Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 19

[ChiTownPhilly]

Personnel disbursement at Camp ChiTownPhilly, Tuesday, March 19

Monitoring the Latrine: Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson? After these last two years? Really?! Even if you loved his early-mid 20s, wouldn't the best you could say about him would be to give him the ol' "I" (incomplete) grade and exercise some caution while seeing how the rest of this career plays out??

Overseeing the Out-House: Serge Savard & Joe Thornton. I guess Savard has some playoff beasting to distinguish himself (markedly) from Thornton... but not a single Norris podium, ever?! Hate to have to choose between these two. Hopefully, it won't be relevant.

Custodial responsibilities on the perimeter (i.e.: they squeaked onto my 120, surviving the late cuts): Peter Št'astný, Martin St Louis, Dave Keon. The Panel seems to like St Louis more than I do. I think I'd still rather have Keon on my team, by a little. Post-war non-Habs O-6ers haven't been faring too well lately, however.

Guarding the approach-road: Nels Stewart, Norm Ullman, Mark Howe. 'Bout the best thing I can say about Stewart is that I still believe he was a marginally better option than Brett Hull. Still, I got M. Howe as the ranking NC-staffer in this trio.

Sentry duty near the building: Eddie Gerard, Tony Esposito, Patrick Kane. Depending on the other nominees, these ones are all top-100-worthy. [I can't undo Cowley and Brett Hull, so there's two slots denied these guys.] Just not their time yet.

Doorman: Toe Blake. Have to make sure that the overvaluing of Lach doesn't lead to the undervaluing of Toe Blake.

Officers' Quarters: Duncan Keith, Bill Gadsby, Eric Lindros, Sid Abel. I undervalued Abel in discussions from years past (and also a little bit in this Project's preliminary thread)-- but I pulled it together to the point where I can say "recommended for advancement this Round." I feel for Gadsby. I think we've already passed eight players who are lesser options than him- including two Defensemen. Still, if overdue nominees come onto the board, I have to assess them as they arrive.

[I know I'm not supposed to think like this, it's kind of an ATD-ish flight-of-fancy, but try this: take Duncan Keith, with a 1950s health-and-fitness regimen (rather than a 21st century one) and transport him onto Gadsby's BlackHawks or Rangers, with THAT "quality" of teammates, and oblige him to match up against the guys Gadsby was assigned to contain. Now, I love Keith, and (as a fan) am personally grateful for what he's done-- but still; good luck with that one, Duncan...]

Command Center: Brian Leetch- I wish folks could slow their roll with the Karlsson comparisons. When Leetch had the wheels, he could play GREAT defense. There won't be so many fond memories of Karlsson's work at his team's end of the ice.

Valeri Vasiliev- Suppose what I like about Vasiliev is that he strikes me as the kind of guy who could take it to you any way you want to play it. Trained purpose-specific for the International Ice- but retained a hardness that translated well to the smaller surface(s).

Jarome Iginla. Finally. Inarguable Alpha and Boss of his team. What he could have accomplished with just a little bit of help is almost beyond imagination. I mean- just look at what the hell he had to work with.

 

[sr edler]

Conroy, Savard, Langkow isn't exactly a murders row for centers.

Marc Savard? He was well above average on the playmaking side of things. Conroy while not an offensive #1C dynamo was a very good all-round guy. Langkow is meh though.

 

[MXD]

Yeah... With regards, if Iginla needed a better player than Savard, Langkow and Conroy, that's actually a great argument as to why he should promptly discarded at this point.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Trying to think of a weaker Hart runner-up in recent memory than Jarome Iginla in 2003-04. The team was 24-10-4 with Kiprusoff and 18-23-3 without, but Iginla places 2nd while placing 16th in scoring? Sure. Full marks for 2001-02 - and even 2007-08 is solid even if I would’ve looked to someone else for a nomination - but I wouldn’t be heartbroken if he misses the cut in favor of other contemporaries with stronger best-3-seasons like Thornton, St. Louis, Kane, or Karlsson.

