Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 10

[DannyGallivan]

2. He scored more playoff points than any other Hab during the 5-year dynasty.

Aided by a massive '57 where he scored 11 goals and 18 points in only 10 games. In fact, his playoffs in the few years before the dynasty were also great.

That's tempered somewhat by only 5 goals and 10 points in 26 playoff games following the dynasty.

Who were his linemates during the dynasty (Beliveau was his centre I assume) and after the dynasty before he became a blueshirt?

 

[MXD]

... I'd like the input of people that more well-informed than I am as to what exactly distinguishes Bernard Geoffrion from Patrick Kane.

EDIT : I'll be using Bernard, thank you very much.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Hart trophy shares

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th+	Total
Milt Schmidt	1	1		2	1		1	6
Syl Apps		3	2					5
Henri Richard				2		1	1	4
Ken Dryden		1		2				3
Peter Forsberg	1						1	2
Bernie Geoffrion	1						1	2
Charlie Conacher		1		1				2
Paul Coffey				2				2
Brad Park					2			2

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Nine of the candidates are listed here. The two who aren't are Tretiak (never played in the NHL) and Pilote (as far as I can tell, never got a single Hart vote). Apps' record looks excellent but, as I wrote last week, there's no way he would have been a finalist five times based on modern standards (he too much time during three of those seasons).

VsX - adjusted scoring

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	7YR	10YR
Charlie Conacher	121.3	120.9	100.0	96.0	95.0	75.0	65.1	52.3	52.3	46.8	96.2	82.5
Peter Forsberg	101.9	100.0	96.7	92.7	90.7	78.9	71.4	70.8	63.2	54.3	90.3	82.1
Bernie Geoffrion	105.6	101.4	88.8	88.5	87.3	79.5	78.3	70.4	70.2	63.9	89.9	83.4
Paul Coffey	104.1	97.9	89.6	82.9	81.3	80.9	79.8	77.4	64.2	62.0	88.1	82.0
Milt Schmidt	120.9	98.4	92.4	86.4	72.7	72.5	64.8	61.4	59.4	59.3	86.9	78.8
Henri Richard	112.7	91.3	90.1	78.6	78.2	75.6	70.1	67.9	62.7	61.4	85.2	78.9
Syl Apps	93.4	83.2	81.7	65.3	58.1	54.1	47.7	31.9	31.1	17.6	69.1	56.4
Brad Park	90.1	72.5	67.0	63.8	51.0	49.6	48.9	48.9	47.9	47.1	63.3	58.7
Pierre Pilote	74.3	71.1	67.9	56.3	50.0	46.2	44.6	44.0	42.3	38.9	58.6	53.5

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Not to repeat myself from last time, but there's a massive drop-off in Conacher's production after his 5th best season. Richard's production is based almost entirely on ES scoring; he received very little powerplay time for a player of his calibre. Pilote's score is unimpressive but, if we look at how he stacks up compared to just the defensemen in his era, his offense was on par with Red Kelly (mind you, that was against weaker competition).

Forsberg also suffers a big drop from year 5 to 6 (not as big as Conacher's mind you, but then again Conachers best seasons are far and away better than anyone else).

Thanks for putting these overviews up as always!

 

[DannyGallivan]

... I'd like the input of people that more well-informed than I am as to what exactly distinguishes Bernard Geoffrion from Patrick Kane.

Boom Boom is much older (and deceased).

Totally different styles. Boom-Boom distinguished himself better among the legends of the day. Kane also suffers from the stigma of still having the back half of his career to play. Plus, Boom-Boom had one more Art Ross than Kane (who likely won't get another one).

I actually had them 56th (Boom-Boom) and 74th (Kane) on my initial list of 120.

 

[pappyline]

It's probably that one (Schmidt's War Time Service) is probably more well-known than the other (Richard's lack of PP time).

Still, all the caveats should be mentioned. You shouldn't pick & choose.

 

[MXD]

Boom Boom is much older (and deceased).

Totally different styles. Boom-Boom distinguished himself better among the legends of the day. Kane also suffers from the stigma of still having the back half of his career to play.

He's also much more dead.

And yeah, I was referring to the difference as far as their output/achievements is concerned. Geoffrion was more biased towards goalscoring than Kane is.

 

[DannyGallivan]

He's also much more dead.

And yeah, I was referring to the difference as far as their output/achievements is concerned. Geoffrion was more biased towards goalscoring than Kane is.

I edited my post to add the fact that Geoffrion had one more scoring title than Kane, and that won't change.

