Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 14

[Michael Farkas]

Can all that time really be weak?

Seems like everyone that wants to downplay a player goes to the weak era argument.

How'd Pierre Pilote get judged? Sure, 3 straight Norris Trophies, but weak era for defensemen. Stuff like that.

Maybe its just my imagination.

Only listen to those who know what they're talking about and who qualify their statements, that way you don't get confused...

 

[Theokritos]

What do you guys make of Andy Bathgate's performance when he finally got the opportunity to play for a top team in Toronto? Did he underperform? Does the system shock absolve him?

And what about Selänne's disappointing stints in San Jose and Colorado? Are injuries to blame?

 

[blogofmike]

Drastic scoring changes will help guide us...first thing that's lost when the talent depletes is well-rounded, quality players...so it's details and defense that go...

Scoring around WWI and about four seasons after balloons...then settles.
Scoring balloons in 1942 and '43...doesn't settle to around four seasons after the war...
Scoring takes another major jump in the mid-70's when everyone over-expands...takes another leap when the WHA joins the fray (to say nothing of WHA scoring in and of itself...sick league)...and scoring is obscene as disco dies...

Three of the weakest times in history by common sense and the eye test have the highest scoring...

You'll also notice more anomalies and weirdos appearing out of the wild, having just odd career years and other miscellany...

Early 1980's saw American high school students just waltzing right into the NHL and winning awards and what not...when Americans were an afterthought in the league...
1944: 19 junior-aged players played 10+ games in the NHL (17-20) [in all 23 teenagers played in the NHL this season]. In 1955, there was just 2...and they were both 20. 1960, 2 junior-aged players played in the league...one of them was 19 year old Stan Mikita.

In 1981, 18 teenaged players played 10+ games in the NHL. By 1987, it was down to 12. By 1991, following possibly the strongest draft class in history, it was down to 10 (2 of which are HOFers).

You get weird awards, weird anomaly seasons, weird...stuff...not surprising that the only two 3-0 comebacks in the first, what, 70 years of seven-game series happen in 1942 and 1975, respectively...that's not to say that odd stuff can't happen sporadically in other seasons...but when the game gets off the rails, or sudden rule changes occur, weird stuff tends to accumulate and hover in those areas...

No offside? Cooney Weiland (who?) scores 17,000 goals by December. No touching/power play league? Jonathan Cheechoo (who?) wins the goal scoring crown. These oddities tend to congregate in weaker times a lot more than they do when the league is well-fueled and orchestrated...follow the breadcrumbs...

I still take issue with the 80s being weaker than the 70s.

Yes, Americans emerged as a new stream of talent. Assuming the Calder doesn't count, the only young award winner from the USA I can think of would be Tom Barrasso, who was very good for a very long time. He was one of many NEW talents who succeeded for a long time. NEW talent was setting records. It wasn't like the 1967 expansion where all the old guys were resurgent, setting new personal bests by feasting off of the overmatched new guys. New guys were outproducing older 70s stars. 1980 saw 4 WHA guys in the Top 10 in scoring (or Top 11, as 10th was a tie) and that's surely different from 1968, where Eddie Joyal at #20 was your top scorer amongst the non-incumbent talent.

Know what most stars in 1981-82 have in common? Many are still productive 5 years later in 1986-87.

Know what most stars in 1976-77 have in common? Most are not by 1981-82.

Every era is influenced by the circumstances. Low scoring doesn't equate to great talent. The post-Lindros 90s saw big guys who had little else beyond their size start radically change the NHL, leading to the DPE garage league Mario Lemieux complained about, where off-puck obstruction became acceptable defense, and Radek Bonk was the #1 centre for a Presidents Trophy winning team despite his best defensive skill being hooking guys who would have otherwise skated by him for a breakaway.

 

[blogofmike]

What do you guys make of Andy Bathgate's performance when he finally got the opportunity to play for a top team in Toronto? Did he underperform? Does the system shock absolve him?

And what about Selänne's disappointing stints in San Jose and Colorado? Are injuries to blame?

