Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 16

[bobholly39]

It goes back to what I said in the previous thread : suppose Hull scores 10% less goals, but get 15% more assists and play a somewhat more well-rounded game.

Your first three statements are now moot (the last three still stand), despite the fact that "my" version of Brett Hull would definitely be a better player. And I frankly can't think of a more one-dimensionnal skater that might become available.

Couldn't the same be said about other top scorers though? Take any of Ovechkin, Maurice Richard, or Bossy and apply the same -10% on goals + 15% on assists and they look different. Richard's overall offense isn't exactly ground breaking for his era without a big advantage on goals. A large reason of why they ranked so high vs contemporaries is because of the goals, even if overall offense (assists) suffer.

 

[sr edler]

I like the avs but yes Foresberg is a real diver

^ streitz's 90s Google group account detected.

 

[Troubadour]

^ streitz's 90s Google group account detected.

I didn't even notice!

 

[MXD]

Couldn't the same be said about other top scorers though? Take any of Ovechkin, Maurice Richard, or Bossy and apply the same -10% on goals + 15% on assists and they look different. Richard's overall offense isn't exactly ground breaking for his era without a big advantage on goals. A large reason of why they ranked so high vs contemporaries is because of the goals, even if overall offense (assists) suffer.

... If you do this across the board :
- Maurice Richard has an Art Ross
- Ovechkin ends up with 3 STRAIGHT Art Ross, joining a very select group (Howe, Esposito, Lafleur, Gretzky and Jagr)
- Mike Bossy... well, it doesn't change much since he still leads the league in goalscoring twice, and impoves only slightly his scoring finishes (he has two 4th that becomes 3rd).

Not to mention their more complete game.

Oh, Richard and Ovechkin both had more dimensions (or, actually, better 2nd and 3rd and 4th) dimensions than Hull. Also, while Brett Hull wasn't a bad playoff performer per se, he's nowhere near close to the same stratosphere as Bossy and Richard.

 

[danincanada]

With regards to Fedorov (my favourite player in the 90's) diving, I think it may be getting confused with him rolling around on the ice when he got hurt. I don't think he was a diver when it came to being hooked or tripped but there was definitely criticism of him staying down and rolling all over the ice when he was slashed or hurt on a play, and that was even among Red Wings fans at times. Maybe he had a lower threshold for pain than someone like Yzerman because it usually looked like a play that hurt but you wouldn't usually see players have the same reaction. That's my take, and that may have been what Keenan was talking about, too.

 

[bobholly39]

... If you do this across the board :
- Maurice Richard has an Art Ross
- Ovechkin ends up with 3 STRAIGHT Art Ross, joining a very select group (Howe, Esposito, Lafleur, Gretzky and Jagr)
- Mike Bossy... well, it doesn't change much since he still leads the league in goalscoring twice, and impoves only slightly his scoring finishes (he has two 4th that becomes 3rd).

Not to mention their more complete game.

Oh, Richard and Ovechkin both had more dimensions (or, actually, better 2nd and 3rd and 4th) dimensions than Hull. Also, while Brett Hull wasn't a bad playoff performer per se, he's nowhere near close to the same stratosphere as Bossy and Richard.

I feel like you're getting too caught up in your hypothetical. If the point you're trying to make is that those 4 players have more outside their goal scoring than Hull does - i agree. Thats why theyre all ranked a long time ago.

 

[MXD]

I feel like you're getting too caught up in your hypothetical. If the point you're trying to make is that those 4 players have more outside their goal scoring than Hull does - i agree. Thats why theyre all ranked a long time ago.

You literally made me write that post by raising those three specific names, but, okay

 

[DannyGallivan]

Oh, Richard and Ovechkin both had more dimensions (or, actually, better 2nd and 3rd and 4th) dimensions than Hull. Also, while Brett Hull wasn't a bad playoff performer per se, he's nowhere near close to the same stratosphere as Bossy and Richard.

...who were both taken way before him in this project. This is the right time for Hull. Actually, the last voting round was.

Edit: I see that point was raised just above this post. Still, it's time for Brett Hull to get voted in.

 

[MXD]

For the record, I don't even dislike Hull in this group. I'm totally disposed to hear arguments as to where he ranks vs. Me, Denneny, Kurri and Bentley (to be honest.... you may totally drop "Me" here -- been there, done that, I know how it ends up). The three goalies appears to be the be the crop of this group, however.

 

[Canadiens1958]

When did Gilmour sulk and quickly get traded? From what I heard him getting traded from St. Louis had more to do with a baby sitter, and I'm from Toronto and never heard stories of sulking when he left town. It was more about a veteran team that imploded so they cleaned house. After Toronto he was past his prime so those trades weren't about sulking either. Was the Calgary to Toronto trade about sulking?

After the arrival of Mats Sundin in TO. Calgary to Toronto.

 

[danincanada]

After the arrival of Mats Sundin in TO. Calgary to Toronto.

Says you. Any evidence of either?

Doug Gilmour explains why Flames traded him to Maple Leafs - Sportsnet.ca

Sounds like he was traded from Calgary due to money/arbitration.

I was in Toronto when he got traded away and I don't recall any stories of him sulking. Like I said before, it was more about a veteran team that was going to miss the playoffs so they started dealing veterans in an effort to rebuild. Are you trying to say Gilmour sulked simply because Sundin was on the team?

