Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 18

[BenchBrawl]

.... Okay, do we need to put Doug Harvey on our ballots for this round?

Yes.

He's that good that he should be ranked twice.

 

[wetcoast]

Ok...so where does Bure go? He barely made pension in the NHL...so doesn't that factor in? Why are you ascribing the lack of Bure (who made my list, for the record) to lack of top-10 finishes instead of the elephant in the room...? Which is him not playing games.

I was using him as a comparison to Harvey in being better than his stats looked.

Games played?

What about for Russia and internationally?

As much as I like him as a player and as a Canuck fan he wouldn't make my top 100.

 

[wetcoast]

Kind of like watching Lindros.

Or Forsberg.

 

[wetcoast]

Old adage about truth being inconvenient at times.

Not really, maybe go back and read my post?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Is that what everyone is referring to when they said he controlled the game? Line changes? You’d better let them know because I don’t think they realized this was what made him second to Orr.

If he was so great at controlling it then why didn’t he turn it into more offense? If he touched the puck the most on the team, which is what this implies, then how could he even avoid not finishing higher in team scoring? I have no doubt he was great for his era, I just question how he could possibly be viewed as the next tier after Orr when we know other defenders came and did their own version of “controlled the game” and were clearly larger contributors to their teams offense. This group is saddled in between Orr and Harvey in this regard in most, if not all cases. Not adding up guys.

Everyone is referring to aspects of the game that you do not recognize or appreciate. Listing some. PK before the 1956-57 rule change limiting the PP to one goal, coincidental penalty situations that did not exist by the time Orr arrived.

Controlling the game pace is about winning, not trying to score taking unnecessary risks and blowing 5-1 leads in playoff games.

 

[danincanada]

Nobody who watched Harvey play can question that he was controlling the game.It's like questioning that Lemieux was a good one-on-one player, or that Chara is tall.This betrays either that you never bothered to watch him (despite arguing against him for over a decade on this board) or that you're brain-damaged when it comes to evaluating talent.Pick one.

Oh I’ve watched and it’s been exaggerated here and accounts and quotes are often taken at face value. Maybe in the early 70’s he stood out as second to Orr with a gap after that but the numbers, which both Mario and Chara have on their side, don’t show him as the closest thing to a poor man’s Orr anymore. Orr was literally leading his teams offense and the numbers clearly show it. Harvey was usually quite far down in team scoring, despite being part of their legendary PP unit. It’s because he wasn’t Orr, didn’t rush the puck nearly as much, not even close, and he sat back far more. It’s fine, but it means he wasn’t controlling the play like some others who have come since that did those things more. Bourque is the best example. Played a ton, shot a ton, was all
over the ice, being the motor behind his team.

Could Harvey have done it more? Sure, but being clear second to Orr is still a stretch.

 

[danincanada]

Everyone is referring to aspects of the game that you do not recognize or appreciate. Listing some. PK before the 1956-57 rule change limiting the PP to one goal, coincidental penalty situations that did not exist by the time Orr arrived.

Controlling the game pace is about winning, not trying to score taking unnecessary risks and blowing 5-1 leads in playoff games.

Is this supposed to be the big reason why Orr and Harvey are so far apart statistically? I’ll give you points for trying.

Sure, but the Habs has way more going for them than just Harvey “controlling the play/pace” so let’s not pretend he was their Orr cause they really weren’t the same type of player. 27 points vs. 120 displays this with a blinding light. Which leads us right back to my original point, which was just a thought on what Farkas posted, which still isn’t going to be proven wrong because it’s true.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

I waited a bit before taking on the mantle of "clubhouse moderator," but i think now's a good time for these reminders:

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

This thread exists for the purpose of discussing this Round's nominees, who are-

Vote 18 Candidates

• Bill Cowley
• Bill Gadsby
• Boris Mikhailov
• Brian Leetch
• Duncan Keith
• Ed Belfour
• Eric Lindros
• Martin St. Louis
• Nels Stewart
• Sergei Fedorov
• Zdeno Chara

And some contributions may be approaching running afoul of this particular clause:

Any attempts to derail a discussion thread with disrespect to old-time hockey will be met with frontier justice

There's so much interesting material available that my biggest struggle is where to start! We shouldn't have to brook off-topic posts about players addressed long ago, or players not yet part of the discussion...

 

[quoipourquoi]

To add to what ChiTownPhilly said: y’all need to shut up about Doug Harvey.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Or Forsberg.

Or Bure.

 

[MXD]

How?



Edit: okay, I see...

Double edit: Flames already have a Cup, they don't need another one.

Triple edit: Was it really Flames fault only though? I mean, St. Louis can't really play the size card here because V. Bure is also a midget.

St-Louis can play the Hart+Art Ross on a Stanley Cup win against that let him go for nothing card. A card that neither Bure brother has in his hand.

 

[sr edler]

Or Bure.

Which one?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Which one?

Candace Cameron

 

[sr edler]

St-Louis can play the Hart+Art Ross on a Stanley Cup win against that let him go for nothing card. A card that neither Bure brother has in his hand.

I like St. Louis and his skillset but some context is probably needed. He won his Hart/Art Ross in the late stages of the DPE when Markus Näslund/Iginla were the big shots Art Ross threats because Forsberg was crippled and everyone else from the 90s were running on fumes after years of abuse and literally dragging Derian Hatcher/Todd Simpson type of players around on the their backs.

