Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 15

[Michael Farkas]

Exactly what I needed. Thank you kindly.

 

[Batis]

Hockey Outsiders posts about the players Playoff R ON and R OFF made me wonder how Firsov who in his prime both was the greatest scorer in international hockey and an expert at keeping the opponents off the scoresheet would do in this regard. This already posted quote from VMBM suggests that Firsovs R ON/R OFF must have been incredibly impressive in at least the 1969 WHC and the 1972 Olympics.

According to a Finnish sports book, the Soviets did not allow a single goal when Firsov was on the ice at the 1969 World Championships (USSR allowed 23 goals in the tournament). And according to the same book, the Vikulov-Firsov-Kharlamov-Tsygankov-Ragulin unit allowed only 1 goal (and scored masses) at the 1972 Olympics, and Firsov had very much a defensive/playmaking kind of role in the tournament.

I mean look at those 1969 WHC numbers. Firsov led the tournament in scoring at the same time as he completely held the opponents off the scoresheet throughout the entire tournament. Although we can't know exactly how many even strenght goals Firsov was in on we know that he had 11 even strenght points which means that he at the very minimum went 11-0 at even strenght. This while the Soviet team let in 23 goals in total. 18 of those 23 goals were let in at even strenght according to the boxscores but still it is obvious that the Soviet team had far stronger numbers when Firsov was on the ice than when he was off the ice. Let us also remember that this was a Soviet team where the Kharlamov-Petrov-Mikhailov line was on the ice for a large part of the time when Firsov was off the ice at even strenght.

While that quote shows that Firsov had outstanding R ON/R OFF numbers at the 1969 WHC and the 1972 Olympics I also wanted to look at his R ON/R OFF in the available footage. As already mentioned my video study of Firsov showed that his ability to prevent the opponents from scoring very much was possible to see in the available footage considering that he in the approximately 11 available games (10 full games and 2 partial games) only was on the ice for 2 goals against in total (1 at even strenght and 1 while shorthanded). So it did not exactly come as a surprise to me that Firsovs R ON/R OFF numbers in those games were incredibly impressive.

Here are the numbers.

Total all games (11 gp):
R ON: 12.000 (12 g f, 1 g a) - R OFF: 1.917 (23 g f, 12 g a)

As you can see above the Soviets outscored their opponents with a 12:1 ratio at even strenght when Firsov was on the ice while they outscored the opponents with less than a 2:1 ratio when Firsov was off the ice. This is of course very impressive numbers from Firsov.

And it is also worth noting that Firsov did not create most of this gap compared to his teammates against the weaker opponents but rather against the stronger ones. As you can see in the post linked here below Czechoslovakia and Sweden were clearly the strongest opponents of the Soviets during the time frame of my video study (1964-1970) and this is Firsovs R ON/R OFF numbers against them. Round 2, Vote 6 (HOH Top Wingers)

Total versus top 2 opponents (6 gp):
R ON: 6.000 (6 g f, 1 g a) - R OFF: 0.800 (8 g f, 10 g a)

Considering that the Soviets were outscored with 8:10 at even strenght without Firsov on the ice against Czechoslovakia and Sweden it is in my opinion extremely impressive that they went 6:1 at even strenght when Firsov was on the ice. And again let us remember that the Kharlamov-Petrov-Mikhailov line was on the ice for a large part of the R OFF considering that 4 out of the 6 games were played at the 1969 and 1970 WHCs.

Since I have the penalty killing data available as well I can say that the Soviets did far better when Firsov was on the ice than when he was not in that part of the game as well. With Firsov on the ice the Soviets had 1:1 over those 11 games and 0:0 in the games against Czechoslovakia and Sweden. Without Firsov on the ice the numbers are 0:3 and 0:2 respectively.

Here is how Firsovs does in a combined even strenght and penalty killing R ON/R OFF stat.