 

[Batis]

Even if I think that he was a great player I am relatively low on Mikhailov and I generally "only" rank him as the 7th greatest Soviet player of all time behind the 5 Soviets already on our list and Maltsev. In this group of players up for voting Mikhailov also starts this round outside of the top 5 for me.

Here in this post I will present some information on Mikhailov from some of my earlier studies.

Soviet player of the year voting record:

Boris Mikhailov
77/78: 128/219 = 0.584
73/74: 67/168 = 0.399
76/77: 73/228 = 0.320
78/79: 435/1734 = 0.251
79/80: 49/207 = 0.237
74/75: 44/195 = 0.226
72/73: 34/177 = 0.192
68/69: 30/165 = 0.182
70/71: 5/204 = 0.025
75/76: 4/192 = 0.021
3-year average: 0.434
5-year average: 0.358
7-year average: 0.316

And here is how he compares to the other top Soviet forwards when it comes to voting shares.

3-year average
1 Sergey Makarov 0.747
2 Anatoly Firsov 0.650
3 Vladimir Krutov 0.630
4 Valery Kharlamov 0.628
5 Alexander Maltsev 0.592
6 Boris Mikhailov 0.434
7 Vyacheslav Starshinov 0.432
8 Vladimir Petrov 0.411
9 Helmuts Balderis 0.304
10 Vyacheslav Bykov 0.303

5-year average
1 Sergey Makarov 0.660
2 Valery Kharlamov 0.522
3 Vladimir Krutov 0.516
4 Alexander Maltsev 0.469
5 Anatoly Firsov 0.418
6 Boris Mikhailov 0.358
7 Vladimir Petrov 0.287
8 Vyacheslav Starshinov 0.264 (Only recieved votes in 4 seasons)
9 Helmuts Balderis 0.192
10 Vyacheslav Bykov 0.189

7-year average
1 Sergey Makarov 0.551
2 Valery Kharlamov 0.440
3 Vladimir Krutov 0.388
4 Alexander Maltsev 0.383
5 Boris Mikhailov 0.316
6 Anatoly Firsov 0.299 (Only recieved votes in 5 seasons)
7 Vladimir Petrov 0.218
8 Vyacheslav Starshinov 0.189 (Only recieved votes in 4 seasons)
9 Igor Larionov 0.144
10 Alexander Yakushev 0.140

Mikhailov did very well in the SPOTY voting from 72/73 and onwards with especially the late 70's being a very strong time frame for him. It is however worth noting just how weak the voting support for Mikhailov was pre-72/73. Overall I would say that his voting record is rather strong but definitely not a point in his favour when being compared to for example someone like Maltsev. It should perhaps be pointed out that Mikhailovs voting record probably takes somewhat of a hit from that one of his strongest seasons (78/79) is the one where we have the results from the Izvestia golden stick voting and at first glance it seems like the Izvestia voting was more spread out over the field and that recieving high voting shares was somewhat more difficult. So Mikhailovs voting record is probably at least somewhat closer to Maltsevs than it seems here. Considering that elite longevity often is something that is being argued as a point in Mikhailovs favour it is however worth noting that he "only" recievied votes in 10 seasons while Maltsev (the other player in Soviet Hockey known for his elite longevity) recievied votes in 14 seasons. The explanation for this is of course Mikhailovs weak voting record prior to 72/73.

International scoring:

This is how Mikhailov does when it comes to scoring in major and minor international tournaments when compared to Soviet and Czechoslovakian players.

