Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 20

[TheDevilMadeMe]

My highest unlisted players are Maltsev, Martinec, and Lundqvist.

Without checking, I'm pretty sure those 3 are my highest unlisted players too.

 

[DN28]

I´m genuinely curious what led some voters to include Vasiliev / Holecek on their preliminary top 120 list and omit Maltsev / Martinec? After all that has been discussed about a reality of anti-defensemen or anti-goalie bias, it is certainly not the case with the sub-group of non-NHL Europeans.

Maltsev and Vasiliev are direct contemporaries who played literally all of their senior career in the same team: USSR and Dinamo Moscow. Maltsev was mostly considered better regardless of if we´re looking at Soviet Player of the Year awards or various international honours.

The same applies for Martinec / Holecek, where the former accumulated more Golden Sticks than any other Czech player not named Jagr or Hasek. Various polls done decades later during 1990s, 2000s confirm that Martinec is generally regarded as the best Czech player of his generation. While Holecek was instrumental in two of the four outstanding successes of the CSSR team in the era (1st place in 1972, 1976), Martinec was instrumental in each of the four (72, 76, + 77 and Canada Cup 1976).

Seems like a bit lazy approach to this set of 4 players during the preliminary discussion and submitting ballots phase: "...just to throw Vasiliev in somewhere, since I´ve got Fetisov high... and just to throw Holecek in somewhere, since I´ve got Tretiak in the first half of the list too..."

And really all that was needed to do in case anyone was confused with them, was to just look at the HOH Top 50 Non-NHL Europeans list produced few years ago here... Among this vote´s 20 candidates, I don´t see Vasiliev or Holecek having too much of a chance. Would have been a different story with Maltsev or even Martinec perhaps.

That being said, Holecek vs. Vasiliev might be an interesting comparison. Initially, I would prefer Vasiliev but Holecek has definitely more "ultra-elite" seasons than Vasiliev. The Czech goalie simply peaked higher, while the Russian d-man has more meaningful longevity.

Holecek is very interesting player to examine regardless. Interesting career arc, even more interesting personality. I have plenty of material on him that I don´t even know where to start. I´ll try to reproduce some more information as time permits.

 

[kruezer]

@quoipourquoi was Bowie the last guy to make the cut? Just want to know if my prediction from the R1 thread was correct!

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

@quoipourquoi was Bowie the last guy to make the cut? Just want to know if my prediction from the R1 thread was correct!

Voting in these things is supposed to be as blind as possible (why the guys in post 1 are alphabetical, etc). Easy to forget when the current group of voters has been quite open towards voting for 1st time candidates (kudos for that, everyone).

Anyway, I'm really curious to get a peak at the aggregate list too when this is over

 

[ted2019]

Firsov's on the list. Cleghorn too, unless you mean Odie Cleghorn.

I missed Firsov & Cleghorn's name. Thanks.

 

[ted2019]

Without checking, I'm pretty sure those 3 are my highest unlisted players too.

My highest are in order:
McGee
Langway
Babe Siebert

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't know.I probably underrated Abel last round, and am open to bump him up now to make amend.

Savard contributed to SCs outside the dynasty, winning the Smythe in 1969.As a whole, I think his playoff legacy is greater than Abel's.

The "dynasty factor" was more a manner of speech than anything, meaning I strongly prefer players with solid playoff resumes for the few spots left on the list.Abel satisfies this criteria too.

I definitely think that being a key contributor to multiple championships isn't something to ignore.

But... is Savard's contribution on an excellent Montreal team more or less impressive than Mark Howe being the best player on a team that lost to Edmonton in the finals twice in 3 years?

FWIW, looks like Howe led the playoffs in plus/minus twice - when Philly lost in the finals in 1987 and when they lost in the semifinals to in 1989: Mark Howe Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

(When the Flyers lost in the finals in 1984-85, Howe was tied with 3 teammates for the team led)

 

[kruezer]

Voting in these things is supposed to be as blind as possible (why the guys in post 1 are alphabetical, etc). Easy to forget when the current group of voters has been quite open towards voting for 1st time candidates (kudos for that, everyone).