 

[DannyGallivan]

He's also much more dead.

And yeah, I was referring to the difference as far as their output/achievements is concerned. Geoffrion was more biased towards goalscoring than Kane is.

Boom-Boom was also pretty chippy, from what I understand. He rearranged a players face with his stick because of a notorious temper early in his career.

(from Wikipedia): early in his playing career, he had a reputation for letting his temper get the best of him.[3] One such example occurred late in the second period of a Canadiens' 3–1 loss to the Rangers at Madison Square Gardenon December 20, 1953. With a two-handed swing, Geoffrion's stick made contact with the left side of Ron Murphy's face, resulting in a broken jaw and concussion. The injuries ended Murphy's season. Geoffrion was suspended for the remaining matches between the two teams in that campaign.[4]

 

[ImporterExporter]

Damn Forsberg looks pretty crispy with his playoff +/– resume. Only one season as a minus player and +50 overall. Sakic (while on the same team, which means disregarding 92–93) is +1. Fedorov in comparison was +38 with Detroit in a similar role. Malkin is + 10 with Pittsburgh.

+/- is largely useless without context.

First off, who was getting the tougher matchups during the postseason? Forsberg or Sakic? Feds or Yzerman? Malkin or Crosby?

Secondly we'd have to literally go back and look at each goal to get a good idea of who was/wasn't responsible for the goals scored for/against.

Sadly, Forsberg's biggest problem is his injury history. Some of that was on PF as his playing style was very hard on him (and others lol). His awards/numbers are less than others because of it. The Avs won in 2001 despite him missing the back half of the postseason. With that being said, he was an incredible two way player who generally played well above the mean in the postseason especially.

He's truly one of the great "what-if" players of all time. I think it's a round too early for him to get serious consideration. But he's an interesting discussion nevertheless.

 

[MXD]

Boom-Boom was also pretty chippy, from what I understand. He rearranged a players face with his stick because of a notorious temper early in his career.

(from Wikipedia): early in his playing career, he had a reputation for letting his temper get the best of him.[3] One such example occurred late in the second period of a Canadiens' 3–1 loss to the Rangers at Madison Square Gardenon December 20, 1953. With a two-handed swing, Geoffrion's stick made contact with the left side of Ron Murphy's face, resulting in a broken jaw and concussion. The injuries ended Murphy's season. Geoffrion was suspended for the remaining matches between the two teams in that campaign.[4]

I was aware of the Ron Murphy incident. The video was also posted a few times to this site. This board would explode should someone do the same in this day and age.

... But the underlined is very interesting. Was that frequent?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Bernie Geoffrion.

1.He was the NHL's top scorer (Art Ross ) the year just prior to the NHL's only 5-year dynasty.

2. He scored more playoff points than any other Hab during the 5-year dynasty.

3. He scored more than any other NHLer (Art Ross) AND won the Hart trophy the year just after the 5-year dynasty.

4. His 7-year peak is more comparable to guys we've inducted ages ago than guys this round.

5. Before the dynasty, he was twice 2nd in playoff points; during the dynasty he was 1st, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 7th (that 7th includes 4 non-Habs!) in playoff points; he surpassed Rocket Richard in career playoff scoring for a couple of years before Gordie took over.

geoffrion is really interesting to me. the way i think about him is, what if there was a third guy to sakic and forsberg? like, what if in 1995 they traded mike ricci and a first round pick for theo fleury? and what if fleury had gotten his life together and worked out spetacularly as a longterm fit?

so fleury isn't as good as sakic or forsberg, but at his very best he is reasonably close. he probably could have put up 120 points on the 1996 avs and as we know he certainly could get on a huge run and lead the league in scoring during the DPE, especially if he has sakic or forsberg as his center.

now if we're talking 1995 to 2001 fleury, he might "only" be battling it out for second, third, or even fourth best RW in the league every year, because that's the overlapping peaks of jagr, bure, and selanne. but he might also sneak through and win an art ross and perhaps a hart in a bum year like 2000, or maybe even 2002. and i think the thing we forget about fleury, because of how it all ended for him, is that he was extremely durable in the 90s. in the eleven seasons from 1990 to 2000, he missed fourteen total games (2nd most, two games behind damphousse); and eleven games over this imaginary '95 to 2001 stretch, which is 55 and 53 games more than sakic and forsberg, respectively. he might have had monster cumulative totals.

where would history remember a guy like that relative to the other two, in the context of a team that also has a goalie better than him and sometimes a norris candidate? would he be (seemingly) underrated like geoffrion often is?

otoh, the question always is does geoffrion score more or less if he and andy bathgate changed places? in this thought experiment, calgary fleury scores less than if you paired him with a top center, which the small sample size of 1999 corresponds with. geoffrion played on the RW of a top five player all time, and sometimes with a third art ross winger on the opposite wing.

