Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 12

[Kyle McMahon]

It probably won't surprise too many people that Kennedy is an instant contender for my #1 spot in this round. A Messier-level playoff performer on a very dominant and underrated 1940s Toronto dynasty. I'll repost some of the info from the playoff project that relates to Kennedy.

Holdovers Brimsek and Conacher will be in my top 5 barring some great arguments for multiple newcomers.

I think Sprague Cleghorn deserves an in-depth look. I'm not sure where I rank him at this point.

I'm not high on Bathgate at all at this point. He really has that "bad team scorer" feel to him. Unlike Dionne, Bathgate did get an opportunity to play on stronger teams. His production dropped quickly and he was expansion draft fodder not long after leaving the Rangers. He'll have his defenders though, and I'm interested in what they have to say.

I guess I'm not shocked to see Pronger available this soon, but I really don't see why he would appear before Stevens, or even Chara. Had all the physical tools, but was only able to put it all together out on the ice in isolated bursts.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Happy to see Ted Kennedy make it.

Same with Cleghorn, Horton and Pronger, though I wish Stevens was there too.

Sad that Brimsek is the sole goalie.

 

[BenchBrawl]

It probably won't surprise too many people that Kennedy is an instant contender for my #1 spot in this round. A Messier-level playoff performer on a very dominant and underrated 1940s Toronto dynasty. I'll repost some of the info from the playoff project that relates to Kennedy.

Holdovers Brimsek and Conacher will be in my top 5 barring some great arguments for multiple newcomers.

I think Sprague Cleghorn deserves an in-depth look. I'm not sure where I rank him at this point.

I'm not high on Bathgate at all at this point. He really has that "bad team scorer" feel to him. Unlike Dionne, Bathgate did get an opportunity to play on stronger teams. His production dropped quickly and he was expansion draft fodder not long after leaving the Rangers. He'll have his defenders though, and I'm interested in what they have to say.

I guess I'm not shocked to see Pronger available this soon, but I really don't see why he would appear before Stevens, or even Chara. Had all the physical tools, but was only able to put it all together out on the ice in isolated bursts.

Same here

 

[Michael Farkas]

I've got a lot of time for Chris Pronger, actually. I give him a lot of credit for being able to transition into a new era in his 30's and not only not miss a beat...but he went on a run where everything he touched turned to absolute gold...

An average Edmonton Oilers team would have won a Cup with him had Roloson not been injured in game 1 of the SCF...which is a weird statement to ever make, but all they needed was above average goaltending to win that series...very next year, he goes to Anaheim - who is a good team, really good, nothing special in net, but they had all the right pieces and he was a big part of that...he averaged over 30 minutes per game in the 2006 and 2007 playoffs...talk about obscene.

Then a few years later, his first in Philadelphia, he makes Matt Carle - who is bad, in case you didn't remember because he fell out of the league - appear on a Norris ballot and drags a minor league goaltender (there's a pattern here too...Roloson journeyman, Giguere very average starter, Leighton sub-NHLer) to the Stanley Cup Final.

Then in the midst of a point per game start to his season, he's lost forever to injury...meanwhile, Philadelphia hardly makes the playoffs without him...they win one playoff series, that joke of an excuse for hockey in the 2012 ECQF, and never win again...

In Anaheim, in the five years after Pronger left, they hardly made the playoffs...they won just one playoff series in that span. Five years after he left Edmonton...they don't make the playoffs a single time. Five years after he left the Blues, they make the playoffs once - don't win a series.

Freakin' Hartford wasn't even allowed to stay in the league after he left them...

Ok...that one was maybe too far...but it seems like a lot of success follows Pronger around and a lot of smoldering corpses are left in his wake...

He might not have the accolades that Chara has accrued, but I see Pronger as clearly a better hockey player and I don't think it's all that close either...Stevens, I could probably buy being in this neighborhood, but not Chara...

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I've got a lot of time for Chris Pronger, actually. I give him a lot of credit for being able to transition into a new era in his 30's and not only not miss a beat...but he went on a run where everything he touched turned to absolute gold...

