Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 4

[quoipourquoi]

Procedure

• You will be presented with ~15 players based on their ranking in the Round 1 aggregate list
• Players will be listed in alphabetical order to avoid creating bias
• You will submit ten names in a ranked order, #1 through #10, without ties via PM to quoipourquoi
• Results of this vote will be posted after each voting cycle, but the individual ballots themselves will remain secret until the completion of this project
• The top-5 players will be added to The List

Eligible Voters

• Ballots from voters who have submitted an approved Round 1 ranking of 220 players (which was used to shape the aggregate list) will have their votes tabulated in the History of Hockey ranking
• Batis, BenchBrawl, bobholly39, buffalowing88, Dennis Bonvie, DN28, Dr John Carlson, Hockey Outsider, MXD, Professor What, ResilientBeast, seventieslord, tarheelhockey, ted2019, TheDevilMadeMe, Vilica, Weztex

Guidelines

• Respect each other. No horseplay or sophistry!
• Stay on topic and don't get caught up in talking about non-eligible players
• Participate, but retain an open mind throughout the discussion
• Do not speculate who cast any particular ballot. Do not make judgments about the mindset of whoever cast that particular ballot. All individual ballots will be revealed at the end of the project.

House Rules

• Any attempts to derail a discussion thread with disrespect to old-time hockey will be met with frontier justice
• We encourage interpositional discussion (forward vs. defenseman vs. goaltender) as opposed to the safer and somewhat redundant intrapositional debates
  
• Take a drink when someone mentions the number of hockey registrations in a given era
• Finish your drink when someone mentions that goaltenders cannot be compared to skaters

The actual voting period will open up on Friday, February 5th at midnight and continue through Sunday, February 7th at 8:59pm. Eastern time zone. I will release the results of the vote on Monday, February 8th.


Vote 4 Candidates

• Alex Delvecchio
  
• Bernie Parent
• Bill Quackenbush
• Busher Jackson
• Doug Bentley
• Gilbert Perreault
• Guy Lapointe
• Jack Stewart
• Pavel Bure
• Pavel Datsyuk
• Peter Stastny
• Rod Langway
• Ron Francis
• Serge Savard
• Valeri Vasiliev

Click to read more...

 

[BenchBrawl]

Gilbert Perreault is the most renowned player on that list, if we listen to people who saw him play. And he's not the only candidate with an amazing highlight reel.

 

[tarheelhockey]

We get both Lapointe-Savard and Quackenbush-Stewart in this round. Those are great comparisons.

Stewart-Quackenbush-Savard-Vasiliev-Langway is just a crazy thing to wrap one’s head around. We might think about approaching this the way @DN28 did last round — where did they rank among D each season? Otherwise it’s really challenging to rank this group, with them all being more defensive-minded and playing across such a wide range of time and geography. But we’ve gotta get it sorted... this type of player is now making up nearly half our list.

Delvecchio - Jackson makes an interesting comparison IMO. Very different players with some common underlying themes.

Perreault - Bure. Two guys with a long highlight reel, lots of fans, but a bit shorter on achievements than you’d expect. Somehow Perreault feels less polarizing than Bure but I’m not sure why.

Stastny finally looks a little better now, after some rough rounds. He makes a good comparison with Bure and Perrault.

Datsyuk-Francis could be an intriguing comparison. Another one where there are underlying themes to go with some interesting contrasts.

We cleared out so many goalies the last 2 rounds that we only have Parent left.

I’m really not feeling Bentley here. He’s another of those guys who was maybe screwed out of a legacy by WWII, and maybe there’s something to be said for his late-40s seasons, but seriously his profile is weak compared to the rest of this group. Either I’m missing something, or it’s going to be quite a long time before he enters my top-10.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