 

[wetcoast]

I'm just going to throw this out there in response to your post - Isn't the main argument for Savard that he was just that important to a dynasty team? And isn't there a similar (and IMO better) argument for Duncan Keith?

I think Keith did more with less help on the back end than Savard in the playoffs.

For instance the Habs won a SC without Savard and then miss the playoffs with him in consecutive seasons.

We had earlier reports of Lafleur driving the bus on those 70s Habs teams and Robinson and Dryden are already on the list and rightly so.

Was Savard really any more important or a better player than Jacques Lemaire (who is quite under rated and much better than Keon for instance)?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Trying to think of a weaker Hart runner-up in recent memory than Jarome Iginla in 2003-04. The team was 24-10-4 with Kiprusoff and 18-23-3 without, but Iginla places 2nd while placing 16th in scoring? Sure. Full marks for 2001-02 - and even 2007-08 is solid even if I would’ve looked to someone else for a nomination - but I wouldn’t be heartbroken if he misses the cut in favor of other contemporaries with stronger best-3-seasons like Thornton, St. Louis, Kane, or Karlsson.

Kiprusoff represents 38 decisions. Less than half the schedule.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Imagine if Iginla actually played with a #1 center his entire career in Calgary? Conroy, Savard, Langkow isn't exactly a murderers row for centers.

Yeah... With regards, if Iginla needed a better player than Savard, Langkow and Conroy, that's actually a great argument as to why he should promptly discarded at this point.

What's the implication?!? That Iginla would have elevated the play of these average cadavers even more than he already did if he was any good?! We should marvel that he did as much as he did with those ordinaries.

As I reviewed Iginla, the comparable I kept coming back to was Bathgate. Not as slick, no doubt. Not much less skilled- more physical (although Bathgate's strength was underestimated in some quarters), not as durable, but pretty durable, all the same... and saddled with strings of sub-optimal teammates for long stetches. For about seven years, Iginla was well in the conversation for best in the world at his position- and competition for that distinction was NOT shallow.

Unlike Bathgate, he didn't get traded to a ready-built Cup contender, and so missed out on hoisting the Big Trophy. Still, we honored Bathgate before the list was two-thirds complete- and we'd better honor Iginla before the clock runs out here- or else we risk sort of beclowning ourselves.

[I hope I don't wind up ending the Project with an IE-style freak-out on this subject.]

 

[MXD]

[I hope I don't wind up ending the Project with an IE-style freak-out on this subject.]

That's pretty much what you're doing by calling Savard and Conroy "average cadavers".

 

[quoipourquoi]

Kiprusoff represents 38 decisions. Less than half the schedule.

Kiprusoff also represents the team pacing for 112 points per-82 instead of 73. Their ascension from a sub-.500 record when he was brought in around Thanksgiving didn’t necessarily have to be attributed to Kiprusoff on the Hart ballots because of how little he played (though he did place high) but it almost certainly should not have been attributed to Iginla.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Never noticed how little Iginla scored for Calgary’s most successful regular season team in that run: just 67 points in 2005-06 on Calgary’s 103-point division winner.

 

[MXD]

It's safe to say that, had Kiprusoff taken as many nights off as Iginla, or just plain had bad nights, those Calgary teams would've gone nowhere.
... Of course, Kipper isn't the only netminder about whom such a thing can be said.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

What's the implication?!? That Iginla would have elevated the play of these average cadavers even more than he already did if he was any good?! We should marvel that he did as much as he did with those ordinaries.

As I reviewed Iginla, the comparable I kept coming back to was Bathgate. Not as slick, no doubt. Not much less skilled- more physical (although Bathgate's strength was underestimated in some quarters), not as durable, but pretty durable, all the same... and saddled with strings of sub-optimal teammates for long stetches. For about seven years, Ignila was well in the conversation for best in the world at his position- and competition for that distinction was NOT shallow.

Unlike Bathgate, he didn't get traded to a ready-built Cup contender, and so missed out on hoisting the Big Trophy. Still, we honored Bathgate before the list was two-thirds complete- and we'd better honor Iginla before the clock runs out here- or else we risk sort of beclowning ourselves.