 

[Captain Bowie]

I like St. Louis and his skillset but some context is probably needed. He won his Hart/Art Ross in the late stages of the DPE when Markus Näslund/Iginla were the big shots Art Ross threats because Forsberg was crippled and everyone else from the 90s were running on fumes after years of abuse and literally dragging Derian Hatcher/Todd Simpson type of players around on the their backs.

Kovalchuk and Sakic were also factors that season.

 

[sr edler]

St-Louis can play the Hart+Art Ross on a Stanley Cup win against that let him go for nothing card. A card that neither Bure brother has in his hand.

Tampa didn't seem to learn from it either because later on they let another small sized undrafted French-Canadian player go for nothing, who also would have won the Cup if not for meeting a team in the finals who actually had more than one player who could do something on the offensive side of the puck.

 

[sr edler]

Kovalchuk and Sakic were also factors that season.

Kovalchuk is a flashier and slightly better/glorified winger version of Alex Yashin. Sakic didn't have that great of a season by his own standards (hence the mentioning of running on fumes). Players like Cory Stillman and Robert Lang also made the top 10 in scoring that year (with Lang actually scoring at a higher clip than Sakic).

 

[MXD]

Another good argument like that and St-Louis will look better than Ed Belfour as far as I'm concerned...

 

[blogofmike]

Ed Belfour vs. other Dallas Stars goaltenders

	Tm GA Rnk	Tm GA	GP	Sv %	GAA
1997	3rd	198
Moog			48	.913	2.15
1998	2nd	167
Belfour			61	.916	1.88
Turek			23	.901	2.22
1999	1st	168
Belfour			61	.915	1.99
Turek			26	.915	2.29
2000	3rd	184
Belfour			62	.919	2.10
Fernandez			24	.920	2.13
2001	2nd	187
Belfour			63	.905	2.34
Turco			26	.925	1.90
2002	18th	213
Belfour			60	.895	3.17
Turco			31	.921	2.49
2003	3rd	169
Turco			55	.932	1.73

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

While Ed Belfour had a career renaissance in Dallas, it does look like a very good defense to have in front of you, because a lot of other guys did just as well. His value added comes in the playoffs for stringing together enough good runs for Dallas to win its only Cup. While Belfour was on my 120 and CuJo was not, I don't think I'd be as quick to put Belfour ahead of Joseph, who generally had weak teams in front of him before Detroit (and then, even mighty Detroit gave him anemic goal support, sending Joseph off with a pair of 1-0 playoff losses in his final games. With a .931 save percentage and 1.64 GAA, Joseph went 4-8 as a Wing.)

 

[MXD]

Ed Belfour vs other Dallas Stars goaltenders

	Tm GA Rnk	Tm GA	Sv %	GAA
1997	3rd	198
Moog			.913	2.15
1998	2nd	167
Belfour			.916	1.88
Turek			.901	2.22
1999	1st	168
Belfour			.915	1.99
Turek			.915	2.29
2000	3rd	184
Belfour			.919	2.10
Fernandez			.920	2.13
2001	2nd	187
Belfour			.905	2.34
Turco			.925	1.90
2002	18th	213
Belfour			.895	3.17
Turco			.921	2.49
2003	3rd	169
Turco			.932	1.73

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

While Ed Belfour had a career renaissance in Dallas, it does look like a very good defense to have in front of you, because a lot of other guys did just as well. His value added comes in the playoffs for stringing together enough good runs for Dallas to win its only Cup. While Belfour was on my 120 and CuJo was not, I don't think I'd be as quick to put Belfour ahead of Joseph, who generally had weak teams in front of him before Detroit (and then, even mighty Detroit gave him anemic goal support, sending Joseph off with a pair of 1-0 playoff losses in his final games. With a .931 save percentage and 1.64 GAA, Joseph went 4-8 as a Wing.)

You can't exactly do this without posting the games played (I mean, you can, but you get the idea...)

 

[blogofmike]

You can't exactly do this without posting the games played (I mean, you can, but you get the idea...)

Edited

 

[Canadiens1958]

You can't exactly do this without posting the games played (I mean, you can, but you get the idea...)

Plus looking at quality of opposition and back to back games on consecutive days.

 

[wetcoast]

Kovalchuk is a flashier and slightly better/glorified winger version of Alex Yashin. Sakic didn't have that great of a season by his own standards (hence the mentioning of running on fumes). Players like Cory Stillman and Robert Lang also made the top 10 in scoring that year (with Lang actually scoring at a higher clip than Sakic).

Lang and Tanguay were also at the same PPG clip as MSL that season and were top 15 in scoring.

The clutch and grab era was alive and well.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I wonder too how much of an effect moving from Reunion Arena to the new building for the 2001-02 season had for Dallas' GAA numbers. The ice at the old building was notoriously awful, and may have suppressed scoring.

 

[MXD]

Plus looking at quality of opposition and back to back games on consecutive days.

Turek had 22 decisions in 1998, 8 of them against teams that were .500+, and that number could've been only 5 had Turek won one (of his two) game(s) against Ottawa AND his game against Phoenix.