VsX summary

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	7 YEAR	10 YEAR
Busher Jackson	106.0	100.0	93.6	88.9	88.4	77.3	72.1	61.4	59.1	55.0	89.5	80.2
Peter Stastny	100.0	98.3	94.6	86.5	84.7	80.7	74.1	71.3	61.2	56.6	88.4	80.8
Ron Francis	99.2	95.6	86.1	85.6	84.3	82.6	78.3	77.7	77.5	75.7	87.4	84.2
Doug Bentley	101.4	98.1	95.0	87.3	81.1	76.8	66.7	63.6	48.5	48.1	86.6	76.7
Gilbert Perreault	95.0	90.5	89.1	84.6	81.7	80.0	79.3	74.4	73.3	67.9	85.7	81.6
Pavel Bure	100.0	98.9	95.8	89.2	76.7	74.3	61.4	51.7	50.5	28.8	85.2	72.7
Alex Delvecchio	96.7	88.5	83.3	83.1	82.1	80.7	79.1	79.0	78.6	77.6	84.8	82.9
Pavel Datsyuk	91.5	88.2	86.0	82.1	78.2	76.3	75.6	69.1	64.2	59.6	82.5	77.1
Guy Lapointe	72.4	62.0	58.2	57.1	51.9	48.9	47.4	45.0	38.5	21.8	56.9	50.3
Serge Savard	49.6	40.0	39.5	38.5	37.5	36.0	29.0	28.4	19.8	17.9	38.6	33.6
Bill Quackenbush	43.9	42.6	36.7	36.2	35.2	35.0	34.9	29.7	29.5	27.9	37.8	35.2
Rod Langway	33.3	30.3	27.3	26.5	25.8	25.0	19.3	15.1	12.8	12.2	26.8	22.8
Jack Stewart	31.7	27.8	25.0	22.2	20.4	20.3	18.2	15.3	5.8	3.0	23.6	19.0

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Not a huge spread in seven-year VsX among the eight forwards. There are some bigger variations in the ten year scores for reasons that are fairly obvious.

Guy Lapointe is the best of the five NHL defenseman (offensively) by a wide margin.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Hart trophy summary (5% vote threshold)

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th+	Total
Doug Bentley		1	1	1				3
Rod Langway		1		2				3
Bernie Parent		1		1				2
Pavel Bure			1				1	2
Gilbert Perreault					1		1	2
Pavel Datsyuk			1					1
Jack Strewrt					1			1
Ron Francis						1		1

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Players who weren't eligible for the Hart - Vasiliev

Players who were eligible, but never received a non-trivial number of votes - Delvecchio, Jackson, Lapointe, Quackenbush, Savard, Stastny (see note re Stastny last week)

Not the most impressive group in terms of Hart trophy finishes - out of the 14 players who played in the NHL, only five of them were ever Hart finalists, and it was only once each (though Langway also has two fourth-place finishes). (EDIT - I missed two of Doug Bentley's seasons as a Hart finalist initially, but it's worth noting it was during the talent-depleted WWII years).

Norris trophy summary (5% vote threshold)

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th+	Total
Rod Langway	2		1		2		1	6
Serge Savard				1	3	1		5
Guy Lapointe		1	1	2				4

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

To repeat my comment from last week - Quackenbush peaked just before the Norris was first awarded in 1954. He was a 1st team all-star three times and a 2nd team all-stat twice. Scanning through the results, he finished 1st (1948), 1st (1949), 2nd (1951), 3rd (1953), 4th (1947), and 5th (1946) - which, on paper, is better than any of the players list above, but it was a relatively weak era for defensemen.

Doing the same thing for Stewart, he finished 2nd (1943*), 2nd (1948), 2nd (1949), 3rd (1947) and 4th (1946). Two notes - first, Stewart missed two prime years (1944 and 1945) due to World War II. It's also tough to figure out exactly how 1943* would translate into modern voting results. There were separate year-end spots for left and right D. Stewart decisively led left D in voting, but it looks like there was weaker competition there, so I've put him at second to be conservative.

Note that Lapointe consistently finished higher than Savard in Norris trophy voting (he has four of the five highest rankings between the two of them), but Savard is generally considered the better player. Is it because Lapointe was much better offensively, and Savard's reliable defense made it tougher to catch the attention of the voters?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

We get both Lapointe-Savard and Quackenbush-Stewart in this round. Those are great comparisons.

Stewart-Quackenbush-Savard-Vasiliev-Langway is just a crazy thing to wrap one’s head around. We might think about approaching this the way @DN28 did last round — where did they rank among D each season? Otherwise it’s really challenging to rank this group, with them all being more defensive-minded and playing across such a wide range of time and geography. But we’ve gotta get it sorted... this type of player is now making up nearly half our list.

Delvecchio - Jackson makes an interesting comparison IMO. Very different players with some common underlying themes.

Perreault - Bure. Two guys with a long highlight reel, lots of fans, but a bit shorter on achievements than you’d expect. Somehow Perreault feels less polarizing than Bure but I’m not sure why.

Stastny finally looks a little better now, after some rough rounds. He makes a good comparison with Bure and Perrault.

Datsyuk-Francis could be an intriguing comparison. Another one where there are underlying themes to go with some interesting contrasts.

