Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 6

[DannyGallivan]

I won't get to in depth with Sakic vs Trottier vs Clarke specifically.

They're all bunched tightly and will probably be all over the place on ballots. Maybe not huge swings but I simply don't think there will be any sort of real consensus.

All 3 were good defensively with Clarke being the best IMO.

Sakic is probably the best offensive F of the 3, but again, we're not talking big gaps here. Clarke though won 3 Hart's, while Sakic and Trots combined for 2. Sakic clearly wins on longevity here IMO, a decent bit ahead of Trottier and then Bobby.

Sakic was 12th all time in the HoH playoff performer project. Trots was 24th. Clarke, unranked although I think last round showed that he's hardly an average or worse postseason player.

Sakic was one spot ahead of Trots in the C's project 4 years back. Clarke actually a few spots ahead of both.

Damn it, I honestly don't see how we're going to separate these 3 very much. And then of course you have Espo who's peak is easily the best of the 4. But that peak also coincided with Bobby Orr.

Could we also say that Trottier's offense was aided by Bossy ? Or vica-versa?

 

[ResilientBeast]

Three straight 17 goal playoffs (almost a goal a game each season) is amazing. However, he only led the playoffs in points once.
Bossy's resume smacks of a one-trick pony who happened to have an amazing trick - he was an incredible, incredible goal scorer. Competition was tough in the 80's, though, and he only led the league in goals twice despite being known as a lamp-lighter. If you want to play the Gretzky card, Bossy still would have won the pre-Maurice Richard Trophy only two more times, and would have a single Art Ross Trophy (the same as his line-mate Trottier).

Hopefully other players come up next round to compare Bossy to.

Right now he's my leading contender for bottom of my list

 

[seventieslord]

Three straight 17 goal playoffs (almost a goal a game each season) is amazing. However, he only led the playoffs in points once.
Bossy's resume smacks of a one-trick pony who happened to have an amazing trick - he was an incredible, incredible goal scorer. Competition was tough in the 80's, though, and he only led the league in goals twice despite being known as a lamp-lighter. If you want to play the Gretzky card, Bossy still would have won the pre-Maurice Richard Trophy only two more times, and would have a single Art Ross Trophy (the same as his line-mate Trottier).

bossy is a strange one, because while I would describe him as a one-trick pony as well, no one's ever said he was exceptionally bad in any other area, either.

 

[DannyGallivan]

bossy is a strange one, because while I would describe him as a one-trick pony as well, no one's ever said he was exceptionally bad in any other area, either.

His assists totals (particularly the year he got 147 points) wasn't bad. Then again, he played with Trottier and often with Potvin on the ice as well. If some are claiming that Espo's points are due largely to Orr, can't we say the same about the Potvin-Trottier-Bossy trio (and methinks Clarke Gillies owes those three royalties every time he signs his memorabilia with the initials HOF).

 

[ImporterExporter]

Mike Bossy is a poor man's Guy Lafleur.

Guy was the best player on his team during his peak. Bossy was not.

Guy just made it in which means Bossy should be waiting for a bit.

Easy peasy in my eyes.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think we should be careful not to think of Mike Bossy as a Luc Robitaille kind of player.By all accounts Bossy was a much better all-around player than guys like Robitaille or Brett Hull.

Admittedly it is tempting to categorize him as just a better version of these guys.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think we should be careful not to think of Mike Bossy as a Luc Robitaille kind of player.By all accounts Bossy was a much better all-around player than guys like Robitaille or Brett Hull.

Admittedly it is tempting to categorize him as just a better version of these guys.

Agreed.

I think Bossy was the clear 3rd wheel on the Islander dynasty. Doesn't mean he's relegated to Robitaille or Hull's level because he was fantastic goal scorer and playoff performer.

But his career largely had the benefit of not being subjected to post 30's examination.

 

[The Macho King]

Could we also say that Trottier's offense was aided by Bossy ? Or vica-versa?

Trottier scored 95 points as a rookie before Bossy ever played. Trottier was fine (although I think both owe a pretty decent amount to Potvin).

But it's the same thing with every good team. To what degree does X owe Y for their success? I think (with the exception of Espo), the general tenor of the discussion has been to not take away credit based on playing on strong teams (see, e.g. every single member of the 50s Habs being on the list already including their equipment manager).

 

[VanIslander]

Bossy as a prospect was labeled soft away from the puck and he was bothered by it and became determined to backcheck responsibly in the NHL. This story was told by coach Arbour, who said Bossy worked hard to play defensively.

