoring, and not his layoff? This brings me to the next point, briefly mentioned by FissionFire.
Fedorov spent a 10 game stretch in '97 playing defence for Bowman: as a forward, I am guessing his stats were around 60-61 Pts in 64 GP, showing he was still an offensive force this season...and also showing that his peak years were indeed disrupted by his off-ice contract problems. His +/- supports this argument as well (+29 in '97, only once did he get over +15 in the remainder of his career, on many stronger Detroit teams), as does his Selke voting (#9 in 97, only cracked the top 10 two times in the next 11 years).
So his very best years basically end with his off-ice contract problems, something that should not be docked in the same way as a simple "lack of effort", imo. To clarify, I'm not saying it was the only factor involved: the trap years, his divorce with Kournikova, limited icetime in Bowman's 4-equal line system, and perhaps to some extent effort all played a role as well.
Regarding the amount of "help" Fedorov received playing on a good team:
To debunk another myth: unlike many all-stars, Fedorov received surprising little help on such a strong team with regards to his scoring/achievements. In '96, he had Slava Kozlov (never had a PPG season) and an old Larionov as his wingers/center, and was often matched with an ancient Fetisov and an all-time defensive defenceman in Vladdy K (the "Russian 5" unit)...ie not much help in the scoring department. In '97, Shanahan went straight to Yzerman's line, leaving Fedorov to lead the Wings in the playoffs with Kozlov and Doug Brown as wingers. In his Hart season in 94, Yzerman missed half a season and Fedorov turned linemate Ray Sheppard into a 50 goal scorer. (Imagine how many points he would have racked up with better wingers those years.)
Compare these linemates to those of say Jagr (Lemieux and/or Ron Francis) or even Forsberg (Hejduk et al), and you`ll see they don`t stack up.
It is no coincidence that Fedorov's offensive numbers (playoff and regular season), and even his Selke voting rankings dropped off after he was locked in a contract battle with Detroit and sat out 60+ regular season games (as well as training camp and the preseason)...so perhaps blaming this on his "effort" is a little misguided.
Problem: Sure he lit up the 97 playoffs, but the argument--that the layoff ended his prime years--fails to take into accout the 96/97 regular season (which was before his layoff), where his stats were down, and league-wide scoring dropped. Perhaps it was the trap, or effort, etc that dropped his scoring, and not his layoff? This brings me to the next point, briefly mentioned by FissionFire.
Fedorov spent a 10 game stretch in '97 playing defence for Bowman: as a forward, I am guessing his stats were around 60-61 Pts in 64 GP, showing he was still an offensive force this season...and also showing that his peak years were indeed disrupted by his off-ice contract problems. His +/- supports this argument as well (+29 in '97, only once did he get over +15 in the remainder of his career, on many stronger Detroit teams), as does his Selke voting (#9 in 97, only cracked the top 10 two times in the next 11 years).
So his very best years basically end with his off-ice contract problems, something that should not be docked in the same way as a simple "lack of effort", imo. To clarify, I'm not saying it was the only factor involved: the trap years, his divorce with Kournikova, limited icetime in Bowman's 4-equal line system, and perhaps to some extent effort all played a role as well.
Regarding the amount of "help" Fedorov received playing on a good team:
To debunk another myth: unlike many all-stars, Fedorov received surprising little help on such a strong team with regards to his scoring/achievements. In '96, he had Slava Kozlov (never had a PPG season) and an old Larionov as his wingers/center, and was often matched with an ancient Fetisov and an all-time defensive defenceman in Vladdy K (the "Russian 5" unit)...ie not much help in the scoring department. In '97, Shanahan went straight to Yzerman's line, leaving Fedorov to lead the Wings in the playoffs with Kozlov and Doug Brown as wingers. In his Hart season in 94, Yzerman missed half a season and Fedorov turned linemate Ray Sheppard into a 50 goal scorer. (Imagine how many points he would have racked up with better wingers those years.)