For Selanne, I'd say yes. He bounced back quite nicely post-lockout.

For Bathgate, he was reasonably productive as a Leaf in year 1 and beat Sawchuk for the Cup-winning goal on a Game 7 breakaway. He was pretty much done as an impact player after that though (Chicago's awful PK brought him back for a brief time in the 1966 semis). He had lingering knee issues in general and had a broken thumb in year 2 in Toronto.

 

[blogofmike]

That game was a Stanley Cup final in 1947 when the Leafs completely outplayed the Canadiens after Buddy O’Connor had put Canadiens ahead in the first minute of play. Toronto finally tied it and in overtime Gus Bodnar scored for the Leafs from a face-off after Durnan had played one of the greatest games in playoff history. Official tabulation showed that he’d stopped seventy-two shots, against a mere twenty-one by Broda.

Yikes. That year was also the 3rd time Durnan led the playoffs in GAA. Durnan and Broda both allowed 13 GA in the Finals.

I am probably higher on Durnan than most. Looking at team GA, Montreal falls from the dominant defensive team under Durnan to an average one. Gerry McNeil was credited with having a great showing whilst being shelled against the 51 Red Wings, which allowed Montreal to survive the round. This suggests that the Canadiens didn't have the smothering defense they might have had later, and their goaltending was a key part of GA prevention.

In Durnan's later years, the Habs weren't great at offense, finishing 5th, 6th, 4th an 5th in GF in Durnan's last 4 years. He also had bad luck with Rocket Richard having poor playoff years in Durnan's last 2 years.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I have Dickie Moore's team splits - it's actually quite interesting comparing him to Geoffrion because his are much more evenly split.

				Total
	Games	Goals	Assists	Points	+/-	Shots
BOS	131	45	57	102	25	151
CHI	131	51	67	118	10	130
DET	128	50	61	111	6	111
MTL	0	0	0	0	0	0
NYR	132	53	66	119	17	172
TOR	132	55	88	143	18	112
	654	254	339	593	76	676
		0.388	0.518	0.907		1.034

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

BOS		0.344	0.435	0.779
CHI		0.389	0.511	0.901
DET		0.391	0.477	0.867
MTL
NYR		0.402	0.500	0.902
TOR		0.417	0.667	1.083

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

For comparison's sake, here's Geoffrion's stats as a Hab:

TOT		0.484	0.507	0.991
		GPG	APG	PPG
BOS		0.472	0.535	1.006
CHI		0.510	0.536	1.046
DET		0.372	0.448	0.821
MTL
NYR		0.654	0.582	1.235
TOR		0.410	0.429	0.840

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

If there's interest, I do have a team split of all the relevant Canadians for that 54-55 to 59-60 era, except for Henri Richard and Bert Olmstead. So Beliveau, M. Richard, Moore, Geoffrion (and Harvey). Without providing all the numbers, Beliveau beat up everybody but especially Chicago, Maurice Richard beat up Chicago, Bernie Geoffrion beat up the Rangers, and Dickie Moore saved his best for Toronto. Doug Harvey averaged more assists per game against New York than he did points per game on any other team. Now you probably know match-ups better and the various reasons why those point totals spiked where they did, but it still is instructive looking at the results for each player.

Also, I've gotten my yearly templates back to the inception of the NHL complete, so I should be able to knock out most all the old players in one go, especially because it's just goals and assists, and tiny season sizes. It takes much longer to track +/- and shots than to just add up points. I'm also down to just a few players left from the top 50 that I want to finish their splits - H. Richard, Esposito, Lindsay and Schmidt.

Also also, I have a comparison/partial argument with Mahovlich and a modern winger (who was on a list of preliminary nominees but I don't know if he will come up for a vote). I know comparing players to players not eligible for voting in that round is frowned upon, but I don't know if that applies to players who might not get a chance to be voted on with Mahovlich.

Only showing the offensive side though. Easily applicable to defensive hockey.