Combined EVS and PK all games (11 gp):
R ON: 6.500 (13 g f, 2 g a) - R OFF: 1.533 (23 g f, 15 g a)

Combined EVS and PK versus top 2 opponents (6 gp):
R ON: 6.000 (6 g f, 1 g a) - R OFF: 0.667 (8 g f, 12 g a)

Here are the games and the data.

10 Full games
USSR-Canada 1964: R ON 0 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 2 gf*, 2 ga
USSR-Canada 1967: R ON 1 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 1 gf, 0 ga
USSR-CSSR 1967: R ON 2 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 2 gf, 2 ga
USSR-West Germany 1968: R ON 2 gf 0 ga - R OFF 6 gf, 0 ga
USSR-Sweden 1968: R ON 2 gf, 1 ga - R OFF 0 gf, 1 ga
USSR-Canada 1968: R ON 1 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 2 gf, 0 ga
USSR-Sweden 1969: R ON 1 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 2 gf, 2 ga
USSR-CSSR 1969: R ON 0 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 0 gf, 1 ga
USSR-Sweden 1970: R ON 0 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 2 gf, 3 ga
USSR-Sweden 1970: R ON 1 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 2 gf, 1 ga

2 Partial games (together they roughly equal one full game worth of footage)
USSR-Finland 1968: R ON 0 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 3 gf, 0 ga
USSR-USA 1968: R ON 2 gf, 0 ga - R OFF 1 gf, 0 ga

* In the boxscore from the USSR-Canada game at the 1964 Olympics there are two different versions. On the Soviets second goal the official version says that the goal was scored 20 seconds after the powerplay ended while the other version says it was a powerplay goal scored the last second of the powerplay. Watching the footage I find the second version far more likely since there is no way that Canada had been at full strenght for 20 seconds when the goal was scored which is why I used that version here. But even if we use the official seemingly inaccurate version the one added even strenght goal to the R OFF does not really make much of a difference considering how dominant Firsovs numbers are. (12:1 to 24:12 instead of 12:1 to 23:12) 1964 Чемпионат Мира и Олимпийские Игры: Австрия (Инсбрук) - Форум хоккейных статистиков им. Виктора Малеванного

I have never worked with R ON/R OFF before so please point out if I am making some mistakes when using the method here in this post.

 

[VMBM]

Dear Firsov fans,

Today is your long-awaited day. Поздравляю!

Do you have any decent game film on Firsov that you would like to use to pump his tires and show off the competition that he faced? That would be most helpful to an eye test proponent such as myself.

Da svidania.

You don't have to be a Firsov fan (or Russian ) to think that he was due and a great hockey player.

Even though I didn't see him as a kid (only later from tape/YouTube) since he played before I was born, I was very much aware of him from early on. Many contemporary/near-contemporary Finnish book sources consider him either the best or one of the very best Russian players of all-time. Having e.g. Boris Mikhailov above him (like in the older Top 100 Hockey Players project) just doesn't seem to be supported by any contemporary source.

 

[wetcoast]

I am one of the unconverted on Firsov. I will take time to digest the stuff from Batis above.

Coming in, I think the larger issues that need to be addressed for Firsov are the quality of his competition and his shorter career.

For example, in his big Olympics run in 1968, these are the rosters of the competitors: Ice hockey at the 1968 Winter Olympics – Rosters - Wikipedia

The strength of competition is a huge problem as this is the greatest 100 players of all time.

Furthermore the referencing of Firsov should be in because some prefer him to Kharlamov then that really opens the door on how he would compare to Fedorov, Kurri, Hull and other in the round and that will come up that were clearly among the top players in the world for some periods.

One question that is really relevant is how would Firsov rank with the late 60's and early 70's NHLers and if he would even be a top 10 NHL player in that time period?

I think that the honest answer would be that he wouldn't crack that level.

 

[MXD]

One question that is really relevant is how would Firsov rank with the late 60's and early 70's NHLers and if he would even be a top 10 NHL player in that time period?

I think that the honest answer would be that he wouldn't crack that level.

So you adhere to the view that Valeri Kharlamov's game got magically better in 1972 because, well, 1972 ?

