Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 11

[MXD]

†Edit- progress-report from inside the weeds: OMG/ITHNOC those late-30s Blackhawks teams have NO front-line scoring- I mean next to no offense whatsoever. I'd like to see Pierre Pilote try to lead Defensemen in scoring passing to that collection of s. I don't think anybody this side of Orr would've had a chance of making scorers out of those dudes. What a stench.

Paul Thompson? Johnny Gottselig?

If you meant that it was absolutely awful after them, you're right.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

For a non-expansion, non-tank-command team, their collective forward scoring offense emanated putrescence on an historically-significant level.

QFT Addendum:

Guidelines: Stay on topic and don't get caught up in talking about non-eligible players

Can we please stop jaying about un-nominated players a little bit?!

 

[MXD]

So seriously... How did Seibert of all players become a candidate before the obviously superior Cleghorn?

Did someone make a passionate case for Seibert in the preliminary thread? I'll admit that I did a **** job of following the preliminary thread.

Actually, all it takes is one or two people ranking one really high, one or two ranking the other very low, and... boom.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

So seriously... How did Seibert of all players become a candidate before the obviously superior Cleghorn?

Modern bias? :p

 

[MXD]

For a non-expansion, non-tank-command team, their collective forward scoring offense emanated putrescence on an historically-significant level.

I've seen somewhere (someone did the math here, I think) there was a 5-year stretch over which Thompson was the NHL's best scorer. That would pretty much preclude Chicago from being such a thing.

Frankly, the argument about the Hawks offense ... is probably better kept to bolster Charlie Gardiner's case honestly.

 

[Batis]

Here are the best-on-best international tournaments numbers of the new available players. Again with a focus on the knockout stage but also taking the overall numbers into account.

Malkin
Olympics 2006: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2010: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Olympics 2014: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
World Cup 2016: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 6 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 20 gp, 7 g, 11 a, 18 pts

Dionne
Canada Cup 1976: 2 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Canada Cup 1981: 2 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 4 gp, 1 g, 2 a, 3 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 13 gp, 5 g, 6 a, 11 pts

I would say that Malkins overall best-on-best numbers are strong. His scoring at the knockout stage is at least somewhat underwhelming though and because of that I don't think that Malkins best-on-best resume quite measures up to that of Tretiak or Forsberg.

Dionnes numbers both overall and at the knockout stage are rather average for a player of his quality when taking into account that he played in a very high scoring era and I would probably rank his best-on-best resume last of the available players.

Tretiak
Forsberg
Malkin
Dionne

Tretiak
Summit Series 1972: 8 gp, 236 saves on 267 shots, 0.883
Canada Cup 1981: 2 gp, 52 saves on 54 shots, 0.963
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 10 gp, 288 saves on 321 shots, 0.897
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 19 gp, 524 saves on 577 shots, 0.908

Forsberg
World Cup 1996: 1 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 1998: 1 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
World Cup 2004: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Olympics 2006: 3 gp, 0 g, 4 a, 4 pts
Olympics 2010: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 7 gp, 1 g, 6 a, 7 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 22 gp, 3 g, 18 a, 21 pts

 

[ted2019]

Where’s everyone on Vladislav Tretiak vs. Peter Forsberg? I feel pretty good on them being on-deck in terms of their own position (though TDMM makes a compelling case for Brimsek), but head-to-head, they haven’t really been compared. I like the two primes argument that was made for Tretiak in an earlier round.

I think that they are both relatively even at this point. I would have no complaints if Tretiak goes before Forsberg or vice-versa.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

I've seen somewhere (someone did the math here, I think) there was a 5-year stretch over which Thompson was the NHL's best scorer.

This passes the fact-check (for the period 1933-34 to 1937-38), but isn't inimical to my point.*

Over the three-year stretch 1936-37 to 1938-39, Chicago's team Goals For average was less than two. Chicago was last in Goals For all 3 seasons. The Goals For average for the rest of the league as a whole (who also played all three seasons- Maroons folded in that span) was 2.61.

Nearly ⅔s of a goal less than remainder-of-league average, for a 3-year span- during a time when 2.6 was ordinary; is a KreistAwful total.