An average Edmonton Oilers team would have won a Cup with him had Roloson not been injured in game 1 of the SCF...which is a weird statement to ever make, but all they needed was above average goaltending to win that series...very next year, he goes to Anaheim - who is a good team, really good, nothing special in net, but they had all the right pieces and he was a big part of that...he averaged over 30 minutes per game in the 2006 and 2007 playoffs...talk about obscene.

Then a few years later, his first in Philadelphia, he makes Matt Carle - who is bad, in case you didn't remember because he fell out of the league - appear on a Norris ballot and drags a minor league goaltender (there's a pattern here too...Roloson journeyman, Giguere very average starter, Leighton sub-NHLer) to the Stanley Cup Final.

Then in the midst of a point per game start to his season, he's lost forever to injury...meanwhile, Philadelphia hardly makes the playoffs without him...they win one playoff series, that joke of an excuse for hockey in the 2012 ECQF, and never win again...

In Anaheim, in the five years after Pronger left, they hardly made the playoffs...they won just one playoff series in that span. Five years after he left Edmonton...they don't make the playoffs a single time. Five years after he left the Blues, they make the playoffs once - don't win a series.

Freakin' Hartford wasn't even allowed to stay in the league after he left them...

Ok...that one was maybe too far...but it seems like a lot of success follows Pronger around and a lot of smoldering corpses are left in his wake...

He might not have the accolades that Chara has accrued, but I see Pronger as clearly a better hockey player and I don't think it's all that close either...Stevens, I could probably buy being in this neighborhood, but not Chara...

A lot of Pronger's case seems to rest on before/after aspects of the teams he played for. And I think that's perfectly reasonable to an extent, but Pronger specifically seems to receive an (IMO) inordinate share of the credit in some cases.

You mention Philly hardly made the playoffs without him...yet they also hardly made the playoffs with him. In fact, his one full season there the Flyers had only 88 points, securing a playoff birth on game 82. They improved considerably the next season, despite him missing significant time. In 2011-12 where he barely played at all they finished with 103 points and easily made it.

Pronger missed practically all of 2002-03, but St. Louis comfortably made the playoffs with 99 points. He returned next season, but Al MacInnis didn't play. The Blues dropped to 91 points and made the playoffs by a very slim margin.

Anaheim dropped a whole two points in the standings in 2009-10 after he left compared to the year before.

If Pronger was so incredibly vital to the success of these teams, it needs to be explained why they were able to produce comparable or even better results when he was absent.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Well, there's 19 other guys on the team. I don't say that to be flip...if there was ever a 100% correlation of success vs. failure with a single player across five years and three teams, I haven't seen it...I don't think we can look for perfection, especially considering where we're at in the list...what I do see is a pretty dominant player on the ice, and subsequently, I notice that he ends up in a lot of big spots in an era he didn't grow up in...what one wants to make of that is, of course, up to them...

 

[MXD]

Sad that Brimsek is the sole goalie.

..Yup. Seriously, my actual Top-5 would be comprised of Charlie Conacher and four netminders. Maybe Tim Horton would snuck in if I actually had my coffee.

 

[seventieslord]

Four comparable, physical defencemen from four distinct eras without overlap.

I feel like this really favours Cleghorn. He was definitely the best of his era, while these other guys were definitely not. Do we downplay his era so much that they should rank ahead of him? At first glance, I see no reason to.

 

[MXD]

I feel like this really favours Cleghorn. He was definitely the best of his era, while these other guys were definitely not. Do we downplay his era so much that they should rank ahead of him? At first glance, I see no reason to.

I think the question -- and the answer -- would be that simple if we wouldn't have to consider Cleghorn's detrimentality.
*Is that a word* ?

 

[seventieslord]

There's a few things that make my ears perk up on Pronger.

His Hart season - probably the weakest Hart win since the Norris came around. Offensive stats tanked to a point that was the lowest Art Ross winner since expansion, and Hasek missed significant time, so it had to go to somebody. Lidstrom had better offensive stats, is a better defender, but Pronger had a super high +/- on the best team in the league.