 

[VMBM]

One question that is really relevant is how would Firsov rank with the late 60's and early 70's NHLers and if he would even be a top 10 NHL player in that time period?

I think that the honest answer would be that he wouldn't crack that level.

Well gee, I'm convinced.

BTW, I seem to remember that in some previous project you weren't very impressed with any Soviet or European players who either didn't play or succeed in the NHL, even though they had played against NHL opposition. So, if Firsov had played against NHL players and had even looked good, would that really change anything for you?

 

[VanIslander]

I have been a HUGE proponent of Soviets for a long time, but I am skeptical of players pre-1972 on a steep curve:

Pre-1960 Bobrov impressed Rocket Richard and I am willing to concede he might have been a 2nd or 3rd top scorer on an O6 NHL team. Maybe. Question mark.

1960-1964ish A huge grain of salt please! The Soviets struggled against low tier Canadians and Tarasov himself spoke of this as a growth period.

1965-69 Um,... this is the hardest stretch to evaluate. It makes a huge difference for a Firsov and Ragulin. One either has faith or cynicism here.

1970-1972 C'mon. The 1972 Summt Series didn't evolve overnight. The Soviets had to be elite skilled for at least 3 seasons.

1973-1989 Tried, tested and true. So many times in many contexts the top Soviets performed so well against NHLers. No one is saying the Soviet league was deep, but most of the selected stars for the national team were world class.

 

[sr edler]

Also - i admit i don't understand the Adam Graves reference...

Only a close circle of posters do. Q, TDMM, vadim, myself, perhaps someone else.

Adam Graves on the Presidents' Trophy winning 1993–94 NYR not only got more Hart votes than all of his own teammates, including two defensemen he didn't manage to outscore while going below PPG, he also got more Hart votes than Bure and all other wingers in the league.

 

[wetcoast]

So you adhere to the view that Valeri Kharlamov's game got magically better in 1972 because, well, 1972 ?

There are some problems with this line of thinking throughout the project.

The Ovechkin should be closer to Bobby Hull and Crosby one was one of the first to come up.

I don't think that Kharlamov got suddenly better in 1972 but as we saw with later stars from Europe (when they did play in the NHL outside of their systems) they often looked really lousy or nowhere near as elite that they did while in Europe or at the WC with no NHLer's or quickly put together teams later in the 80's.

I also think that the 72 series can be overstated as the Russians really prepared as a unit and played a team game and that Canada obviously wasn't prepared properly.

We have many examples of teams being greater than the sum of their parts doing extremely well, while not having alot of talent, take this years version of the NYI.

Note I'm not saying that the Russians didn't have talent in the late 60's and throughout the 70's where it really started to flourish.

Gilbert Perreault isn't up yet, do you honestly think that Firsov could have come into an expansion Sabers team and done anything close to what he did, assuming that Firsov was fluent in English for the sake of the argument?

Yes Firsov excelled at the WC and Olympics but as BlogofMike[/USER] noted in the 1968 Olympics the level of competition was really poor.

Just look at the guys who even played professionally in North america at all.

Is Fran Huck (probably the best player of that group) even a top 500 player of all time?

What about the stars of the WHA in the 70's who did very well against the Russian touring teams, should Marc Tardif be considered, after all he does have some success in the NHL as well and could have been part of that Habs dynasty, right?

I'm not sure of your age but perhaps you saw Tardif play, he was very skilled and has an impressive resume as well.

I'm not advocating for Tardif here just asking the question for comparative purposes.

These are the questions we should be asking as a group, along with your question.

This is after all the top 100 players of all time they should be able to stand out and star against the best (fit in easily with the other top 100 players, not forced)

 

[sr edler]

Finally you-know-who.

No idea who you're talking about.

 

[MXD]

There are some problems with this line of thinking throughout the project.

The Ovechkin should be closer to Bobby Hull and Crosby one was one of the first to come up.