Compare these linemates to those of say Jagr (Lemieux and/or Ron Francis) or even Forsberg (Hejduk et al), and you`ll see they don`t stack up.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,815
- 16,549
Chris Pronger
Dave Keon
Ron Francis
Jack Stewart
Serge Savard
Chuck Gardiner
Bill Quackenbush
Yvan Cournoyer
If you take away Pronger and Quackenbush, you have.... (somebody won't like me)
Frank Nighbor
Busher Jackson
Wings, those are some excellent arguments for Fedorov. Not that I agree with them, but they're well-thought-out and expressed. Some of the lesser lights who have posted in these threads could learn a thing or two.
Just a few rebuttals:
*On the four straight 20-point playoffs. It's impressive. But I think at least half his points came in the four-game sweep of San Jose. It was a message sending series for Fedorov, since he wasn't great the year before against the Sharks, and earned a suspension thanks to the 1994 series. But Detroit outscored the Sharks 24-6 in 1995. Fedorov wasn't nearly as good in the final two rounds. And he left a lot of people wanting after his performance in the 1996 playoffs.
*I wouldn't say he was dominant in 1992-93. It was a strong year for him, but keep in mind that there were 20-ish 100-point players that year, and several more who scored at the 100-point clip. He was really good, but not dominant.
*He left a lot of people wanting more in 1995 and 1995-96. It wasn't that he played poorly, but expectations were so high after 1993-94, and he just didn't play at that high level on a regular basis. I thought in 1995-96 that Yzerman was Detroit's best player. I don't think he would have finished top 10 in Hart voting in 1995, thanks to the outstanding season that Paul Coffey had.
*As I said before, the shift to defence was often done as a way to motivate him. I don't think he was happy playing on the blue-line. Sometimes it was done as an injury substitute. Did a motivated, playing at or close to his potential Fedorov play defence for Detroit when the Red Wings blue-liners were healthy? And he never played defence for an extended period of time. There's a world of difference between Fedorov's tours of duty on the blue-line, and those of a Red Kelly or a Dit Clapper.
*Made my case countless times for the lack of legitimacy for the Selkes of Fedorov, Francis and Gilmour.
*Word to the wise: all-star game appearances are generally viewed as a last-ditch, desperation argument in these parts.
*The five-goal game in 1996-97 was impressive. It was the last one for the next 11 years. But to a certain extent, I think it's very indicative of Fedorov post-1994. When he wanted to, he could dominate. There wasn't a player like him in the league. But he didn't always deliver. He had the ability to dominate. And when he wanted to, he did it. But too many nights where it looked like he was just out for a skate, and he didn't do much.
*Ray Sheppard was actually a very, very good goal scorer. I don't know why Fedorov and Sheppard clicked - Sheppard was a terrible skater, but he had great hands in tight, a nose for the net and just overall excellent scorer's instincts. A 38-goal rookie year in Buffalo, 35 goals in 65 games with San Jose and Florida in 1996 are proof that Sheppard could deliver offensively without Fedorov. I don't think he was an ideal linemate due to his limited mobility, but he was definitely a guy a playmaking centre would want for a linemate.
I don't know why his play tailed off in the regular season so much after 1995-96. I don't think it was the layoff. I've seen a lot of guys take an extended layoff due to contract squabbles. Most of them responded by playing some of their best hockey afterwards. Did Fedorov get comfortable from 1998-99 to 2001-02 because of the front-end loaded contract? Perhaps. He had his money after the 1998 playoffs. And when the contract expired in 02-03, he had his best regular season in nearly a decade. After that, it was mostly forgetable hockey, until he got to Washington.
I don't care about the supporting cast when it comes to Fedorov. I won't use it against him. My only concern was Fedorov's ability to deliver in the playoffs when he was the go-to-guy, the guy that the opposition keyed on. For most of his Detroit career, the go-to guy was Yzerman. When it was Fedorov in the playoffs (except for the series against San Jose in 1995), Fedorov was ineffective in that role.
Fedorov's inconsistency and frequent apathy has been and will be used against him. For most of his career, the word "apathy" has dogged him.