*to lead the league in scoring over a pre-selected 5-year span, without ever leading the league in Goals, OR Assists, kind of puts Paul Thompson snugly into the Claude Giroux receptacle, where it feels like he probably belongs...

 

[DannyGallivan]

Here are the best-on-best international tournaments numbers of the new available players. Again with a focus on the knockout stage but also taking the overall numbers into account.

Malkin
Olympics 2006: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
Olympics 2010: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Olympics 2014: 2 gp, 0 g, 0 a, 0 pts
World Cup 2016: 1 gp, 0 g, 1 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 6 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 20 gp, 7 g, 11 a, 18 pts

Dionne
Canada Cup 1976: 2 gp, 0 g, 2 a, 2 pts
Canada Cup 1981: 2 gp, 1 g, 0 a, 1 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments knockout stage: 4 gp, 1 g, 2 a, 3 pts
Total at best-on-best tournaments overall: 13 gp, 5 g, 6 a, 11 pts

I would say that Malkins overall best-on-best numbers are strong. His scoring at the knockout stage is at least somewhat underwhelming though and because of that I don't think that Malkins best-on-best resume quite measures up to that of Tretiak or Forsberg.

Dionnes numbers both overall and at the knockout stage are rather average for a player of his quality when taking into account that he played in a very high scoring era and I would probably rank his best-on-best resume last of the available players.

Tretiak
Forsberg
Malkin
Dionne

Minor points when compared to overall career. Having said that, I have Malkin over Dionne. As of now, I have Dionne ahead of Forsberg and Tretiak.

 

[ted2019]

My current feelings.

• Bernie Geoffrion: Still a bit early for "Boom Boom" He might look a lot better next round.
• Charlie Conacher : Same as Geoffrion.
• Earl Seibert : Hard one to get a handle on. He faced some tough competition for the post season AS. A real steady defenseman, who also has a retro Conn Smythe in his resume. Also had a really nice sized peak.
• Evgeni Malkin : Malkin started out like gang busters, but then had a few peaks and valleys until current time. His lack of post season nominations scares me off a bit, but he has come up clutch for the most part in the playoffs.
• Frank Brimsek: Unless I see something different coming up, Brimsek should make my top 4.
• Marcel Dionne : Not yet, most likely next round.
• Milt Schmidt : "Uncle Milt" will be near the top for myself.
• Peter Forsberg: Top 5 for sure.
• Pierre Pilote: Might be left out in the cold again.
• Vladislav Tretiak : getting closer.

 

[DannyGallivan]

I'm probably the biggest Bobby Clarke & Eric Lindros fan on the HOH section, but I didn't vote Clarke high in this 1st round eligible, as there were better players available. Same with Lindros with the whole Forsberg debate when someone said that they had Lindros & Forsberg side by side. I said they were crazy and I had Lindros 55 spots lower then Forsberg.

"In Your Opinion"
Reminds me of why you never want the home town boy to ref your game... they often try too hard to look impartial.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Had a look at Pilote's first Norris. I got the vibe that Pilote nailed it down via the 'Hank Sauer>Stan Musial' method: voters eventually wearied of x-ing the 'Harvey' box and changed-it-up.

I don't see ANYTHING in the metrics to suggest that Pilote was superior to Harvey that year.

Also took note of Pilote's last Norris- a defensible selection-- but they could have given it to a few guys that year. Can't figure out how Horton didn't get any consideration that campaign, though.

In fairness, Pilote looked to be a credible candidate for the "won't-be-seeing-you-for-a-while" Norris that was given to Howell in 1966-67.

Alas, hockey is not baseball. You can't just throw a bunch of "metrics" and think that's where the answers are hidden. So much of hockey has to be seen. That's what makes this exercise so challenging/interesting/subjective. These guys were voted on by the eye-witnesses of the time. Either we assume the voters were wrong/crooked/biased, or we assume they knew a little more about what they were witnessing in real time than we do now 50 years after the fact.

 

[DannyGallivan]

My current feelings.