I don't think that Kharlamov got suddenly better in 1972 but as we saw with later stars from Europe they often looked really lousy or nowhere near as elite that they did while in Europe or at the WC with no NHLer's or quickly put together teams later in the 80's.

I also think that the 72 series can be overstated as the Russians really prepared as a unit and played a team game and that Canada obviously wasn't prepared properly.

We have many examples of teams being greater than the sum of their parts doing extremely well, while not having alot of talent, take this years version of the NYI.

Note I'm not saying that the Russians didn't have talent in the late 60's and throughout the 70's where it really started to flourish.

Gilbert Perreault isn't up yet, do you honestly think that Firsov could have come into an expansion Sabres team and done anything close to what he did, assuming that Firsov was fluent in English for the sake of the argument?

Yes Firsov excelled at the WC and Olympics but as BlogofMike[/USER] noted in the 1968 Olympics the level of competition was really poor.

Just look at the guys who even played professionally in North america at all.

Is Fran Huck (probably the best player of that group) even a top 500 player of all time?

What about the stars of the WHA in the 70's who did very well against the Russian touring teams, should Marc Tardif be considered, after all he does have some success in the NHL as well and could have been part of that Habs dynasty, right?

I'm not sure of your age but perhaps you saw Tardif play, he was very skilled and has an impressive resume as well.

I'm not advocating for Tardif here just asking the question for comparative purposes.

These are the questions we should be asking as a group, along with your question.

This is after all the top 100 players of all time they should be able to stand out and star against the best (fit in easily with the other top 100 players, not forced)

That's a very long post for not addressing my point at all.

 

[wetcoast]

That's a very long post for not addressing my point at all.

Actually I did and I will put the part in bold.

 

[MXD]

I have been a HUGE proponent of Soviets for a long time, but I am skeptical of players pre-1972 on a steep curve:

Pre-1960 Bobrov impressed Rocket Richard and I am willing to concede he might have been a 2nd or 3rd top scorer on an O6 NHL team. Maybe. Question mark.

1960-1964ish A huge grain of salt please! The Soviets struggled against low tier Canadians and Tarasov himself spoke of this as a growth period.

1965-69 Um,... this is the hardest stretch to evaluate. It makes a huge difference for a Firsov and Ragulin. One either has faith or cynicism here.

1970-1972 C'mon. The 1972 Summt Series didn't evolve overnight. The Soviets had to be elite skilled for at least 3 seasons.

1973-1989 Tried, tested and true. So many times in many contexts the top Soviets performed so well against NHLers. No one is saying the Soviet league was deep, but most of the selected stars for the national team were world class.

I can't actually disagree with your timeline; however, if you strictly adhere to it, you have to think that Firsov (and, well, every Russian player to a certain extent!) got somehow magically better right between 69 and 70 ( if you're to deny him the credit).

In a way, Firsov retroactively validated his elite seasons (up until age caught up).

 

[Dingo]

Id have Hull better than Bure personally though i admittedly didnt think of Bure with my post. Hull has a much more complete career in addition to being a better goal scorer (career, peak, prime - if maybe not "raw talent").

Oates is a good player and he helped Hull but Hull was by no means a product of him as this post implies. A ton of players in their best years had help by linemates too - not sure how this is a negative especially as were ranking in the 70s here - were not exactly in the top 20 anymore.

Im not even sure i want to penalize Kurri for his center anymore in the 70s....so Hull is almost certainly a no

I feel like Oates and Bure are getting underrated a bit here.
Cam Neely was barely a 50 goal scorer when he played with a nifty center in Craig Janney. He had one of the best 49 game scoring stretches ever when he had Oates. He also had 11 in 13 the year before.

Oates himself had his best year the year he didnt have Hull or Neely. He scored 45 goals, 142points and made it look as though Joey Juneau was the next big thing. He wasnt.

Wherever he went he made wingers FAR better than they were otherwise, and this very much includes Hull.

Bure had his two massive seasons with..... who did he play with in Florida? Ray Whitney one year? I dont know this answer, not being a dick. He also led the league in goals with just his even strength goals one of those years.

