Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time (Part 2)

Status
Not open for further replies.

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,187
10,074
There are also reasons to believe that the decline had started even before USSR collapsed considering that Tikhonov already back in the 85/86 season talked about that their hockey system had entered a downperiod. This decline can also to some extent be seen in the results of the national team in 1985-1989 compared to the results during the 1978-1984 time frame when Soviet hockey was at its absolute peak. Then the final collapse of the Soviet Union probably only made this already on-going decline of their hockey program even steeper.

I think people are confusing 2 different things here.

Sure the Russian national team has suffered, due in large part to not having absolute control over each and every one of their players and their ability to incorporate systems.

There has been however no lack of talent from Russia since the collapse of the USSR.
 

Vilica

Registered User
Jun 1, 2014
425
487
I think people are confusing 2 different things here.

Sure the Russian national team has suffered, due in large part to not having absolute control over each and every one of their players and their ability to incorporate systems.

There has been however no lack of talent from Russia since the collapse of the USSR.

I agree with you on your first point, but not completely on your second point. If you look at the Russian talent in the NHL since the lockout, the forward talent arrived immediately and continued to arrive, as individual talent didn't need the USSR system to develop. It took a bit, but after goaltender coaching settled in, the talent spigot at goalie in Russia has opened up. However, at defense, the position that probably benefited most from the USSR system, there hasn't been an influx of talent. The two best Russian defensemen debuting since the lockout (so I'm excluding Gonchar, Markov, and Zubov) are probably Orlov and Voynov, and while both have proven to be able to be the 2nd or 3rd best defenseman on a Cup winner, neither are what we'd call a #1D.

To speculate further, I think this has largely contributed to Russia's struggles in the Olympics compared to their success in the 70s and 80s, in that the USSR system and their training insulated their defensemen from any talent gap, but the current Olympic format of a midseason short tournament places more reliance on individual talent, and the collapse of the Soviet Union led to an absence of top tier defense talent. No Russian has been a Norris finalist since Zubov in 05-06, and if you ranked the defensemen at each Olympic Games, a Russian isn't going to be in the top 5 (probably). That matters less in the preliminary rounds, but when competing best against best, that talent gap is just enough to hold them back.

[Also, as a completely irrelevant aside, if Crosby was Russian and Malkin was Canadian, I think the Russian team would have been much better off and the Canadian team not much worse, not due to any real talent difference, but because I think a Crosby/Ovechkin line would work together unlike the Malkin/Ovechkin line that never really worked, because Crosby and Ovechkin's skillsets complement the other's, whereas Malkin and Ovechkin's skillsets mostly overlapped.]
 
  • Like
Reactions: wetcoast

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
48,540
28,739
No love for Kent Nilsson? Gretzky called him, "the most skilled hockey player I ever saw in my career".
He might not have the big career numbers, but at least give him back his nickname . The original "Magic Man".
So first - No.

And if we were ranking players that Gretzky put ridiculous compliments on, Kyle Turris would have been in the top 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

Say Hey Kid

Kobayashi Maru
Dec 10, 2007
23,500
5,444
No love for Kent Nilsson? Gretzky called him, "the most skilled hockey player I ever saw in my career". He might not have the big career numbers, but at least give him back his nickname . The original "Magic Man".
I have him ranked 600th.
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,187
10,074
No love for Kent Nilsson? Gretzky called him, "the most skilled hockey player I ever saw in my career".
He might not have the big career numbers, but at least give him back his nickname . The original "Magic Man".

You are right his skill was incredible by his drive wasn't even ECHL caliber and that was the problem.
 

Merya

Jokerit & Finland; anti-theist
Sep 23, 2008
2,279
418
Helsinki
You are right his skill was incredible by his drive wasn't even ECHL caliber and that was the problem.
That's rather insulting to ECHL players who are trying their darnest to achieve even AHL with limited skills. Kent and to lesser extent Kovalev are players who could've been so much more if they had taken the effort outside the rink more seriously.
Jesse Niinimäki from Finland was from the same mold.
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,187
10,074
That's rather insulting to ECHL players who are trying their darnest to achieve even AHL with limited skills. Kent and to lesser extent Kovalev are players who could've been so much more if they had taken the effort outside the rink more seriously.
Jesse Niinimäki from Finland was from the same mold.


Sure that's what I was trying to say in a clumsy way.

The bottom line is that Kent Nilsson simply didn't have an NHL caliber work ethic.
 

Nick Hansen

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
3,118
2,649
I can't speak to Kent Nilsson but Kovalev's problem was never his fitness or anything like that, he was always very well-conditioned and strong it seemed to me. His vision, however, was not quite up to par with his skill. Decent, even pretty good, yes, but not elite.
 

Merya

Jokerit & Finland; anti-theist
Sep 23, 2008
2,279
418
Helsinki
I can't speak to Kent Nilsson but Kovalev's problem was never his fitness or anything like that, he was always very well-conditioned and strong it seemed to me. His vision, however, was not quite up to par with his skill. Decent, even pretty good, yes, but not elite.
My eyes simply disagree. I think he was a bit of a coaster with amazing an skillset, but something missing to get to the level of superstar. One of my biggest disappointments. I so wanted him to have a breakthru season, but it never happened. :/
 

LT

Global Moderator
Jul 23, 2010
41,475
12,841
The 1K post rule is back in effect. Please make a new thread.

Closed.
 

rmartin65

Registered User
Apr 7, 2011
2,659
2,142
Seriously. In what world does Martin St. Louis make the list and not Gil? That is pathetic.

Set aside the homerism and you'll see why.

Perreault, for as great as he was, was never a 1st team all star, and was only 2nd team twice. St. Louis, on the other hand, was 1st team once, and 2nd team an additional 4 times.

Perreault was never top 3 in Hart voting. MSL won it once and finished 3rd once.

Perreault never won the Art Ross. MSL did twice.

Both were great players. But it is not "pathetic" that the player with greater career accolades and superior vs. peer production made the list.
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
30,844
13,621
Seriously. In what world does Martin St. Louis make the list and not Gil? That is pathetic.

I'd usually just ignore posts like this, but deep down I feel you're right that Perreault was a better and more significant player than MSL.

Am ashamed I didn't rank Perreault higher.
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
22,187
10,074
I have him ranked 600th.


Not that the top 100 went that deep but let's say they did a top players of all time I bet the range (even if we take out the top 5% either direction outliers) would be over a range of several hundred spots, say 450 to 750 just to use an example).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Batmann
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->