• Bernie Geoffrion: Still a bit early for "Boom Boom" He might look a lot better next round.
• Charlie Conacher : Same as Geoffrion.
• Earl Seibert : Hard one to get a handle on. He faced some tough competition for the post season AS. A real steady defenseman, who also has a retro Conn Smythe in his resume. Also had a really nice sized peak.
• Evgeni Malkin : Malkin started out like gang busters, but then had a few peaks and valleys until current time. His lack of post season nominations scares me off a bit, but he has come up clutch for the most part in the playoffs.
• Frank Brimsek: Unless I see something different coming up, Brimsek should make my top 4.
• Marcel Dionne : Not yet, most likely next round.
• Milt Schmidt : "Uncle Milt" will be near the top for myself.
• Peter Forsberg: Top 5 for sure.
• Pierre Pilote: Might be left out in the cold again.
• Vladislav Tretiak : getting closer.

Geoffrion: Has the resume, acheivements and high octane offense to be "knocking on the door" this round. May be the last cut for me.

Conacher: Same with Boom-Boom

Seibert: Too early in my opinion. Like others, I had Cleghorn about 25 spots ahead of Seibert in my original list of 120. However, I am researching him more vigorously before I send in my votes.

Malkin: Art Rosses, Hart, Conn Smythe, Ted Lindsay, Calder, Stanley Cups. What hasn't he won? Inconsistencies and penchant for giveaways aren't enough to exclude him from the top four for me.

Brimsek: I'm thinking that it's a round too early for him, but he's also my candidate for highest upward mobility on my list. We'll see.

Dionne: Unfairly bashed for being mired in L.A. for so many years. Massive offensive numbers, not enough opportunities in the playoffs. He may squeak in for me, at the expense of Geoffrion.

Schmidt: He's top three for me.

Forsberg: Great talent, but we've punished lack of longevity before. He'll get in soon, but I'm not sure that he'll crack my top four this time around.

Pilote: Three Norris Trophies? Eight consecutive all-star team berths? A retro Conn Smythe? Probably the best defenseman of the 1960's until Orr came around. What's a guy gotta do? He's in.

Tretiak: Played great against inferior opponents in Soviet league. Inconsistent. Overrated.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

The only way home to considering that Pilote was superior to Harvey in 1962-63 would be to say that he had an "intangibles" argument- because there's nothing in the "tangibles" that would steer us to that conclusion.

Pilote with an 'intangibles' argument over Harvey? That would be interesting...

Don't like my hypothesis of why Pilote got the nod? Offer another one, without resorting to the 'deference-to-authority' canard that "voters-of-the time-must-have-known-what-they-were-doing..." We've seen that in a few instances, they really didn't. Good luck.

 

[DannyGallivan]

The only way home to considering that Pilote was superior to Harvey in 1962-63 would be to say that he had an "intangibles" argument- because there's nothing in the "tangibles" that would steer us to that conclusion.

Pilote with an 'intangibles' argument over Harvey? That would be interesting...

Don't like my hypothesis of why Pilote got the nod? Offer another one, without resorting to the 'deference-to-authority' canard that "voters-of-the time-must-have-known-what-they-were-doing..." We've seen that in a few instances, they really didn't. Good luck.

That's the flip side of "I didn't see the hockey myself so I'll look at the numbers because stats never lie" nod. As my grand pappy used to say, "same poop, different pile" (he didn't say "poop", but whatever).

So hypothetically, Harvey gets that Norris, then Pilote picks up another one in '67. Six of one, half dozen of the other. The bottom line for me is that he should have been voted in a round earlier. This time he gets in... at least for me.

 

[overpass]

What does the panel make of the fact that Vladislav Tretiak’s star power and reputation in North America? He was very highly rated and popular among Montreal fans in particular. In fact, after their careers, I suspect a poll of Montrealers would have rated Tretiak above Ken Dryden.

La Presse (a Montreal newspaper) had a fan survey in 1987 for their centennial edition asking for their readers' favourite athletes of the past century. 1250 readers submitted 10 name ballots, which were scored using a 10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 system. Maurice Richard won going away, with baseball player Babe Ruth in second, Gordie Howe in third, and boxers Joe Louis and Muhammed Ali in fourth and fifth. Below are the results for the hockey players. Note that Tretiak received substantial support and was not far behind Jacques Plante, the only other goaltender to get votes.

