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

[DannyGallivan]

I have the defensemen as following.

1. Chara: As someone else stated, but he qualities that are hard to quantify. He was no doubt the leader of those Bruin teams. I also think that by the playoffs, he was wore down and his play suffered. The year they won the cup, in regards of ice time during the regular season, it was Chara, Seidenberg, Boychuk and then everybody else. In the playoffs in the 2010/11 season, Chara & Seidenberg played 27:39 & 27:38 and then the next closet defensemen were Johnny Boychuk & Andrew Ference at 20:38 & 20:37. 7 minutes per game in the playoffs is a huge difference.

2. Gadsby: 7x post season AS, whether it was a "weak" time for defensemen or not, is still pretty good. He played on some bad teams as he only made the playoffs 8x in 20 years, so to be voted as an AS as much as he did, meant that he was recognized as being on of the top players in the league. If he played on better teams, he probably would've had more post-season AS berths and better numbers.

3. Brian Leetch: His career is basically from the 1987-88 to 1996-97, as except for the 2000-01 season, he was an average defenseman. He had a great playoff career, but that won't put him no higher then 4th. I find it hard to vote Leetch over Mark Howe, who was the better player.

4. Duncan Keith: All I really have to say is that his career has been too inconsistent to be ranked higher in this group. I still think that it could be a reach for him to even be a top 100 player.

You almost have my list upside down (except I too have Gadsby second among this group).

 

[Michael Farkas]

I understand what you mean.

But Chara is the one player that has to be the hardest to rate.

When he was bad early in his career, yes, he was worse than anyone on this list. His skill set is not as good as anyone else's except that he can shoot really, really hard. But no one else is 6'9", either. No one else can be standing in the faceoff circle and poke-check someone just coming over the blueline. No one else could fight anyone anytime simply because they could just neutralize them with size and strength. And then you look at his numbers as a shutdown defenseman. Take away his Islander years and he's +310, facing the top lines every game and being the top PK guy every year. Also an excellent captain.

Eye test shows a failure here. But his accomplishments are very good. That said, its a little too early for me.

One exception, the eye test doesn't fail here. Quite the opposite, this where we need to rely on it because Chara wasn't a big producer and there are no stats for defense. Similarly, one could understand why they'd want someone like Savard over him.

Other than that, that's all very agreeable.

 

[ted2019]

my mid-week list.
1. Bill Cowley: He seems to me as the strongest player in the field of voting. He was such a great offensive player and at this stage of things, his lack of defense should/could be overlooked. By his own admission, he never backchecked. Backchecking Bill Cowley? Not A Chance!

2.Ed Belfour.: One of the most consistent players in this round. He had his faults just like everyone else left, but he was a constant in the Vezina voting throughout his career, even though he only made 3 post-season AS teams.

3. Boris Mikhailov: His back to back MVP's in the Soviet Union is nothing to sneeze at. It's his time now.

4. Nels Stewart: Just like I stated with Mikhailov, it's time to put Stewart in now. The numbers show how dominant he was.

5. Zdeno Chara: A player that stats couldn't define. He made the Bruins tougher and much harder to play against when he got to Boston. He also made Ottawa a lot weaker when he left, which says something about the player and his intangibles. Was and still a workhorse at 41 years old ( TOI this season he's at 21:00)

6. Eric Lindros: If Eric could only keep his head up. Most dominant player in the terms of overall package in this round. Was a star in the Olympics at 18 years old, which should help his case.

7/8/9: ( no particular order) Gadsby, Fedorov, St. Louis. Not ready to see them inducted yet, if at all.

10/11. Leetch/Keith. Don't find them worthy at all.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Arguably, Belfour went against the three best goaltenders of all time...maybe 3 of the top 5...and he basically was with them every step of the way too in terms of season-to-season...

I imagine he's been on the list for a while now if not for that...thoughts?

 

[bobholly39]

my mid-week list.
1. Bill Cowley: He seems to me as the strongest player in the field of voting. He was such a great offensive player and at this stage of things, his lack of defense should/could be overlooked. By his own admission, he never backchecked. Backchecking Bill Cowley? Not A Chance!

2.Ed Belfour.: One of the most consistent players in this round. He had his faults just like everyone else left, but he was a constant in the Vezina voting throughout his career, even though he only made 3 post-season AS teams.

3. Boris Mikhailov: His back to back MVP's in the Soviet Union is nothing to sneeze at. It's his time now.

4. Nels Stewart: Just like I stated with Mikhailov, it's time to put Stewart in now. The numbers show how dominant he was.