We cleared out so many goalies the last 2 rounds that we only have Parent left.

I’m really not feeling Bentley here. He’s another of those guys who was maybe screwed out of a legacy by WWII, and maybe there’s something to be said for his late-40s seasons, but seriously his profile is weak compared to the rest of this group. Either I’m missing something, or it’s going to be quite a long time before he enters my top-10.

Agree on Bentley.

Don't see Stewart or Devecchio this round either.

I like Lapointe more than Perreault. Always felt he was underrated because of his teammates. Perreault overrated because he was a joy to watch when he had the puck.

 

[seventieslord]

We get both Lapointe-Savard and Quackenbush-Stewart in this round. Those are great comparisons.

I like that too. At first glance I was pretty underwhelmed by the other new candidates, except these two.

I don't think I'm prepared to vote for Lapointe over Savard, but we should discuss why Lapointe does better than Savard year after year in all star and Norris voting and yet Savard is almost universally considered the better player today.

 

[MXD]

What does Jack Stewart has on Ching Johnson and Shea Weber (for whom it would be extremely early, if I may add? Weber, I mean. Johnson would be right at home with this group)

 

[tarheelhockey]

Hart trophy summary (5% vote threshold)

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th+	Total
Rod Langway		1		2				3
Bernie Parent		1		1				2
Pavel Bure			1				1	2
Gilbert Perreault					1		1	2
Pavel Datsyuk			1					1
Doug Bentley				1				1
Jack Strewart					1			1
Ron Francis						1		1

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Players who weren't eligible for the Hart - Vasiliev

Players who were eligible, but never received a non-trivial number of votes - Delvecchio, Jackson, Lapointe, Quackenbush, Savard, Stastny

Not the most impressive group in terms of Hart trophy finishes - out of the 14 players who played in the NHL, only four of them were ever Hart finalists, and it was only once each (though Langway also has two fourth-place finishes).

Bentley was a 2-time finalist, right? H-R has his Hart record as 2,3,4.

Of course the fly in the ointment is that those were in 1943 and 1944, giving them almost no value.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Bentley was a 2-time finalist, right? H-R has his Hart record as 2,3,4.

Of course the fly in the ointment is that those were in 1943 and 1944, giving them almost no value.

Good catch - updated. The numbers I was looking at only went back to 1947.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Again, Pavel Bure hype.

Only had 5 NHL seasons where he played over 70 games. Scored 51, 58, 59, 60 and 60 goals in those seasons. Led the league 3 times.

5th best goals per game all-time regular season. 8th best all-time playoffs.

Led the league in short-handed goals twice.

Led the playoffs in goals & even strength goals in 1994.

Never had the benefit of playing with a great center or team.

 

[sr edler]

Again, Pavel Bure hype.

Only had 5 NHL seasons where he played over 70 games. Scored 51, 58, 59, 60 and 60 goals in those seasons. Led the league 3 times.

5th best goals per game all-time regular season. 8th best all-time playoffs.

Led the league in short-handed goals twice.

Led the playoffs in goals & even strength goals in 1994.

Never had the benefit of playing with a great center or team.

Other impressive Bure things includes being voted best forward at the 1989 WJCs. This is especially impressive considering he was a 17-year old 1st time participant competing for the berth against on one hand the new American golden generation with Mike Modano, Jeremy Roenick & John LeClair (all either one & two years older), and on the other hand his own teammates Fedorov & Mogilny (two years older), plus Finnish new sensation Teemu Selänne (one year older). He really passes the eye test on this one too if you look up clips from the Anchorage, Alaska tournament, flying up the left wing with the puck. Then without Fedorov & Mogilny the next two years he would go on to become one of the best goal scorers ever at the WJCs.

Most impressive from his 1994 playoff run is probably that 16 game point streak. Second longest point streak in a single Stanley Cup playoffs ever, only behind 1980s dynasty Isles Bryan Trottier (18 games).

Also voted best forward at the best-on-best 1998 Olympics against a crop of forwards including Selänne, Koivu, Forsberg, Sundin, Fedorov, Jagr, Sakic, Yzerman, Lindros, Hull, Modano, Lafontaine.

