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

[BenchBrawl]

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.

Don't know if that's really the cause, but FTR I didn't stop voting.

I did miss Vote 7 and Vote 15 on pure brain cramps of forgetting to vote on Sundays and missing the deadline, but otherwise I've read and voted every week, and I'm pretty busy lately.Don't think the ATD workload can justify dropping out of the project altogether.

 

[Sentinel]

Kurri was a much better player.

Sergei Fedorov was a much better player than Jari Kurri.

I don't even know what ATD is. That's not my reason at all.

 

[Michael Farkas]

If he was better...if...it's not by a lot.

Regardless, you haven't gone 10 minutes without reminding us why you quit...you didn't like that your favorite players weren't given the same random preferential treatment that you give them. Can you just take that line, put it in the first-person and add it to your signature so that you don't have to keep repeating it for everyone else that isn't interested?

 

[Kyle McMahon]

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

The NHL's top 100 list probably would have been rejected by the screeners of our project (and not just because it had no non-NHLers, obviously). It was a really half-assed effort, despite the league talking it up for months in advance.

 

[sr edler]

The NHL's top 100 list probably would have been rejected by the screeners of our project (and not just because it had no non-NHLers, obviously). It was a really half-assed effort, despite the league talking it up for months in advance.

I think it was a "best 100 NHL players" kind of list, so non-NHLers on that list would have been pretty contradictory I think. Gartner shouldn't be there anyways though.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I think it was a "best 100 NHL players" kind of list, so non-NHLers on that list would have been pretty contradictory I think. Gartner shouldn't be there anyways though.

Yes, that's correct. I meant it would have been rejected by our screeners even if ignoring the fact that it had no non-NHLers on it. There's probably 20 names on that list that raise eyebrows, and the inclusions of Gartner and Nieuwendyk in particular are flat-out ridiculous.

 

[ted2019]

According To me :

Yes
No.

Agreed.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

One way our list is better than THN's: everyone submitted a top 120 for the aggregate list. THN voters each submitted top 50s that were then aggregated to form a top 100.

So anyone in the 51-100 range on THN's list probably only had a few (top 50!) votes.

 

[ted2019]

Sergei Fedorov was a much better player than Jari Kurri.

I don't even know what ATD is. That's not my reason at all.

You stopped voting because you took your pucks and went home.

 

[ted2019]

Sergei Fedorov was a much better player than Jari Kurri.

I don't even know what ATD is. That's not my reason at all.

As someone else said, Fedorov was more talented, but Kurri was the far better player.

 

[MXD]

Fedorov and Kurri are not that far one from an other.

But Joe Thornton... I don't quite know how to put it, but for a guy who could defend competently (in that, he wasn't a 1-way player) and who could genereally make the ice tilt in its favor so that he isn't always defending, and whose offense is probably the best off just about any player left, including those actually for voting, why the actual f*** are we discussing Nels Stewart, exactly?

 

[Nick Hansen]

Thornton has accumulated these point finishes within a period of 14 years: 1,2,3,4,5. (and 8th). Just thought that looked cool.

 

[wetcoast]

Yes, that's correct. I meant it would have been rejected by our screeners even if ignoring the fact that it had no non-NHLers on it. There's probably 20 names on that list that raise eyebrows, and the inclusions of Gartner and Nieuwendyk in particular are flat-out ridiculous.

So would Scotty Bowman's list, yet it still gets trotted out from time to time for some weird reason.

Agree, not even sure if either Gartner or Nieuwendyk would make a top 200 NHLers of all time list.

 

[Sentinel]

As someone else said, Fedorov was more talented, but Kurri was the far better player.

The only way to spin it would be "Kurri PLAYED with a far better player."

Anybody with a pair of eyes saw that Feds was better in every aspect of the game. Except maybe scoring goals.

 

[Sentinel]

You stopped voting because you took your pucks and went home.

I don't have any pucks to take home. Now if you said "my money to the bank"...

I stopped voting because it got ridiculous.

 

[Captain Bowie]

The only way to spin it would be "Kurri PLAYED with a far better player."

Anybody with a pair of eyes saw that Feds was better in every aspect of the game. Except maybe scoring goals.