Anyway, I'm really curious to get a peak at the aggregate list too when this is over

Valid point I can be patient!

 

[blogofmike]

Good points about Parent and killing so many penalties.

My query as to whether or not Parent was an above average goalie for more than a few seasons was borne out of Philadelphia/Toronto playing hot potato with him in the early 70's. Were there extenuating circumstances surrounding his trade to the Leafs in 1971? Seems the Flyers decided Doug Favell was their guy and flipped Bernie in a three-way trade that brought them the much older Bruce Gamble and rookie pro Rick MacLeish. Was MacLeish that highly touted at the time?

Toronto trading him back to the Flyers a couple years later in a draft picks/futures trade makes sense to a point, since he was in the WHA at the time.

After the two legendary Cup winning years, injuries unfortunately derailed his career and he only played a couple more full seasons really while posting some fairly forgettable playoff numbers.

It could be that 1971 was a down year after Parent had 4th, 3rd, and 3rd place finishes in save percentage. According to his Legends of Hockey bio, the Flyers traded Parent instead of Favell because he was "better trade bait." Parent, Bernie -- Biography -- Honoured Player -- Legends of Hockey

As a Flyers goaltender from expansion through 1971, Parent outperformed Favell by a small margin over 3.5 years.

Parent 188 GP, 54-81-47, .922 Sv%, 2.70 GAA
Favell 100 GP, 33-42-18, .918 Sv%, 2.82 GAA

Before the 1970-71 realignment, Parent faced more East (O6) teams than Favell (49 GP vs. West, 24 GP vs. East). As a sidenote, in games against Montreal, Parent went 2-12-3, in spite of a shiny .924 save percentage and 2.80 GAA.

During this period (expansion thru Feb 1, 1971) here are the NHL save percentage leaders:

Player	GP	Sv %
Plante	98	.934
Esposito	108	.928
Bower	64	.927
Villemure	29	.926
Parent	188	.922
Worsley	100	.922
Wakely	63	.921
Favell	100	.918
Hall	129	.915
Gamble	177	.915

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Obviously team defensive play helped these guys as a lot of them played on the same teams, but Parent was a high performing goaltender for a lot of games. So was old Bruce Gamble, who was part of the deal.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I definitely think that being a key contributor to multiple championships isn't something to ignore.

But... is Savard's contribution on an excellent Montreal team more or less impressive than Mark Howe being the best player on a team that lost to Edmonton in the finals twice in 3 years?

FWIW, looks like Howe led the playoffs in plus/minus twice - when Philly lost in the finals in 1987 and when they lost in the semifinals to in 1989: Mark Howe Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

(When the Flyers lost in the finals in 1984-85, Howe was tied with 3 teammates for the team led)

People seem to be conveniently forgetting Savard's regular defensive partner was Larry Robinson and earlier it was Jacques Laperriere. Both Norris winners. They also had Lapointe, who was a 4 time all-time all-star. I would argue Jacques Lemaire was just as important to those Canadiens teams as Savard.

Savard, Lapointe & Lemaire were all great players on what may have been the greatest team ever. But I don't se any of them being top 100 players.

 

[BenchBrawl]

People seem to be conveniently forgetting Savard's regular defensive partner was Larry Robinson and earlier it was Jacques Laperriere. Both Norris winners. They also had Lapointe, who was a 4 time all-time all-star. I would argue Jacques Lemaire was just as important to those Canadiens teams as Savard.

Savard, Lapointe & Lemaire were all great players on what may have been the greatest team ever. But I don't se any of them being top 100 players.

People also conveniently forget that Savard (not Laperriere) won the Conn Smythe trophy before Robinson even started his career, and Scotty Bowman ranked him over Big Bird in his Top 100 Canadian players list.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I´m genuinely curious what led some voters to include Vasiliev / Holecek on their preliminary top 120 list and omit Maltsev / Martinec? After all that has been discussed about a reality of anti-defensemen or anti-goalie bias, it is certainly not the case with the sub-group of non-NHL Europeans.

