Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread (Citizens on Patrol)

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The All-Time Draft (ATD) is a fantasy hockey draft game based on the history of hockey, which encourages the creation of well-researched biographies of the players drafted. The bios tend to be fairly brief, the internet equivalent of 1-10 pages long.

The downside is that because it is a competitive environment, some bio makers tend to see the player they are profiling with rose-colored glasses. So keep that in mind when reading ATD bios. But the ATD bios are a great compilation of player information from various sources.

 

[Sentinel]

Where do you have Brodeur? Feels like somebody who could have wildly different positions on the lists.

#45

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Where do you have Brodeur? Feels like somebody who could have wildly different positions on the lists.

I think he should be very close to Nik Lidstrom. Both great for a very long time, indispensable parts of 3+ Cup wins. Weren't always the best individual performers in their Cup wins/long playoff runs, but maybe were the best overall when looking at the big picture. Not at Jean Beliveau level, but above Steve Yzerman level for one-franchise immortals. (We'll forget the St. Louis stint for Mr. Brodeur)

 

[Michael Farkas]

Here's a dumb question...as I continue to struggle with players that I generally cannot watch...

Why is there such a large gap between Howie Morenz and Newsy Lalonde? Minus, the fact that Morenz was great in two eras, whereas Lalonde played in one...which is appreciably fact in my book. But the gap doesn't feel that small...what's the feeling there?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Here's a dumb question...as I continue to struggle with players that I generally cannot watch...

Why is there such a large gap between Howie Morenz and Newsy Lalonde? Minus, the fact that Morenz was great in two eras, whereas Lalonde played in one...which is appreciably fact in my book. But the gap doesn't feel that small...what's the feeling there?

Gap between Morenz and his peers was much greater and longer than Lalonde and his peers. Hard to show that Lalonde was clearly the #1 player at any point of his career.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Here's a dumb question...as I continue to struggle with players that I generally cannot watch...

Why is there such a large gap between Howie Morenz and Newsy Lalonde? Minus, the fact that Morenz was great in two eras, whereas Lalonde played in one...which is appreciably fact in my book. But the gap doesn't feel that small...what's the feeling there?

I'd dispute that Lalonde only played in one era. He lasted 20 years, a career spanning countless rule changes, leagues, customs.

But to your point. I'll echo the thoughts of C58, there is precious little evidence that anybody besides Morenz was considered the best player in the game for a decent chunk of his career. Lalonde probably couldn't claim to be more than "possibly the best" at any point in time. I liken Lalonde to Mark Messier and Bobby Clarke. I mean, the Moose has two MVPs, Clarke three...but calling either the best player in hockey at any point in their careers is a tough sell. Morenz seems to have been revered to a Bobby Hull/Rocket Richard extent.

I guess it depends on what you consider "far apart" as well. I have Lalonde in my top 30, which isn't all that far away from 10th or 12th when you consider you're representing 120+ years of history. Like, if you have him down outside the top 50-60 then yeah, that's pretty far apart I suppose.

 

[MXD]

- Brodeur : 17th. 4th goalie. Very confident for the 4th goalie part, but 17th feels a tad high. Rather close to Lidstrom, indeed. I have him ahead of Potvin, Makarov and Kelly (amongst others) and I'm not quite sure this is totally right.

- Lalonde/Morenz : Morenz more than 25 ranks ahead. I don't have many pre-NHL on the list and felt having Lalonde higher than I have him would fail to capture that might not even have been the best player during his career.

Rant : I ranked big fat useless soiled slug Nels Stewart and I'm not quite sure I'm liking myself over that one.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Exactly 25 spots between Morenz and Lalonde.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think he should be very close to Nik Lidstrom. Both great for a very long time, indispensable parts of 3+ Cup wins. Weren't always the best individual performers in their Cup wins/long playoff runs, but maybe were the best overall when looking at the big picture. Not at Jean Beliveau level, but above Steve Yzerman level for one-franchise immortals. (We'll forget the St. Louis stint for Mr. Brodeur)

Yep. Those two are basically interchangeable with Joe Sakic for me.

If Martin Brodeur was competing against the same field Lidstrom was, he’s not leaving with less than the equivalent of seven Norris Trophies (1997 over Leetch, 1998 over Blake, 2001 over Bourque, 2003 over MacInnis, 2004 over Niedermayer, 2007 over Niedermayer, 2008 over Phaneuf). And he’d probably be just as deserving of a final tribute in 2010 as Lidstrom was in 2011.

Don’t know a single bulletpoint in Lidstrom’s favor that Brodeur doesn’t equally satisfy, so any substantial gap between them (#17 vs #37 on the 2009 list is ridiculous) would be one of those cases where we’re getting history wrong.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Morenz played in a stronger era than Lalonde and was a significantly more multi-faceted player.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Yep. Those two are basically interchangeable with Joe Sakic for me.