1 Maurice Richard 6767
3 Gordie Howe 2745
6 Wayne Gretzky 2513
9 Guy Lafleur 1375
10 Jean Beliveau 1062
13 Howie Morenz 955
20 Jacques Plante 667
22 Bobby Orr 662
27 Vladislav Tretiak 502
36 Aurele Joliat 320
50 Mike Bossy 24

 

[DannyGallivan]

What does the panel make of the fact that Vladislav Tretiak’s star power and reputation in North America? He was very highly rated and popular among Montreal fans in particular. In fact, after their careers, I suspect a poll of Montrealers would have rated Tretiak above Ken Dryden.

La Presse (a Montreal newspaper) had a fan survey in 1987 for their centennial edition asking for their readers' favourite athletes of the past century. 1250 readers submitted 10 name ballots, which were scored using a 10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 system. Maurice Richard won going away, with baseball player Babe Ruth in second, Gordie Howe in third, and boxers Joe Louis and Muhammed Ali in fourth and fifth. Below are the results for the hockey players. Note that Tretiak received substantial support and was not far behind Jacques Plante, the only other goaltender to get votes.

1 Maurice Richard 6767
3 Gordie Howe 2745
6 Wayne Gretzky 2513
9 Guy Lafleur 1375
10 Jean Beliveau 1062
13 Howie Morenz 955
20 Jacques Plante 667
22 Bobby Orr 662
27 Vladislav Tretiak 502
36 Aurele Joliat 320
50 Mike Bossy 24

I saw Tretiak play about 20- 25 times. I recall him stealing just one game. It was the 3-3 1975 New Years Eve tie against the Montreal Canadiens. The Habs outclassed the Red Army in every imaginable facet of the game... except in goal. Dryden was absolutely horrible, letting in two soft goals and three in total on only 13 shots. Montreal had 38 shots on Tretiak, and should have scored about 8 goals. Without going too far off track here, that game has often been called the greatest game of all time - that's garbage. It was too one-sided to be called that. All three '87 Canada Cup final games were more riveting.

Anyways, I think Tretiak's rep in Montreal got a huge, huge boost from that game.

 

[Michael Farkas]

DG, don't you also not care much for Dryden either (relatively speaking?)...which, to be clear, I'm not doubting your opinion on...but, who were the best three (or whatever) goalies from say, 1970 to 1985 for you?

 

[overpass]

I saw Tretiak play about 20- 25 times. I recall him stealing just one game. It was the 3-3 1975 New Years Eve tie against the Montreal Canadiens. The Habs outclassed the Red Army in every imaginable facet of the game... except in goal. Dryden was absolutely horrible, letting in two soft goals and three in total on only 13 shots. Montreal had 38 shots on Tretiak, and should have scored about 8 goals. Without going too far off track here, that game has often been called the greatest game of all time - that's garbage. It was too one-sided to be called that. All three '87 Canada Cup final games were more riveting.

Anyways, I think Tretiak's rep in Montreal got a huge, huge boost from that game.

The 1981 Canada Cup final also took place in Montreal. Tretiak was brilliant in that game as well.

Even if Montreal fans tended to see Tretiak at his best, they’ve seen a lot of hockey and a lot of great players over the years and still rated him highly among the greats. Look at those poll results...the non-Montreal hockey players with substantial votes are Howe, Gretzky, Orr, and Tretiak.

 

[Canadiens1958]

What does the panel make of the fact that Vladislav Tretiak’s star power and reputation in North America? He was very highly rated and popular among Montreal fans in particular. In fact, after their careers, I suspect a poll of Montrealers would have rated Tretiak above Ken Dryden.