5. Zdeno Chara: A player that stats couldn't define. He made the Bruins tougher and much harder to play against when he got to Boston. He also made Ottawa a lot weaker when he left, which says something about the player and his intangibles. Was and still a workhorse at 41 years old ( TOI this season he's at 21:00)

6. Eric Lindros: If Eric could only keep his head up. Most dominant player in the terms of overall package in this round. Was a star in the Olympics at 18 years old, which should help his case.

7/8/9: ( no particular order) Gadsby, Fedorov, St. Louis. Not ready to see them inducted yet, if at all.

10/11. Leetch/Keith. Don't find them worthy at all.

Really appreciate these summary posts. I wish more people would do those (and yes i realize the irony when I haven't made many of those myself).

I really like Belfour here. He might be my #1. I think him and Brett Hull might be the 2 players who have dropped the most for me from my preliminary list.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I would have put Ed Belfour on this list a month ago. I might need another month before I’m not leaving Keith unranked.

Even in his Norris seasons, Keith was on the ice for 81 and 71 even-strength GA compared to Chara’s 50 and 45 in those same years with close TOI. Keith’s high-offense seasons that resonated with voters just don’t seem to have the stable GA numbers of the other years when the Blackhawks were winning multiple Jennings Trophies.

A #1 defenseman on a high-profile team that goes 36-7-5 should not be an afterthought in the Norris race in the Subban/Suter/Letang year.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I would have put Ed Belfour on this list a month ago. I might need another month before I’m not leaving Keith unranked.

Even in his Norris seasons, Keith was on the ice for 81 and 71 even-strength GA compared to Chara’s 50 and 45 in those same years with close TOI. Keith’s high-offense seasons that resonated with voters just don’t seem to have the stable GA numbers of the other years when the Blackhawks were winning multiple Jennings Trophies.

A #1 defenseman on a high-profile team that goes 36-7-5 should not be an afterthought in the Norris race in the Subban/Suter/Letang year.

Agree. But it was the voters completely blew it that season. That was the same year Ovechkin was an all-star at two positions, and won an incredibly dubious Hart Trophy. That said, Keith was visibly worse the next season, yet scored more points, and therefore won the Norris.

I do prefer Chara at this point though. Longevity in spite of playing such huge minutes on a generally average Boston blueline for so many years. I think Keith was a little better at his peak and in the playoffs with the way he could drive offense at even strength, but Chara was a star before Keith was even in the league. All those big minutes appear to have taken their toll on Keith, who is no longer a star player. Chara just keeps on ticking. Keith also had an elite support pairing (Hjalmarsson-Oduya) who could take tough matchups when called upon. Chara had no such support in Boston.

Out of the four defensemen available right now, Chara is rising to the top of the pile for me. I think I have him over Gadsby slightly at the moment. Keith would be third by a small margin over Leetch. I'd say both of them were equally important to their teams, but the difference is Keith was more opportunistic, winning three Cups. Leetch never come close to winning again after 1994.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

That season really helped Ovechkin with the Hart as he also beat up on the southeast division.

Crosby did as well but at least he had a more even distribution of points among the 3 divisions.

MSL "feels" like a bit of a compiler but he actually has other very good attributes, good in playoffs, decent defensive play for a winger ect... makes him a hard guy to place this round.

I'm not sure about him being a compiler. He did most of his damage within a ten year window and definitely did not linger around to pad his career stats. Agree about the rest though.

 

[sr edler]

Both Chara and Keith are apparently fitness freaks. Chara seems to have more natural athleticism though, although it was hidden early on in his career in a flamingo body.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Chara probably bikes the entire Tour de France as a warmup before games...he asked - I think this is out there - but he asked a few years ago if he could try to play all 60 minutes of a game...

 

[wetcoast]

I'm not sure about him being a compiler. He did most of his damage within a ten year window and definitely did not linger around to pad his career stats. Agree about the rest though.

That's why I said "feels like" as I don't think he was either.

He is sort of like the 2000s version of Adam Oates who feels like a compiler but wasn't really.

 

[sr edler]

When it comes to St. Louis/Iginla, Calgary had both those players and chose to go with the latter one. Ottawa went with Redden over Chara though. Teams make dubious/hard decisions all the time. I like St. Louis' versatility a little better than Iginla's who sometimes seemed/looked like a tunnel vision player. None of them are better than Pavel though, or Patrick Kane.