I wouldn't give or take away anything from his accomplishments in terms of intangibles. No minus defensively. No plus in leadership.

Clutch playoff dynasty goal scoring is his main achievement. The nine 50-goal scoring seasons was hyped but really is reflective of the era. He is at best CONSISTENT.

He twice led the NHL in goals. And if you ignore Lafleur and Gretzky, he would have two more. That's it. Four times he trailed Kurri. Heck, he trailed Lanny MacDonald's 66 goals in 1983. Such was the era.

Time has not been kind to Bossy's legacy. Once often called the greatest sniper and arguably greatest goal scorer, his numbers don't hold up so well. He sniped better than Ovechkin (goals per shot ratio) but is much less of a scorer relative to his high-flying peers.

 

[The Macho King]

Bossy as a prospect was labeled soft away from the puck and he was bothered by it and became determined to backcheck responsibly in the NHL. This story was told by coach Arbour, who said Bossy worked hard to play defensively.

I wouldn't give or take away anything from his accomplishments in terms of intangibles. No minus defensively. No plus in leadership.

Clutch playoff dynasty goal scoring is his main achievement. The nine 50-goal scoring seasons was hyped but really is reflective of the era. He is at best CONSISTENT.

He twice led the NHL in goals. And if you ignore Lafleur and Gretzky, he would have two more. That's it. Four times he trailed Kurri. Heck, he trailed Lanny MacDonald's 66 goals in 1983. Such was the era.

Time has not been kind to Bossy's legacy. Once often called the greatest sniper and arguably greatest goal scorer, his numbers don't hold up so well. He sniped better than Ovechkin (goals per shot ratio) but is much less of a scorer relative to his high-flying peers.

One point of order - if we're pretending Gretzky doesn't exist, Kurri probably doesn't finish ahead of Bossy, does he?

 

[quoipourquoi]

On the topic of overtime scoring, Joe Sakic didn’t just score goals; of all the players we checked in the playoff project (tables were lost), he was the top in assists too. I’ll pull the numbers this week, but I think he literally had half of his team’s OT scoring.

Joe Sakic - not Patrick Roy - is in my opinion the greatest player in Stanley Cup overtime.

 

[VanIslander]

One point of order - if we're pretending Gretzky doesn't exist, Kurri probably doesn't finish ahead of Bossy, does he?

Lol. Take Trottier away and Bossy becomes Gartner.

No one is pretending Gretzky never existed, just factoring OUT Gretzky and Lafleur as contemporaries he of course would have trailed, as we've inducted them already.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Lol. Take Trottier away and Bossy becomes Gartner.

No one is pretending Gretzky never existed, just factoring OUT Gretzky and Lafleur as contemporaries he of course would have trailed, as we've inducted them already.

Bossy is likely to find himself in the basement this round and for good reason, but this is too much.

Look at Brent Sutter's career: Brent Sutter Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Never broke 70 points, except 1984-85, when he hit 105. Why? Trottier was injured in 1984-85 (missed games and then played through injuries), and Sutter played with Bossy: 1984-85 New York Islanders Roster and Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Of course, this board has already determined that Potvin was the straw that stirred the Islander's drink.

 

[The Macho King]

Lol. Take Trottier away and Bossy becomes Gartner.

No one is pretending Gretzky never existed, just factoring OUT Gretzky and Lafleur as contemporaries he of course would have trailed, as we've inducted them already.

I mean - I think the point of taking Gretzky out is acknowledging that he's several standard deviations above the typical superstar of the time. Replace him with (say) Messier, a top 24 player on this list, and you would expect to see significant downgrades across the board.

And seriously - we can count on one hand the number of players who excel without assistance. In fact, we can count on four fingers.

On the topic of overtime scoring, Joe Sakic didn’t just score goals; of all the players we checked in the playoff project (tables were lost), he was the top in assists too. I’ll pull the numbers this week, but I think he literally had half of his team’s OT scoring.

Joe Sakic - not Patrick Roy - is in my opinion the greatest player in Stanley Cup overtime.

Doesn't surprise me, but it also doesn't move the needle much for me for the same reasons. Sakic's playoff resume is what it is, and whether it took place in OT or the first 60 doesn't change it much in my eyes.

 

[VanIslander]

When looking at Sakic as a playoff performer don't leave out his international tourney resume:

Joe was the MVP of the 2002 Olympics with an epic gold-medal game performance against a mighty US squad.

He also was 1st in goals, 2nd points for Canada's winning team in the 2004 World Cup.

