Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 7

[sr edler]

One played in the 80's and we all know that forwards tend to peak in their earlier years, the other played in the 90's where scoring started to become lower. This is why Yzerman career numbers are "better".

This doesn't make a lot of sense since Yzerman had his first 100 point season in his 5th year (in 1988, in 64 games), and then had six straight ones. And the first half of the 90s was high scoring (for both players, obviously), certainly the 1989–1994 time period when Sakic played his first 5 years in the league.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

This doesn't make a lot of sense since Yzerman had his first 100 point season in his 5th year (in 1988, in 64 games), and then had six straight ones. And the first half of the 90s was high scoring (for both players, obviously), certainly the 1989–1994 time period when Sakic played his first 5 years in the league.

Okay then I could say that Yzerman had played long enough in the NHL at that time to be at his prime/peak when scoring was at its highest in the league while Sakic just started his NHL career and far of his prime/peak years which he had in the Dead Puck Era. But at the end, Sakic > Yzerman, better longevity and better playoffs performer too.

 

[blogofmike]

Just to post what I have for the three older players not covered here:

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	7YR	10YR
Bill Cook	116	114	103	103	96	95	91	88	79	77	102.6	96.2
Newsy Lalonde	109	108	100	94	92	90	80	72	71	66	96.1	88.2
Cyclone Taylor	123	111	106	100	100	62	54	53	38	33	93.7	78

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Cyclone Taylor's numbers include 9 seasons he was a forward, and one where he played point (1911). The other seasons are 1918, 1914, 1919, 1915, 1916, 1913, 1917, 1920, and 1907 (IHL).

From these numbers, it's arguable that Taylor had a Guy Lafleur-like best 5 years - but so did Cook, and Cook's got so much better longevity beyond that.

Lalonde was not as dominant as Taylor offensively in his best seasons, but his 10th best season was better than Taylor's 6th.

Knowing everything we know about these players, I'm not sure how we can rank either Lalonde or Taylor over Cook. He's just better.

Lalonde vs. Taylor might come down to one's personal priorities.

(these VsY numbers - since a VsX snob once told me not to call it VsX - are manually calculated year-by-year, league-by-league. I imagine a fully consolidated hockey world, including prominent minor and european leagues, and manipulate benchmarks to create a realistic leaderboard for each season. Like post-1926 VsX, one player typically gets a score over 100, one earns 100, and everyone falls in from there. This allows me to judge each season case by case - does the PCHA have a more impressive leaderboard and dominant scoring leader, or does the NHA? Does that guy who led the OPHL by a drastic margin deserve consideration as a top-10 scorer? And so on.)

Do you still have playoff VsX numbers from the last project?

Just wondering how those would shake out, considering Cook would hit 100 a few times on a Rangers-Team-Only-VsX, but I don't think he'd ever break it. In his 4 longest playoff runs, Cook didn't stand out as a Ranger.

NYR Team Playoff Scoring Leaders by Year

1928
Boucher 10
Cook 5
Other Cook 4

1929
Keeling 3
Thompson 2
Boucher/Other Cook 1
…
Cook 0

1932
Boucher 9
Other Cook 8
Cook 6

1933
Cecil Dillion 10
Murray Murdoch 6
Cook 5

Taylor and Lalonde got far fewer kicks at the playoff can. But they did have a few significant showings. Taylor's 1915 and 1918 Finals were very strong. He was the most reliable player to score under PCHA and NHA rules, while some of his teammates were less spectacular under NHA rules.

Lalonde scored points on 6 of his team's 7 goals in a failed effort in 1918, then saved the Habs from defeat in the 1919 tie with Seattle. Seattle won games 1 and 3. Game 2 was a Montreal win with Lalonde scoring 4 goals in a 4-2 win. Game 5 was an OT win where Lalonde scored 2 3rd period goals to tie the game at 3-3 before the Habs won in overtime in a situation where a loss would have given the Cup to Seattle. May not have been as strong under the PCHA rules, as Taylor was at the NHA rules.