If Martin Brodeur was competing against the same field Lidstrom was, he’s not leaving with less than the equivalent of seven Norris Trophies (1997 over Leetch, 1998 over Blake, 2001 over Bourque, 2003 over MacInnis, 2004 over Niedermayer, 2007 over Niedermayer, 2008 over Phaneuf). And he’d probably be just as deserving of a final tribute in 2010 as Lidstrom was in 2011.

Don’t know a single bulletpoint in Lidstrom’s favor that Brodeur doesn’t equally satisfy, so any substantial gap between them (#17 vs #37 on the 2009 list is ridiculous) would be one of those cases where we’re getting history wrong.

The one edge I give them over Sakic is that they were a little more durable and consistent. Sakic's 97-00 stretch is mildly bothersome. Another season like 96 or 01 in that span could probably make him a top 30 contender for me, but alas he had significant missed time in 3 out of 4 regular seasons and a couple bad playoffs in there.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Morenz played in a stronger era than Lalonde and was a significantly more multi-faceted player.

Lalonde also could stray into that territory where he was violent to the point that it hurt his own team. Even in an era of appalling violence by today's standards.

 

[sr edler]

Brodeur is 29th on my list. Lalonde 45th.

Lalonde was also a top lacrosse player. According to his wiki page he earned more money playing lacrosse than hockey.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Brodeur: Number 6 goaltender
Lidström: Number 4 defenseman (and he doesn't miss out on #3 by much, I don't think)

Don't have a problem with placing the latter measurably ahead of the former.

And... a word about "significant gaps" between rated players. I'm confident that there are at least 6500 players who've played major hockey throughout history. [The NHL alone has about 5600.] So-- maybe it would be more useful to consider that our GOAT isn't worth 120 points, it's really more like 6500. And a player like the aforementioned fat slug Nels Stewart is worth a "mere" 6391.

In a lot of cases, we're trying to measure micrometric differences- and we're using calipers that aren't all set to the same scale. I'm sure I'll hear it. Some of you will too: things like "[H]ow can you rate Tretiak so high? How can you rate Henri Richard so low?

A 20-place gap in a field of over 6000 eligible athletes isn't as big a span as it might seem at first blush.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Brodeur: Number 6 goaltender
Lidström: Number 4 defenseman (and he doesn't miss out on #3 by much, I don't think)

If this is the case, then I would suggest it would be more difficult to establish yourself as the former.

If we looked at the inverse (Lidstrom vs. Brodeur’s field of competition), Lidstrom is probably at the value of three or four Vezina Trophies (2000 over Kolzig, maybe 2001 over Hasek/Cechmanek, 2003 over injured Turco, 2008 over Nabokov).

Unless someone wants to suggest that there’s a path over Hart/Pearson winners/nominees 1998 Hasek, 1999 Hasek, 2002 Theodore/Roy/Burke, 2004 Kiprusoff/Luongo, 2006 Kiprusoff, 2007 Luongo, and 2011 Thomas.

Obviously an extensive debate I’d love to have in Round 2, but last time, Nicklas Lidstrom was added to the list two voting periods before Martin Brodeur was even eligible, so maybe the 7-time-to-Lidstrom’s-1-in-the-same-overlap top-5 Hart finisher doesn’t get that chance.

 

[ted2019]

- Brodeur : 17th. 4th goalie. Very confident for the 4th goalie part, but 17th feels a tad high. Rather close to Lidstrom, indeed. I have him ahead of Potvin, Makarov and Kelly (amongst others) and I'm not quite sure this is totally right.

- Lalonde/Morenz : Morenz more than 25 ranks ahead. I don't have many pre-NHL on the list and felt having Lalonde higher than I have him would fail to capture that might not even have been the best player during his career.

Rant : I ranked big fat useless soiled slug Nels Stewart and I'm not quite sure I'm liking myself over that one.

Brodeur: 35th in my rankings, which makes him the 6th goalie on my list. I see Brodeur as a product of the Devils system.

Lalonde/Morenz: I have them 37 spots apart.

Lidstrom: After trumpeting Lidstrom as a top 10 player in the beginning, looking into things and such, I settled Nicky into 18th. Now I know that still mot likely places him higher then most, it's still lower then I originally had him slotted.

 

[quoipourquoi]

“Product” is a little harsh, right? Beneficiary, sure (though if you believe there is a correlation between low-volume SA games and a depressed save percentage, maybe not a statistical beneficiary). But wasn’t one of his signature seasons in 2006-07 after that system was replaced?

