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

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Keith, St Louis, and Chara all have good shots at my top 5. At minimum, a comparison of the 4 defensemen this round seems in order. 2

Need convincing Belfour should be the next goalie to add.

Mikhailov looks good for top 5.

With Lindros an option, Fedorov doesn't look so bad. Lindros is the only player so far who I won't vote for top 100, no matter what. Just didn't accomplish enough in his career. If the project 10 years ago unjustly favored 50s-70s players, this one sure looks to unjustly favor 90s players.

How the hell aren't Ullman and Cowley options yet?

Edit: how did I miss Cowley? The best offensive player left has a good shot at my #1
 

DannyGallivan

Your world frightens and confuses me
Aug 25, 2017
7,562
10,110
Melonville
I'm waiting patiently for Serge. I had him 88th on my original list of 120. Meanwhile, Chara was 119. I'm open to listening as to why I placed Chara too low.
 

sr edler

gold is not reality
Mar 20, 2010
11,845
6,290
Lindros was in (a relatively large) part himself responsible for the DPE, so you can in a way say it was the monster that mirrored the beast. Some managers/teams got so caught up in the Lindros induced size hype they panicked and started wasting 1st round picks like candy on players like Wade Belak, Mike Rupp and even Scott Parker. Other names that comes to mind are fat giraffe defensemen like Chris Therien and Mike Rathje (spelling?).

Question is how he met up to that challenge. So-so, mixed bag. PPG is nice, but if you want to be a MVP type of player you have to help your team in as many games as possible. You can't really fault him for the 97 finals, but the biggest problem was he couldn't stay healthy for a full season in his prime to save his life. He even had to miss 2 games during the 94–95 lockout season which cost him the Ross on a tiebreaker.

I've said it before, but both Forsberg (who he was traded for) and Fedorov (who is available this round) were smarter, headier and in a way more cynical players than Lindros who seemed to carry over too much junior hockey mentality into the pro game for his own best.

Also didn't make a big splash in the Nagano Olympics, where he was supposed to take over as the guy on Team Canada, although he set up Trevor Linden nicely behind the net against the Czechs for the game tying goal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kyle McMahon

DannyGallivan

Your world frightens and confuses me
Aug 25, 2017
7,562
10,110
Melonville
Also didn't make a big splash in the Nagano Olympics, where he was supposed to take over as the guy on Team Canada, although he set up Trevor Linden nicely behind the net against the Czechs for the game tying goal.
It's still a team game. He didn't give Rob Zamuner a roster position. He also wasn't responsible for the injuries that took Kariya (who was playing the best hockey of his career) out of the tournament and Sakic out of the game against the Czechs. I would wager that having either of those two players in that game against Hasek may have been the difference between where Canada ended up, and a possible Gold medal.
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
1992-93 through 1998-99
Jagr: 512 GP, 286 G, 736 PTS
Selanne: 485 GP, 313 G, 644 PTS
Sakic: 493 GP, 236 G, 612 PTS
...
Lindros: 431 GP, 263 G, 600 PTS


Obviously we all know he missed a lot of time, but it isn’t as though Lindros was too far off of the raw production of his contemporaries we’ve ranked above him. He lacked their longevity, so he’s understandably the last to become available.

Lindros’ per-82 statline for those 7 seasons from 1993-1999 (during which he played 80% of games) was 50 goals, 114 points, and a +34.

Despite all of the missed time, he still ranked 2nd in even-strength scoring to Jagr in this time frame.

I expect him to be extremely polarizing, but it might be worth considering that he actually accomplished quite a bit in 7 seasons - even when only playing 4 out of every 5 games.
 

sr edler

gold is not reality
Mar 20, 2010
11,845
6,290
If the Red Wings had carried Lindros on their shoulders into their locker room in 97 to celebrate the Cup with them, he would probably already be on the list... :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: wetcoast

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
1992-93 through 1998-99
Jagr: 512 GP, 286 G, 736 PTS
Selanne: 485 GP, 313 G, 644 PTS
Sakic: 493 GP, 236 G, 612 PTS
...
Lindros: 431 GP, 263 G, 600 PTS


Obviously we all know he missed a lot of time, but it isn’t as though Lindros was too far off of the raw production of his contemporaries we’ve ranked above him. He lacked their longevity, so he’s understandably the last to become available.

Lindros’ per-82 statline for those 7 seasons from 1993-1999 (during which he played 80% of games) was 50 goals, 114 points, and a +34.

Despite all of the missed time, he still ranked 2nd in even-strength scoring to Jagr in this time frame.

I expect him to be extremely polarizing, but it might be worth considering that he actually accomplished quite a bit in 7 seasons - even when only playing 4 out of every 5 games.

Interesting comparison. Similar in many ways in terms of performance to Bernie Geoffrion between 1955 and 1961.
Geoffrion missed 96 RS games or almost 14 per season in a 70 game season. Won two Ross Trophies, great playoff performer 1956 to 1960.