Cook is fairly unique in that he has a playoff record that is completely undeserving of Conn Smythe/Retro Smythe consideration. It is underwhelming against this field, even compared to Lindsay. Even post-dynasty Sawchuk was pretty good, and had that game where he checked himself out of the hospital, pitched a shutout against the favoured Chicago Blackhawks, and then went back to the hospital.

Of course it is not a playoff performers list, so him ranking 11th isn't insurmountable. Cook was the best regular season winger in hockey for a decade. From 1924-33, I don't think he's THAT much better than Bossy, who is the highest scoring non Big 4 player from 1978-87, outscoring Dionne 1126-1101, and coming in with a non-Big 4 best 1.50 PPG (tied with Stastny). It is a gap that can be crossed a Bossy, who had a number of very good runs and a 1981 playoff that was better than even Guy Lafleur's best playoff year.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Cook is fairly unique in that he has a playoff record that is completely undeserving of Conn Smythe/Retro Smythe consideration

Same with Clarke and Jagr, probably Esposito.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

So with one day left for anyone to change my mind...

-I have Taylor and Brodeur at the top of my ballot.

-I have Bossy, Trottier, and Cook pretty much in a dead heat right now.

-Lalonde and Sawchuk lose some luster due to inconsistency. And costing his team with penalties in some key situations for Lalonde. But their peaks are high enough to still consider them for inclusion.

-I'm still fairly undecided on Robinson. He has some supporters in here, but I haven't quite seen the argument that he's a must-include in this vote.

-I'll consider Sakic since I think he compares reasonably close with Cook and Trottier.

-Not a ton of support for Lindsay. I expect he will be available next round and get a much closer look. Close to Lalonde, but comes up a little short of him for me.

-I came in with Yzerman towards the bottom. I've probably warmed to him a little, but not enough that he'll be a contender for me in this round.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Cook is fairly unique in that he has a playoff record that is completely undeserving of Conn Smythe/Retro Smythe consideration.

Take ANY Winger who doesn't have the opportunity to compete for a Stanley Cup until they're in their 30s- and see how they'd measure up. Do you wonder what we'd wind up with? Well, you don't have to wonder, because I've already run the data.

Here follows the list of Smythe/Retro-Smythe Wingers, playing age 31 and above:
1924: Jack Walker (Maybe!) [age 36]. He's in the record-books, somewhat ambiguously, as a 'Forward.'

1944: Toe Blake [age 31]. War-depleted year.

1958: Maurice Richard [age 36].

2018: Alex Ovechkin [age 32].

So... think of ALL the Wingers whose careers extended past age 30 who were never credited with a Smythe (or Smythe-similacrum)- Howe, Hull, Jágr, Lafleur and more.

Two more things:

1) Frank Boucher was FIVE FULL YEARS YOUNGER than Bill Cook when they were Rangers teammates. Cook had a lot less tread on his tires when they were NHL contemporaries.

2) Stanley Cup playoffs then were a completely different animal from Stanley Cup playoffs now. You could walk away with the whole thing by winning merely five games. In fact, in 1927-28 (1st Rangers Cup), that's exactly what came to pass! Qtrs: 1-1 vs. the Pirates, advanced on goal-differential. Semis: beat Bruins- 1 win, 1 tie. Cup Final: defeated Maroons 3-2.
In Modern Times, that quantity of games probably won't get you out of the Second Round. Clearly, that brings up another point- the number of total games in Early Times Playoffs has a fraction of the statistical significance of a 21st Century playoff run. In quantity, it's perhaps comparable to modern-day International Play (if participating). If assigning great significance to such spans, you risk committing what I'll call (in honor of an earlier "seventieslord" post) the Frank McGee fallacy.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Probably not a WHOLE lot separating our thoughts this time around.

-I came in with Yzerman towards the bottom. I've probably warmed to him a little, but not enough that he'll be a contender for me in this round.

Yeah- I've kind of drifted closer to the "nominated on time" camp as opposed to the "too-early-to-think-about" camp.

-I'm still fairly undecided on Robinson. He has some supporters in here, but I haven't quite seen the argument that he's a must-include in this vote.