[I hope I don't wind up ending the Project with an IE-style freak-out on this subject.]

Bathgate is not an unreasonable comparison. But he has Iginla beat handily in terms of consistency. Bathgate never dipped below 5th in league scoring for 9 consecutive seasons. Iginla had several seasons in his prime that were way below his AST-caliber years.

And Iginla did get traded to a ready-built Cup contender. The Penguins finished 2nd overall in the league in 2013, when they acquired him at the trade deadline. Next to Chicago, they were Cup favorites. The results were rather poor.

 

[DN28]

Excellent contribution.

What do you make of the fact that Stastny's scoring totals in the Czech league were very consistent from 1976-77 onwards? This was more or less the basis for my assertion that he may have had 100-point potential in the NHL for a few years before actually defecting. Is it possible he was an underrated commodity in the Czech/European awards voting?

It´s true that Stastny´s scoring totals in the League were very consistent but I don´t think the numbers were truly elite. Peter, unlike his brother Marian, never won the league scoring, nor did he ever came really close to win it. He really misses the one big defining domestic scoring season.

Looking at CSSR domestic scoring can be sometimes frustrating experience because you will encounter different set of numbers for every season. This is due to the fact that there were 3 different sources, producing the charts with goals and assists: First, there were official game records written by referees who were assigning points to players as they saw it on ice during the action. Second, there were coaches (or other assistant coaches) who were also obliged to assign points to players as they saw it. These club-internal stats were then to be sended to Gól magazine, weekly or bi-weekly soccer and hockey magazine, where these stats were published. Third, there were writers for daily sports newspaper Československý sport, who had a job of writing game reports including stats such as goals, assists, or number of shots for instance. So these writers also assigned points to players as they themselves saw fit, which was sometimes different than those two previous sources.

I have published seasonal top 10 scoring charts on this forum some years ago, and those were largely sourced from official game records, so I can just re-post seasons 1976 to 1980, when P. Stastny was a member of CSSR national team (all of this quoted data from 5 following seasons comes from official game records):

1975-1976 (6.68 goals per game)
1. Milan Nový - 57 points (32+25) / 32 games
2. Vladimír Martinec - 48 points (23+25) / 32 games
3. Ivan Hlinka - 45 points (25+20) / 30 games
4. Eduard Novák - 42 points (26+16) / 32 games
5. Václav Mařík - 37 points (12+25) / 32 games
6. Vincent Lukáč - 34 points (17+17) / 28 games
7. Jiří Bubla - 34 points (11+23) / 31 games
8. Bohuslav Ebermann - 32 points (19+13) / 31 games
9. František Černík - 32 points (17+15) / 32 games
10. Petr Brdička - 31 points (21+10) / 32 games

1976-1977 (7.18 goals per game)
1. Milan Nový - 93 points (59+34) / 44 games
2. Vincent Lukáč - 79 points (48+31) / 42 games
3. Eduard Novák - 63 points (37+26) / 44 games
4. Bohuslav Ebermann - 60 points (31+29) / 44 games
5. Ivan Hlinka - 58 points (39+19) / 42 games
6. Miroslav Klapáč - 57 points (30+27) / 44 games
7. Peter Šťastný - 54 points (25+29) / 44 games
8. Jiří Novák - 52 points (30+22) / 39 games
9. Marián Šťastný - 52 points (29+23) / 44 games
10. Václav Mařík - 51 points (21+30) / 44 games

1977-1978 (6.77 goals per game)
1. Milan Nový - 73 points (40+33) / 44 games
2. Ivan Hlinka - 72 points (33+39) / 43 games
3. Jaroslav Pouzar - 62 points (42+20) / 43 games
4. Vincent Lukáč - 58 points (36+22) / 42 games
5. Peter Šťastný - 54 points (31+23) / 42 games
6. Jiří Bubla - 51 points (22+29) / 44 games
7. Eduard Novák - 49 points (37+12) / 44 games
8. Marián Šťastný - 48 points (30+18) / 44 games
9. Jozef Lukáč - 48 points (29+19) / 44 games
10. Libor Havlíček - 44 points (18+26) / 43 games