Point is that a RW is not nearly as critical to cementing a team's game to game play while a #1 center is.

Have to look well beyond the artificial per 82 games numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kyle McMahon

Hockey Outsider

Registered User
Jan 16, 2005
9,056
13,987
Some first impressions -

Bill Cowley - I don't want to dismiss him too quickly as being a product of the war years. He still won a Hart trophy and was twice a first-team all-star before the talent vacuum began (with four years in the top five in scoring). Remember that VsX already heavily discounts the war years, so I think those numbers can likely be taken at face value. Trivia - Cowley is the only player in history aside from Gretzky to lead the league in scoring on the strength of his assists alone. I'll need to look into how good he was in the playoffs, and just how bad was he defensively.

Bill Gadsby - is he any better than Chara, who has a somewhat similar style of play? The giant Slovak has a better Norris trophy voting record, and a stronger playoff resume.

Boris Mikhailov - back-to-back MVP trophies in the Soviet leagues is impressive (something that only Firsov and Tretiak ever accomplished). But I found him underwhelming in the Summit Series and Canada Cup.

Brian Leetch - atypical for an elite defenseman, he became noticeably worse in his thirties. Once he lost his elite speed, he wasn't able to cover his sometimes ill-advised rushes. That being said, I think he was generally better than he was given credit for defensively, both during and after his prime. Perhaps more than any other player this round (except possibly Chara), he brought enormous value on special teams. His playoff scoring numbers look exceptional (jumping about 20% from RS to PO!) - but remember that he made the postseason just once after age 28.

Duncan Keith - one can reasonably argue that he has the 2nd best playoff resume of any player from 2006 onwards (behind only Crosby). What hurts Keith is he has a lot of good regular seasons, but only a few that are great. He has two Norris trophies but was only in top five once more; for comparison, Leetch has five seasons in the top five, against stronger competition.

Ed Belfour - I like that he had Vezina calibre seasons on three different teams. He had some unexpected down periods though (towards the end of his time in Chicago; and that awful final season Dallas, before immediately bouncing back in Toronto). He was an excellent playoff performer (his adjusted playoff save percentage is identical to Hasek's, over a much larger number of games). He deserved serious consideration for the Smythe in 1999 (and that probably wasn't even his best postseason).

Eric Lindros - I don't think it's time for the Big E just yet - but he was a good playoff performer (better than generally recognized) and although I wouldn't call him a great defensive player in the traditional sense, he was so good at maintaining possession that his ES ratio (goals for to goals against while he's on the ice), especially during his prime in Philadelphia, is exceptional.

Martin St. Louis - I had him just outside the top 100, slightly behind contemporaries Iginla and Thornton. Two factors that work in his favour are he was pretty good defensively, and generally a strong playoff performer. But I can't help but feel that his trophy case is a lot better than it "should" be. He has two Art Ross trophies and a runner-up but I think he had some good luck (I've already written before that 2004 was one of the weakest years for top-end talent; in 2011 and 2013 I'm not convinced he was the best player on his own line).

Nels Stewart - he was already in my top five last round. His consistency and longevity (especially as a goal-scorer, but also as a point producer in general) was exceptional for his era. I find it significant that he was the NHL's all-time goal-scoring leader for 16 years (and points for 6 years). Two Hart trophies is also impressive. 1926 was something of a teaser though - he played very well in the postseason, and filled in as a defenseman - never again in his career was he a great playoff performer, nor was there any record of him playing well defensively. One of the strikes against Stewart is he's hard to build around (slow, bulky) but I see that as more of an issue in an All-Time Draft context.

Sergei Fedorov - I think I've soured on Fedorov in recent years; I used to rank him higher than Forsberg. Yes he was great defensively but I have a tough time seeing how little he produced after his big year (from 1995 to 2003, he was outscored by players like Palffy, Weight, Turgeon, LeClair and Amonte). His regular season resume is so thin compared to most other players on this list - but his strong playoff resume helps.

Zdeno Chara - I don't think that most people fully appreciate how good Chara has done in Norris trophy voting. He's one of only five players in history to have ten "significant" seasons (where he's getting at least a 5% vote share) - the others were Bourque, Lidstrom, Harvey and Pilote. It's true that he peaked in an era with weaker high-end talent, but if think we've already discount his resume significantly - on paper he should have gone with MacInnis several rounds ago.
 
Last edited:

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,672
16,395
I'm wondering what to do with the non-numbers, non-playing (if that makes sense) factors for Ed Belfour. He's generally signficantly underrated as a playoff performer and his longevity is interesting, in that he continued to "add" to his legacy even in Toronto (he didn't only add games), since he had yet to fare extremely well on so-so defensive teams. Ideally... He's with Broda and Durnan. Not all alone. Also the player in this group with the best individual season as far as I'm concerned.