Maltsev and Vasiliev are direct contemporaries who played literally all of their senior career in the same team: USSR and Dinamo Moscow. Maltsev was mostly considered better regardless of if we´re looking at Soviet Player of the Year awards or various international honours.

The same applies for Martinec / Holecek, where the former accumulated more Golden Sticks than any other Czech player not named Jagr or Hasek. Various polls done decades later during 1990s, 2000s confirm that Martinec is generally regarded as the best Czech player of his generation. While Holecek was instrumental in two of the four outstanding successes of the CSSR team in the era (1st place in 1972, 1976), Martinec was instrumental in each of the four (72, 76, + 77 and Canada Cup 1976).

Seems like a bit lazy approach to this set of 4 players during the preliminary discussion and submitting ballots phase: "...just to throw Vasiliev in somewhere, since I´ve got Fetisov high... and just to throw Holecek in somewhere, since I´ve got Tretiak in the first half of the list too..."

And really all that was needed to do in case anyone was confused with them, was to just look at the HOH Top 50 Non-NHL Europeans list produced few years ago here... Among this vote´s 20 candidates, I don´t see Vasiliev or Holecek having too much of a chance. Would have been a different story with Maltsev or even Martinec perhaps.

That being said, Holecek vs. Vasiliev might be an interesting comparison. Initially, I would prefer Vasiliev but Holecek has definitely more "ultra-elite" seasons than Vasiliev. The Czech goalie simply peaked higher, while the Russian d-man has more meaningful longevity.

Holecek is very interesting player to examine regardless. Interesting career arc, even more interesting personality. I have plenty of material on him that I don´t even know where to start. I´ll try to reproduce some more information as time permits.

Holecek was the only one I had on my original list (#88). There were some good arguments for his inclusion. I had Petrov (114) because he always looked better to me than Maltsev when I saw them play.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Bowman also ranked Dave Keon 12th, ahead of Messier, Bourque, Potvin, Robinson, Yzerman, Sakic, Plante, Esposito, Roy, Trottier and Brodeur. The list is garbage.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I definitely think that being a key contributor to multiple championships isn't something to ignore.

But... is Savard's contribution on an excellent Montreal team more or less impressive than Mark Howe being the best player on a team that lost to Edmonton in the finals twice in 3 years?

FWIW, looks like Howe led the playoffs in plus/minus twice - when Philly lost in the finals in 1987 and when they lost in the semifinals to in 1989: Mark Howe Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

(When the Flyers lost in the finals in 1984-85, Howe was tied with 3 teammates for the team led)

Mark Howe had the benefit of playing in the shortshift era on a team that pioneered the strategy.So shift management was not a factor.

Serge Savard led the playoffs in +/- twice, 1978 tied with Larry Robinson:

Serge Savard Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Under more demanding circumstances the two years they were leaders. Howe was a combined +29 in 45 games while Savard was a combined +36 in 28 games, significantly better.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

We've now had 114 players come up for discussion (94 who have been voted in, and 20 who are up this round). Of those 114, 110 were on my initial list.

Players who are now up, who weren't on my list (alphabetical order) - Bowie, Bure, Gerard, Holocek.

Players who I included, who aren't yet up (alphabetical order) - Bucyk, Delvecchio, Gilmour, Lapointe, Langway, Maltsev, Niedermayer, Oates, Quackenbush, Smith.

I had all 4 of those guys on my list (Bowie very high).

 

[BenchBrawl]

I definitely think that being a key contributor to multiple championships isn't something to ignore.

But... is Savard's contribution on an excellent Montreal team more or less impressive than Mark Howe being the best player on a team that lost to Edmonton in the finals twice in 3 years?

FWIW, looks like Howe led the playoffs in plus/minus twice - when Philly lost in the finals in 1987 and when they lost in the semifinals to in 1989: Mark Howe Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

(When the Flyers lost in the finals in 1984-85, Howe was tied with 3 teammates for the team led)

Savard was the best player in 1969, as indicated by his Smythe.So right off the bat you can take Howe's best run and at best call it a wash.

