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

[Michael Farkas]

Even take it a step further...for those that had seen them...Dickie Moore, Frank Mahovlich, Max Bentley...they probably left some hardware on the table, but they were incredibly talented from a technical perspective. Hell, even Mario Lemieux...Lemieux had more technical skill and was a better skater than Gordie Howe...yet, there was a push to knock Lemieux out of the top 4...

It's tough to pump the tires of one or two guys late in the game, when we played "this is what you actually did" card earlier in the game when it was more heavily scrutinized...

Don't even remove Fedorov's 1994...just exchange it, for say, Yashin's 1999...is Fedorov even on as many lists as Patrice Bergeron at that point? I'm not so sure...

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Durnan got held back again? I'm starting to wonder how he even became available at the point he did.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Vezina counting and less educational conversation about the War years not just being 1944 and 1945 like had been purported in the past...?

 

[MXD]

Durnan got held back again? I'm starting to wonder how he even became available at the point he did.

Well... Durnan wasn't going to look great in a round where he wasn't even the best short career netminder.
Then again, I had Gardiner 1st and Durnan 2nd, so I probably helped Durnan in the grand scheme of things.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Durnan got held back again? I'm starting to wonder how he even became available at the point he did.

Polarizing players getting buried on handfuls of ballots kills their chances. Durnan picked up 86 voting points from his 10 best ballots, then just 17 voting points from his 10 worst.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I guess I'm just surprised that Kurri went flying way past him (they were close in the previous vote) while Denneny also leapfrogged him. What changed? Not saying it's wrong, but I don't recall either Kurri or Denneny having some highly compelling case laid out for them. (Heh, maybe my post about Kurri's low PP time/downplaying the Gretzky effect was a catalyst?). In any case, time to move on to the next round.

 

[sr edler]

Don't even remove Fedorov's 1994...just exchange it, for say, Yashin's 1999...is Fedorov even on as many lists as Patrice Bergeron at that point? I'm not so sure...

First of all, Fedorov's 1993–94 happened.

Secondly, Fedorov's detractors from last round actually seems to be a bit more obsessed with his 1993–94 season than his supporters from the same round. Any peak season must be viewed in a proper context. Switch those two seasons you mention, Fedorov's 94 and Yashin's 99, but look at it from the opposite angle → does it make Alexei Yashin (a pretty good player, with early career franchise C pedigree, who was also once rumored to go in a one-on-one trade for Steve Yzerman) a viable option for a Top 100 of All-Time list? No, it obviously doesn't. Because Yashin didn't have/didn't show much else at all. He had some good seasons I guess without looking, but yeah...., sucked donkeys ass in the playoffs and was pretty mediocre/non-dynamic at international stages. A poor mans Mats Sundin, at best.

Sergei Fedorov did show a lot outside of 1993–94, if you're curious enough to look at other things than just prolonged regular season numbers (VsX, or whatever it's called), and if you're attentive enough to consider proper context regarding seasonal deployment.

Outside of his overall strong playoff resume, with 94–95 showing he could go all in on offense (to the delight of the stat watchers, perhaps...), the 1995–96 regular season is obviously the best example of this. Selke recipient and leading scorer by a 12 point margin to Steve Yzerman on a team which had a historical regular season, winning it by a whopping 27 points in front of the Colorado Avalanche. Chasing #7 on our list here in this project from his team, after a memorable game in Montreal, where he (#7) had won 2 Stanley Cups and reached almost saint hood status.

Fedorov was the 1C on that team, the best team in the league by an outstanding margin, and he was the best scorer on that team, and the best defensive forward on that team, and it was his unit that put on the clinic in that game mentioned in the last sentence of the former paragraph which chased Patrick Roy from the Montreal Canadiens.

Bergeron is on my list, obviously, but I'm not sure I can see him replacing Sergei Fedorov offensively on the 1995–96 Russian Five unit. And, I'm also not sure he ever led the SC playoffs in scoring by a considerable margin. His teammate (Krejci) did twice though (minus perhaps "considerable margin" in his case). But Bergeron is an interesting name here, nonetheless, because Fedorov under Bowman, 97–03, did put up Bergeron-esque kinda numbers strictly offensively speaking.

