Top 10 defensemen of all-time?

[Fire Benning]

Mine would be something like this:

1. Orr
2. Lidstrom
3. Harvey
4. Bourque
5. Potvin
6. Shore
7. Robinson
8. Chelios
9. Red Kelly
10. Coffey

Click to read more...

 

[BenchBrawl]

1.Bobby Orr
2.Doug Harvey
3.Raymond Bourque
4.Denis Potvin
5.Eddie Shore
6.Nicklas Lidstrom
7.Larry Robinson
8.Red Kelly
9.Slava Fetisov
10.Chris Chelios

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

Orr
Harvey
Bourque
Lidstrom
Shore
Kelly
Potvin
Fetisov
Robinson
Chelios

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I prefer Post #2.

 

[Neutrinos]

I'm starting to wonder if Chris Pronger was just a figment of my imagination

 

[Bluesguru]

Too many great defensemen to narrow it to 10. Pronger like the guy above said and I really think Brad Park belongs on there too. Just too many great ones to narrow it down.

 

[Sentinel]

1. Orr
2. Lidstrom
3. Fetisov
4. Bourque
5. Potvin
6. Harvey
7. Shore
8. Robinson
9. Chelios
10. Coffey

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm starting to wonder if Chris Pronger was just a figment of my imagination

Pronger somewhere between 14th and 20th for me.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

1. Orr
2. Lidstrom
3. Fetisov
4. Bourque
5. Potvin
6. Harvey
7. Shore
8. Robinson
9. Chelios
10. Coffey

For someone who values playoff success as much as you do, Red Kelly is a glaring omission. But I guess your list is extremely pro-modern.

Anyway, my list:

1. Orr
2. Harvey
3. Bourque
4. Lidstrom
5. Shore
6. Kelly
7. Potvin
8. Fetisov
9. Robinson
10. Chelios

Edit: Or I could have just me too'd post #3

 

[Canadiens1958]

For someone who values playoff success as much as you do, Red Kelly is a glaring omission. But I guess your list is extremely pro-modern.

Anyway, my list:

1. Orr
2. Harvey
3. Bourque
4. Lidstrom
5. Shore
6. Kelly
7. Potvin
8. Fetisov
9. Robinson
10. Chelios

Edit: Or I could have just me too'd post #3

Kelly is very interesting. As time goes by evidence keeps surfacing that he played more time as a forward with Detroit than previously believed.

This creates a situation where all-time or overall his status rises at the expense of his position as a d-man.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Kelly is very interesting. As time goes by evidence keeps surfacing that he played more time as a forward with Detroit than previously believed.

This creates a situation where all-time or overall his status rises at the expense of his position as a d-man.

Why does his overall status rises because he played more forward-time in Detroit? We already know he was positionally versatile due to his Toronto days, and now his offensive numbers as a defenseman might be artificially boosted (not saying it's the case, I have no idea to what extent he played forward in Detroit).

 

[Canadiens1958]

Why does his overall status rise because he played more forward-time in Detroit? We already know he was positionally versatile due to his Toronto days, and now his offensive numbers as a defenseman might be artificially boosted (not saying it's the case, I have no idea to what extent he played forward in Detroit).

Very basic. Pre 1967 expansion, NHL rosters were much smaller. So a player like Kelly who could play C/LW/D offered great roster flexibility. O6 dynasty teams Detroit, Montreal, Toronto were loaded with such players.

Issue comes down to interpreting Kelly's Norris and AST results. Do the shortcomings reflect the talent gap between him and Doug Harvey, Bill Gadsby, some others or the voters favouring those who played a dedicated position.

 

[BruinDust]

I think the Top 5 all-time are for the most part agreed upon by the majority of the hockey world. The order after No.1 (Orr) can be debated.

For me:

1) Orr
2) Harvey
3) Bourque
4) Lidstrom
5) Shore

I've always considered Potvin No.6 for me.

After that I have 7) Pronger, 8) Robinson, 9) Park, and 10) Chelios

Of current players, Doughty and Karlsson have a chance to knock out Park and Chelios off my list depending on how the 2nd half of their careers go.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Orr
Harvey
Bourque
Lidstrom
Shore
Kelly
Potvin
Fetisov
Robinson
Chelios

Very close to what I have.

Although I rank Kelly above Potvin based on their entire careers (ie taking into account Kelly's time as a center), I'd put Potvin ahead if we're talking only about their careers as defensemen.

I still struggle with ranking Shore. He has a good case for anywhere between #2 and #5. I have a harder time nailing down his position than anyone else on the list.

 

[Neutrinos]

What exactly is the argument for Fetisov over Pronger?