 

[blogofmike]

NHL Playoff Leaders in PP Points

	GP	PP Pts	PPPPG
Wayne Gretzky	208	125	0.601
Nicklas Lidstrom	263	111	0.422
Al MacInnis	177	97	0.548
Mark Messier	236	92	0.390
Ray Bourque	214	89	0.416
Paul Coffey	194	87	0.448
Denis Potvin	185	80	0.432
Joe Sakic	172	80	0.465
Mario Lemieux	107	78	0.729
Mike Bossy	129	76	0.589
Steve Yzerman	196	76	0.388
Evgeni Malkin	158	75	0.475

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

PP usage and PPO will vary, but MacInnis was very productive as a playoff performer. His Conn Smythe run saw him produce 23 PP points, more than any non-Gretzky player scored in a single playoff year.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I still take issue with the 80s being weaker than the 70s.

Yes, Americans emerged as a new stream of talent. Assuming the Calder doesn't count, the only young award winner from the USA I can think of would be Tom Barrasso, who was very good for a very long time. He was one of many NEW talents who succeeded for a long time. NEW talent was setting records. It wasn't like the 1967 expansion where all the old guys were resurgent, setting new personal bests by feasting off of the overmatched new guys. New guys were outproducing older 70s stars. 1980 saw 4 WHA guys in the Top 10 in scoring (or Top 11, as 10th was a tie) and that's surely different from 1968, where Eddie Joyal at #20 was your top scorer amongst the non-incumbent talent.

Know what most stars in 1981-82 have in common? Many are still productive 5 years later in 1986-87.

Know what most stars in 1976-77 have in common? Most are not by 1981-82.

Every era is influenced by the circumstances. Low scoring doesn't equate to great talent. The post-Lindros 90s saw big guys who had little else beyond their size start radically change the NHL, leading to the DPE garage league Mario Lemieux complained about, where off-puck obstruction became acceptable defense, and Radek Bonk was the #1 centre for a Presidents Trophy winning team despite his best defensive skill being hooking guys who would have otherwise skated by him for a breakaway.

Barrasso's peak was centered almost entirely in his teenage years in a weaker league...very uncommon for a goalie to have his best seasons pre-22 years old, but here we are...we highlight (the same) oddity in an odd time...

We already quantified the amount of players that were able to hang on because of the early 80's but, yet, later birthdays (with seemingly, the advantage) were unable to hold on past the mid 1980's...this was displayed on a macro level with NHL regulars. If you have actual evidence to the contrary on such a level, we'd like to see it.

The last paragraph will need more meat to it to be considered. High scoring follows around weakness...as already displayed, plus WHA (seen at the junior level in the 90's and 00's...QMJHL was the highest scoring league, etc.)...there was a high concentration of talent in the NHL in the 1990's, there was also much less expansion in the time that you're suggesting, so the league was pretty well settled...you note some circumstances that affected scoring certainly (style of play), but what you ultimately end highlighting is how deep the league was with more complete players at this time, compared to the 1980's...and scoring, predictably, dips...

 

[Nick Hansen]

Just seems so wrong that Lemieux only managed to appear in 107 playoff games...

 

[blogofmike]

...but what you ultimately end highlighting is how deep the league was with more complete players at this time, compared to the 1980's...and scoring, predictably, dips...

That's what you get from Radek Bonk? The guy who was -31 on a team where no one else was worse than a -9? The guy who had the relatively lower bar of qualifying for Czech Republic Olympic team, but was never invited? Bonk was as complete a player as Dennis Maruk. They lacked completeness in different areas.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Nope, I didn't get anything out of the Radek Bonk comment, that's why I ignored it. It wasn't relevant. The parts I asked about were relevant and required backing...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Boy, I'm glad I'm not participating anymore! Too frustrating...

If you don't vote, it only hurts the players you are advocating for.

 

[BM67]

Dickie Moore is getting short changed here, being dismissed as a 2 year peak. He put up a point a game as a rookie in 52, while only Gordie Howe put up over a point a game. He also put up 1.21 Pts/GP in 61, a higher pace than his 1st Art Ross season. His 2nd Art Ross was the single season record for points in a season at the time.