To me, both Lidstrom and Brodeur were beneficiaries, but not products. They’d be good anywhere, but performing in environments that had several fail-safes probably lessened the chance that they could even be perceived to have off-years.

 

[psycat]

Well I am open to rank Lidström lower than most but that comes with the caveat that Crosby should be nowhere near top 5 of all time, he is a average superstar with great concistency and a lacking peak. His Conn Smythe's and post season success is to me very superficial in the sense that I don't believe he deserved his second Smythe and he has been playing on the powerhouse of his era(since you guys like to discredit Lidström for that).

Same goes for Harvey obviously as he is pretty much a Canadian Lidström but with lower play-offs contribution.

In reality I prefer trophy counting above anything else, rest is entirely subjective which would lean towards Lidström being in the range of 10-15. Not entirely convinced Bourque should be ranked above(and I have him as the most likely 2nd dman of all time).

Brodeur would miss my top 5 goalies list which would have him a good 15+ spots below, albeit all the players in the 15-35 range are pretty close so the number of players between him and Lidström doesn't necessarily mean that there is a large, albeit there is a small, gap between them ability or performance wise.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Yep. Those two are basically interchangeable with Joe Sakic for me.

If Martin Brodeur was competing against the same field Lidstrom was, he’s not leaving with less than the equivalent of seven Norris Trophies (1997 over Leetch, 1998 over Blake, 2001 over Bourque, 2003 over MacInnis, 2004 over Niedermayer, 2007 over Niedermayer, 2008 over Phaneuf). And he’d probably be just as deserving of a final tribute in 2010 as Lidstrom was in 2011.

Don’t know a single bulletpoint in Lidstrom’s favor that Brodeur doesn’t equally satisfy, so any substantial gap between them (#17 vs #37 on the 2009 list is ridiculous) would be one of those cases where we’re getting history wrong.

Hmmm... I have Lidstrom 22 and Brodeur 27. Brodeur fell back on my list, while I felt compelled to move Lidstrom up further on my list from previous drafts.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Brodeur: 35th in my rankings, which makes him the 6th goalie on my list. I see Brodeur as a product of the Devils system.

Kind of how I view Dryden as a product of the great Habs teams, although I have him much further down my list than Brodeur. This all should be interesting!

 

[DannyGallivan]

Lalonde/Morenz: I have them 37 spots apart

and me... 39 spots apart. You were looking over at my list during the test!

 

[DannyGallivan]

A 20-place gap in a field of over 6000 eligible athletes isn't as big a span as it might seem at first blush.

I made this point earlier. Just because someone is, let's say, 50 spots ahead of another player, if we scored them out of 10 one player maybe a 9.1 and the other a 8.9.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Hmmm... I have Lidstrom 22 and Brodeur 27. Brodeur fell back on my list, while I felt compelled to move Lidstrom up further on my list from previous drafts.

To me, that’s a perfectly reasonable gap. But the past perception on HOH reminds me a lot of the Messier/Bourque thing from last month (Messier being better than Bourque’s Norris competition in 5-7 seasons: 1982, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1996, 1997).

Another example where the previous HOH list had the Defenseman added to the final list two entire rounds before the non-Defenseman who faces tougher positional award competition was even eligible.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Ok, back to Morenz.

How much weight to we put on that 1950 Canadian Press poll that Morenz dominated (27 to, whatever it was, 3 over Nighbor and 2 Cyclone Taylor and then a bunch of ones like Shore, Lalonde, etc. I feel like maybe Rocket was one of the guys that got multiple votes actually now that I think about it...whatever, it was a romp)?

Do we find that to be at odds at all with Hart Trophy voting at the time...? Or do we view it as on point considering Shore's many Harts came largely after Morenz's peak? Further, do we glean that the Hart Trophy was more true to form then of "most valuable" rather than "best", as it tends to lean now...as, presumably, there's some overlap of CP poll voters and Hart Trophy voters. To that last point, does this speak then (via cause and effect, so to speak) to the weakness of Shore's Boston's clubs (meaning...he was deemed valuable so often because he played with a bunch of slugs...where as Morenz was on a stronger team and not deemed as valuable).

I say all this for a reason I already stated. But also because, even adjusting for era (Morenz played in a stronger era, and bridged the gap successfully with passing rule changes), Lalonde's resume looks pretty damn impressive even when you put it next to Morenz's...

I am not against taking the CP poll at its word...but, if we're not in a position to (or have a desire to) challenge that massive victory for the tragically deceased Morenz, do we want to read anything else into the lack of support for, say, a multi-time Hart winner like Shore, the king of the Coast in Cyclone Taylor or the otherwise offensively dominant performer than Lalonde seems to have been both RS and playoffs...?

 

[ImporterExporter]

My list is in.