 

[DannyGallivan]

I was aware of the Ron Murphy incident. The video was also posted a few times to this site. This board would explode should someone do the same in this day and age.

... But the underlined is very interesting. Was that frequent?

He was in the Lady Byng race later in his career, for what it's worth.

On a slightly related note... I as at the Manitoba Museum this weekend looking at their hockey exhibit. They had so many great things there, including old sticks. I marveled at just how wide and thick the shaft on Stan Mikita's stick was. As dangerous as the sticks they used now are, they are twigs compared to the oaks the players used then. Geoffrion and Murphy are so lucky Murphy didn't die.

 

[DannyGallivan]

I was aware of the Ron Murphy incident. The video was also posted a few times to this site. This board would explode should someone do the same in this day and age.

... But the underlined is very interesting. Was that frequent?

 

[sr edler]

The Avs won in 2001 despite him missing the back half of the postseason.

COL hardly moves past LAK that year without Forsberg. LAK was in cinderella mode that year and had already upset DET the previous round. Sakic had 2 points in 5 games that series and was –2. Forsberg had 8 points and drove the offense flanked by Tanguay/Hejduk. It's not like he was Gary Suter in 89.

 

[Matsun]

Surprised not to see Malkin yet. I think him and Geoffrion are close. Both guys were not the primary focus of the other team and both were powerplay triggermen with great playoff records, leading the playoffs in points twice. Both guys were injured a lot but produced when fit. Top 10 PPG finishes:
Malkin: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 7, 8
Geoffrion: 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10
Same amount of top 10 finishes. Geoffrion has more top 2 finishes, Malkin has more top 3, top 4, etc.
Top 10 Scoring finishes:
Malkin: 1, 1, 2, 4
Geoffrion: 1, 4, 6, 6, 7, 7
Both guys had years where they obviously would have finished higher (Malkin was 15th in scoring in 13-14, but second in PPG by a good margin to Getzlaf in third, Geoffrion was 5th in PPG in 57-58 by a big margin but only played 42 games etc)
Hart voting:
Malkin: 1, 2, 2, 7
Geoffrion: 7
Both guys lost votes to teammates, Geoffrion more so than Malkin (I mean not even top 5 when winning the Art ross in 54-55, finishing behind 3 teammates is a bit harsh).

Geoffrion has a clear edge in goals, but Malkin is no scrub and has some strong finishes here too. Who ever is over the other is not that important to me, I don't think these players should be far from each other in the ranking.

 

[MXD]

Surprised not to see Malkin yet. I think him and Geoffrion are close. Both guys were not the primary focus of the other team and both were powerplay triggermen with great playoff records, leading the playoffs in points twice. Both guys were injured a lot but produced when fit. Top 10 PPG finishes:
Malkin: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 7, 8
Geoffrion: 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10
Same amount of top 10 finishes. Geoffrion has more top 2 finishes, Malkin has more top 3, top 4, etc.
Top 10 Scoring finishes:
Malkin: 1, 1, 2, 4
Geoffrion: 1, 4, 6, 6, 7, 7
Both guys had years where they obviously would have finished higher (Malkin was 15th in scoring in 13-14, but second in PPG by a good margin to Getzlaf in third, Geoffrion was 5th in PPG in 57-58 by a big margin but only played 42 games etc)
Hart voting:
Malkin: 1, 2, 2, 7
Geoffrion: 7
Both guys lost votes to teammates, Geoffrion more so than Malkin (I mean not even top 5 when winning the Art ross in 54-55, finishing behind 3 teammates is a bit harsh).

Geoffrion has a clear edge in goals, but Malkin is no scrub and has some strong finishes here too. Who ever is over the other is not that important to me, I don't think these players should be far from each other in the ranking.