It's unfortunate he missed most of the 98–99 season with a hold-out & injuries because he looked absolutely amazing there, scoring at a 1.40 PPG clip and instantly looking like a marquee player from his first skating stride. I thought about this around that whole Willy Nylander hold-out debacle, and the subsequent on-ice let down, with some people making excuses that he didn't have a training camp, et cetera. Not making any Nylander comparisons (obviously) but if you're a real marquee player you go in there like you didn't miss a beat and dominate from the first puck drop, like Forsberg in the 02 playoffs after missing a whole season. That's what separates the wheat from the chaff. Especially memorable from that 98–99 window was that hat-trick on Patrick Roy, Panthers leading 5-0. 5-1 after two periods, then Bure goes out with an injury and doesn't play in the 3rd and his team completely implodes without him, the Avalanche winning 5-7 (with Forsberg having 6 points).

 

[tarheelhockey]

Good catch - updated. The numbers I was looking at only went back to 1947.

To be fair, it's probably just as well to look at him having only the 4th place finish. I wonder if his early eligibility is based on "bonus" achievements in 1943 and 1944 when there was virtually no competition:

Bentley with 1943 and 1944:
3x First All Star
1x Second All Star
2x Hart Finalist + a fourth place finish
2x goals leader
3x top-10 goal scorer
2x assists leader
7x top-10 assist scorer
1x points leader
6x top-10 point scorer

Bentley without 1943 and 1944:
1x First All Star
1x Second All Star
Fourth place Hart finish
1x top-10 goal scorer
2x assists leader
5x top-10 assist scorer
4x to-10 point scorer

I don't mean to drag the guy, but the latter is a slightly more statistically -prolific version of Kenny Wharram or Gaye Stewart. We would not be considering him now, and maybe not even in this project, if those two war years weren't in the picture.

 

[MXD]

To be fair, it's probably just as well to look at him having only the 4th place finish. I wonder if his early eligibility is based on "bonus" achievements in 1943 and 1944 when there was virtually no competition:

Bentley with 1943 and 1944:
3x First All Star
1x Second All Star
2x Hart Finalist + a fourth place finish
2x goals leader
3x top-10 goal scorer
2x assists leader
7x top-10 assist scorer
1x points leader
6x top-10 point scorer

Bentley without 1943 and 1944:
1x First All Star
1x Second All Star
Fourth place Hart finish
1x top-10 goal scorer
2x assists leader
5x top-10 assist scorer
4x to-10 point scorer

I don't mean to drag the guy, but the latter is a slightly more statistically -prolific version of Kenny Wharram or Gaye Stewart. We would not be considering him now, and maybe not even in this project, if those two war years weren't in the picture.

... On the other hand, he's also the only forward (I can think of) with three Top-4 Hart placements still left on the board.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

To be fair, it's probably just as well to look at him having only the 4th place finish. I wonder if his early eligibility is based on "bonus" achievements in 1943 and 1944 when there was virtually no competition:

Bentley with 1943 and 1944:
3x First All Star
1x Second All Star
2x Hart Finalist + a fourth place finish
2x goals leader
3x top-10 goal scorer
2x assists leader
7x top-10 assist scorer
1x points leader
6x top-10 point scorer

Bentley without 1943 and 1944:
1x First All Star
1x Second All Star
Fourth place Hart finish
1x top-10 goal scorer
2x assists leader
5x top-10 assist scorer
4x to-10 point scorer

I don't mean to drag the guy, but the latter is a slightly more statistically -prolific version of Kenny Wharram or Gaye Stewart. We would not be considering him now, and maybe not even in this project, if those two war years weren't in the picture.

Yes, Bentley's numbers from 1943 and 1944 stick out like a sore thumb.

But he was in his prime at the time and may have accomplished something even with everyone playing.

Post war he did lead the league in assists two years in a row while coming in 2nd and 3rd in scoring.

That said, he seems too early for voting.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

... On the other hand, he's also the only forward (I can think of) with three Top-4 Hart placements still left on the board.

Let's not forget the immortal Claude Giroux!

 

[MXD]

Let's not forget the immortal Claude Giroux!