Anyways, I know you guys like Cups and an abundance of healthy years, so I can see Hull as ahead of Bure in this project quite easily, but I feel like not really noting Oates’ playmaking over Ronning or Whitney’s is a disservice to both Oates and Bure

 

[VanIslander]

C'mon.. I admitted 1965-1969 is the fuzzy zone.. it's unclear whether the faithful or cynics are right.

The only clarity is 1964 needs heavy discounting and 1970 needs acceptance due to absurdity of expecting 1972 to be when the Soviets magically got the skating and passing skills that IMPRESSED the Canadians so much.

As I wondered to begin: How steep is the curve pre-1972?

 

[VMBM]

Yes Firsov excelled at the WC and Olympics but as BlogofMike[/USER] noted in the 1968 Olympics the level of competition was really poor.

Well, Czechoslovakia managed to beat the Soviets at the 1968 WOG and would continue to do that fairly regularly until 1978. Sweden beat USSR sometimes too.

No idea who you're talking about.

No worries mate! (that's some slogan?) I don't know what I'm talking about half the time. Some terrible flashback I'm sure.

 

[wetcoast]

Well gee, I'm convinced.

BTW, I seem to remember that in some previous project you weren't very impressed with any Soviet or European players who either didn't play or succeed in the NHL, even though they had played against NHL opposition. So, if Firsov had played against NHL players and had even looked good, would that really change anything for you?

Sure it would and I think I'm higher on guys like Makarov, Larionov and Fedorov for example than most here are.

We saw lots of stars from Europe who didn't look very good in the 70's NHL (extremely diluted) or 80's NHL later on.

We also saw some really great transitions.

Firsov's size wouldn't translate well and was obviously more suited for the international ice.

I'm a huge fan of the Russian style of system or full team hockey as well but this is about individual players.

 

[Theokritos]

We saw lots of stars from Europe who didn't look very good in the 70's NHL (extremely diluted) or 80's NHL later on.

We also saw some really great transitions.

Firsov's size wouldn't translate well and was obviously more suited for the international ice.

To you a player has to succeed in the NHL? Succeeding against the NHL is not enough?

 

[VMBM]

Sure it would and I think I'm higher on guys like Makarov, Larionov and Fedorov for example than most here are.

And all of those players played many years in the NHL, Fedorov even a career NHL'er, so...?

Firsov's size wouldn't translate well and was obviously more suited for the international ice.

Some other smaller or similar-sized players; Valeri Kharlamov, Sergei Makarov, Boris Mikhailov, Aleksandr Maltsev, your fav Igor Larionov... basically the who's who of great Soviet hockey forwards.

 

[sr edler]

who did he play with in Florida?

Someone (an actual player/coach/manager, not a poster here) actually called Viktor Kozlov a great talent. I think it was talent, but perhaps it was player. A great player (better than Firsov?).

 

[MXD]

C'mon.. I admitted 1965-1969 is the fuzzy zone.. it's unclear whether the faithful or cynics are right.

The only clarity is 1964 needs heavy discounting and 1970 needs acceptance due to absurdity of expecting 1972 to be when the Soviets magically got the skating and passing skills that IMPRESSED the Canadians so much.

As I wondered to begin: How steep is the curve pre-1972?

Let's put it this way : the achievements/results from 65-69 are in a fuzzy zone. I agree with that. And I even agree with pretty much everything you before in that post as well.

Hence the retroactive validation.

 

[MXD]

I don't think that Kharlamov got suddenly better in 1972 but as we saw with later stars from Europe (when they did play in the NHL outside of their systems) they often looked really lousy or nowhere near as elite that they did while in Europe or at the WC with no NHLer's or quickly put together teams later in the 80's.

Do you think Valeri Kharlamov deserved to be on our list?
If yes, how to explain Kharlamov sometimes being outplayed by Firsov up until 1972 (at which point Firsov entered a perfectly understandable age-related decline).