...That's pretty accurate, if anything. Both players are also best described as non-factors without the puck : we have very good reasons to believe they aren't any better than their numbers suggest.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Surprised not to see Malkin yet. I think him and Geoffrion are close. Both guys were not the primary focus of the other team and both were powerplay triggermen with great playoff records, leading the playoffs in points twice. Both guys were injured a lot but produced when fit. Top 10 PPG finishes:
Malkin: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 7, 8
Geoffrion: 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10
Same amount of top 10 finishes. Geoffrion has more top 2 finishes, Malkin has more top 3, top 4, etc.
Top 10 Scoring finishes:
Malkin: 1, 1, 2, 4
Geoffrion: 1, 4, 6, 6, 7, 7
Both guys had years where they obviously would have finished higher (Malkin was 15th in scoring in 13-14, but second in PPG by a good margin to Getzlaf in third, Geoffrion was 5th in PPG in 57-58 by a big margin but only played 42 games etc)
Hart voting:
Malkin: 1, 2, 2, 7
Geoffrion: 7
Both guys lost votes to teammates, Geoffrion more so than Malkin (I mean not even top 5 when winning the Art ross in 54-55, finishing behind 3 teammates is a bit harsh).

Geoffrion has a clear edge in goals, but Malkin is no scrub and has some strong finishes here too. Who ever is over the other is not that important to me, I don't think these players should be far from each other in the ranking.

I had Malkin 41st on my original list of 120. I had Boom-Boom 56th.

 

[The Macho King]

I was aware of the Ron Murphy incident. The video was also posted a few times to this site. This board would explode should someone do the same in this day and age.

... But the underlined is very interesting. Was that frequent?

I think that type of punishment is much more viable with 5 other teams than with 30, but it's interesting to say the least.

 

[MXD]

I think that type of punishment is much more viable with 5 other teams than with 30, but it's interesting to say the least.

Apparently, Geoffrion got away with 8 games. That would make the length of suspension reasonable, considering it was 1953 and that Murphy was indeed sent to the WHL by the Rangers for instigating the whole thing.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Essentially, Schmidt sacrificed likely his three most potentially productive years to serve his country. He would likely already have been voted into our list if that didn't happen.

However, shortened careers (regardless of circumstance) robbed Orr of number one in this list, Bossy of a higher placement, Lindros of a higher placement, Neely of any placement (I'm guessing here), etc.

You don't have to guess. Neely was listed by no-one.

Schmidt is the class of the new arrivals. I just happen to think that the previous Round holdovers are just a little too strong.

It'll take one helluva revelatory dissertation for me to recommend field-promoting anybody this Round. From where I sit on Day One- if anybody has a shot, it's Schmidt.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

... I'd like the input of people that more well-informed than I am as to what exactly distinguishes Bernard Geoffrion from Patrick Kane.

EDIT : I'll be using Bernard, thank you very much.

Yeah, I (too) know it's naughty to bring up un-nominated players... but I struggle to find Geoffrion's advantages over Iggy [ithnoc].

 

[Nick Hansen]

I think Forsberg looks just right here...I think some of the Hart voting of the past is a bit sketchy at times (and even today, it seems to go through routes of positions getting extra credit depending on era...King Clancy wouldn't have had the same record later on for instance...) and he did go up against his own teammate Joe Sakic, Hasek and Jagr, who are all above him on this list. His Hart voting is a bit disappointing but consider his Selke voting as well as him playing on a great team with goddamn Sakic behind or in front of him any which way you see it. He was very well-regarded as an all-around force. AS-voting has been put forward as well...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think Forsberg looks just right here...I think some of the Hart voting of the past is a bit sketchy at times (and even today, it seems to go through routes of positions getting extra credit depending on era...King Clancy wouldn't have had the same record later on for instance...) and he did go up against his own teammate Joe Sakic, Hasek and Jagr, who are all above him on this list. His Hart voting is a bit disappointing but consider his Selke voting as well as him playing on a great team with goddamn Sakic behind or in front of him any which way you see it. He was very well-regarded as an all-around force. AS-voting has been put forward as well...

Agree.

Forsberg could do it all (at top speed), in all 3 zones. Best player in this bunch, only shortened career holding him back.

 

[ted2019]

My very early take:
1 & 2. Syl Apps Sr & Brad Park
3/4/5. Milt Schmidt, Paul Coffey , Henri Richard
6/7/8. Peter Forsberg , Bernie Geofrion , Vladislav Tretiak
9/10/ Ken Dryden, Pierre Pilote

My 1st 2 choices most likely won't change.
Schmidt is a favorite of mine, but not sure if he can be Coffey's offense & Richard's strong 2 way play.
Forsberg & Geoffrion will most likely be fighting it out for 6th & 7th, with Tretiak 8th
Dryden is a product of his team & Pilote I have change my mind on and think that It's a bit early for him.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Agree.

Forsberg could do it all (at top speed), in all 3 zones. Best player in this bunch, only shortened career holding him back.

Easily the best playoff performer along with Henri Richard. Ken Dryden a close third.