Away from the madding discussion, I tried my parlor-trick of "if I were" to try to separate some skaters. For the "if I were a lunch-pail checking-line Winger on a 3-year NMC contract, who would I want as a teammate?" hypothetical- Larry Robinson topped the chart in that column.

Edit: just voted. A-B-C on my preliminary list was recast on my ballot as C-A-B. Wouldn't have expected that I'd wind up doing THAT two days ago. It marks the third time I've migrated a player up two slots from my Preliminary List. [The first two were Lidström and Fetisov. And in case anyone thinks they see a pattern, (C) is NOT Robinson.]

 

[seventieslord]

Do you still have playoff VsX numbers from the last project?

Just wondering how those would shake out, considering Cook would hit 100 a few times on a Rangers-Team-Only-VsX, but I don't think he'd ever break it. In his 4 longest playoff runs, Cook didn't stand out as a Ranger.

NYR Team Playoff Scoring Leaders by Year

1928
Boucher 10
Cook 5
Other Cook 4

1929
Keeling 3
Thompson 2
Boucher/Other Cook 1
…
Cook 0

1932
Boucher 9
Other Cook 8
Cook 6

1933
Cecil Dillion 10
Murray Murdoch 6
Cook 5

Taylor and Lalonde got far fewer kicks at the playoff can. But they did have a few significant showings. Taylor's 1915 and 1918 Finals were very strong. He was the most reliable player to score under PCHA and NHA rules, while some of his teammates were less spectacular under NHA rules.

Lalonde scored points on 6 of his team's 7 goals in a failed effort in 1918, then saved the Habs from defeat in the 1919 tie with Seattle. Seattle won games 1 and 3. Game 2 was a Montreal win with Lalonde scoring 4 goals in a 4-2 win. Game 5 was an OT win where Lalonde scored 2 3rd period goals to tie the game at 3-3 before the Habs won in overtime in a situation where a loss would have given the Cup to Seattle. May not have been as strong under the PCHA rules, as Taylor was at the NHA rules.

Cook is fairly unique in that he has a playoff record that is completely undeserving of Conn Smythe/Retro Smythe consideration. It is underwhelming against this field, even compared to Lindsay. Even post-dynasty Sawchuk was pretty good, and had that game where he checked himself out of the hospital, pitched a shutout against the favoured Chicago Blackhawks, and then went back to the hospital.

Of course it is not a playoff performers list, so him ranking 11th isn't insurmountable. Cook was the best regular season winger in hockey for a decade. From 1924-33, I don't think he's THAT much better than Bossy, who is the highest scoring non Big 4 player from 1978-87, outscoring Dionne 1126-1101, and coming in with a non-Big 4 best 1.50 PPG (tied with Stastny). It is a gap that can be crossed a Bossy, who had a number of very good runs and a 1981 playoff that was better than even Guy Lafleur's best playoff year.

I've got Cook at 344 in his best 5 years, Lalonde 363, and Taylor 270 in his only four playoffs.

 

[seventieslord]

Taylor is hurt at least a little by spending some good years as a defenseman though, right?

A little, but I'm not sure how much.

Definitely 1908, 1909, 1910, 1911 and 1912 were five missed opportunities to place high in the scoring race as a center/rover and make his 7-year and 10-year scores better, but as a center in 1906 and 1907 he didn't exactly tear the IHL apart. The IHL wasn't such a bad league that we should ignore what players did there, but it also was definitely not at the level of the top league at the time (let's say approximately WHA quality), and a 22-23 year old Taylor was far from the best scorer in that league.

Also, as a point man in the east, though he was a relatively high scoring D-man, he only tied for the points lead twice and outright led once - he didn't put significant distance between himself and a guy like Walter Smaill, statistically at least. In his first season in the PCHA, 1913, he only earned a VsY score of 62, on pace for 71 in a full schedule. It was only the following season, at age 29, that he finally posted dominant offensive figures.

If we were to try to project what Taylor would produce in a full schedule during his 5 seasons in the east between the IHL and the PCHA, I'd have to look at the VsY score of 33 that he earned in his last IHL season (full schedule) and go from there, to the 71 he was on pace for in 1913. So, perhaps 40, 50, 55, 60, 70 - so you can see it makes very little difference to his 7-year score (his 1912 perhaps becomes his 7th best season) and his 10-year score becomes 84.1, somewhat close to Lalonde but still noticeably behind.