Firsov's size wouldn't translate well and was obviously more suited for the international ice.

Same-sized Henri Richard somehow didn't receive the memo, and ended up going in an illustrious career, crowned by winning the Stanley Cup 11 times, more than any other player. Many of these Cups were won when Firsov was still active.

 

[VanIslander]

Firsov was 7 years older than Kharlamov.

Conparing 1964-1971 to 1972-1980...

Their peaks were significantly different.

 

[Batis]

One question that is really relevant is how would Firsov rank with the late 60's and early 70's NHLers and if he would even be a top 10 NHL player in that time period?

I think that the honest answer would be that he wouldn't crack that level.

It seems like you and Marshall Johnston who first played against Firsov internationally in the 60's and then in the NHL later on have different opinions on this matter.

Marshall Johnston (2008):
"Firsov might have been the best hockey player I've ever seen."

Note: Johnston played for the Canadian national team from 1963-1968 and in the NHL from 1968-1974. Quoted after John McGourty, NHL.com.

 

[Theokritos]

1960-1964ish A huge grain of salt please! The Soviets struggled against low tier Canadians and Tarasov himself spoke of this as a growth period.

1965-69 Um,... this is the hardest stretch to evaluate. It makes a huge difference for a Firsov and Ragulin. One either has faith or cynicism here.

1970-1972 C'mon. The 1972 Summt Series didn't evolve overnight. The Soviets had to be elite skilled for at least 3 seasons.

Right.

By 1960, the upper echelon Soviet players were still in awe when they got to see the NHL. 12 years later the Summit Series happened. In between there was obviously some serious development. From the 1964 Olympics to the 1972 Olympics, the Soviets won every single Olympic and World Championship tournament (since 1970 with "Canadian rules": bodychecking in the offensive zone). This period coincides almost exactly with Firsov's prime. Of course, the counter argument remains valid: They didn't face NHL opposition.

We can't travel back in time and put e.g. the 1968 Soviet national team in the NHL, but at least we can listen to opinions of contemporary observers we have reason to consider informed. Here are some:

In 1967-1968 the coaches of the Canadian national team, Jackie McLeod and Father David Bauer, put the Soviet national team (not a single Soviet club!) roughly on par with the O6 teams in the NHL, except for SC winners Toronto and SC finalists Montreal. (See "The match that didn't take place".) Firsov is singled out as one of only two Soviet players who wouldn't be at loss if he entered an NHL team – despite of the difference in style between Soviet hockey and the NHL.

Marshall Johnston played internationally against Firsov and then in the NHL in the early 1970s. Later he was a scout for a long time (nhl.com: "The Carolina Hurricanes' director of pro scouting, has built a deserved reputation as an excellent judge of hockey talent. He was the scouting director whose picks helped Lou Lamoriello build the New Jersey Devils in the late 1980s and early 1990s.") His take on the 1968 Olympics: "We played well but Anatoly Firsov, who passed away in 2000, scored a couple of timely goals and they went on to win. Firsov might have been the best hockey player I've ever seen."

During the 2010 Olympics, Scotty Bowman was interviewed by a Russian magazine. His claim that only six players from the roster of the Russian team would also make Team Canada raised some attention. A few months later the same magazine came back to Bowman for a follow-up interview. This led to the following exchange:

Sport Express: "Since we are talking about Russian players, what is your general opinion about them?"
Scotty Bowman: "There have always been excellent players in Russia. But the best I have seen was Firsov, no doubt."
Sport Express: "What was special about him?"
Scotty Bowman: "He was just a brilliant passer! And had magical hands."
Sport Express: "Which other old-time players would you mention?"
Scotty Bowman: "Boris Mayorov I do remember very well. Mikhailov was generally the best center [sic!] of his time. Makarov and Krutov were very good. True, not when they arrived in the NHL, but when they were young. And Larionov was one of the smartest players I've ever worked with."

Source (in Russian)

Speaking of Bowman: As late as 1974 the Montreal Canadiens tried to sign Firsov who at that point was already retired.