1978-1979 (6.94 goals per game)
1. Marián Šťastný - 73 points (39+34) / 40 games
2. Vladimír Martinec - 62 points (42+20) / 45 games
3. Milan Nový - 57 points (33+24) / 44 games
4. Peter Šťastný - 55 points (32+23) / 39 games
5. Anton Šťastný - 53 points (31+22) / 43 games
6. Vincent Lukáč - 52 points (27+25) / 38 games
7. Eduard Novák - 41 points (22+19) / 44 games
8. Ladislav Svozil - 41 points (19+22) / 44 games
9. Libor Havlíček - 40 points (17+23) / 43 games
10. Miloš Holaň - 39 points (27+12) / 44 games

1979-1980 (7.20 goals per game)
1. Milan Nový - 66 points (36+30) / 44 games
2. Vincent Lukáč - 64 points (43+21) / 41 games
3. Jaroslav Pouzar - 63 points (40+23) / 44 games
4. Anton Šťastný - 56 points (30+26) / 43 games
5. Jiří Novák - 52 points (26+26) / 40 games
6. Jaroslav Vlk - 50 points (31+19) / 41 games
7. Peter Šťastný - 50 points (26+24) / 41 games
8. Marián Šťastný - 49 points (28+21) / 36 games
9. Ladislav Svozil - 49 points (19+30) / 44 games
10. Vladimír Martinec - 47 points (27+20) / 35 games

I also have the scoring totals published by Gól magazine.. I don´t think this topic is that important to spend a lot of time now to re-write those tables here, but I can quickly provide the numbers and the scoring finishes of P. Stastny for comparison with the tables above. So from the Gól magazine:

1975-1976: P. Stastny scored 28 points (19+9), 15th in overall league scoring.
1976-1977: scored 50 points (24+26), 8th in overall league scoring.
1977-1978: scored 53 points (29+24), 7th in overall league scoring.
1978-1979: scored 55 points (32+23), 4th in overall league scoring.
1979-1980: scored 52 points (26+26), 6th in overall league scoring.
________________

To answer your question, I don´t think Stastny was underrated, or that he was supposed to finish higher in votings thanks to his scoring numbers.. If anything, I´d say even the opposite. Peter, nor Marian, were not known for their defensive efforts, the "glue-guy" or the defensive LW of the Slovan´s top line was Anton Stastny, the youngest from the trio. Slovan Bratislava as a team were known for their run-and-gun offense oriented style of play. So these two factors - three brothers playing together their whole life, plus offensively inclined team - may have inflated Stastny´s league numbers even.. I´ve actually described the 1979 Slovan Bratislava league champion before:

3) Slovan Bratislava.
This season´s winner. Worth to put in here description of them and how they managed to win: “Many times they strived for title, last years were quite thin for them though. In previous season they were even the last for 10 rounds. Yet no one worried about their destiny, on the contrary: some would bet on their bright future. But that the Champion would crystallize from this young collective already this season, that is a little shock. Smart conceptual work (5 junior league titles in a row and regular scouting of talents over the whole Slovakia) has brought the first fruit. (…) Bratislava with its game defies the tradition of the Czechoslovak hockey school, they do not come from a secured defense, they build almost everything on a complex offense. Pressure, against which an opponent is facing especially in Bratislava, is big and relentless. Team has 2 strong units and one completely unparalleled. Opponent skates on the ice against P. Šťastný´ unit with one thought: not let them score too much. Only rarely someone achieves that. No one has the courage and strength to outplay the offensive game of this unit composed from physically, technically and tactically matured hockey players. Particularly multiple champion bitterly realized that this year: Kladno did not gain a single point against Slovan… Marián Šťastný is currently the leading individual in the League, creating with his teammates the strongest unit of the competition – but they´re not alone. There were other players regularly appearing among the best players in the Canadian scoring: Sakáč playing in his life form (although he was paying the price for total attacking of his team in the Canadian scoring to his detriment), defensemen Ujváry and Černý, forwards Miklošovič, Jaško, Bezák. And naturally the whole unit which was nominated into the National team.”