 

[overpass]

Zdeno Chara’s great plus-minus total has already been mentioned. I’ll add that he has been a huge part of great defensive teams over the course of his career. The statistical record very strongly suggests that he’s had a great impact as a defensive player.

I posted in an earlier round of the project that the Boston Bruins had the best goal prevention record of any team during Eddie Shore’s prime. The same is true for Zdeno Chara’s Bruins tenure. Boston has allowed 2572 GA since 2006-07, with the other NHL teams allowing 2580 (Sharks) to 3112 (Oilers)

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1000&sort=goalsAgainst

Narrow it down to Chara’s Boston prime with Claude Julien (2007-08 to 2013-14, Chara is a Norris finalist in 5 of 7 seasons) and Boston leads in GA by even more. 1261 GA, the other teams range from 1291 (Rangers) to 1689 (Leafs).

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,500&sort=goalsAgainst

Boston also had the lowest goals against per game in the playoffs over this time period. 2.27 GA/G over 97 GP.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...er=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=goalsAgainstPerGame

The Ottawa Senators had the third fewest goals against of any team over Chara’s four seasons in Ottawa. 784 GA, the other teams ranged from 742 GA (Devils) to 1117 GA (Penguins).

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,200&sort=goalsAgainst

And the Senators also had the second lowest GA/G of any team in the playoffs from 2002 to 2006...even with Patrick Lalime and Ray Emery in net! 2.02 GA/G, second only to the Devils’ 1.93 GA/G.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...er=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=goalsAgainstPerGame

I dont think anyone is putting much weight on Chara’s early seasons,but the Islanders has the second most GA in Chara’s four seasons on Long Island. 1012 GA, the other teams ranged from 706 GA (Stars, good job Ed Belfour) to 1151 GA (Lightning, holy crap they were bad before Marty St Louis joined them)

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,300&sort=goalsAgainst

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Chara probably bikes the entire Tour de France as a warmup before games...he asked - I think this is out there - but he asked a few years ago if he could try to play all 60 minutes of a game...

Chara climbed Mount Kilimanjaro (the tallest mountain in Africa; the summit is 5,895 meters above sea level). I joke that it only took him a few steps.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Zdeno Chara’s great plus-minus total has already been mentioned. I’ll add that he has been a huge part of great defensive teams over the course of his career. The statistical record very strongly suggests that he’s had a great impact as a defensive player.

I posted in an earlier round of the project that the Boston Bruins had the best goal prevention record of any team during Eddie Shore’s prime. The same is true for Zdeno Chara’s Bruins tenure. Boston has allowed 2572 GA since 2006-07, with the other NHL teams allowing 2580 (Sharks) to 3112 (Oilers)

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1000&sort=goalsAgainst

Narrow it down to Chara’s Boston prime with Claude Julien (2007-08 to 2013-14, Chara is a Norris finalist in 5 of 7 seasons) and Boston leads in GA by even more. 1261 GA, the other teams range from 1291 (Rangers) to 1689 (Leafs).

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,500&sort=goalsAgainst

Boston also had the lowest goals against per game in the playoffs over this time period. 2.27 GA/G over 97 GP.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...er=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=goalsAgainstPerGame

The Ottawa Senators had the third fewest goals against of any team over Chara’s four seasons in Ottawa. 784 GA, the other teams ranged from 742 GA (Devils) to 1117 GA (Penguins).

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,200&sort=goalsAgainst

And the Senators also had the second lowest GA/G of any team in the playoffs from 2002 to 2006...even with Patrick Lalime and Ray Emery in net! 2.02 GA/G, second only to the Devils’ 1.93 GA/G.

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...er=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=goalsAgainstPerGame

I dont think anyone is putting much weight on Chara’s early seasons,but the Islanders has the second most GA in Chara’s four seasons on Long Island. 1012 GA, the other teams ranged from 706 GA (Stars, good job Ed Belfour) to 1151 GA (Lightning, holy crap they were bad before Marty St Louis joined them)

http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?aggre...&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,300&sort=goalsAgainst

True BUT .......... the Chara /Julien combo are responsible for the 2010 meltdown against Philly blowing a 3-0 lead in games and in goals in game 7.

Also 2013 finals against Chicago game 6 last minute and a half was mishandled.

Managed team leader is not a Top 100 player.

Also in Ottawa, Jacques Martin deserves credit.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Boston's performance with and without Cowley in three seasons that he missed time to injury - 1938-39, 1941-42, 1943-44.