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1968/69 (WHC)
1. Anatoly Firsov 10 gp, 10 g, 4 a, 14 pts
1. Boris Mikhailov 9 gp, 9 g, 5 a, 14 pts
1. Jaroslav Holik 10 gp, 4 g, 10 a, 14 pts
4. Valery Kharlamov 10 gp, 6 g, 7 a, 13 pts
5. Vaclav Nedomansky 10 gp, 9 g, 2 a, 11 pts
5. Alexander Maltsev 10 gp, 5 g, 6 a, 11 pts
7. Jan Suchy 8 gp, 5 g, 4 a, 9 pts
8. Vladimir Petrov 10 gp, 6 g, 2 a, 8 pts
8. Jiri Holik 9 gp, 4 g, 4 a, 8 pts
10. Vyacheslav Starshinov 10 gp, 6 g, 1 a, 7 pts
10. Yevgeny Mishakov 9 gp, 4 g, 3 a, 7 pts
10. Yevgeny Paladyev 10 g, 4 g, 3 a, 7 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1969/70 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Alexander Maltsev 14 gp, 17 g, 6 a, 23 pts
2. Vaclav Nedomansky 15 gp, 14 g, 7 a, 21 pts
3. Anatoly Firsov 12 gp, 6 g, 10 a, 16 pts
4. Vladimir Vikulov 14 gp, 10 g, 5 a, 15 pts
4. Jan Suchy 10 gp, 8 g, 7 a, 15 pts
6. Boris Mikhailov 14 gp, 11 g, 3 a, 14 pts
7. Valery Kharlamov 13 gp, 9 g, 3 a, 12 pts
8. Vladimir Petrov 14 gp, 8 g, 3 a, 11 pts
9. Richard Farda 15 gp, 7 g, 3 a, 10 pts
10. Vyacheslav Starshinov 13 gp, 6 g, 3 a, 9 pts
10. Jiri Holik 14 gp, 6 g, 3 a, 9 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1970/71 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Anatoly Firsov 14 gp, 14 g, 10 a, 24 pts
2. Valery Kharlamov 13 gp, 7 g, 14 a, 21 pts
3. Alexander Maltsev 14 gp, 12 g, 8 a, 20 pts
4. Vladimir Vikulov 14 gp, 10 g, 7 a, 17 pts
5. Vladimir Petrov 12 gp, 10 g, 3 a, 13 pts
5. Richard Farda 14 gp, 6 g, 7 a, 13 pts
5. Vyacheslav Starshinov 13 gp, 4 g, 9 a, 13 pts
8. Jiri Holik 14 gp, 5 g, 6 a, 11 pts
9. Ivan Hlinka 14 gp, 8 g, 2 a, 10 pts
9. Boris Mikhailov 12 gp, 7 g, 3 a, 10 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1971/72 (WOG, WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Valery Kharlamov 17 gp, 20 g, 14 a, 34 pts
2. Alexander Maltsev 18 gp, 16 g, 16 a, 32 pts
3. Vladimir Vikulov 18 gp, 22 g, 8 a, 30 pts
4. Vaclav Nedomansky 17 gp, 15 g, 9 a, 24 pts
5. Boris Mikhailov 16 gp, 15 g, 4 a, 19 pts
5. Jaroslav Holik 16 gp, 11 g, 8 a, 19 pts
7. Alexander Yakushev 15 gp, 11 g, 7 a, 18 pts
7. Yury Blinov 18 gp, 9 g, 9 a, 18 pts
9. Vladimir Martinec 18 gp, 8 g, 8 a, 16 pts
10. Jan Klapac 10 gp, 9 g, 6 a, 15 pts
10. Vladimir Petrov 17 gp, 7 g, 8 a, 15 pts
10. Richard Farda 16 gp, 6 g, 9 a, 15 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1972/73 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Vladimir Petrov 14 gp, 23 g, 23 a, 46 pts
2. Boris Mikhailov 14 gp, 19 g, 15 a, 34 pts
3. Valery Kharlamov 14 gp, 14 g, 16 a, 30 pts
4. Alexander Maltsev 13 gp, 14 g, 10 a, 24 pts
5. Alexander Yakushev 14 gp, 13 g, 9 a, 22 pts
6. Alexander Gusev 14 gp, 9 g, 9 a, 18 pts
7. Alexander Bodunov 14 gp, 9 g, 8 a, 17 pts
8. Alexander Martynyuk 10 gp, 12 g, 4 a, 16 pts
8. Jiri Holik 13 gp, 6 g, 10 a, 16 pts
10. Vaclav Nedomansky 14 gp, 10 g, 5 a, 15 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1973/74 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Boris Mikhailov 14 gp, 13 g, 13 a, 26 pts
2. Alexander Yakushev 14 gp, 10 g, 8 a, 18 pts
3. Ivan Hlinka 14 gp, 11 g, 6 a, 17 pts
3. Vladimir Martinec 14 gp, 10 g, 7 a, 17 pts
3. Alexander Maltsev 14 gp, 10 g, 7 a, 17 pts
3. Vladimir Petrov 12 gp, 8 g, 9 a, 17 pts
7. Vaclav Nedomansky 14 gp, 12 g, 4 a, 16 pts
8. Valery Kharlamov 14 gp, 8 g, 7 a, 15 pts
9. Jiri Holik 14 gp, 6 g, 6 a, 12 pts
9. Yury Lebedev 14 gp, 6 g, 6 a, 12 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1974/75 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Valery Kharlamov 25 gp, 19 g, 20 a, 39 pts
2. Vladimir Petrov 26 gp, 15 g, 21 a, 36 pts
3. Viktor Shalimov 25 gp, 16 g, 14 a, 30 pts
4. Vladimir Martinec 25 gp, 18 g, 11 a, 29 pts
5. Alexander Yakushev 24 gp, 20 g, 8 a, 28 pts
5. Boris Mikhailov 25 gp, 13 g, 15 a, 28 pts
7. Milan Novy 27 gp, 18 g, 8 a, 26 pts
8. Alexander Maltsev 25 gp, 18 g, 6 a, 24 pts
9. Sergey Kapustin 26 gp, 16 g, 4 a, 20 pts
9. Vladimir Shadrin 25 gp, 8 g, 12 a, 20 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1975/76 (WOG, WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Vladimir Martinec 18 gp, 15 g, 17 a, 32 pts
2. Valery Kharlamov 18 gp, 12 g, 18 a, 30 pts
3. Milan Novy 18 gp, 16 g, 8 a, 24 pts
4. Jiri Novak 16 gp, 12 g, 9 a, 21 pts
4. Ivan Hlinka 18 gp, 9 g, 12 a, 21 pts
6. Boris Mikhailov 17 gp, 10 g, 9 a, 19 pts
6. Viktor Shalimov 18 gp, 9 g, 10 a, 19 pts
8. Alexander Yakushev 18 gp, 10 g, 8 a, 18 pts
8. Vladimir Shadrin 17 gp, 10 g, 8 a, 18 pts
8. Viktor Zhluktov 16 gp, 6 g, 12 a, 18 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1976/77 (Canada Cup, WHC, Izvestia Trophy)
1. Vladimir Martinec 21 gp, 12 g, 16 a, 28 pts
2. Boris Mikhailov 13 gp, 16 g, 9 a, 25 pts
2. Helmuts Balderis 18 gp, 14 g, 11 a, 25 pts
2. Viktor Zhluktov 19 gp, 13 g, 12 a, 25 pts
2. Vladimir Petrov 14 gp, 8 g, 17 a, 25 pts
6. Sergey Kapustin 17 gp, 14 g, 10 a, 24 pts
6. Milan Novy 18 gp, 11 g, 13 a, 24 pts
8. Ivan Hlinka 21 gp, 12 g, 7 a, 19 pts
8. Alexander Maltsev 17 gp, 5 g, 14 a, 19 pts
10. Marian Stastny 17 gp, 8 g, 8 a, 16 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1977/78 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy, Rude Pravo Cup)
1. Boris Mikhailov 18 gp, 15 g, 12 a, 27 pts
2. Ivan Hlinka 18 gp, 10 g, 13 a, 23 pts
3. Bohuslav Ebermann 18 gp, 12 g, 9 a, 21 pts
4. Valery Kharlamov 18 gp, 11 g, 9 a, 20 pts
5. Helmuts Balderis 17 gp, 13 g, 4 a, 17 pts
5. Vladimir Martinec 17 gp, 10 g, 7 a, 17 pts
7. Sergey Kapustin 18 gp, 9 g, 7 a, 16 pts
7. Peter Stastny 17 gp, 7 g, 9 a, 16 pts
7. Alexander Maltsev 18 gp, 6 g, 10 a, 16 pts
10. Marian Stastny 17 gp, 7 g, 8 a, 15 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1978/79 (WHC, Izvestia Trophy, Rude Pravo Cup)
1. Vladimir Petrov 14 gp, 11 g, 11 a, 22 pts
2. Valery Kharlamov 14 gp, 9 g, 11 a, 20 pts
3. Sergey Kapustin 15 gp, 12 g, 6 a, 18 pts
3. Helmuts Balderis 15 gp, 9 g, 9 a, 18 pts
3. Boris Mikhailov 14 gp, 8 g, 10 a, 18 pts
6. Bohuslav Ebermann 15 gp, 11 g, 5 a, 16 pts
7. Sergey Makarov 15 gp, 10 g, 5 a, 15 pts
7. Alexander Golikov 14 gp, 7 g, 8 a, 15 pts
9. Viktor Zhluktov 15 gp, 9 g, 5 a, 14 pts
9. Vladimir Martinec 14 gp, 5 g, 9 a, 14 pts