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I get what you're saying but...

We already have Nighbor, Benedict, Denneny from Ottawa. Clancy and Cleghorn for some of the years.

Kelly (more for Detroit), Horton, and Mahovlich for 60s Toronto.

And nobody from recent Chicago.

That said, I am pleasantly surprised to see Gerard available. I think he was #2 behind Nighbor on the Ottawa dynasty, but did less outside the dynasty than guys who have been ranked over him. Definitely a player worth talking about at least.

And do we have a link to just who was on that panel that voted for Keon?

I can understand the sentiment of over-representing the Ottawa dynasty, but like you say, Gerard has a good case as the #2 guy there behind Nighbor. Personally, I think he should have been inducted back when we were inducting Denneny and Benedict. And the latter two would probably be more appropriate to discuss at this stage of the project. I mean, Benedict is a tough case to quantify, as are any goaltenders pre-1930. But I do have the impression that if our list was shown to a panel of Senators fans in 1930, they would be perplexed at our placement of Denneny ahead of Gerard.

 

[sr edler]

I get what you're saying but...

We already have Nighbor, Benedict, Denneny from Ottawa. Clancy and Cleghorn for some of the years.

Kelly (more for Detroit), Horton, and Mahovlich for 60s Toronto.

And nobody from recent Chicago.

That said, I am pleasantly surprised to see Gerard available. I think he was #2 behind Nighbor on the Ottawa dynasty, but did less outside the dynasty than guys who have been ranked over him. Definitely a player worth talking about at least.

What I feel or think about this, and this is not specifically about Eddie Gerard being up for voting, is that it looks a bit odd with so many players from that Ottawa team already listed or being up for voting, while I've seen no one so far from the semi-contemporary Toronto/Seattle/Victoria intra-team dynasty with a core group (Walker, Foyston, Holmes) that won 3 Cups over a period of a decade, played in another undecided finals (1919), with Holmes winning another Cup (1918) on the side in Toronto with Hugh Cameron (who won two "on the side" himself after not having followed ship to Seattle).

This especially in light of Ottawa having additional key HHOF pieces (Mr. Clutch Jack Darragh, Buck Boucher, and to a lesser degree H. Broadbent) helping everything roll along in the early 20s.

Regarding Gerard though, while probably not entirely out of place here, I can't really see a case for him over Moose Johnson, another stockily built left-winger turned defenseman from the same era. To me at least, dragging the Portland Rosebuds, as their undisputedly best player, to one goal from the Stanley Cup in game 5 in Montreal in 1916, on a team with only one additional HHOF player (T. Dunderdale) and led offensively by Charles Tobin and Smokey Harris, is way more impressive than jumping in for one game with the St. Patricks in the 1922 SC finals.

Johnson also crush Gerard outside the dynasty context (Wanderers/Senators), where Johnson was a (or the) top PCHA defenseman for over a decade while Gerard spent way too many years as a very good but not really dominating player in the Ottawa City League and the Interprovincial Amateur Hockey Union playing against teams like the Ottawa Cliffsides (I know those guys, but I'm not entirely sure everyone else does).

There are other interesting names on D from this era while thinking about Gerard. Joe Hall comes to mind.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Marc Savard? He was well above average on the playmaking side of things. Conroy while not an offensive #1C dynamo was a very good all-round guy. Langkow is meh though.

in three of his four best non-2002 seasons, iginla had alex tanguay as his primary puck distributor. that's not still not great, and neither is young marc savard really, but alex tanguay, who was a converted center, was at least one of the best playmaking wingers of his era. iginla certainly had more help in those years than looking at his centers (langkow and matt stajan) would suggest.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

And Iginla did get traded to a ready-built Cup contender. The Penguins finished 2nd overall in the league in 2013, when they acquired him at the trade deadline. Next to Chicago, they were Cup favorites. The results were rather poor.

You're right to point out that Iginla was traded to a team that had reasonable Cup expectations.