Well, I indeed forgot about him
But more seriously, my point was that, the fact his Hart higher mark happened during WW2 is probably already taken in consideration.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

VsX summary

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th	8th	9th	10th	7 YEAR	10 YEAR
Busher Jackson	106.0	100.0	93.6	88.9	88.4	77.3	72.1	61.4	59.1	55.0	89.5	80.2
Peter Stastny	100.0	98.3	94.6	86.5	84.7	80.7	74.1	71.3	61.2	56.6	88.4	80.8
Ron Francis	99.2	95.6	86.1	85.6	84.3	82.6	78.3	77.7	77.5	75.7	87.4	84.2
Doug Bentley	101.4	98.1	95.0	87.3	81.1	76.8	66.7	63.6	48.5	48.1	86.6	76.7
Gilbert Perreault	95.0	90.5	89.1	84.6	81.7	80.0	79.3	74.4	73.3	67.9	85.7	81.6
Pavel Bure	100.0	98.9	95.8	89.2	76.7	74.3	61.4	51.7	50.5	28.8	85.2	72.7
Alex Delvecchio	96.7	88.5	83.3	83.1	82.1	80.7	79.1	79.0	78.6	77.6	84.8	82.9
Pavel Datsyuk	91.5	88.2	86.0	82.1	78.2	76.3	75.6	69.1	64.2	59.6	82.5	77.1
Guy Lapointe	72.4	62.0	58.2	57.1	51.9	48.9	47.4	45.0	38.5	21.8	56.9	50.3
Serge Savard	49.6	40.0	39.5	38.5	37.5	36.0	29.0	28.4	19.8	17.9	38.6	33.6
Bill Quackenbush	43.9	42.6	36.7	36.2	35.2	35.0	34.9	29.7	29.5	27.9	37.8	35.2
Rod Langway	33.3	30.3	27.3	26.5	25.8	25.0	19.3	15.1	12.8	12.2	26.8	22.8
Jack Stewart	31.7	27.8	25.0	22.2	20.4	20.3	18.2	15.3	5.8	3.0	23.6	19.0

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Not a huge spread in seven-year VsX among the eight forwards. There are some bigger variations in the ten year scores for reasons that are fairly obvious.

Guy Lapointe is the best of the five NHL defenseman (offensively) by a wide margin.

Thanks. A few comments on the forwards

• Busher Jackson was basically an offense-only player, but I think his regular season numbers should get him in this round.
• Does Stastny's single year of elite play in the CSSR bring him up to Jackson level?
• Francis is the first strong two-way player of the bunch, but as discussed before, his 1995-1998 "prime" needs to be brought back to earth. Good playoff record in the 2nd half of his career though.
• Bentley was the backchecker of the Bentley-Bentley-Monsienko line. Good two-way player, voted best hockey player for the first half century of the Hawks. He's worth discussing this round - probably shojldnt' fall too far behind his brother Max. Was his playoff record weak or just incomplete?
• Perreault's peak MAY have been suppressed by playing his home games in the small Buffalo area. He also kills Bure in longevity, as evidenced by 10 year VsX
• Still looks a little too early for Bure
• Delvecchio is interesting - good two-way player, good in the playoffs, great longevity - sound like Francis? What I find interesting about Delvecchio is he had arguably his best season in a one of the rare years he didn't center Gordie Howe. I'll try to dig up the info from the centers project, I believe @overpass posted it.
• For some reason, Datstyuk is a hard player for me to rank. At his best, I think he was a more impactful player than Bure or Francis. Francis at least kills him in longevity, which means something.

 

[Professor What]

Re: Lapointe and Savard

I'm in what I recognize to be a minority in that I'd take Lapointe over Savard. To me, the massive gap in offensive production is difficult to make up, and while I know there are plenty of players who aren't very defensively capable, as a rule, I think it's easier to disrupt and tear down than to build.

BUT, I also don't think the comparison is quite that simple, thanks to the disparity between the way voters of the day saw them and the way they're generally viewed today. I know a lot of weight is put into the feelings of contemporaries, and that's as should be. Since the two of them played in an era that we have plenty of video from, it's not quite the same, but I still think there's plenty to be said for having been there at the time to actually witness it. That being said, even as someone who rates Lapointe more highly, I have a hard time wrapping my head around Savard's voting record. How could he have never been better than the fourth-best defenseman in the league? How does a stalwart defender who scores 20 goals and 60 points in 1974-75 only finish fifth? How does he never get any votes for the Norris before that year? Obviously, he wasn't an unknown with that Conn Smythe already on his mantle. Of any individual season between Savard and Lapointe, I'll take that one as the best, and I only rate Orr ahead of him without any question.