Pronger is the one guy where if you take out his peak season, his resume looks like it's probably not even HHOF-worthy (forget top 100). His postseasons are kind of cut in two - pre-lockout he was a disappointment, and post-lockout he has a reputation as a stud (well-deserved, but a bit overvalued). His Norris record is pretty bad, he missed a lot of time, and when he was on the ice, he spent a lot of it in the penalty box.

Why is he here over say... Niedermayer or Chara?

Actually, the fact that we need there to not be a standout goalie or forward, in order for a defenseman to seriously challenge for the Hart, is a problem. Pronger was outstanding and a deserving Hart winner. The statistical record for that season is unassailable.

 

[The Macho King]

Actually, the fact that we need there to not be a standout goalie or forward, in order for a defenseman to seriously challenge for the Hart, is a problem. Pronger was outstanding and a deserving Hart winner. The statistical record for that season is unassailable.

Come on. Lidstrom outscored him by 11 points, and Lidstrom was Lidstrom defensively.

I am also the first guy to bring up how shitty the Hart is w/r/t defenseman. That season was a great year for a not-particularly notable Dmen year for a Dman to win it. Pronger's performance was not out of a normal distribution great season for a Dman, yet he won the first non-Orr Hart since the 30s. I'm not saying it wasn't a great season, I'm just saying a) I think Lidstrom had a better one, and b) it took Bure, Jagr, and Hasek missing significant games for a Dman to be considered.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

My recollection is that nobody was questioning Pronger's Hart season at the time; this seems to be a more recent phenomenon. He seemed like the obvious choice from about Christmas time onwards, and nobody was surprised that he won it. There's no way Lidstrom was winning the award on a team where Yzerman, Fedorov, and sometimes even Shanahan were generally considered just as important to their success. The Blues kind of came out of nowhere to win the President's Trophy, and Pronger was their top dog. Remember, unlike today, this was an era where being physical and dirty was still a positive attribute, especially in the West where you had guys like Chelios, Hatcher, and Foote running wild. I don't think he ever put together another full season at that level, but for one year, Pronger was MVP-level good.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I still don’t get why people have an issue with Pronger’s Hart season other than close votes (1990, 2000, 2002) seem to always attract the most claims of deserving/not deserving.

Team suffers major injuries to two top stars and somehow still wins the President’s Trophy while allowing just 165 goals (45 fewer than Detroit) even though Roman Turek isn’t even top-10 in save percentage. Maybe Jagr is better in 63 games, but I’m not sure what difference that makes. It was a great season that obviously checked all of the boxes - AND he was replicating it in 2000-01, so it wasn’t some fluke:

34-11-6 with Pronger and his 47 points in 51 games statline in 2001; 9-11-11 without him. More of the same in 2006-07 when Anaheim was 42-14-11 with Pronger (59 points in 66 games), and 6-6-3 without. These are injuries and potential Hart/Norris votes (he was a Christmas-time favorite both years before his teams lost 1st place in his absence) that are lost from being one of the more prolific shot blockers of a generation.

It’s easy to jump on his supposed inconsistencies when his teams didn’t necessarily put him in great positioning for monster plus-minus numbers that so often dictated a defenseman’s reputation. Take 2005-06 and 2008-09:

53 ESGA in 2005-06 and 64 ESGA in 2008-09 on 8th seeded teams. Norris winner Lidstrom has 59 ESGA in 2005-06 while Norris winner Chara has 61 ESGA in 2008-09. So how are they in the +20s when he’s a +2 and an even-0? They played for 2nd ranked offensive teams while Pronger’s ranked 13th and 14th respectively.

If his career was peppered with occasional high ESGA numbers, I’d buy that he was inconsistent, but he stopped having those after 1995-96. More than that, he was consistent enough that THN ranked him as a top-3 Defenseman every year from at least 1998-2008 (any one have the 2009 and 2010 yearbooks?) and top-10 at any position in 9 of those 11 seasons. That’s much closer to his actual reputation than 4 scattered All-Star selections - and I genuinely welcome someone to disagree.

Seriously, did anyone come out of 2005-06 thinking Pronger was better represented by his 7th place Norris finish than his #2 overall THN ranking?