Major and Minor International Tournaments 1979/80 (WOG, Izvestia Trophy, Rude Pravo Cup, Sweden Cup)
1. Peter Stastny 18 gp, 12 g, 13 a, 25 pts
1. Sergey Makarov 19 gp, 12 g, 13 a, 25 pts
3. Alexander Golikov 15 gp, 12 g, 12 a, 24 pts
4. Valery Kharlamov 19 gp, 8 g, 15 a, 23 pts
5. Boris Mikhailov 19 gp, 10 g, 11 a, 21 pts
6. Milan Novy 18 gp, 10 g, 9 a, 19 pts
7. Jaroslav Pouzar 18 gp, 9 g, 9 a, 18 pts
7. Anton Stastny 18 gp, 8 g, 10 a, 18 pts
7. Viktor Zhluktov 15 gp, 7 g, 11 a, 18 pts
10. Marian Stastny 14 gp, 9 g, 8 a, 17 pts

Since I also wanted to analyze the numbers posted by the the top players I decided to take a look at how they compared to the field (the average score of the 2nd-10th scorer) over their 5 strongest seasons.

5-season Vs2-10 average among Soviet and Czechoslovakian players in Major and Minor International Tournaments during the 64/65-88/89 time frame:

1. Sergey Makarov: 154.4
2. Anatoly Firsov: 153.5
3. Valery Kharlamov: 147.6
4. Vladimir Krutov: 145.6
5. Alexander Maltsev: 144.7
6. Boris Mikhailov: 144.1
7. Vladimir Petrov: 140.7
8. Vyacheslav Fetisov: 119.1
9. Vladimir Vikulov: 118.7
10. Vladimir Martinec: 118.0
11. Vaclav Nedomansky: 115.4
12. Igor Larionov: 105.5
13. Vyacheslav Starshinov: 99.6
14. Alexander Yakushev: 98.7
15. Ivan Hlinka: 98.5

The players who fits in the first tier when it comes statistical performance in major and minor international tournaments among Soviet and Czechoslovakian players are in my opinion Makarov, Firsov and Kharlamov. While Makarovs five best years may only have been marginally stronger than Firsovs when it comes to dominance over the field Makarov was clearly the most consistent point producer of all as evidenced by him finishing first or tied for first in scoring a record number of 7 times and finishing top 7 in scoring in all 11 season between 78/79 and 88/89. It is however clear that while Makarov was the most dominant Soviet player compared to his peers internationally as well it is not quite as clearcut as it is domestically. I would say that Firsov probably had the statistically most impressive consecutive stretch of any player in 66/67-70/71 when he was the leading scorer 4 times and finished third the other year. Kharlamovs 70/71-75/76 stretch is also very impressive especially when it is taken into account that the 70´s quality-wise was the height of the Soviet-Czechoslovakian rivalry with both countries having a truly great generation of players.