Then you have 5 other deep runs, two in which Savard led his team in +/- (1st in 1976 (by 4 over 2nd place), 1st tied with Robinson in 1978 (by 8 over 3rd place)).

Are Mark Howe's combined 2nd and 3rd best runs more valuable than Serge Savard's combined 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th best SC runs? I doubt it.

But then I'm not trying to downplay Mark Howe, he is a candidate to make my list somewhere.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Bowman also ranked Dave Keon 12th, ahead of Messier, Bourque, Potvin, Robinson, Yzerman, Sakic, Plante, Esposito, Roy, Trottier and Brodeur. The list is garbage.

The list may be garbage, but how he ranked the players he coached is of particular interest.Especially if they played on the same team.

 

[Nick Hansen]

The list may be garbage, but how he ranked the players he coached is of particular interest.Especially if they played on the same team.

I can buy that. But ranking Savard ahead of Robinson gotta be a case of him seeing how praised Big Bird was and thinking that Savard was an underrated player in comparison. I don't think he actually thought Savard was better than Robinson. Then again, one wonders how he could think Gainey was better than Roy or Esposito, or how Steve Shutt finished ahead of Trottier. I mean, come on!

 

[blogofmike]

Mark Howe had the benefit of playing in the shortshift era on a team that pioneered the strategy.So shift management was not a factor.

Serge Savard led the playoffs in +/- twice, 1978 tied with Larry Robinson:

Serge Savard Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Under more demanding circumstances the two years they were leaders. Howe was a combined +29 in 45 games while Savard was a combined +36 in 28 games, significantly better.

Slightly misleading. According to HO's post, over their careers when Serge Savard stepped off the ice, his team improved slightly. When Mark Howe stepped off the ice, his team collapsed, almost as if they had already spent a large sum of money on a full year course membership and needed enough free time to start playing enough golf to justify the expense.

According to ratios, Mark Howe is the leader of this group, well ahead of Dave Keon. Serge Savard is in the basement with Norm Ullman.

Given that Savard's career ratio is negative, for all of the good runs, (including his 1978 run where he may have been a beneficiary of "the demanding circumstance" of standing beside Larry Robinson on a Smythe run,) there must have been a few bad ones. If we say Serge Savard was crucial in 1978, did he cost his team in 1974? At even strength, the 74 Canadiens outscored New York 9-7 without Savard. With Savard, who was last in +/-, they were outscored 11-6 at ES on their way to being eliminated by the lower seeded 74 Rags.

Savard was the best player in 1969, as indicated by his Smythe.So right off the bat you can take Howe's best run and at best call it a wash.

Savard has a Smythe, but it's not a 1994 Brian Leetch Smythe. It was as part of a team so good, that it was better when he stepped off the ice. Howe's Flyers were pretty much even, and when he stepped on they were hugely outscoring everybody but Edmonton.

Howe was also a better RS performer. As a Flyers he had three AS-1 nods while finishing 2nd in Norris voting vs Savard only having 4 years where he received any Norris votes at all.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

I definitely think that being a key contributor to multiple championships isn't something to ignore.

I'll go along with that. But also consider, being sine qua non to multiple championships is impressive, too(!)

First impressions - Russell Bowie and Jiri Holecek are absolutely worth talking about.

I think Jirí Holeček calls for immediate consideration, as well. Russell Bowie- he'll probably sketch around the central part of my ballot, as I try to consider if he's worth an 8th-9th-10th, or an NR.

Brian Leetch and Norm Ullman look to be the only "must adds" left at this point.

I know I haven't said anything kind about Ullman for a few days. I do have to add that I have him so far ahead of St'astný (to say nothing of Thornton) that I regretted that I was placed in the position where I felt impelled to smack all of them with the NR-cudgel.

