Top 100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread II
- Thread starter quoipourquoi
- Start date
ResilientBeast
Proud Member of the TTSAOA
The thing I'm most excited for when we get the results and lists is going to be the spread for goalies
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
I don't have him anywhere at this point, but I have only 37 players ranked. Including 6 goalies. I can't really tell at this point whether he'll end up in the Top half or the bottom half of my list.
I'll have a few pre-war goalies ahead of Bill Durnan.
I'm fairly convinced on Potvin>Trottier>Bossy.
I have a harder time with the 50s Canadiens. I'm leaning towards Harvey>Beliveau>Richard>Plante, and H.Richard>Geoffreon>Moore, but it really is pretty close.
I expect to have Henri Richard ranked higher than most.
I have a harder time with the 50s Canadiens. I'm leaning towards Harvey>Beliveau>Richard>Plante, and H.Richard>Geoffreon>Moore, but it really is pretty close.
I expect to have Henri Richard ranked higher than most.
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,776
- 29,312
50s Habs are really hard, although I have Plante comfortably fourth out of them. I think I go Harvey>Richard>Believeau, but honestly that changes based on what phase of the moon we're in.
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
I agree mostly with your rankings of 50's Habs, except the Pocket Rocket didn't crack my list and I have Beliveau just ahead of Harvey.
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
What Plante does upon his comeback is pretty impressive I feel like...whether that's enough to push him past some other of those other great names is a matter for the courts...
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
One of the things that makes ranking players so subjective is that hockey is a team sport. Players rely on one another for production. On occasion, you'll get a Gretzky from '79, a Dale Hawerchuk or a Paul Kariya and Mario Lemieux early in their careers who have virtually no help on their respective teams. But hockey is not golf or tennis, it's a team sport.
Yes, Orr and Espo benefited from one another, just as Gretzky benefited from Coffey and the rest of his team.
Espo won a couple of Harts and obliterated Hull's single season goal record the same way Gretzky eventually obliterated his. And, against the best the Soviets could muster, Espo was clearly the Team Canada MVP in '72 (with all due respect to Paul Henderson). And then there's his long string of exceptionally high goal and point totals (he once held the assist record for centres as well).
Espo deserves to be ranked high on this list. Yeah, he didn't produce a lot of highlight reel goals, but man... did he produce.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
I have Espo in the mid 20's so he's plenty high (I think), I just happen to believe when you look at pre and post Orr, Espo has very little to write home about in an all time sense. Long story short I think Orr would have been the same other worldly player on any team, anywhere, anytime. Given we have data on Espo without Orr, I can't say the same thing about Phil. But as you said, he did produce historically ridiculous numbers.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Top 100?
Geez, I have him just inside my top 50. He's probably the most underrated Hab of all time.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
Again -- Pocket is a guy that, the more you dig, the more you realize he's much more than a trivia answer, much more than the lil' bro and much more than something of a passenger. I can't quite put a number on him, but he shouldn't end up (in my list) very far from, say, Frank Boucher. In the Centers project, he was ranked exactly between Yzerman and Forsberg, and that's probably where he should be here as well.
(He was also right behind Boucher, which I didn't remember when writing this post).
It DOES require digging though.
(He was also right behind Boucher, which I didn't remember when writing this post).
It DOES require digging though.
Last edited:
Canadiens1958
Registered User
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
That's why I highly recommend folks who have never stopped in the ATD section to go to the master bio thread and check out the many amazing bio's members have done over the years. Hundreds of hours worth of compiling newspaper clippings, all kinds of statistical studies done, etc. It really is the most diverse and in depth place you can learn about players dating back to creation of hockey....at least for free.
Edit: I actually have Henri 1 spot ahead of Frank Boucher.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,776
- 29,312
The tricky thing with him is - damn those teams were stacked. I mean with Harvey, Beliveau, Richard, and Plante, you're talking four guys who you could argue are top 10 players of all time (and certainly top 20). Then you add two *other* guys with multiple Art Ross trophies to their name in Moore and Geoffrion. Assuming those guys with the hardware are better than him (for the sake of argument) - where do you rank the 7th best player on a dynasty team in a top 100 players of all-time list?
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
Well, it's not to say that he won't find a spot somewhere on my list eventually, but if he does it'll be closer to the bottom of the 120. And that's still a big "if". I'd like to put him in, though. I like the old-time Habs.
He has his gaudy Stanley Cup totals and a whole lot of seasons as an important supporting cast player without ever being "the man". I felt a similar way with omitting Jacques Lemaire and Steve Shutt (although I'd put Henri ahead of those two anyways). With only 120 players from 100 years and other countries, there'll be some eye brow raisers.
Here's a question... I totally forgot Normy Ullman, so I was looking for a place to plug him in. How would you compare his career to Henri's?
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
After digging more from this past ATD, I would say Jacques Laperriere, absolutely and also Claude Provost.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Henri Richard was the youngest member of the dynesty team who went on to be one of the cornerstones of the late sixties dynasty and the 1971 and 73(captain) SC teams.
No one has managed such an accomplishment. Most participate in one, maybe two championship team groups.
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
I personally have Henri (late 40's) just over Geoffrion and Moore (50's to 60's). A lot that value comes from his 200 foot game and very strong even strength scoring.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
How do you compare 0 SCs to 11 SCs or even 8 SCs Lemaire?
Beliveau, H.Richard and Backstrom owned Ullman when he played with Detroit and Howe. Lemaire did likewise when Ullman moved on to Toronto.
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
Are we talking Stanley Cups now instead of individual achievments? If so, my top 20 players are all Habs.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
Ullman has a really strong regular season resume, especially if you don't get caught up in hardware counting. His scoring touch at ES was very strong and he was also, like Richard, a strong 2 way player. But the big difference is postseason play. It's not that Ullman was poor there (I actually think he was above average) it's just hard to ignore 0 Cups and the fact that head to head, as C58 said, he got bested time and time again by the Habs. Plus Henri Richard was a very important cog in the 50's dynasty all the way through 1973. Yes, the Habs were the most talented teams on paper most years (I think Toronto by the 60's has bridged the gap considerably) but I can't look past at how long Richard played at a high level for Montreal and helped them win continually.
Ullman, I'd wager will end up being down in the 80's or so. Haven't got that far yet.