As an (old) 35 year old. [He would turn 36 that summer.] (Bathgate was 31 during the parallel time.) And if Pittsburgh's results were "rather poor" (because Boston had the personnel to bring the Kryptonite to the Crosby company {c.f.: Datsyuk/Zetterberg Detroit, or Pittsburgh's piteous head-to-head record against Toews/Kane Chicago detailed elsewhere, although admittedly in a small sample-size}), then what you call Pittsburgh's performance the year before?!?

Final Four kind of sucks when the fan-base is eyeing the Cup, wondering how the names are going to look on the metal-plating. It does, however, have its merits over a First Round Bounce.

I believe that you really didn't mean to imply that Iginla's Pittsburgh stint should be counted as some type of demerit. [Did you?]

 

[MXD]

... If Duncan Keith is a better RS offensive performer than Mark Howe (source : VsX tables), despite Howe spending some seasons as a Forward, and Keith is also a better playoff performer (source not needed), it would probably entail that Duncan Keith should be ranked ahead of Mark Howe, unless someone could prove, as oppose to only argue, that Howe had better defensive value and longevity... and considering he spent a sizeable chunk of his career as a forward, that's probably not happening.

This said, I really like Howe in this group, too.

 

[MXD]

I believe that you really didn't mean to imply that Iginla's Pittsburgh stint should be counted as some type of demerit. [Did you?]

Meanwhile, Martin St-Louis....

 

[Kyle McMahon]

You're right to point out that Iginla was traded to a team that had reasonable Cup expectations.

As an (old) 35 year old. [He would turn 36 that summer.] (Bathgate was 31 during the parallel time.) And if Pittsburgh's results were "rather poor" (because Boston had the personnel to bring the Kryptonite to the Crosby company {c.f.: Datsyuk/Zetterberg Detroit, or Pittsburgh's piteous head-to-head record against Toews/Kane Chicago detailed elsewhere, although admittedly in a small sample-size}), then what you call Pittsburgh's performance the year before?!?

Final Four kind of sucks when the fan-base is eyeing the Cup, wondering how the names are going to look on the metal-plating. It does, however, have its merits over a First Round Bounce.

I believe that you really didn't mean to imply that Iginla's Pittsburgh stint should be counted as some type of demerit. [Did you?]

A demerit? No. But his performance was passable, at best. Iginla declined a trade to Boston that year, insisting on the Penguins at the last minute. It's not exactly a great look that those Bruins subsequently embarrassed the Penguins in the Conference Final.

For what it's worth, Iginla signed with the Bruins, who won the President's Trophy the next year, but eventually gagged in the second round to a nothing-special Habs team. I'm not blaming that on Iginla either (he scored their only goal in Game 7, and rang the would-be tying goal off the post if I'm remembering correctly), but he did have two reasonable shots at winning a Cup late in his career.

Calgary from 2006-2012 was not a Cup contender, but I don't think they were nearly as thin as some are making them out to be. They ranged from average to good during that span, and guys like Cammalleri, Tanguay, Conroy, Jokinen, Langkow were perfectly reasonable options as top-six forwards in a 30-team salary capped league. Plus Vezina-caliber goaltending from Kiprusoff for several years. People are talking like Iginla was stuck on the Florida Panthers or something.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

... If Duncan Keith is a better RS offensive performer than Mark Howe (source : VsX tables), despite Howe spending some seasons as a Forward, and Keith is also a better playoff performer (source not needed), it would probably entail that Duncan Keith should be ranked ahead of Mark Howe, unless someone could prove, as oppose to only argue, that Howe had better defensive value and longevity... and considering he spent a sizeable chunk of his career as a forward, that's probably not happening.