I feel that the Taylor we know from game reports deserves more benefit of the doubt than that, but IMO this is what the statistical record suggests.

 

[seventieslord]

So with one day left for anyone to change my mind...

-I have Taylor and Brodeur at the top of my ballot.

-I have Bossy, Trottier, and Cook pretty much in a dead heat right now.

-Lalonde and Sawchuk lose some luster due to inconsistency. And costing his team with penalties in some key situations for Lalonde. But their peaks are high enough to still consider them for inclusion.

-I'm still fairly undecided on Robinson. He has some supporters in here, but I haven't quite seen the argument that he's a must-include in this vote.

-I'll consider Sakic since I think he compares reasonably close with Cook and Trottier.

-Not a ton of support for Lindsay. I expect he will be available next round and get a much closer look. Close to Lalonde, but comes up a little short of him for me.

-I came in with Yzerman towards the bottom. I've probably warmed to him a little, but not enough that he'll be a contender for me in this round.

Why Taylor over Cook?

 

[Sentinel]

Well, let's draw this out to its conclusion then. Yzerman's 155 point season led the Red Wings to first place in the Norris Division with 80 points. They were matched up against a weak (66 points) Chicago team in Round 1.

The Red Wings were upset in 6 games by the Hawks. Yzerman looks alright production-wise, with 5 goals and 10 points. But a deeper look suggests he was out-dueled by the opposing #1 C Denis Savard in an offensive track meet. Yzerman was a disastrous minus-7, most of the damage coming on the road, where he only mustered three points in three games. Savard exploded for 13 points and was a plus-7, producing well regardless of home or road conditions. So at his peak, Yzerman was badly outplayed by a player who will not appear on this list.

If one season is going to be the crux of the argument, we need to consider all facets of it. Mike Bossy won the Conn Smythe in his peak season. Joe Sakic was probably the runner-up in his.

That very same year Lemieux's Penguins were eliminated by Philadelphia, with Lemieux fress off the 199 point season, scoring once in the last two games of the series.

You can spin Yzerman's heroics however you see fit.

 

[Sentinel]

Voted.

Yzerman #1, followed by two Islanders.

 

[streitz]

Yzerman's wingers when he scored 155 points

Come to think of it Maclean also helped Hawerchuk to a 3rd overall in scoring finish,Also pretty sure he was on the Oates/Hull line for the first year of the trade when Hull had his first 70 goal season. Maybe he was good luck.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

the first hull 70 goal season it was momesso and zezel, mostly. oates centered maclean and rookie brind’amour, sometimes gino cavallini.

then in the 86 goal year lowry replaced big mo.

 

[sr edler]

the first hull 70 goal season it was momesso and zezel, mostly.

This is correct. Brett even name-dropped Momesso (as a bodyguard type of guy) when he visited Late Night with David Letterman on February 9, 1990. As you also can see in the clip below (@ 0:31) Momesso is the first player to congratulate Hull with a hug after Hull scored his 50th goal of the 89–90 season on a breakaway.

Momesso name-dropping @ 1:39.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Why Taylor over Cook?

I guess for me it comes down to Taylor dominating the PCHA to the degree he did. I pretty much have him on par with Esposito. Scoring title level player for about 5 years. And the years as an elite defenseman surely can't hurt his case.

I have been convinced that Cook deserves to be a top 5 candidate in this round though. I have always preferred Frank Boucher, but excellent arguments for Cook have me reconsidering that position. There have been good points raised that suggest Cook was basically Gordie Howe before the real Gordie Howe.

I think "star power" does need to count, for the pre-war guys certainly. Taylor was hockey's greatest star for an appreciable length of time. I've mentioned the blurred lines that exist between "greatest player" and "greatest box office attraction". I'm giving Taylor the benefit of the doubt in this regard. I understand the opposite stance as well though.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

That very same year Lemieux's Penguins were eliminated by Philadelphia, with Lemieux fress off the 199 point season, scoring once in the last two games of the series.