Next up we have Krutov, Maltsev, Mikhailov and Petrov all of whom have very strong numbers and a similar level of dominance over the field. Considering things such as strenght of linemates I would probably put Maltsev at the top of that group and very close to the Makarov/Firsov/Kharlamov group. While Maltsev obviously played with very good players himself he certainly did not have quite the support that Krutov, Mikhailov and Petrov generally had. While Krutovs point production was very impressive I would still say that the most impressive thing about him was that he was the leading goalscorer during a record number of 5 seasons. The most impressive thing about Petrov is definitely his 72/73 season which is by far the most statistically dominant season of any player. When it comes to Mikhailov his elite longevity with 11 times in the top 9 is really what stands out the most even if his best 5 years also are impressive.

Penalty killing:

Mikhailov was one of the greatest Soviet penalty killers of his era and I would say that he is one of the top 10 greatest Soviet penalty killers of all time among forwards. Here is the post about Mikhailov from my penalty killing study.

3. Boris Mikhailov
Ice time finishes: 1st at the 75/76 Super Series, 1st at the 1978 WHC, 1st at the 79/80 Super Series, 2nd at the 1972 WHC, 2nd at the 1974 Summit Series, Tied for 2nd at the 1977 WHC, 3rd at the 1972 Summit Series, 4th at the 1969 WHC, Tied for 5th at the 1970 WHC, 5th at the 1976 WOG, 5th at the 1976 WHC, 5th at the 1979 WHC

Overall stats: 4 goals forward and 10 goals against over 60 min, 50 sec

Boris Mikhailov along with Vladimir Petrov formed what in my opinion was the strongest penalty killing forward pairing of the 70's. Mikhailov had great longevity as a penalty killer and his intensive style of play made him one of the greatest Soviet penalty killers of all time. One thing that should be noted regarding Mikhailovs ice time finishes though is that 2 of his 1st place finishes was on CSKA Moscow at times when perhaps the two strongest penalty killers of the national team did not play on CSKA. Shadrin and Shalimov of Spartak in 75/76 and the Golikov brothers of Dynamo in 79/80. This is especially important to take into account when comparing Mikhailov (and any CSKA player of the 70's) with players from this era who did not play on CSKA like the just mentioned ones. Still even when taking into account that those 1st place finishes probably rather is worth something like a finish in the 2-4 range on the national team it is obvious that Mikhailov is one of the greatest Soviet penalty killers of both this era and all-time.

As mentioned above Mikhailovs instensive style of play really made him stand out as a penalty killer. Not unlike someone like Starshinov, Mikhailov killed penalties as if the survival of the planet was on the line and I don't even think that he knows what it means to not give an 100 percent effort. And while the Petrov-Mikhailov pairing did not build their penalty killing on puck possession as much as pairings like for example Almetov-Loktev or Krutov-Makarov did they still used and excelled at that tactic as well.



Truly great shorthanded shift from Mikhailov against Czechoslovakia at the 1979 WHC. Look at his effort before assisting on Petrovs goal. Truly outstanding. And they keep up the strong play after the goal as well.



Very impressive 3 on 5 shift from Mikhailov, Tsygankov and Lutchenko against Montreal Canadiens at the 75/76 Super Series. Just look at their confidence with the puck when playing keep-away.



Extremely impressive puck possession exhibition from Petrov and especially Mikhailov against New York Rangers at the 75/76 Super Series. In the beginning of it the teams play 4 on 4 but at 1:20:35 the Rangers gets back to full strenght so the majority of the puck possession exhibition is done while shorthanded.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Says you. Any evidence of either?

Doug Gilmour explains why Flames traded him to Maple Leafs - Sportsnet.ca

Sounds like he was traded from Calgary due to money/arbitration.

I was in Toronto when he got traded away and I don't recall any stories of him sulking. Like I said before, it was more about a veteran team that was going to miss the playoffs so they started dealing veterans in an effort to rebuild. Are you trying to say Gilmour sulked simply because Sundin was on the team?

Calgary, he was not being or going to be paid like a #1 center.

Toronto, once Sundin arrived for Clark, the team was younger with their center for the future.

 

[danincanada]

It goes back to what I said in the previous thread : suppose Hull scores 10% less goals, but get 15% more assists and play a somewhat more well-rounded game.

Your first three statements are now moot (the last three still stand), despite the fact that "my" version of Brett Hull would definitely be a better player. And I frankly can't think of a more one-dimensionnal skater that might become available.

Selanne was about as one-dimensional as they come and he's already been voted in. I'd take Brett Hull and Kurri over him. Say what you want about Hull but Bowman used him as a regular PK forward usually paired with Yzerman in '02 and he bought in to Hitchcock's system before that and won it all so he was a vastly superior two-way player to Teemu. Hull's playoff resume is superior to Selanne's as well so this group missed the boat on that one IMO.

 

[danincanada]

Calgary, he was not being or going to be paid like a #1 center.

Toronto, once Sundin arrived for Clark, the team was younger with their center for the future.