This is built off a post that @overpass made several years ago. The original data was lost in the site migration, but NHL.com's new historical player game logs made it relatively easy to reconstruct (and with more accuracy than looking through old newspapers!)

1938-39

With Cowley
34 GP | 3.59GF/G | 1.74GA/G | 26-6-2

Without Cowley
14 GP | 2.43 GF/G | 1.21 GA/G | 10-4-0

The Bruins were ridiculously strong and deep this season. While they were slightly worse without Cowley, they were still very strong. Their scoring pace dropped off dramatically without Cowley but their defensive record improved.

Milt Schmidt missed several games during Cowley's time out of the lineup as well. Flash Hollet moved up from his defense/utility role to take a full-time spot at centre while Cowley was out.

After Cowley had returned from injury, with 16 games remaining in the season, Art Ross sent both Cowley's wingers, Ray Getliffe and Charlie Sand, to the minors. He stated he was unsatisfied with the defensive performance of the line. While both returned to Boston within two weeks, Roy Conacher and Mel Hill replaced them on Cowley's wings and they were even more offensively potent than the Getliffe-Cowley-Sand trio had been.

_____

In the playoffs, the Conacher-Cowley-Hill line tore it up. Cowley led the playoffs in scoring (for which he was awarded a Retroactive Conn Smythe), as the Conacher-Cowley-Hill line easily led the Bruins offense: 1938-39 Boston Bruins Roster and Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com (Cowley was injured and not much of a factor when the Bruins would win the Cup again in 1941, after his record-breaking Art Ross year).
______

1941-42

With Cowley
28 GP | 3.36 GF/G | 2.18 GA/G | 18-7-3

Without Cowley
20 GP | 3.30 GF/G | 2.85 GA/G | 7-10-3


At the time of Cowley's injury in Januray, the Bruins were in first place in the league, but they dropped to third without him. Interesting that this year, it was mainly an increased number of goals-against that hurt them when Cowley wasn't in the lineup.
An complicating factor is that the Kraut Line left the Bruins to enlist in the RCAF near the end of this season. The Bruins were 3-6-1 without Cowley and the Krauts, and were 4-4-2 with the Krauts but without Cowley.

With Krauts, No Cowley
10 GP | 3.20 GF/G | 2.40 GA/G | 4-4-2

Without Krauts or Cowley
10 GP | 3.40 GF/G | 3.30 GA/G | 3-6-1

Even adjusting for the absence of the Krauts, it seems the Bruins' goals against actually got noticeably worse without Cowley in the lineup.
____________________

1943-44

With Cowley
36 GP | 4.86 GF/G | 5.33 GA/G | 15-16-5

Without Cowley
14 GP | 3.43 GF/G 48| 5.43 GA/G76 | 4-10-0

Yes, scoring really did increase that much during the war years.

Cowley was on pace to run away with his second Art Ross in the war-ravaged season, and Boston was holding their own as a team. Then Cowley went down to a knee injury in early January, and Boston went into a tailspin without him as they could no longer score at such a high rate. The Art Ross would eventually go to Cowley's linemate, Herb Cain, who only missed 1 game to Cowley's 14.

Herb Cain with Cowley
35 GP | 31-29-60 | 1.71 points-per-game

Herb Cain without Cowley
14 GP | 5-17-22 | 1. 57 points-per-game

After missing 11 games Cowley returned for a game, but he bumped his knee and missed the next 3 games. He returned for good after that but Boston's play did not improve. While they started scoring again, their goals against took a hit. Maybe Cowley had not fully recovered from his knee injury? In fact, Cowley did not perform as well in the remaining three seasons of his career and it's possible that he was never the same after the knee injury.
____________________________________
In summary

• In all 3 seasons examined, the Bruins' winning record was better with Cowley in the lineup. The difference was small in 1938-39, when the Bruins were one of the most stacked teams in NHL history. But it was quite large in both 1941-42 and 1943-44.
• In all 3 seasons, the Bruins scored more goals-per-game with Cowley in the lineup. The difference was very large in 1938-39 and 1943-44.
• Surprisingly, for a player with a reputation for never backchecking, Cowley mostly seems to have held his own from a goals-against perspective. The Bruins' GA was significantly better in 1938-39 without Cowley in the lineup (but the difference wasn't nearly as great as the increase in GF Cowley brought). However, the team's GA was actually significantly worse without Cowley in the lineup in 1941-42. 1943-44 shows Cowley mostly holding his own, but broken down, Cowley seems to have had a positive impact on GA before his knee injury and a negative impact on GA after coming back from the injury. Maybe Cowley was right about the positive effects of his puck possession (at least when healthy)?
• As a side note, Cowley's effect at increasing his linemates' numbers shines through even though I wasn't initially looking for it. Cowley's new (at the time) line finished 1-2-3 in Bruins playoff scoring in 1939, and it was clearly Cowley driving the bus. Also, Herb Cain probably has his linemate Cowley (and his late season injury ) to thank for his Art Ross in 1943-44.