You can spin Yzerman's heroics however you see fit.

For what it's worth, I seriously considered Lemieux below 4th place for exactly these reasons...his incredible offense came at a huge cost.

I can't help but think Yzerman of the late 80s and early 90s was a bit of a poor man's Lemieux. Superb scoring ability, but not a lot else of substance. Credit for the mid 90s transformation though. Still, I can't help but think a Trottier is ahead of him for his ability to combine all aspects of the game at the same time.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

A little, but I'm not sure how much.

Definitely 1908, 1909, 1910, 1911 and 1912 were five missed opportunities to place high in the scoring race as a center/rover and make his 7-year and 10-year scores better, but as a center in 1906 and 1907 he didn't exactly tear the IHL apart. The IHL wasn't such a bad league that we should ignore what players did there, but it also was definitely not at the level of the top league at the time (let's say approximately WHA quality), and a 22-23 year old Taylor was far from the best scorer in that league.

Also, as a point man in the east, though he was a relatively high scoring D-man, he only tied for the points lead twice and outright led once - he didn't put significant distance between himself and a guy like Walter Smaill, statistically at least. In his first season in the PCHA, 1913, he only earned a VsY score of 62, on pace for 71 in a full schedule. It was only the following season, at age 29, that he finally posted dominant offensive figures.

If we were to try to project what Taylor would produce in a full schedule during his 5 seasons in the east between the IHL and the PCHA, I'd have to look at the VsY score of 33 that he earned in his last IHL season (full schedule) and go from there, to the 71 he was on pace for in 1913. So, perhaps 40, 50, 55, 60, 70 - so you can see it makes very little difference to his 7-year score (his 1912 perhaps becomes his 7th best season) and his 10-year score becomes 84.1, somewhat close to Lalonde but still noticeably behind.

I feel that the Taylor we know from game reports deserves more benefit of the doubt than that, but IMO this is what the statistical record suggests.

I think we really need to do a deep dive on the IHL. The names that populated this league are noteworthy. At this point, I'm almost prepared to say the ECAHA was more like the WHA, while the IHL was closer to the NHL. This might be a topic best explored if/when Russell Bowie enters the discussion.

 

[blogofmike]

Take ANY Winger who doesn't have the opportunity to compete for a Stanley Cup until they're in their 30s- and see how they'd measure up. Do you wonder what we'd wind up with? Well, you don't have to wonder, because I've already run the data.

Here follows the list of Smythe/Retro-Smythe Wingers, playing age 31 and above:
1924: Jack Walker (Maybe!) [age 36]. He's in the record-books, somewhat ambiguously, as a 'Forward.'

1944: Toe Blake [age 31]. War-depleted year.

1958: Maurice Richard [age 36].

2018: Alex Ovechkin [age 32].

So... think of ALL the Wingers whose careers extended past age 30 who were never credited with a Smythe (or Smythe-similacrum)- Howe, Hull, Jágr, Lafleur and more.

Two more things:

1) Frank Boucher was FIVE FULL YEARS YOUNGER than Bill Cook when they were Rangers teammates. Cook had a lot less tread on his tires when they were NHL contemporaries.

2) Stanley Cup playoffs then were a completely different animal from Stanley Cup playoffs now. You could walk away with the whole thing by winning merely five games. In fact, in 1927-28 (1st Rangers Cup), that's exactly what came to pass! Qtrs: 1-1 vs. the Pirates, advanced on goal-differential. Semis: beat Bruins- 1 win, 1 tie. Cup Final: defeated Maroons 3-2.
In Modern Times, that quantity of games probably won't get you out of the Second Round. Clearly, that brings up another point- the number of total games in Early Times Playoffs has a fraction of the statistical significance of a 21st Century playoff run. In quantity, it's perhaps comparable to modern-day International Play (if participating). If assigning great significance to such spans, you risk committing what I'll call (in honor of an earlier "seventieslord" post) the Frank McGee fallacy.

Bill Cook's age was not unusual. He beast a 34-year old Dick Irvin by a point for a scoring title, in the same year an ancient Cy Denneny scored 5 playoff goals in 6 games to lead the playoffs.