He's one of 23 players to lead the NHL in RS points 2 or more times. He's one of 20 players to lead the NHL in playoff scoring 2 or more times. He's one of only 10 players on both lists. Only 8 of those 10 led the league in both goals and assists in both the RS and PO as Moore did, and he did that while being a complete 2-way 200 ft player.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Dit Clapper - Firsts and Onlys

First 20 year NHL career

First living member of the HHOF

Only active player ever inducted into the HHOF

Only post season all-star at forward and defense

Only player to win 3 Cups with the Bruins

 

[Hockey Outsider]

For anyone wondering, I have Joe Malone at 98 over 7 years, and 82 over 10 years. I have Denneny at 96 over 7 years, and 88 over 10 years. They both appear to be the premier offensive players of this round.

Were those scores adjusted to take into account the fact that Malone and Denneny played all/most of their career pre-consolidation? Denneny's score looks like pretty much what I calculated without taking that into account (ie a 2nd place finish in a split league isn't worth as much, since half of the players who could challenge him in the scoring race were in the Western or Pacific league).

 

[MXD]

Only post season all-star at forward and defense

Only player to win 3 Cups with the Bruins

The first statement is wrong. Neil Colville did that, too, at a tougher position (generally speaking) as a forward as well.
The second statement is relevant only if there's a premium to be a Bruin.

 

[sr edler]

Of course, the NHL playoffs aren't the only measure of how Selanne played during pressure games. He played a lot of international hockey in his career. Consider this: the NHL has sent players to the Olympics five times. Despite playing for a team that is never one of the top-three favorites, Selanne's teams have won four Olympic medals in those five tournaments. Individually, he was the tournament's leading scorer in 1998, the tournament's leading scorer in 2006, and the tournament's Most Valuable Player in 2014. That's three of the five tournaments where Selanne was a major star.

First you're saying Finland wasn't that good of a team, but then you forget to mention that Selänne co-led the Olympics in scoring both in 98 and 06, with his center linemate (S. Koivu). And in 14, when he got that MVP vote, he was outscored by his center linemate (Granlund). So in none of those three instances you mention did he separate himself points wise from his center linemate. On the plus side this shows he was a player who could gel nicely with a linemate in a dynamic duo, but it also shows he hardly carried all the work himself. Saku Koivu was an excellent open ice player and always seemed to put his game at a higher gear when representing Finland in international tourneys. He was a bit like Mats Sundin in that sense. Both Sundin and Koivu had their moments in the NHL too, but the beast level moments always seemed to come with a higher frequency representing their national teams as team captains.

People tend to brush off the 2014 selection as a parting-gift, but the circumstances weren't much different than how Joe Sakic won the MVP in 2002: like Sakic who was also not the leading scorer of the 2002 Olympics (trailing Sundin by 3 points), Selanne (trailing Kessel by 2 points) was the leading scorer of the playoff round (and in Selanne's case, he scored both of Finland's GWGs against Russia and the USA - goals that broke a tie in both games). And besides, if you're that against a player being named Most Valuable of a tournament that he wasn't the leading scorer of, remind yourself that Selanne already did that twice.

Q, come on. We're talking about a bronze game here. I saw that game and the intense/care level of the US team looked on par with bingo at a retirement home. Sweden in 14 wasn't a beast anymore with 8 HHOFers like in 2006. Why didn't Selänne score two goals in the semis instead? Because the opponent cared to check him.

So how did Selanne get the reputation?

As a weak playoff performer? I don't think any of us VAN fans has called Selänne a bad playoff performer. I just said I think he had an opportunistic game and also whined a little about him not being an all situations player. I think he was the second best winger in the game in the 90s though for volume scoring in the regular season (after Jagr). That is both a compliment and a slight.

