Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Voting Results (Part 1)

[The Macho King]

Well this is all over the place as expected

Honestly Makarov is the biggest surprise to me. I'm not shocked he went, but I'm shocked at how concentrated he is in being ranked top 3.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Surprisingly, Esposito is the only one who never finished below 8th.

Weird that he's the one with no "hater".

 

[bobholly39]

Player	Ballots	Points	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	NR
Viacheslav Fetisov	30	220	4	9	3	4	4	3	1	1	0	1	0
Sergei Makarov	28	210	5	7	5	4	2	1	2	1	0	1	2
Phil Esposito	30	204	6	5	2	5	1	2	5	4	0	0	0
Glenn Hall	28	194	2	6	8	4	2	1	1	0	3	1	2
Bobby Clarke	27	183	6	1	2	3	8	3	2	2	0	0	3
Martin Brodeur	29	177	6	2	3	3	4	1	2	3	3	2	1
Bryan Trottier	30	115	0	0	1	3	3	5	3	4	8	3	0
Joe Sakic	27	103	0	0	1	1	1	8	4	4	6	2	3
Cyclone Taylor	27	101	0	0	2	1	4	3	3	5	3	6	3
Terry Sawchuk	26	85	1	0	2	2	1	1	2	3	3	11	4
Mike Bossy	18	58	0	0	1	0	0	2	5	3	4	3	12

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Super happy to see Esposito get 0 NR, 0 10th and 0 9th place votes. For all the negativity around him in the last thread i was afraid of a few bombs.

Having Espo behind Makarov seems a bit weird to me, but oh well.

Exactly.

In the span of a week he's now behind all 3?

Considering there was easily more discussion on Broduer in a positive light the past week, I don't see how.

Whatever.

I guess he'll be #1 on my ballot next round.

They were really close last week though. 11 points from 1st to fourth. I don't think it's that unreasonable to see small fluctuations round to round

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Well this is all over the place as expected

Makarov would have been first had he not gotten 2 NRs (which are ridiculous).

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Are you that surprised? I'm sure Brodeur, as much as any player in this thing, has his steady NRs.

Well... the remainder of Brodeur in this thing is the main reason why Bill Cook isn't an automatic #1 for me whenever he appears.

Brodeur only had 1 NR (and it wasn't me). Clarke had 3, Hall had 2.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Makarov would have been first had he not gotten 2 NRs (which are ridiculous).

Makarov was 10 points behind Fetisov. Two 10ths instead of NR would yield two points leaving him 8 short.

 

[VanIslander]

Surprisingly, Esposito is the only one who never finished below 8th.

Weird that he's the one with no "hater".

Given he has been hated on for the last few rounds,...

Haters can only hate reasonably for so long.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Makarov was 10 points behind Fetisov. Two 10ths instead of NR would yield two points leaving him 8 short.

I stand corrected.

Do I have to give back my likes?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Given he has been hated on for the last few rounds,...

Haters can only hate reasonably for so long.

For all the bellyaching about "hating on" Phil Esposito, he was just voted ahead of Glenn Hall and Bobby Clarke, two players who appeared at the same time he did.

 

[The Macho King]

For all the bellyaching about "hating on" Phil Esposito, he was just voted ahead of Glenn Hall and Bobby Clarke, two players who appeared at the same time he did.

Espo has been in the discussion since round 4. Hall and Clarke came in round 5.

God damn... it feels like we were talking about Esposito for months. Weird how that works.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Espo has been in the discussion since round 4. Hall and Clarke came in round 5.

God damn... it feels like we were talking about Esposito for months. Weird how that works.

I should really spend more time copying and pasting info about Bill Cook in the other thread, and less time behind wrong in this thread.

 

[VanIslander]

For all the bellyaching about "hating on" Phil Esposito, he was just voted ahead of Glenn Hall and Bobby Clarke, two players who appeared at the same time he did.

Yet more ranked Espo outside the top 5 this round than the other two: a whopping 12 GMs had him 7th or 8th (14 in all didn't vote for his induction).

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yet more ranked Espo outside the top 5 this round than the other two: a whopping 12 GMs had him 7th or 8th (14 in all didn't vote for his induction).

I'm not seeing that.

Am I looking in the wrong table?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Out of shear morbid curiosity, and I'll never really know, even after we all open our robes...but I'd like to know what the ven diagram looks like of people who think Brodeur is a "product of a system" and voted him lowly accordingly but voted Esposito highly, which would offer a moderate to strong degree of contradiction in my mind...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Out of shear morbid curiosity, and I'll never really know, even after we all open our robes...but I'd like to know what the ven diagram looks like of people who think Brodeur is a "product of a system" and voted him lowly accordingly but voted Esposito highly, which would offer a moderate to strong degree of contradiction in my mind...

It would be the same contradiction if one were to vote Brodeur high and Esposito low, right?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Not at all. Proper talent evaluation would lead one to a more thorough, nuanced conclusion in my opinion. Esposito just doesn't do it for me on this level of player...it's easy to be mystified by the stats, and I get that they're hard to overcome...but man, it's a really tough sell to watch those games and come away saying "yeah, Esposito is a more impactful player than Bobby Clarke"...I just don't know how you (royal you) can watch a game and say that, quite frankly.