Also, the Gilmour @ 1990 World Championship example from vote 16 was about adaptability. Fedorov stepped in from day one in the NHL and was already then a finished two-way product who never looked out of place, at any side of the rink. Searching for an all-tool all-adaptability all-situations guy (Fedorov was awesome on the penalty kill, unlike say Malkin who....) the sight makes you drool, Mike.

 

[danincanada]

Oh, don't worry about that. There's also this thing called "having an opinion". We, as a group, might have been a tad severe over Fedorov... But it's certainly a fact that he was romanticized into something he never quite was (after his great season) due to that very season.

He showed what he was he was capable of during his big Hart season and that's one hell of a nice tip of a peak, but it raised expectations too much. '96 wasn't exactly shabby with 102 adjusted points, +49, and a Selke. The league was rich and deep in talent then so it just didn't stand out as much as it may have if it happened another season. Then after that his numbers dropped and they started winning Cups with him as a key cog.

I'm sure no one is being too severe due to personal reasons. Not in a serious project like this.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Man super lame......Kurri 154 to Hull 124. How does this happen?

Kurri played in higher scoring era (high flying 80s) moreso than Hull
Out of ALL OF THE PLAYERS we're going to rank in this project - there will not be a single player up for discussion at any point who benefited from teammates more than Kurri. Great player of course - but his results are FULL of Gretzky effect, in regular season and playoffs. Despite that - Hull and Kurri have practically equal number of games played, points and PPG. To me there should be a very clear edge to Hull in regular season.

That's without counting his insane peak seasons. Whereas Kurri has practically 0 hart votes in his career.

Playoff career numbers aren't even that far apart - which is pretty impressive considering Hull played over 50% of his playoff games past age 33 - compared to about 12% of his games for Kurri.

To me these are two very easy wingers to compare considering how closely they played - and Hull is clearly superior. Really disappointed with how so many voters continue to disregard offense in this project.

"Really disappointed with how so many voters continue to disregard offense in this project."

Do you not see the irony in this quote?

NO ONE disregards offense.

However, some (like yourself, for instance) want to totally disregard defense.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Was Fedorov really all that better than say, Doug Gilmour? What about Joe Thornton?

 

[MXD]

Was Fedorov really all that better than say, Doug Gilmour? What about Joe Thornton?

According To me :

Yes
No.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Agree.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Man super lame......Kurri 154 to Hull 124. How does this happen?

Kurri played in higher scoring era (high flying 80s) moreso than Hull
Out of ALL OF THE PLAYERS we're going to rank in this project - there will not be a single player up for discussion at any point who benefited from teammates more than Kurri. Great player of course - but his results are FULL of Gretzky effect, in regular season and playoffs. Despite that - Hull and Kurri have practically equal number of games played, points and PPG. To me there should be a very clear edge to Hull in regular season.

That's without counting his insane peak seasons. Whereas Kurri has practically 0 hart votes in his career.

Playoff career numbers aren't even that far apart - which is pretty impressive considering Hull played over 50% of his playoff games past age 33 - compared to about 12% of his games for Kurri.

To me these are two very easy wingers to compare considering how closely they played - and Hull is clearly superior. Really disappointed with how so many voters continue to disregard offense in this project.

Others have stated this before in various ways. Most participants understand that defensive hockey mirrors offensive hockey.Just a question of willingness and application.

Specifically, similar to a pre-schooler learning to turn on the lights also learns how to turn off the lights. Whether the lights are turned off is a question of willingness and application.

 

[wetcoast]

Was Fedorov really all that better than say, Doug Gilmour? What about Joe Thornton?

In a word, yes he was better than both players.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Was Fedorov really all that better than say, Doug Gilmour?

More talented, yes. Better, no.

What about Joe Thornton?