Good thing that's not very important.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

I don't have any pucks to take home. Now if you said "my money to the bank"...

I stopped voting because it got ridiculous.

Nah just because "your guys" (Red Wings players and Russians) were not those who were picked (and rightfully).

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Fedorov and Kurri are not that far one from an other.

But Joe Thornton... I don't quite know how to put it, but for a guy who could defend competently (in that, he wasn't a 1-way player) and who could genereally make the ice tilt in its favor so that he isn't always defending, and whose offense is probably the best off just about any player left, including those actually for voting, why the actual **** are we discussing Nels Stewart, exactly?

Is Thornton really any better than Adam Oates was?

 

[MXD]

Is Thornton really any better than Adam Oates was?

They're nowhere close at this point. I mean, without going into specifics, in terms of raw points, Joe Thornton is ahead of Adam Oates as we speak, and considering the era they respectively played in (and the fact that their non-offense game is a bit of a wash), that should probably makes sure there's not even a hint of a debate.

(I'm probably the furthest thing from being a Thornton fan here, but seriously, in terms of pure offence, he's probably closer to Joe Sakic than to Adam Oates)

 

[BenchBrawl]

Thought experiment: Why would I take Joe Thornton over a guy like Mike Modano among recent modern centers? Because he scored more points and has a better trophy case? Are we measuring the table with the ruler or the ruler with the table?

Modano is a superior #1 center to build a team around, as he has proven.Even when the Sharks went to the Finals it was clear Thornton was a secondary piece.Nothing against Thornton, great playmaker, tough player, but just incapable of taking a team on his back and push it forward in the post-season.He's a not a ''franchise player''.

Modano played in all situations, crazy TOI in the playoffs.In the RS, under the Hitchcock system, his offense suffered.Yet played a key role in back-to-back trips to the SC Finals, winning one SC.

 

[MXD]

Thought experiment: Why would I take Joe Thornton over a guy like Mike Modano among recent modern centers? Because he scored more points and has a better trophy case? Are we measuring the table with the ruler or the ruler with the table?

Modano is clearly a superior #1 center to build a team around, as he has proven.Even when the Sharks went to the Finals it was clear Thornton was a secondary piece.Nothing against Thornton, great playmaker, tough player, but just incapable of taking a team on his back and push it forward in the post-season.

Modano played in all situations, crazy TOI in the playoffs.In the RS, under the Hitchcock system, his offense suffered.Yet played a key role in back-to-back trips to the SC Finals, winning one SC.

... I get the feeling this is actually an argument for Ed Belfour in disguise. Modano won jack squat without an elite netminder, too.

The idea with Thornton being... If those intangibles didn't matter at all, he'd ALREADY be in.

 

[BenchBrawl]

... I get the feeling this is actually an argument for Ed Belfour in disguise.

Belfour was better in 2000 than 1999 IIRC.

Regardless, Modano was a great performer in the back-to-back runs, and IMO the MVP for Dallas if you take them together.

No point in discussing Modano for 2 pages, but I wanted to bring Modano vs. Thornton, because both played in the Western Conference recently, in a conference with a bunch of tough centers and tough teams, and he managed to get a SC out of it, as opposed to Thornton.And let's not pretend Thornton played on weak teams.

 

[ted2019]

The only way to spin it would be "Kurri PLAYED with a far better player."

Anybody with a pair of eyes saw that Feds was better in every aspect of the game. Except maybe scoring goals.

Kurri's defense ALLOWED Gretzky to play half the rink. I'll still take Kurri of Fedorov any day of the week and twice on Sunday's.

 

[sr edler]

Good thing that's not very important.

Just because someone is better at something than someone else doesn't mean the gap has to be big.

 

[MXD]

Belfour was better in 2000 than 1999 IIRC.

Regardless, Modano was a great performer in the back-to-back runs, and IMO the MVP for Dallas if you take them together.

No point in discussing Modano for 2 pages, but I wanted to bring Modano vs. Thornton, because both played in the Western Conference recently, in a conference with a bunch of tough centers and tough teams, and he managed to get a SC out of it, as opposed to Thornton.And let's not pretend Thornton played on weak teams.

Belfour vs. Toskala, Nabokov, Niemi, Nittymaki, Jones.