 

[trentmccleary]

Selanne had an incredible career. One of the best goalscorers or offensive ever, whose production ranks as probably just shy of generational.
He's the all time leading scorer of Olympic hockey and had some Herculean efforts for a middling Finnish team.

But his history of production in the playoffs is consistently horrendous.

Here's a list of his contemporaries, sorted by career PPG in the postseason; with a breakdown by how they produced in every series they ever played in. There are also percentages calculating how often a player was 1.00 PPG or better and 0.60 PPG or worse. Selanne should have been up near Forsberg and Lindros based on what you'd expect from his regular season performances. Instead, he's in between Marleau and Arnott... along with playoff disappointments like Mogilny, Tkachuk and Naslund.

Player	Series	1.20+	1.00-1.19	.67-.86	.4-.6	0.40<	>1.00 %	<0.60 %	GP	G	Pts	GPG	PPG
Forsberg	27	12	7	4	1	3	0.70	0.15	151	64	171	0.42	1.13
Lindros	12	4	3	2	2	1	0.58	0.25	53	24	57	0.45	1.08
Zetterberg	24	4	7	5	5	3	0.46	0.33	137	57	120	0.42	0.88
Kariya	10	3	1	1	4	0	0.40	0.40	46	16	39	0.35	0.85
St.Louis	18	4	4	4	4	2	0.44	0.33	107	42	90	0.39	0.84
Iginla	14	2	3	6	2	1	0.36	0.21	81	37	68	0.46	0.84
Modano	32	3	8	14	3	4	0.34	0.22	176	58	146	0.33	0.83
Alfredsson	24	6	5	6	3	4	0.46	0.29	124	51	100	0.41	0.81
Elias	29	3	7	9	3	7	0.34	0.34	162	45	125	0.28	0.77
Thornton	28	4	6	7	8	3	0.36	0.39	160	27	123	0.17	0.77
Lecavalier	13	2	2	4	2	3	0.31	0.38	75	26	56	0.35	0.75
Kovalev	22	3	6	4	6	3	0.41	0.41	123	45	100	0.28	0.77
H.Sedin	18	2	5	4	4	3	0.39	0.39	105	23	78	0.22	0.74
Hossa	37	5	6	10	10	6	0.30	0.43	205	52	149	0.25	0.73
Datsyuk	29	3	7	6	7	6	0.34	0.45	157	42	113	0.27	0.72
B.Richards	25	3	5	6	4	7	0.32	0.44	146	37	105	0.25	0.72
D.Sedin	18	3	2	5	6	2	0.28	0.44	102	25	71	0.25	0.70
Naslund	8	1	2	0	3	2	0.38	0.63	52	14	36	0.25	0.70
Mogilny	21	2	5	5	2	6	0.33	0.38	124	39	86	0.31	0.69
Marleau	31	5	4	7	5	7	0.29	0.39	177	68	120	0.38	0.68
Selanne	23	0	6	5	9	3	0.26	0.52	130	44	88	0.34	0.68
Tkachuk	16	1	2	5	6	2	0.19	0.50	89	28	56	0.31	0.63
Arnott	23	0	3	6	7	7	0.13	0.61	122	32	73	0.26	0.60
Doan	11	1	0	4	2	4	0.09	0.55	55	15	28	0.27	0.51
Whitney	19	0	1	5	4	9	0.05	0.68	108	21	53	0.19	0.49

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Was this because he played most playoff games outside of his prime? No, not really.
This table groups regular seasons by similar PPG averages (RS PPG) and compares to his playoff PPG in those seasons.

# Seasons	RS PPG	GP	G	A	Pts	PPG	PPG Diff.	PPG %
3	1.47	21	13	7	20	0.95	-0.52	65%
3	1.13	43	17	19	36	0.84	-0.29	74%
4	0.84	37	11	9	20	0.54	-0.3	64%
3	0.45	29	3	9	12	0.41	-0.04	91%
13	0.96	130	44	44	88	0.68	-0.28	71%

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

His elite seasons were precisely where we find the largest declines between his regular and postseason production. Conversely, it's his injury plagued or decline seasons where he shows the most similarity between the regular season and postseason at 91%.