If your answer is simply "I saw them both and he was better", then fine, I'm not familiar enough with Fetisov's prime to make any sort of rebuttal

But I am familiar with Chelios' prime and he simply wasn't as dominant as Pronger

So why the double standard?

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

Very interesting that most opinions seem to have shifted from Shore > Lidstrom to the opposite now. I used to be in the camp of the former but after nailing down my criteria for GOAT lists, I just couldnt put Shore ahead if I was to be consistent.

What exactly is the argument for Fetisov over Pronger?

If your answer is simply "I saw them both and he was better", then fine, I'm not familiar enough with Fetisov's prime to make any sort of rebuttal

But I am familiar with Chelios' prime and he simply wasn't as dominant as Pronger

So why the double standard?

Im pretty sure most rankings are based on careers. Peak Pronger was probably better than Chelios, but Chelios' career value is just better.

 

[Neutrinos]

Im pretty sure most rankings are based on careers. Peak Pronger was probably better than Chelios, but Chelios' career value is just better.

Pronger was definitely better than Chelios. There's no "probably" about it

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

Pronger was definitely better than Chelios. There's no "probably" about it

If you want to go and say "definitely" better at their peaks, then sure. I dont see how you can use "definitely" for career value.

Its the same thing with Lindros (to a lesser extent). Ranking solely based on peak and ranking on career value are two different things.

 

[Neutrinos]

If you want to go and say "definitely" better at their peaks, then sure. I dont see how you can use "definitely" for career value.

Its the same thing with Lindros (to a lesser extent). Ranking solely based on peak and ranking on career value are two different things.

I understand that

My point was, Fetisov is getting ranked for his peak/prime with USSR (certainly nothing he did at the NHL level would warrant his place in this thread)

Whereas Chelios is getting ranked for his career value

Pick a criteria and stick with it

 

[BenchBrawl]

I understand that

My point was, Fetisov is getting ranked for his peak/prime with USSR (certainly nothing he did at the NHL level would warrant his place in this thread)

Whereas Chelios is getting ranked for his career value

Pick a criteria and stick with it

There's peak, prime, career, lenght of peak, lenght of prime, lenght of career, per-game value in all of those, consistency from season to season, injury-prone-ness, playoffs runs, playoffs career, star power, individual trophy case, competition, cups/medals, importance to team and intangibles.All of those play a role.Reducing them to peak and career is obscuring.

It's not like Chelios is wayyy ahead of Pronger on most people's list anyway.Chelios will usually get ranked around 10th, Pronger around 16th or something.If you rank Pronger ahead of Chelios, I wouldn't find it crazy, just outside the norm.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Kelly is very interesting. As time goes by evidence keeps surfacing that he played more time as a forward with Detroit than previously believed.

This creates a situation where all-time or overall his status rises at the expense of his position as a d-man.

Has new information surfaced that Kelly played significant forward in Detroit outside of the 1955-56 regular season and that one playoff run (I forget the year, sorry)?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I understand that

My point was, Fetisov is getting ranked for his peak/prime with USSR (certainly nothing he did at the NHL level would warrant his place in this thread)

Whereas Chelios is getting ranked for his career value

Pick a criteria and stick with it

By my criteria (quality, consistency, and length of prime is most important), Chelios and Fetisov both easily rank over Pronger.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Has new information surfaced that Kelly played significant forward in Detroit outside of the 1955-56 regular season and that one playoff run (I forget the year, sorry)?

Piecemeal info. The 1950 playoffs and 1955-56 are definites but it seems that most seasons in the fifties there were a few games, shifts in games, streches. Times when the Wings had depth on defence.

Problem is that multiple position players were more common than today - no one easily slips back and forth between defence and forward today, yet in the fifties and sixties yoy had players like Kelly, Mohns, Turner,, Spencer, Odrowski, Horton, Ron Stewart Fleming, a few others, who did especially when on the road, as an injury precluded a recall from the minors due to time or the late season roster freeze which prohibited unlimited minor league or junior call-ups.

 

[Neutrinos]

To those of you listing Chelios in the Top 10, you'd obviously rather build a team around him instead of Stevens, am I right?


Chelios (+350) averaged .57 PPG in 1651 games

Stevens (+393) averaged .56 PPG in 1635 games

 

[BenchBrawl]

To those of you listing Chelios in the Top 10, you'd obviously rather build a team around him instead of Stevens, am I right?


Chelios (+350) averaged .57 PPG in 1651 games

Stevens (+393) averaged .56 PPG in 1635 games

Weird way to compare Scott Stevens and Chris Chelios.