So where is the evidence that Gilmour actually sulked? Teams go in different directions but your claim was that he actually sulked. Please provide evidence.

 

[MXD]

Selanne was about as one-dimensional as they come and he's already been voted in. I'd take Brett Hull and Kurri over him. Say what you want about Hull but Bowman used him as a regular PK forward usually paired with Yzerman in '02 and he bought in to Hitchcock's system before that and won it all so he was a vastly superior two-way player to Teemu. Hull's playoff resume is superior to Selanne's as well so this group missed the boat on that one IMO.

Selanne was better rounded offensively (Selanne actually has Top-10 assists finishes) and, well, plain better offensively, too. Here is their offensive finishes, taking out similar results

Selanne : 2, 5, 7, 8, 8
Hull : 4

Their goalscoring is... well, Hull DOES have something of an edge, but it's nowhere near Selanne's advantage in other respects.

Selanne : 3
Hull : 6, 8, 9

And, frankly, I don't think we can't quite ignore the effect Adam Oates had on Hull's goalscoring, nor the non-negligible difference in terms of longevity.

 

[MXD]

...Also, if, when taking into account the Pre-Consolidation years, I'm about equal in VsX to Brett Hull; if so, how can Hull be deemed the better player, considering I was better at just about every other damn thing in hockey as Brett Hull?

 

[VMBM]

While I rank Mikhailov above Maltsev, I too feel that he shouldn't necessarily be voted in this round.

I agree that while especially for a Soviet player, Mikhailov had good longevity (played at the elite level until 35 or so), it should definitely be noted that his first true 'superstar season' was only in 1972-73; before that he had been well overshadowed not only by his (usual) linemate Kharlamov, but also by the 5 years younger Maltsev and even by another young Right Wing Vladimir Vikulov (SPOTY voting, All-Stars), not to mention by the 3 years older Firsov. A strangely late bloomer, then, but he developed into an exceptional goal-scorer (around the net), was hard-working and fairly versatile, and had leadership qualities; a sort of coaches' dream player. But was he a true all-time player in the same sense as Kharlamov, Firsov, Makarov and the like? I'm not so sure.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

While I rank Mikhailov above Maltsev, I too feel that he shouldn't necessarily be voted in this round.

I agree that while especially for a Soviet player, Mikhailov had good longevity (played at the elite level until 35 or so), it should definitely be noted that his first true 'superstar season' was only in 1972-73; before that he had been well overshadowed not only by his (usual) linemate Kharlamov, but also by the 5 years younger Maltsev and even by another young Right Wing Vladimir Vikulov (SPOTY voting, All-Stars), not to mention by the 3 years older Firsov. A strangely late bloomer, then, but he developed into an exceptional goal-scorer (around the net), was hard-working and fairly versatile, and had leadership qualities; a sort of coaches' dream player. But was he a true all-time player in the same sense as Kharlamov, Firsov, Makarov and the like? I'm not so sure.

Mikhailov = Iginla in both style and quality. Am I off base?

I realize I'm being somewhat simplistic.

 

[Canadiens1958]

So where is the evidence that Gilmour actually sulked? Teams go in different directions but your claim was that he actually sulked. Please provide evidence.

Calgary:

Doug Gilmour explains why Flames traded him to Maple Leafs - Sportsnet.ca

deserted the team New Years Eve 1991, traded Jan.2,1992.

Toronto:

Doug Gilmour explains why he rejected Maple Leafs deal to Canucks - Sportsnet.ca

Last word. Gilmour is not the focus of the thread. Not indulging you anymore.

 

[danincanada]

Calgary:

Doug Gilmour explains why Flames traded him to Maple Leafs - Sportsnet.ca

deserted the team New Years Eve 1991, traded Jan.2,1992.

Toronto:

Doug Gilmour explains why he rejected Maple Leafs deal to Canucks - Sportsnet.ca

Last word. Gilmour is not the focus of the thread. Not indulging you anymore.

If you take Gilmour's account as truth then he left because Risebrough was going to trade him anyways because he was upset about Gilmour being awarded too much in arbitration. There's no mention of Risebrough wanting to trade him due to him sulking.

There's no mention of sulking in the second article either, just that ownership wanted to trade him.

 

[overg]

With regards to Fedorov (my favourite player in the 90's) diving, I think it may be getting confused with him rolling around on the ice when he got hurt. I don't think he was a diver when it came to being hooked or tripped but there was definitely criticism of him staying down and rolling all over the ice when he was slashed or hurt on a play, and that was even among Red Wings fans at times. Maybe he had a lower threshold for pain than someone like Yzerman because it usually looked like a play that hurt but you wouldn't usually see players have the same reaction. That's my take, and that may have been what Keenan was talking about, too.

Keenan was 100% trying to play an angle when he started that talk. He was looking to slow Fedorov down, and thus wanted to plant the seed that Fedorov dove so his players could get away with more hooks and holds on him. Keep in mind, this is the same era when Bowman allegedly had the visitor's locker room painted before a game. Coaches were doing a lot this sort of "mind game" nonsense.

I don't think Keenan's motives in starting the talk had anything to do with Fedorov's nationality. But I do think his nationality had a lot to do with why anyone listened to such talk. I don't think it's a coincidence that the "divers" named in Troubadour's post were Fedorov, Forsberg, and Jagr. All three were extremely skilled, strong skaters who weren't afraid to skate right into opposing defenseman, and all were European.