La Presse (a Montreal newspaper) had a fan survey in 1987 for their centennial edition asking for their readers' favourite athletes of the past century. 1250 readers submitted 10 name ballots, which were scored using a 10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 system. Maurice Richard won going away, with baseball player Babe Ruth in second, Gordie Howe in third, and boxers Joe Louis and Muhammed Ali in fourth and fifth. Below are the results for the hockey players. Note that Tretiak received substantial support and was not far behind Jacques Plante, the only other goaltender to get votes.

1 Maurice Richard 6767
3 Gordie Howe 2745
6 Wayne Gretzky 2513
9 Guy Lafleur 1375
10 Jean Beliveau 1062
13 Howie Morenz 955
20 Jacques Plante 667
22 Bobby Orr 662
27 Vladislav Tretiak 502
36 Aurele Joliat 320
50 Mike Bossy 24

Pockets. Montreal, Tretiak was extremely popular, less so provincially.

Suspect NA popularity varied. Low in Philly high Canadian west,in between elsewhere.

 

[DannyGallivan]

DG, don't you also not care much for Dryden either (relatively speaking?)...which, to be clear, I'm not doubting your opinion on...but, who were the best three (or whatever) goalies from say, 1970 to 1985 for you?

I was a Dryden fan because I was a huge Montreal fan, but as such I saw on a weekly basis (or more) than Kenny's main job was to make the first easy save (most nights), and lean on his stick for most of the period. So, it's not that he was bad... he was great. It's just that his legend was overblown.

I probably like Tony Esposito more than Dryden and I like Dryden slightly more than Tretiak. I would put all three among the better goalies of that 15 year period. For my money, the best goaltending we saw in that era was from Bernie Parent. However, his lack of longevity or "prime" works against him overall. I also thought that Rogie Vachon was incredible, considering how awful his defense was. This hurts his numbers and hardware, which prevents him from making this list. However, put him on the '70's Habs and his legacy would take a 180 degree turn. However, in my opinion, that was an era where the skaters' evolution outpaced the goalies and defense in general. Gilles Gilbert in Boston was hugely underrated... I thought he was better than Cheevers (and I thought Cheevers was a decent enough money goalie, but Billy Smith was far more awesome when he needed to be.). Gilles Meloche was another goalie who got the poop end of the stick when it came to teams. I would have loved to have seen him on a contender. Mike Liut was also great for a very brief moment in time. And let's not forget Pelle.

So, do I think Dryden and Tretiak belong somewhere on this list? Yes, they were both great goalies. This is just an example of pointing out that a great player is overrated doesn't mean that I think they sucked... it's just that I don't think their real-life play is on the same level as their myth.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The 1981 Canada Cup final also took place in Montreal. Tretiak was brilliant in that game as well.

Even if Montreal fans tended to see Tretiak at his best, they’ve seen a lot of hockey and a lot of great players over the years and still rated him highly among the greats.

Game #1, 1972 Summit Series was in Montreal as well.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Yet Vachon lost the #1 job to Ken Dryden.

 

[DannyGallivan]

The 1981 Canada Cup final also took place in Montreal. Tretiak was brilliant in that game as well.

Even if Montreal fans tended to see Tretiak at his best, they’ve seen a lot of hockey and a lot of great players over the years and still rated him highly among the greats. Look at those poll results...the non-Montreal hockey players with substantial votes are Howe, Gretzky, Orr, and Tretiak.

I remember that game more for huge defensive errors and a total mental surrender (think Canada only had three or four shots on goal in the third period).

 

[DannyGallivan]

Yet Vachon lost the #1 job to Ken Dryden.

It wouldn't be the first time a great goalie was let go.

Dryden's reputation hangs largely on his 1971 performance, where he was perforated by goals and yet won the Conn Smythe because Boston was supposed to sweep the playoffs, win the Stanley Cup and outscore every team by five goals per game. Frank Mahovlich's production was largely forgotten in those playoffs. With some exceptions, whenever Dryden face a lot of shots, he needed his team to win a goal-scoring sprint in order to win the game.

Montreal had both Vachon and Tony O. I think they never needed to worry about dominating the 70's. In fact, they may have one an additional Stanley Cup if they kept either of them over Dryden, since Wayne Thomas was a poor replacement in goal in '74 and Dryden was kinda rusty when he came back in '75.