This said, I really like Howe in this group, too.

are those vsx tables posted upthread? i think i missed them.

if we are going by h-r adjusted stats, their nine year offensive peaks are basically identical.

did we ever account for how much forward howe played pre-philadelphia in the defensemen project?

for defensive value, the thing i can't get past is at his peak he helped three different goalies in three years to top two vezina finishes, with two of them winning it.

this remains one of the most amazing numerical feats i've seen--

Rk	Player	+/-	Tm	Pos	From	To	Active	GP	G	A	PTS	PIM	EV	PP	SH	GW
1	Mark Howe*	195	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	219	57	140	197	104	35	9	13	3
2	Brad McCrimmon	183	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	217	31	107	138	218	23	6	2	7
3	Brad Marsh	52	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	233	4	40	44	338	4	0	0	1
4	Doug Crossman	41	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	238	19	101	120	149	8	10	1	3
5	J.J. Daigneault	13	PHI	D	1986	1987	1	77	6	16	22	56	6	0	0	1
6	Thomas Eriksson	13	PHI	D	1984	1986	2	115	10	33	43	52	5	4	1	1
7	Miroslav Dvorak	11	PHI	D	1984	1985	1	47	3	14	17	4	2	0	1	1
8	Kerry Huffman	5	PHI	D	1986	1987	1	9	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0
9	Daryl Stanley	3	PHI	D	1985	1987	2	66	1	4	5	145	1	0	0	1
10	Steve Smith	2	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	6	0	0	0	15	0	0	0	0
11	Jeff Chychrun	0	PHI	D	1986	1987	1	1	0	0	0	4	0	0	0	0
12	John Stevens	0	PHI	D	1986	1987	1	6	0	2	2	14	0	0	0	0
13	Mike Stothers	0	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	9	0	1	1	10	0	0	0	0
14	Ed Hospodar	-1	PHI	D	1984	1987	3	112	8	7	15	321	8	0	0	1
15	Kevin McCarthy	-1	PHI	D	1985	1987	2	6	0	0	0	4	0	0	0	0
16	Dave Richter	-1	PHI	D	1985	1986	1	50	0	2	2	138	0	0	0	0
17	Greg Smyth	-2	PHI	D	1986	1987	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
18	Glen Cochrane	-5	PHI	D	1984	1985	1	18	0	3	3	100	0	0	0	0
19	Kjell Samuelsson	-11	PHI	D	1986	1987	1	46	1	6	7	86	1	0	0	0

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

he finished second for the norris twice in those years and led his team to two finals, losing both times to the oilers.

and fwiw, re: his norris runner ups, in 1983, he actually finished slightly ahead of langway in AST voting. and the difference between him and coffey's record breaking season in '86 was changing his 2nd to 1st and coffey's 1st to 2nd on eleven out of sixty ballots. decently close, i'd say, considering that coffey broke orr's goals record and was maybe a vindictive sather benching away from breaking the points record too.

 

[seventieslord]

Monitoring the Latrine: Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson? After these last two years? Really?! Even if you loved his early-mid 20s, wouldn't the best you could say about him would be to give him the ol' "I" (incomplete) grade and exercise some caution while seeing how the rest of this career plays out??

And if the rest of his career plays out like, say, Mike Green's has, what's the worst we're going to rank a guy with two Norrises and two runner-ups?

 

[wetcoast]

Excellent contribution.

What do you make of the fact that Stastny's scoring totals in the Czech league were very consistent from 1976-77 onwards? This was more or less the basis for my assertion that he may have had 100-point potential in the NHL for a few years before actually defecting. Is it possible he was an underrated commodity in the Czech/European awards voting?

Agree with this especially since Peter in his first NHL season established himself as elite and the guy considered better in Europe, Novy, literally stunk in his NHL time.

 

[seventieslord]

unless someone could prove, as oppose to only argue, that Howe had better defensive value and longevity... and considering he spent a sizeable chunk of his career as a forward, that's probably not happening.

His NHL career?

 

[wetcoast]

I get what you're saying but...

We already have Nighbor, Benedict, Denneny from Ottawa. Clancy and Cleghorn for some of the years.

Kelly (more for Detroit), Horton, and Mahovlich for 60s Toronto.

And nobody from recent Chicago.

That said, I am pleasantly surprised to see Gerard available. I think he was #2 behind Nighbor on the Ottawa dynasty, but did less outside the dynasty than guys who have been ranked over him. Definitely a player worth talking about at least.

And do we have a link to just who was on that panel that voted for Keon?

Agree with this Keon is really weak overall for a top 100 player of all time.

If he had played for the NYR his name would have never come up.