And sure, he didn’t carve out a playoff legacy in the Western Conference pre-lockout. Tell me, who are these mythical non-COL/DAL/DET players who did? Because from 1996-2002, Pronger’s 2001 Blues were the only ones in 7 years to crack the Conference Final stranglehold. Everyone else had a ~75% chance of meeting Colorado, Dallas, or Detroit in Round 1 or a 100% chance of meeting them in Round 2. For seven years. Every star player in the West was handed a beating for SEVEN YEARS.

The Blues lost, what, one series in which they were favored? One in which Pronger scored 7 points in 7 games while Roman Turek established that the whole 165 GA in 82 games thing was not about him? Pronger’s teams knocked out more favorites than the other way around.

Yeah, he’s on-deck for his generation.

 

[sr edler]

@quoipourquoi I knew you would deliver at least one of these long post.

I'm not even a Pronger fan, but his Hart is fine. Bure allegedly scored half of his goals on empty netters. If he plays 82 games and scores 60+ goals and 100+ points, then yeah perhaps he could have given Pronger a run for his money but at least he beat Graves who only had 40 points with the Rangers.

 

[MXD]

I think the issue regarding Hart/Pronger is that, well, it was a great season; it just wasn't anything special compared to other great seasons from non-Bobby-Orr D-Men.

If Bourque had won the Hart the year he should've won it and if Karlsson would've won it in 16-17 or even 14-15 (TBH, I don't think he was better than McDavid in 16-17 or and he certainly wasn't better than Price in 14-15, but he probably should've fared much better than 5th and 9th), Pronger's Hart wouldn't raise that many eyebrows.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think the issue regarding Hart/Pronger is that, well, it was a great season; it just wasn't anything special compared to other great seasons from non-Bobby-Orr D-Men.

What would be a comparable season since Bobby Orr where a team rode mid-range goaltending to a 14-goal margin for the Jennings? From 1987-2004, one of Roy and Hasek and Brodeur and Belfour won the trophy every year except 1990 (Boston over Montreal by 2 goals), 1996 (Detroit with a heavy margin over New Jersey), and the 2000 Blues.

Bourque nearly won the Hart, and the Red Wings had half of the top-6 in Norris voting. Before that, we’re looking at Mark Howe being a Hart nominee for Philadelphia in 1986 and Rod Langway being a nominee for Washington in 1984.

The defensemen whose teams had those GA wins were rewarded for it in the time between Orr and Pronger.

 

[VanIslander]

Bathgate was a New York Ranger for 12 seasons before he even went to Toronto.

To judge him based on anything AFTER his time as a Leaf is unfair. If he retired after the Stanley Cup or if he continued should make no difference: trying to extend a long career should only count as bonus points of longevity (if production in the 15th+ season is significant).

 

[overpass]

Come on. Lidstrom outscored him by 11 points, and Lidstrom was Lidstrom defensively.

I am also the first guy to bring up how ****ty the Hart is w/r/t defenseman. That season was a great year for a not-particularly notable Dmen year for a Dman to win it. Pronger's performance was not out of a normal distribution great season for a Dman, yet he won the first non-Orr Hart since the 30s. I'm not saying it wasn't a great season, I'm just saying a) I think Lidstrom had a better one, and b) it took Bure, Jagr, and Hasek missing significant games for a Dman to be considered.

Pronger was better defensively than Lidstrom in the 1999-2000 season. Almost all the voters thought so and I would agree. Pronger was considered a Norris favourite and a Hart candidate all season for his defensive play and breakout passing leading the Blues to a huge season. Lidstrom was a strong #2 who had a Norris-worthy season that just didn’t measure up to Pronger’s season.

 

[ted2019]

Pronger might be my #1 here. LOVE Pronger and what he brought to the table.
Bathgate & Conacher should make it ( however, Conacher could be on the outside looking in)
Kennedy & Horton will battle it out for 4th & 5th
Cleghorn could shoe his way in somewhere, as could Brimsek.
Mahovlich will be last, with the rest in between.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Pronger might be my #1 here. LOVE Pronger and what he brought to the table.
Bathgate & Conacher should make it ( however, Conacher could be on the outside looking in)
Kennedy & Horton will battle it out for 4th & 5th
Cleghorn could shoe his way in somewhere, as could Brimsek.
Mahovlich will be last, with the rest in between.