But there's one thing that really irks me about Belfour : the way he left both Dallas and Chicago. It's not "Durnan in playoffs" bad, but it's ugly. And, very small sample size, but what the hell happened in San Jose?

....But there's worse than this. Like, being high on Charlie Gardiner, apparently. :naughty::naughty:
 

ted2019

History of Hockey
Oct 3, 2008
5,492
1,882
pittsgrove nj
Belfour is an interesting case. Started out on fire early on with the 2 Vezina's. He was never a back-up (except for his rookie year) and was in the Vezina conversation basically his entire career. Was a relatively good playoff performer his entire career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: overg

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Yes, categorically refusing a player like Lindros because he was only relevant for 7 years while being sky high on Charlie Gardiner who was relevant for 7 years seems a bit contradictory.

Compare games missed during that 7 years, compare average career length across time, and compare playoff performances
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenchBrawl

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
So looking at Belfour again, he does look very good as the next goalie to be added.

Much better playoff record than Tony Esposito or Roy Worters. Much better longevity than Bernie Parent or Jiri Holecek. Much better All-Star record than Johnny Bower.

-----

Edit - comparing across positions, he easy beat fellow "90s" players Fedorov and Lindros in number of historically noteworthy seasons.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,672
16,395
So looking at Belfour again, he does look very good as the next goalie to be added.

Much better playoff record than Tony Esposito or Roy Worters. Much better longevity than Bernie Parent or Jiri Holecek. Much better All-Star record than Johnny Bower.

-----

Edit - comparing across positions, he easy beat fellow "90s" players Fedorov and Lindros in number of historically noteworthy seasons.

... Playoffs are to Roy Worters what Greenland is to Maps : No Data.

But yeah, that group of five netminders you mentionned above (to which HOH will probably add Henrik Lundqvist two years from now) is the group in which Belfour tends to be more often than not lumped in, while he's something like the middle ground between Broda (longevity + playoffs) and Durnan (elite seasons + RS).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

Captain Bowie

Registered User
Jan 18, 2012
27,139
4,414
1992-93 through 1998-99
Jagr: 512 GP, 286 G, 736 PTS
Selanne: 485 GP, 313 G, 644 PTS
Sakic: 493 GP, 236 G, 612 PTS
...
Lindros: 431 GP, 263 G, 600 PTS


Obviously we all know he missed a lot of time, but it isn’t as though Lindros was too far off of the raw production of his contemporaries we’ve ranked above him. He lacked their longevity, so he’s understandably the last to become available.

Lindros’ per-82 statline for those 7 seasons from 1993-1999 (during which he played 80% of games) was 50 goals, 114 points, and a +34.

Despite all of the missed time, he still ranked 2nd in even-strength scoring to Jagr in this time frame.

I expect him to be extremely polarizing, but it might be worth considering that he actually accomplished quite a bit in 7 seasons - even when only playing 4 out of every 5 games.
The big difference is those guys added a lot of complimentary seasons outside of that span, hence why they are so much further ahead.

My biggest problem with Lindros is too much of his case is based on "what could have been". His legend heavily outweighs his actual accomplishments. Yeah, if things had gone better for him he could be a top 25 player on this list, but they didn't. I'm only interested in what actually happened.
 

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,538
4,911
Boris Mikhailov - back-to-back MVP trophies in the Soviet leagues is impressive (something that only Firsov and Tretiak ever accomplished). But I found him underwhelming in the Summit Series and Canada Cup.

Mikhailov didn't play in the Canada Cup.
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
The big difference is those guys added a lot of complimentary seasons outside of that span, hence why they are so much further ahead.

My biggest problem with Lindros is too much of his case is based on "what could have been". His legend heavily outweighs his actual accomplishments. Yeah, if things had gone better for him he could be a top 25 player on this list, but they didn't. I'm only interested in what actually happened.

I feel like people are covering what actually happened.

He did score 600 points in that 7-season span (comparable to Selanne and Sakic). He did have four seasons of relevant Hart support. He didn’t have the extra fluff though, which is why he’s among the last of the best-player-in-the-world types that we’ll be ranking.

But let’s not dismiss 431 games of dominant hockey as “what could have been”. The distribution might have been spread over 6 full seasons and a lockout season instead of (431/80) 5.4 seasons, but it’s still a lot of work to appreciate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiTownPhilly

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,672
16,395
If Belfour is the next ranked goalie, we just had a run of goalies go in so he may have to wait another round, but I know that's not the right voting mindset so hopefully there will be a solid case for him one way or another, I know @MXD will make one for sure.

I think I can safely say it's not gonna happen at this point.
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Pretty sure he's referring to Cowley. Excellent regular season offense (one of the top 20 seven-year VsX scores), four years as a first-team all-star, pretty solid playoff numbers for his era - but he was a notoriously bad defensive player, and a lot of his accomplishments came during the war years.

From what I've read about Cowley it sounded like he was more indifferent to defensive play than bad at it. I guess to some voters that may be relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->