Yes.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Player	Ballots	Points	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	NR
Charlie Gardiner	23	177	6	4	5	3	1	1	2			1
Jari Kurri	23	154	5	2	3	5	1	1	1	3	1	1
Max Bentley	23	144	1	1	4	3	9	2	1		2
Aurele Joliat	23	139	3	2	2	3	3	4	2	2		2
Cy Denneny	23	131	1	5	2		3	2	5	3	1	1
Brett Hull	23	124	2	3	1	3	1	3	2	5	1	2
Bill Durnan	23	114	3	3	2	1	1		2	1	7	3
Turk Broda	23	109		1	4	3	2	2	3	1	3	4
Boris Mikhailov	23	88		2		1		5	3	4	6	2
Sergei Fedorov	23	85	2			1	2	3	2	4	2	7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Canadiens1958]

Player	Ballots	Points	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	NR
Charlie Gardiner	23	177	6	4	5	3	1	1	2			1
Jari Kurri	23	154	5	2	3	5	1	1	1	3	1	1
Max Bentley	23	144	1	1	4	3	9	2	1		2
Aurele Joliat	23	139	3	2	2	3	3	4	2	2		2
Cy Denneny	23	131	1	5	2		3	2	5	3	1	1
Brett Hull	23	124	2	3	1	3	1	3	2	5	1	2
Bill Durnan	23	114	3	3	2	1	1		2	1	7	3
Turk Broda	23	109		1	4	3	2	2	3	1	3	4
Boris Mikhailov	23	88		2		1		5	3	4	6	2
Sergei Fedorov	23	85	2			1	2	3	2	4	2	7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Very disappointing that only 23 of 32 voted.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Very disappointing that only 23 of 32 voted.

We did get a 24th ballot that had an error on it, but we are down from the consistent 30/32 we were getting.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Max Bentley is our biggest decliner so far - he dropped 31 spots compared to the 2008 project. Bill Durnan will ultimately be a larger decliner though - the highest he could finish is 80th, and that represents a 36 spot drop.

We now have 11 players who have, or are guaranteed to, drop 15+ spots from the 2008 project. All but two of them were active, at least to some extent, between 1945 and 1960.

Of the 13 players who have risen 15+ spots, 7 of them were active in the 21st century (and one more retired in the late 1990's).

Also, comparing our list to the NHL's centennial list from a couple of years ago - we now have 58 players in common (out of 79 selected so far). Some of that is due to differences in eligibility criteria (their list is NHL only, so Fetisov, Makarov and Tretiak, among others, are excluded). But I think we're going to see some significant differences - will be interesting to see how closely the lists line up. I feel much better with our list so far (including Nighbor, Cook and Boucher, Seibert, Brimsek, Pilote, and Malkin) over some of their choices (Cournoyer, Gainey, Gartner, Lafontaine, Nieuwendyk, Sittler, Toews).

 

[MXD]

I didn't knew Gartner was on the Centennial's list, and frankly, I'd rather have stayed ignorant about that.

 

[ted2019]

How does that explain the low total for Fedorov though?

Kurri was a much better player.

 

[wetcoast]

Kurri was a much better player.

I guess we are going to agree to disagree here on this one.

 

[sr edler]

Kurri was a much better player.

I've noticed some of the more vocal detractors of Fedorov are fans of Eastern Conference teams that were rivals to the Red Wings when Fedorov was at his best torch mood.

But seriously, you could have settled with "Kurri was a better player", and I probably wouldn't have collected enough energy to push the reply button. "Much better" in this case just doesn't make much sense at all.

 

[sr edler]

Very disappointing that only 23 of 32 voted.

It's been kinda dragging out a lot though. We had two weeks for a single round. Some posters who were active to very active in the early rounds hasn't posted for several rounds now, but they seem to be quite active in the fantasy team section of this sub board, so perhaps that's a thing. Two things going on at the same time.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Participation dropped from the high 20s to low 20s as soon as the 2019 All-Time Draft started, which unfortunately was to be expected. We've been stable at the low 20s for several rounds now.