Just a few rebuttals:
*On the four straight 20-point playoffs. It's impressive. But I think at least half his points came in the four-game sweep of San Jose. It was a message sending series for Fedorov, since he wasn't great the year before against the Sharks, and earned a suspension thanks to the 1994 series. But Detroit outscored the Sharks 24-6 in 1995. Fedorov wasn't nearly as good in the final two rounds. And he left a lot of people wanting after his performance in the 1996 playoffs.
*I wouldn't say he was dominant in 1992-93. It was a strong year for him, but keep in mind that there were 20-ish 100-point players that year, and several more who scored at the 100-point clip. He was really good, but not dominant.
*He left a lot of people wanting more in 1995 and 1995-96. It wasn't that he played poorly, but expectations were so high after 1993-94, and he just didn't play at that high level on a regular basis. I thought in 1995-96 that Yzerman was Detroit's best player. I don't think he would have finished top 10 in Hart voting in 1995, thanks to the outstanding season that Paul Coffey had.
*As I said before, the shift to defence was often done as a way to motivate him. I don't think he was happy playing on the blue-line. Sometimes it was done as an injury substitute. Did a motivated, playing at or close to his potential Fedorov play defence for Detroit when the Red Wings blue-liners were healthy? And he never played defence for an extended period of time. There's a world of difference between Fedorov's tours of duty on the blue-line, and those of a Red Kelly or a Dit Clapper.
*Made my case countless times for the lack of legitimacy for the Selkes of Fedorov, Francis and Gilmour.
*Word to the wise: all-star game appearances are generally viewed as a last-ditch, desperation argument in these parts.
*The five-goal game in 1996-97 was impressive. It was the last one for the next 11 years. But to a certain extent, I think it's very indicative of Fedorov post-1994. When he wanted to, he could dominate. There wasn't a player like him in the league. But he didn't always deliver. He had the ability to dominate. And when he wanted to, he did it. But too many nights where it looked like he was just out for a skate, and he didn't do much.
*Ray Sheppard was actually a very, very good goal scorer. I don't know why Fedorov and Sheppard clicked - Sheppard was a terrible skater, but he had great hands in tight, a nose for the net and just overall excellent scorer's instincts. A 38-goal rookie year in Buffalo, 35 goals in 65 games with San Jose and Florida in 1996 are proof that Sheppard could deliver offensively without Fedorov. I don't think he was an ideal linemate due to his limited mobility, but he was definitely a guy a playmaking centre would want for a linemate.
I don't know why his play tailed off in the regular season so much after 1995-96. I don't think it was the layoff. I've seen a lot of guys take an extended layoff due to contract squabbles. Most of them responded by playing some of their best hockey afterwards. Did Fedorov get comfortable from 1998-99 to 2001-02 because of the front-end loaded contract? Perhaps. He had his money after the 1998 playoffs. And when the contract expired in 02-03, he had his best regular season in nearly a decade. After that, it was mostly forgetable hockey, until he got to Washington.
I don't care about the supporting cast when it comes to Fedorov. I won't use it against him. My only concern was Fedorov's ability to deliver in the playoffs when he was the go-to-guy, the guy that the opposition keyed on. For most of his Detroit career, the go-to guy was Yzerman. When it was Fedorov in the playoffs (except for the series against San Jose in 1995), Fedorov was ineffective in that role.
Fedorov's inconsistency and frequent apathy has been and will be used against him. For most of his career, the word "apathy" has dogged him.
pappyline
Registered User
My top guys not added yet from my original List:
!. Busher Jackson
2.Chuck Gardiner
3.Bill Cowley
4.Doug bentley
5.Toe Blake
6.Dave Keon
7.Alex Delvecchio
In Hindsight
!. Busher Jackson
2.Chuck Gardiner
3.Doug bentley
4.Toe Blake
5.Alex Delvecchio
6.Dave Keon
7.Norm Ullman or Bill Gadsby
!. Busher Jackson
2.Chuck Gardiner
3.Bill Cowley
4.Doug bentley
5.Toe Blake
6.Dave Keon
7.Alex Delvecchio
In Hindsight
!. Busher Jackson
2.Chuck Gardiner
3.Doug bentley
4.Toe Blake
5.Alex Delvecchio
6.Dave Keon
7.Norm Ullman or Bill Gadsby