I'm genuinely curious what led some voters to include Vasiliev / Holecek on their preliminary top 120 list and omit Maltsev / Martinec?

I wouldn't know, 'cause I didn't!

 

[Canadiens1958]

People seem to be conveniently forgetting Savard's regular defensive partner was Larry Robinson and earlier it was Jacques Laperriere. Both Norris winners. They also had Lapointe, who was a 4 time all-time all-star. I would argue Jacques Lemaire was just as important to those Canadiens teams as Savard.

Savard, Lapointe & Lemaire were all great players on what may have been the greatest team ever. But I don't se any of them being top 100 players.

People are not forgetting anything. The truth is captured on video. 1979 Game 7 semi-finals in OT just prior to the Yvon Lambert goal.



Note Serge Savard covering for his partner ..... Larry Robinson, caught up the ice. On the faceoff prior to the winning goal sequence, Savard lined-up as a right dman.

Note to Nick Hansen. The video also explains why Bowman preferred Savard to Robinson who was a converted forward prone to judgemental mistakes.

Note to BlogofMike. "the demanding circumstance" of standing beside Larry Robinson on a Smythe run. Covering up for Larry Robinson would be more accurate.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Savard was the best player in 1969, as indicated by his Smythe.So right off the bat you can take Howe's best run and at best call it a wash.

Then you have 5 other deep runs, two in which Savard led his team in +/- (1st in 1976 (by 4 over 2nd place), 1st tied with Robinson in 1978 (by 8 over 3rd place)).

Are Mark Howe's combined 2nd and 3rd best runs more valuable than Serge Savard's combined 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th best SC runs? I doubt it.

But then I'm not trying to downplay Mark Howe, he is a candidate to make my list somewhere.

This isn't the best playoff performance ranking, is it?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

People are not forgetting anything. The truth is captured on video. 1979 Game 7 semi-finals in OT just prior to the Yvon Lambert goal.



Note Serge Savard covering for his partner ..... Larry Robinson, caught up the ice. On the faceoff prior to the winning goal sequence, Savard lined-up as a right dman.

Note to Nick Hansen. The video also explains why Bowman preferred Savard to Robinson who was a converted forward prone to judgemental mistakes.

Note to BlogofMike. "the demanding circumstance" of standing beside Larry Robinson on a Smythe run. Covering up for Larry Robinson would be more accurate.

So as a group we really overrated Larry Robinson.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The list may be garbage, but how he ranked the players he coached is of particular interest.Especially if they played on the same team.

The list has become a tool for advocating unconventional rankings.

For me, lots of seemingly dumb rankings. But Orr #1 and Keon #12 are excellent choices of a brilliant hockey mind.

 

[trentmccleary]

Jarome Iginla. The inconsistency in his prime, both overall and within individual seasons, is probably what keeps him out for me. A couple more seasons like 2007 or 2008 and perhaps he sneaks in, but as it stands he comes up short. Calgary imploding down the stretch on multiple occasions is one of those things where a modern player perhaps gets more scrutiny since we actually witnessed and remember it. But as we've seen with Kane, recency-bias can also be beneficial. Give and take.

The funny thing is that his career looks like it would much more sense if 2002 and 2010 switched places. Then everything would fit.

Might as well post my third and final "standard" post now - playoff R-on/R-off.

I wanted to post a few responses a few weeks ago, but got busy.
If something similar has been posted, my apologies.

The R-On, R-Off stats are certainly interesting, but there's certainly context that would need to be applied.
I watched my own team in Ottawa go from two balanced lines pre-lockout into a super line post lockout. I'd expect that the score in the balanced lineup would be noticeably less impressive than the super line or pairing to a bare bones 2nd line.

When I saw Chara go up with very positive scores in Ottawa, I was a little thrown at first because that would have largely been a comparison to Redden. Chara wasn't any better than Redden in Ottawa and was typically banged up before and during the playoffs, hurting his performances. Do you know who consistently got better in the playoffs in the early-mid 2000's?... Chris Phillips. Who was typically bad?... Redden's rotating partners.