In 1927, at Cook's age 30 season (we'll go with 30 HR and Wikipedia have different birthdays) the NHL had 20% of skaters aged 32 or over (27 of 135). Last year it was 114 of 888 (12.8%). Bossy's last year was 34 of 620 (5.5%).

Also Cook's first playoffs were at age 28 in Saskatoon, and he was still only average. Cyclone Taylor was 30, and a few months shy of 31 in 1915. Taylor delivered great performances in he 1915 and 1918 Finals. Cook did not.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Also Cook's first playoffs were at age 28 in Saskatoon, and he was still only average.

Bill Cook's "average playoffs."

A two-game sample, where his team lost to the eventual Cup winner.

This is exactly the sort of shitf*** I was referring to when people assign dispositive significance to roaring '20s-era "playoffs."

 

[Sentinel]

For what it's worth, I seriously considered Lemieux below 4th place for exactly these reasons...his incredible offense came at a huge cost.

I can't help but think Yzerman of the late 80s and early 90s was a bit of a poor man's Lemieux. Superb scoring ability, but not a lot else of substance. Credit for the mid 90s transformation though. Still, I can't help but think a Trottier is ahead of him for his ability to combine all aspects of the game at the same time.

Except (a) Lemieux never came close to Yzerman's two-way transformation, while Yzerman arguably came close to Lemieux's offensive genius (b) even in the late 80s Yzerman displayed some moments of defensive acumen and (c) both offensive and defensive peaks of Yzerman, even not occurring simultaneously, are higher than the simultaneous offensive / defensive peak of Trottier. Add to that Yzerman's longevity exceeding Lemieux's and Trottier's, and voila.

 

[blogofmike]

Bill Cook's "average playoffs."

A two-game sample, where his team lost to the eventual Cup winner.

This is exactly the sort of ******** I was referring to when people assign dispositive significance to roaring '20s-era "playoffs."

4 games counting the next season, which brings him to 50 playoff games. And through the course of those 50 games? He was average.

 

[MXD]

Bill Cook is still, at this point, the biggest head-scratcher to me.

If I'm strictly ranking how good the players were, he'd be, AT WORSE, third. But I give lots of weight to playoffs, and Bill Cook has the worse playoff resume amongst skaters available this round, bar none. Cook was somewhat useful without the puck, so he's not a total negative, but his numbers really don't look good.

But then again, pretty much everyone except goaltenders had bad numbers in the playoffs, and consistency was just nowhere to be found.

I said, "Pretty Much", because there is one playoffs forward standout for that era. His center, Frank Boucher.

Meanwhile, there's something heretical to putting Bill Cook below Mike Bossy, despite the latter being clearly a great playoff performer.

__________________________

For many reasons, including peaking later at a point when the talent pool got slightly bigger, and the fact that I really, but really don't care about starpower flowing clearly from flashiness, I've always prefered Lalonde to Taylor. But Lalonde... has something of the Eddie Shore problem that I don't quite know what to do with. I've been... REALLY harsh on Shore, and playoff individual and team underachievement/detrimental play was a big reason why.

For the record, I had neither (Taylor & Lalonde) in the Top-41 of my R1 list, but arguments from this round made me reevaluate them. I'll rank both.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Except (a) Lemieux never came close to Yzerman's two-way transformation, while Yzerman arguably came close to Lemieux's offensive genius (b) even in the late 80s Yzerman displayed some moments of defensive acumen and (c) both offensive and defensive peaks of Yzerman, even not occurring simultaneously, are higher than the simultaneous offensive / defensive peak of Trottier. Add to that Yzerman's longevity exceeding Lemieux's and Trottier's, and voila.

Please make the argument for the bolded.

 

[Sentinel]

Please make the argument for the bolded.

155 is the 3rd highest offensive output, behind Gretzky and Lemieux. 199 is the 2nd highest offensive output, behind Gretzky. Unlike Bossy, Esposito, Nicholls, and Jagr (people in the ballpark), Yzerman didn't have an all-time talent as his teammate, like Trottier, Orr, Gretzky, and Lemieux, respectively.

You're welcome. I'm sure you knew all this without me.