 

[ted2019]

I'm not sure about him being a compiler. He did most of his damage within a ten year window and definitely did not linger around to pad his career stats. Agree about the rest though.

To me, Mark Recchi, Ron Francis & Jeremy Roenick are the definition of a compiler in hockey. Ironically, I don't think you will see any of those 3 at any time in this project, but St. Louis is here. Roenick never came close to a post season award, The best Recchi could do was a single 2nd team AS really early in his career, while Francis at least won a Selke and finished 2nd the following season.

 

[ted2019]

Both Chara and Keith are apparently fitness freaks. Chara seems to have more natural athleticism though, although it was hidden early on in his career in a flamingo body.

As someone who is a large person like Chara, it takes time to "grow" into your body when you are big. It took me as a Sophomore to be as physically strong as my size suggested that I should be ( I was 6'5" and 245 lbs.).

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I think we were pretty good about recognizing Denis Potvin.

fair, but i think the gap between potvin and his forwards is more obvious than the gap between keith and kane.

potvin had three norrises, five top twos, and six norris noms in seven years. he had two top tens in scoring and a top five, and a hart runner up, which for a post-norris defenseman is very rare. up to his retirement he was unequivocally a top five player at his position ever and was in the top 20 in all-time scoring and the only defenseman to crack 1,000 points. trottier has the hart/ross and a pair of runner ups, and bossy has a 2nd place to gretzky and a lot of top fives and a three gretzky-less top threes, but it was "easier" imo to distinguish them from potvin, who after all was also the captain.

it's murkier with keith and kane, and of course toews was/is the captain. keith has just the two norrises, one 2AST and nothing else on his RS resume. kane has the hart/ross and over the last four years is the leading scorer in the league (although will kucherov catch him by the end of the season... maybe though seven points over the last twelve games is a tall order and kane has a game in hand)-- there is no multi-season stretch of trottier's career where you can say that, nor bossy's though if you take out gretzky bossy is #1 for a good deal of the '80s. i guess my gut just tells me if at the end of the day kane has a peak where he was 1, 2, x, 2 in scoring with a hart, history will find it hard to say that he, not keith of "just" the two norrises, was the man on those teams.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

In retrospect, Kane should have probably been added around when Selanne was; lack of Kane shouldn't affect Keith's spot if Keith is worthy.

 

[wetcoast]

Chara climbed Mount Kilimanjaro (the tallest mountain in Africa; the summit is 5,895 meters above sea level). I joke that it only took him a few steps.

Technically it's a walk but still a very long and hard one.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yes. Robinson was the "best" defenseman, However, Savard was the most balanced (I guess that's what I meant when I said best mix of offense and defense... I could have worded that better). He leaned more towards defensive defenseman after his broken leg. Plus, his teammates universally considered him the calm in the storm, the one guy who never got rattled (which is why I give him the defensive "leader" tag...and he was a captain, after all). Anyways, we can get into this more when Savard's name comes up.

If you read "The Game" Dryden considered Lapointe the most important of the big 3.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Late 60's and first half of the 70's seems like a suspect era in terms of defensemen beyond Orr and Park.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Technically it's a walk but still a very long and hard one.

I know, I've done it. Like you said, it's "only" a very long walk - maybe some light scrambling depending on the route. The hardest part, aside from the lack of oxygen from the high altitude, is the change in temperatures - it's around 30 degrees at the start and -10 (or colder) at the summit - a big change for 4-6 days.

 

[MXD]

I know, I've done it. Like you said, it's "only" a very long walk - maybe some light scrambling depending on the route. The hardest part, aside from the lack of oxygen from the high altitude, is the change in temperatures - it's around 30 degrees at the start and -10 (or colder) at the summit - a big change for 4-6 days.

Chara would've crawled it (and his feet would've stayed warm when his head reached the peak).