Selanne had a phenomenal career; one that 99.9% of NHL'er could ever dream of. However, he was pretty bad in the playoffs. It is a real wart to consider on an otherwise spectacular career.

 

[MXD]

Dickie Moore is getting short changed here, being dismissed as a 2 year peak. He put up a point a game as a rookie in 52, while only Gordie Howe put up over a point a game. He also put up 1.21 Pts/GP in 61, a higher pace than his 1st Art Ross season. His 2nd Art Ross was the single season record for points in a season at the time.

He's one of 23 players to lead the NHL in RS points 2 or more times. He's one of 20 players to lead the NHL in playoff scoring 2 or more times. He's one of only 10 players on both lists. Only 8 of those 10 led the league in both goals and assists in both the RS and PO as Moore did, and he did that while being a complete 2-way 200 ft player.

Two other things that tend to get lost for Moore as well :

- He didn't get much PP time in his first seasons, especially, 54-55 and 55-56, so he's not quite on the same footing as most players being compared here.
- One of the reasons his career getting cut short is the fact he got injured in the off-season while working for his own construction company (I gotta find some more specific evidence for this, I know). Of course... injuries are injuries, he can't be credited for what he didn't do, blah blah blah... But the money wasn't the same back then, and I'm 99% certain that more recent players (Selanne, probably McInnis) were contractually prohibited from doing such a thing.

 

[seventieslord]

Were those scores adjusted to take into account the fact that Malone and Denneny played all/most of their career pre-consolidation? Denneny's score looks like pretty much what I calculated without taking that into account (ie a 2nd place finish in a split league isn't worth as much, since half of the players who could challenge him in the scoring race were in the Western or Pacific league).

Yes they were. In my sheet, one player gets over 100 each season, one gets 100. They could both be from the same league or from separate leagues, depends on the circumstances of that season.

 

[BM67]

Two other things that tend to get lost for Moore as well :

- He didn't get much PP time in his first seasons, especially, 54-55 and 55-56, so he's not quite on the same footing as most players being compared here.
- One of the reasons his career getting cut short is the fact he got injured in the off-season while working for his own construction company (I gotta find some more specific evidence for this, I know). Of course... injuries are injuries, he can't be credited for what he didn't do, blah blah blah... But the money wasn't the same back then, and I'm 99% certain that more recent players (Selanne, probably McInnis) were contractually prohibited from doing such a thing.

According to his spotlight, he retired because Montreal was going to trade him because of salary, and he could make more money running his company, and the injury came before his comeback with Toronto.

Legends of Hockey - Spotlight - One on One with Dickie Moore

 

[wetcoast]

Only listen to those who know what they're talking about and who qualify their statements, that way you don't get confused...

I think the key here is to look at the arguements and then evaluate the information.

For instance the 80s had 21 NHL team with a decent influx of good quality players from non traditional talent streams.

The 70s for the last 7 years had more than 30 professional North American teams so talent was spread out a lot more.

There probably was along more "talent" in the 80s NHL.

 

[Sentinel]

If you don't vote, it only hurts the players you are advocating for.

As I noticed, it doesn't make a difference.

 

[Sentinel]

Took your ball and went home.

Not my ball, but yes.

 

[wetcoast]

According to his spotlight, he retired because Montreal was going to trade him because of salary, and he could make more money running his company, and the injury came before his comeback with Toronto.

Legends of Hockey - Spotlight - One on One with Dickie Moore

This is interesting but is it anything we should consider in evaluating Moore?

I mean Dryden could have kept playing but had other interests certainly no one is giving him credit for something he hasn't done right?

The biggest problem with Moore is 2 fold.

1) even in his 2 Art Ross seasons he was 8th and 5th in Hart voting in a 6 team league.

2) outside of his 4 best seasons, the 2 Ross ones and the 2 following his next best ones really don't belong on a top 100 players of all time 5, 6 and 7th best seasons do they?