 

[danincanada]

Selanne was better rounded offensively (Selanne actually has Top-10 assists finishes) and, well, plain better offensively, too. Here is their offensive finishes, taking out similar results

Selanne : 2, 5, 7, 8, 8
Hull : 4

Their goalscoring is... well, Hull DOES have something of an edge, but it's nowhere near Selanne's advantage in other respects.

Selanne : 3
Hull : 6, 8, 9

And, frankly, I don't think we can't quite ignore the effect Adam Oates had on Hull's goalscoring, nor the non-negligible difference in terms of longevity.

Hull had Oates but Selanne had Kariya for his big seasons in Anaheim. They had great chemistry as well.

Hull had an impact at age 23 to Selanne's 22 and Hull had an impact until age 39 whereas Selanne hung onto until he was 43 but probably should have retired at 41. Does that really make a big difference to you?

As far as adjusted stats Hull was at 1.095 PPG over 1,269 games while Selanne was at 1.078 PPG over 1,451 games.

Hull showed the ability to play a far better defensive game later in his career, which Selanne never really displayed, and of course Hull blows Selanne away in the playoffs.

 

[MXD]

MXD realizes MXD is not perfect (though its mostly because MXD got prompted), but is it possible to compare Brett Hull and Sergei Fedorov to Me and Max Bentley instead of to, say, Doug Gilmour and Teemu Selanne?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Charlie Gardiner in Detail

Input by both @Hawkey Town 18 and me.

SUMMARY

-only goaltender to captain his team to a Cup win
-charter member of the Hall of Fame in 1945

End of the year all-star teams only existed for his final 4 seasons
-First Team All-Star 3 times (1931, 1932, 1934)
-Second Team All-Star 1 time (1933)

-Vezina winner (= modern Jennings) in 1932, 1934
-Stanley Cup in 1934 (backstopping a fairly weak team to the Cup)

-Regular season career GAA: 2.02
-Playoff career GAA: 1.43 (a drop of 30%)
-Twice led the league in shutouts

-Durability: He only missed 4 games in his 7 year career

Nicknamed "The Roving Scotsman" because:

-he was born in Scotland - making him the first European-born captain to win the Stanley Cup
-he would leave his net to break up plays

Charlie Gardiner was Chicago's first hockey superstar. He led them to the top of the league and eventually their first Stanley Cup in 1934 and put hockey on the map in the Windy City.
...
As a sophomore Gardiner lost a league high 29 games despite a 1.93 GAA. The Hawks won only 7 games. But Gardiner continued to play with unbreakable spirit, and earning high praise despite the statistics. The great Howie Morenz once claimed "Bonnie Prince Charlie" was the toughest goalie to score upon.
The Hawks continued to struggle as the 1930s progressed, but Gardiner emerged to become what many people feel was the best goalie of his day. He posted 42 shutouts and 2.02 GAA in 7 seasons. He won the Vezina Trophy in 1932 and 1934 and was named to 4 All Star Teams. He played with a team that offered very little offensive support (the whole team scored only 33 goals in 44 games in 1928-29). But Gardiner's play, much like that of Dominik Hasek years later with Buffalo, made the team a contender to reckon with.

Gardiner's exceptional play was augmented by his ability to direct his teammates on the ice, a factor that led to his being chosen to serve as team captain in 1933-34.

HIGH PRAISE FOR THE YEARS BEFORE THE FIRST OFFICIAL ALL STAR TEAMS

It would be perhaps be advisable in the first place to point out that such a choice is after all merely the opinion of one man."
...
Goal: Roy Worters, backed up by Charlie Gardiner

About Worters: "he makes the hardest chances look easy"
About Gardiner: "with the team he has in front of him, we have every reason to suspect that Gardiner has very little time to collect his wits."

-The Morning Leader, Jan 26, 1929
The Morning Leader - Google News Archive Search

But Gardiner played a great game, the sort of display local fans are beginning to expect from this sensational youngster, who seems to combine the best tricks of the late Houdini in keeping a storm of rubber out of his net. Gardiner gave another demonstration of black magic last night, and the only "curtains" he used were a puck, a goaler's stick and a keen eye and brain...

The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search

Late in December 1930 the New York Americans offered $10,000 to the Hawks in exchange for Gardiner, double his salary; McLaughlin refused the offer

The above occurred in the first half of the 1930-31 season, which was the first season AS teams were awarded. One could deduct that Gardiner must have been recognized as one of the league's top goalies before this season for the Americans to make such a large offer as early as December (and for that offer to be turned down).

(Frank Brimsek) is the best looking rookie goaltender since Chuck Gardiner

The Milwaukee Journal - Google News Archive Search

OUTSTANDING IN THE PLAYOFFS

The miraculous goaltending of Chuck Gardiner in the Hawks nets, was all that kept the Canucks* from scoring time after time, but after being injured twice, the Chicago marvel at last succumbed to a shot from Morenz after 51 minutes and 53 seconds of overtime play.
...
Abel on the Hawks defense was, outside of Gardiner, the greatest player on the ice.
...
George Mantha rushed Gardiner and knocked him down while trying to score. The game was held up for a minute while he recovered from a blow to the stomach. Chuck continued to perform brilliantly however, stopping seemingly impossible shots time after time .