 

[MXD]

Lol. Take Trottier away and Bossy becomes Gartner.

No one is pretending Gretzky never existed, just factoring OUT Gretzky and Lafleur as contemporaries he of course would have trailed, as we've inducted them already.

That's probably the only thing that could've convinced me to put Bossy amongst the very best players available.

I mean, that's so demonstrably insane, it's can't really be serious, and thus becomes an argument IN FAVOR of Bossy, if anything, because I don't even one remotely thinking I could possibly agree to this.

 

[VanIslander]

Gartner was a talented finisher who nine (9) times had 40+ goal seasons but just once hit 50.

Imagine if he had a top-30 all-timer like Trottier to play with for years!

Geez. No disrespect to Bossy. Respect for 700-goal Gartner, a HHOFer but not one in our top 100 eh?

Anyways,... my initial point in bringing it up was a "lol" laugh at the absurdity of someone's claim to pretend Gretzky didn't exist. That is all. Full stop.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Surprised everyone is this low on Bossy, given the number of people who viewed Ovechkin as a shoe-in last round. Bossy will enter this round towards the back of the pack for me (which is where I had Ovechkin last round).

In general, I have the holdovers from last round towards the top in this one, along with Cyclone Taylor. But this is going to be very tight. I'm pretty open-minded on Makarov at this point.

We were very high on Kelly, voting him through at the first opportunity. Taylor is extremely comparable as a two-position star, and likely the only player available that can make a serious claim that they were the best player in the game for an appreciable length of time. That should have considerable weight at this stage.

I'll listen to arguments for Sakic, but it feels early. For a guy who is being remembered as Mr. Clutch in the playoffs, he really only has three playoff runs that are moving the needle in an all-time sense. Fantastic in the two Cup wins, but also some years that he may have left you wanting a little more. Great peak, and a long prime. But I'd argue those non-peak prime years are a little too low-end for me to seriously entertain him as a top 30 all-time player.

 

[MXD]

Gartner was a talented finisher who nine (9) times had 40+ goal seasons but just once hit 50.

Imagine if he had a top-30 all-timer like Trottier to play with for years!

Geez. No disrespect to Bossy. Respect for 700-goal Gartner, a HHOFer but not one in our top 100 eh?

Anyways,... my initial point in bringing it up was a "lol" laugh at the absurdity of someone's claim to pretend Gretzky didn't exist. That is all. Full stop.

Your initial point was inexistant because you went batshit crazy with the comparison, and when the thing got pointed out to you, you doubled down on your terribly insane take.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Sakic was voted 12th in this forum's very own playoff performer list just a year ago, not the place I'd look for weaknesses...

 

[MXD]

I'll listen to arguments for Sakic, but it feels early. For a guy who is being remembered as Mr. Clutch in the playoffs, he really only has three playoff runs that are moving the needle in an all-time sense. Fantastic in the two Cup wins, but also some years that he may have left you wanting a little more. Great peak, and a long prime. But I'd argue those non-peak prime years are a little too low-end for me to seriously entertain him as a top 30 all-time player.

My lone issue with this is some of his non-peak prime years were spent with the Nordiques... When that was definitely not the ideal setting for performing in the playoffs. Other than that, your argument is definitely not far-fetched.

 

[VanIslander]

Again: my comment was a reply, started with a laugh, at the idea of pretending Gretzky doesn't exist. It also would be silly to pretend Trottier didn't exist! Bossy wouldn't even be in consideration for this project if we did that (ie., a Gartner).

(My original list has Bossy as the only forward between Sakic and Yzerman. I respect him. I just had him and Sakic outside the top 30.)

Anyways,.. let's move on..

 

[MXD]

Please stop misrepresenting what I say.

Again: my comment was a reply, started with a laugh, at the idea of pretending Gretzky diesn't exist. It also would be silly to pretend Trottier didn't exist! Bossy wouldn't even be in cobsideration for this project if we did that (ie., a Gartner).

Taking off Gretzky, or seriously account for him, was actually the reasonable thing to do in that context, so I wouldn't say that you aren't helping your case... but... you really aren't helping your case.

 

[Nick Hansen]

This video shows Makarov scoring goals or making plays against great Canadian defensemen with the NT:

 

[VanIslander]

Taking off Gretzky, or seriously account for him, was actually the reasonable thing to do in that context, so I wouldn't say that you aren't helping your case... but... you really aren't helping your case.

I know. I said if we IGNORE Gretzky then Bossy would have another 1st in goals season! Geez. I was making no case. Anyone can go back and see what I was replying to, all in context.