Too rough on The Big M! One of my favorites as a kid.

He did win 6 Cups, was an all-star 9 times (first team 3 times). Usually 2nd to Bobby Hull.

 

[wetcoast]

Ugh... Pronger's overratedness continues.

In what way do you think that he is over rated?

Well he is the best playoff performer up this round and was excellent at his peak, although he had issues with consistency in the regular season in terms of being elite year in year out.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Too rough on The Big M! One of my favorites as a kid.

He did win 6 Cups, was an all-star 9 times (first team 3 times). Usually 2nd to Bobby Hull.

Lost goalscoring (retro) awards to Hull and Espo multiple times as well.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Chris Pronger's strength was defending the slot against a North/South offence.

2010 SC Finals against Chicago the wheels locked-up.

 

[wetcoast]

His Hart season - probably the weakest Hart win since the Norris came around. Offensive stats tanked to a point that was the lowest Art Ross winner since expansion, and Hasek missed significant time, so it had to go to somebody. Lidstrom had better offensive stats, is a better defender, but Pronger had a super high +/- on the best team in the league.

To the part in bold Ted Kennedy says a BIG HELLO.

I think he was worthy to be in the mix for the Hart but I wouldn't get too caught up in just his Hart season, there is a lot more meat on his resume than just the Hart season.

Pronger is the one guy where if you take out his peak season, his resume looks like it's probably not even HHOF-worthy (forget top 100).

Well let's take out that Hart season and this is how he stacks up in Norris voting

3,3,3,4,5,5, 7,8,10,10 Now let's compared to Tim Horton
2,2,3,3,4,4

And then let's remember that Pronger lost a season to the lockout between a 3rd and 7th place finish.

So is he really not HHOF worthy with that one Hart season taken out?

His postseasons are kind of cut in two - pre-lockout he was a disappointment, and post-lockout he has a reputation as a stud (well-deserved, but a bit overvalued).

His pre lockout postseasons weren't bad he played on the Blues, when Dallas, Colorado and Detroit were the big 3 in the west.

Pronger's level of play was actually pretty decent pre lockout and post lockout he was money.

His Norris record is pretty bad, he missed a lot of time, and when he was on the ice, he spent a lot of it in the penalty box.

See above for his Norris record and add back in that 1st Norris in his Hart year as well.

If Prongers Norris voting is bad what does that make Horton who gets all of his very late in age, perhaps indicating the level of competition for Norris isn't exactly the same for both players?

Why is he here over say... Niedermayer or Chara?

I think that Hart season is one reason and I expect that Niedermayer might come up, not sure about Chara.

 

[overpass]

Common link,both Cleghorn and Bathgate were dumped by teams.

Cleghorn by the pre dynasty Senators, Bathgate by the Leafs who won the 1967 SC while Bathgate spent time in the AHL, sent down by the non-playoff Wings.

As far as I can tell, Cleghorn’s leaving Ottawa was because the league transferred him to Hamilton in an effort to balance the league. Wikipedia doesn’t mention it but I think I remember reading something about a salary limit of which Ottawa was in violation. Cleghorn refused to report to Hamilton, so he ended up playing in Toronto and then getting traded to Montreal. I wouldn’t say he was discarded...Ottawa would have liked to keep him, and tried to do so, even though they had George Boucher, star of the 1920 Cup final, ready to step in on defence.

His departure from Montreal was ostensibly because Montreal was making their team an all-French squad. (Howie Morenz was billed as being of Swiss descent, which I suppose was close enough to French for Leo Dandurand’s scheme.) Maybe if Sprague hadn’t enraged Dandurand with his dirty play, they would have gone back to the Norman conquest to find a French ancestor for M. Cleghorn. In any case the papers all said Cleghorn was sold because the Canadiens were going French, and Boston paid them well to secure his services.

And of course Cleghorn left the Wanderers only because the team was disbanded after their arena burned down.