*meaning Montreal Canadiens

-Calgary Daily Herald, March 29, 1930
The Calgary Daily Herald - Google News Archive Search

Charlie Gardiner is the greatest goalkeeper hockey fans ever saw. Saskatchewan hockey supporters cannot imagine what a team of superstars the Montreal Canadiens are - Johnny Gottselig and Harold March are the best two forwards on the Black Hawks roster.
...
Gardiner is even better than Hughie Lehman, known as "Eagle Eye' was in his prime, and the way he comes out of his goal - sometimes as much as 15 feet - just breaks the hearts of opposing sharpshooters.

-The Leader Post, April 8, 1931
http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...BAJ&pg=5341,4644892&dq=charlie+gardiner&hl=en

Particularly fascinating is the fact that in 1931, the Blackhawks were beaten by the Canadiens in the final, and Gardiner had been so stellar in goal, that immediately upon completion of the final game, the whole Montreal team carried Gardiner on their shoulders around the Forum ice, and then down the tunnel and into their dressing room, where they fed him champagne.

Additional source confirming the above: http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...2166911&dq=gardiner+carried+stanley+cup&hl=en

(Title)Chicago Hawks Defeat Detroit in Cup Series, Chuck Gardiner plays big part in Team's 4 to 1 triumph

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AIBAJ&pg=4526,1199434&dq=chuck+gardiner&hl=en

Heroic performance in his final playoffs (READ THE WHOLE THING!):

Gardiner's finest moment came in the 1934 playoffs, as "Smiling Charlie" advanced the Hawks to the Stanley Cup Finals against Detroit. This despite the fact that Gardiner was feeling quite ill at the time. Unbeknownst to him or his doctors, Gardiner had long suffered from a chronic tonsil infection. The disease had spread and had begun to cause uremia convulsions. Undaunted, Gardiner pressed on as winning the Stanley Cup had become an obsession with him. Though playing in body-numbing pain, the Hawks prevailed over the Wings. He permitted only 12 goals in 8 playoff games - a 1.50 GAA.

A well liked and jovial fellow, Gardiner served as the Blackhawks captain, a rarity for a goalie even when it was allowed. Before the decisive 4th game, the "Roving Scotsman" showed his leadership and reportedly told his teammates that they would only need to score one goal that night. Sure enough, the game had gone into double overtime at a 0-0 tie. Suffering from growing fatigue, Gardiner was weakening considerably as the game went on. But he managed to hold the Red Wings scoreless until Chicago's XXX finally scored.

The Hawks hoisted their first Stanley Cup, but Gardiner, the only goalie to captain a Cup champion, was just as happy he could escape the ice and collapse in the dressing room. A few weeks later Gardiner underwent brain surgery after suffering a massive brain hemorrhage. Unfortunately complications from the surgery would cost him his life on June 13, 1934.

"BEST GOALIE EVER" AT HIS TIME OF DEATH?*

He (Joliat) picked an all star team (at the request of W.A. Howard, a writer for Canadian National Magazine) confined to players who played against him during his 16 years as a professional. He puts Benedict or Gardiner in goal; Shore and Noble on defense; Nighbor at centre; with Cook and Jackson on the wings. It's a well balanced unit. -

Charlie Gardiner is the greatest goalkeeper hockey fans ever saw.
...
Gardiner is even better than Hughie Lehman, known as "Eagle Eye' was in his prime, and the way he comes out of his goal - sometimes as much as 15 feet - just breaks the hearts of opposing sharpshooters.

When Howie Morenz, speed artist of the Montreal Canadiens, was at his best four years ago, he said the Winnipeg kid was the hardest netman he had ever tried to outguess.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AIBAJ&pg=6578,1727079&dq=chuck+gardiner&hl=en

(Frank) Boucher tapped for his all-time team goalie Chuck Gardiner of the Chicago Black Hawks, defense men Eddie Shore of the Boston Bruins and Ching Johnson of the Rangers, Center Frank Nighbor of Ottawa, left winger Aurel Joliat of the Montreal Canadians and right winger Bill Cook.​

​

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...&pg=4844,3988229&dq=chuck+gardiner+best&hl=en

I always thought of him as far superior to any other goaltender in the National League​

​

-The Montreal Gazette, June 14, 1934 (right after Gardiner died - take the quote with a grain of salt, but it's quite strongly worded).

OTHER GOALIE IS THE BEST SINCE CHUCK GARDINER

Of the big Rangers squad, only Davey Kerr, the little goalie, has been recognized as a star. There's no forward on the squad with a reputation such as Howie Morenz, Bill Cook, Nels Stewart, Chuck Conacher, and even older and more famous stars of the past. The defensemen haven't had the publicity granted Ching Johnson, Eddie Shore, or Lionel Conacher. And Kerr isn't being classed with Chuck Gardiner or Georges Vezina.​

​

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&pg=3878,46195&dq=chuck+gardiner+best&hl=en

(Montreal coach)Dick Irvin is quoted as saying that Bill Burnan (sic) is the best goaler since the late Chuck Gardiner of Chicago... We'll take Brimsek even while admitting Durnan is a pretty fair puck-stopper.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...J&pg=4246,502297&dq=chuck+gardiner+best&hl=en[/QUOTE]