I guess what I'm saying is that Esposito is unique...like a knight in chess...but I'm still much more interested in queens at this stage in the voting...

Hmph, no chance that can be misquoted or misinterpreted, I'll leave it as is...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Not at all. Proper talent evaluation would lead one to a more thorough, nuanced conclusion in my opinion. Esposito just doesn't do it for me on this level of player...it's easy to be mystified by the stats, and I get that they're hard to overcome...but man, it's a really tough sell to watch those games and come away saying "yeah, Esposito is a more impactful player than Bobby Clarke"...I just don't know how you (royal you) can watch a game and say that, quite frankly.

I guess what I'm saying is that Esposito is unique...like a knight in chess...but I'm still much more interested in queens at this stage in the voting...

Hmph, no chance that can be misquoted or misinterpreted, I'll leave it as is...

What games are you talking about?

And who was talking about Bobby Clarke? I thought we were talking about Brodeur and Esposito.

 

[VanIslander]

Oh. We all have Venn diagrams we're gonna draw. No conclusions, just accurate pictures drawn.

 

[Michael Farkas]

What games are you talking about?

And who was talking about Bobby Clarke? I thought we were talking about Brodeur and Esposito.

Games from the time period they both played. Not any one or ten specific ones...Clarke just offers a lot more on a per-game basis...

And yeah, just because we were talking about Esposito and Brodeur doesn't mean we can't draw some other lines in the sand along the way...

Plus, I find comparing Brodeur to Esposito a great disservice to Brodeur. They were not close to the same caliber of player in my eyes, we really chased the back of the hockey card on this one and fell hard...

But start small, Espo wasn't the best center of the post-expansion era...he may have scored more goals, but he wasn't the better player for my money...

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Seek solace in the "delta;" that's what I do.

On the 2009 list, Esposito was 20th- he's now 27th.

For my part, I'm chuffed about the fact that the '09 list had Clarke at 21- but now he's at 29. Progress all around... but still more work-to-be-done.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Games from the time period they both played. Not any one or ten specific ones...Clarke just offers a lot more on a per-game basis...

And yeah, just because we were talking about Esposito and Brodeur doesn't mean we can't draw some other lines in the sand along the way...

Plus, I find comparing Brodeur to Esposito a great disservice to Brodeur. They were not close to the same caliber of player in my eyes, we really chased the back of the hockey card on this one and fell hard...

But start small, Espo wasn't the best center of the post-expansion era...he may have scored more goals, but he wasn't the better player for my money...

For the record, I had Bobby Clarke ranked 3rd last round. On my original list he was ranked one spot ahead of Esposito. So I'm well aware of what he brought to the game.

As for Brodeur and Esposito not being the same caliber of player, I simply find that amusing.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Player	Ballots	Points	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	NR
Viacheslav Fetisov	30	220	4	9	3	4	4	3	1	1	0	1	0
Sergei Makarov	28	210	5	7	5	4	2	1	2	1	0	1	2
Phil Esposito	30	204	6	5	2	5	1	2	5	4	0	0	0
Glenn Hall	28	194	2	6	8	4	2	1	1	0	3	1	2
Bobby Clarke	27	183	6	1	2	3	8	3	2	2	0	0	3
Martin Brodeur	29	177	6	2	3	3	4	1	2	3	3	2	1
Bryan Trottier	30	115	0	0	1	3	3	5	3	4	8	3	0
Joe Sakic	27	103	0	0	1	1	1	8	4	4	6	2	3
Cyclone Taylor	27	101	0	0	2	1	4	3	3	5	3	6	3
Terry Sawchuk	26	85	1	0	2	2	1	1	2	3	3	11	4
Mike Bossy	18	58	0	0	1	0	0	2	5	3	4	3	12

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

So the "winner" in this round gets in on the strength of being considered the second best option out of just less than a third of voters. Four other players had more first place votes. In fact, three players are tied for the most first place votes, but they come in third, fifth and sixth overall.

Decision by Committee... reminds me of the most frustrating part of by job, lol.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Honestly Makarov is the biggest surprise to me. I'm not shocked he went, but I'm shocked at how concentrated he is in being ranked top 3.

I had him second.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Seek solace in the "delta;" that's what I do.

On the 2009 list, Esposito was 20th- he's now 27th.

For my part, I'm chuffed about the fact that the '09 list had Clarke at 21- but now he's at 29. Progress all around... but still more work-to-be-done.

Too low. Hurt by questionable "aesthetics" and the old "played with Orr" thing.
If Orr can be given that much credit for Espo's crazy-good peak numbers, he should have beaten Gretzky by a large margin in the first round.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Out of shear morbid curiosity, and I'll never really know, even after we all open our robes...but I'd like to know what the ven diagram looks like of people who think Brodeur is a "product of a system" and voted him lowly accordingly but voted Esposito highly, which would offer a moderate to strong degree of contradiction in my mind...

...or, we were face with 11 excellent hockey players but were forced to place them in some kind of hierarchy ,which would reflect the vast variety of votes... maybe even the "NR" votes. For example, Mike Bossy is virtually an icon of NHL history, and it seems odd to me to see so many NR votes under his name. Yet, the competition was fierce so those NR votes aren't totally unjustifiable.