I don't think that Savard's poor Norris voting record can be simply tied to his style of play. Rod Langway was still two absurdly win two Norris Trophies, and he made Savard look like Paul Coffey offensively while not being that much better defensively. I'd take Savard over Langway any day. Perhaps going forward from 1974-75, Bobby Orr was too fresh of a memory and voters wanted the next Orr, but Orr had been gone for less than a decade when Langway won. When comparing Savard to Langway, Savard certainly wins in my book

I enjoy discussions about awards that I think voters got wrong, and as we've seen -- in my opinion, at least -- the quality of voting decline, I think those discussions become more valuable. So, I wonder two things about Savard's voting record. 1) Was he a victim of a decline in the quality of voting because of an expanding league? I mean, it wasn't as pronounced in 1974-75 as today, but 18 teams made it a lot harder to actually observe everyone accurately than six did. 2) How much pushback is there to an incorrect record? I don't mean to cast any question on anyone's motives, but I still can't help but wonder if a slight overreaction has occurred over time in trying to fix the legacy.

Just my two cents, and it might look like rambling to everyone else, but I think all of that has to be addressed if we really want to understand the gap between the two players' recognition at the time and the gap between how they were compared now and then.

 

[voyageur]

Peter Stastny was 2nd in points in the 1980s behind a certain legendary player, so I think he's a lock, and if he isn't you didn't watch him play.

Pavel Bure was a generational superstar, so I think he deserves to be in there.

Pavel Datsyuk would have my vote.

I'm too young to remember Gilbert Perreault, it would come down to him, Francis, or Savard, in my opinion for the final spot.

I guess I'll vote for Francis as #4, he's still up there in all time scoring, though he was never a player who struck me as dominant.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Player	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	7th+	Total
Rod Langway	2		1		2		1	6
Serge Savard				1	3	1		5
Guy Lapointe		1	1	2				4

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

To repeat my comment from last week - Quackenbush peaked just before the Norris was first awarded in 1954. He was a 1st team all-star three times and a 2nd team all-stat twice. Scanning through the results, he finished 1st (1948), 1st (1949), 2nd (1951), 3rd (1953), 4th (1947), and 5th (1946) - which, on paper, is better than any of the players list above, but it was a relatively weak era for defensemen.

Doing the same thing for Stewart, he finished 2nd (1943*), 2nd (1948), 2nd (1949), 3rd (1947) and 4th (1946). Two notes - first, Stewart missed two prime years (1944 and 1945) due to World War II. It's also tough to figure out exactly how 1943* would translate into modern voting results. There were separate year-end spots for left and right D. Stewart decisively led left D in voting, but it looks like there was weaker competition there, so I've put him at second to be conservative.

Note that Lapointe consistently finished higher than Savard in Norris trophy voting (he has four of the five highest rankings between the two of them), but Savard is generally considered the better player. Is it because Lapointe was much better offensively, and Savard's reliable defense made it tougher to catch the attention of the voters?

I have no problem voting Lapointe below Savard. PP point totals heavily factor into Norris voting, and Lapointe was Montreal's top PP guy over even Larry Robinson. At even strength, Savard's goal differential numbers are dominant, and his PK numbers are top 5 ever. Also, aren't those same people who voted for the awards the ones who consistently vote Savard and not Lapointe as a top 100 player whenever the media does their own top 100 lists? To be honest, I thought Lapointe's advantage in Norris voting was even more than this.

At first glance, Quackenbush's record looks a fairly big step up from Stewart's right in the voting record? I mean, there's a reason we rather easily ranked him higher in the defensemen project, right?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Re: Lapointe and Savard

I'm in what I recognize to be a minority in that I'd take Lapointe over Savard. To me, the massive gap in offensive production is difficult to make up, and while I know there are plenty of players who aren't very defensively capable, as a rule, I think it's easier to disrupt and tear down than to build.

BUT, I also don't think the comparison is quite that simple, thanks to the disparity between the way voters of the day saw them and the way they're generally viewed today. I know a lot of weight is put into the feelings of contemporaries, and that's as should be. Since the two of them played in an era that we have plenty of video from, it's not quite the same, but I still think there's plenty to be said for having been there at the time to actually witness it. That being said, even as someone who rates Lapointe more highly, I have a hard time wrapping my head around Savard's voting record. How could he have never been better than the fourth-best defenseman in the league? How does a stalwart defender who scores 20 goals and 60 points in 1974-75 only finish fifth? How does he never get any votes for the Norris before that year? Obviously, he wasn't an unknown with that Conn Smythe already on his mantle. Of any individual season between Savard and Lapointe, I'll take that one as the best, and I only rate Orr ahead of him without any question.

I don't think that Savard's poor Norris voting record can be simply tied to his style of play. Rod Langway was still two absurdly win two Norris Trophies, and he made Savard look like Paul Coffey offensively while not being that much better defensively. I'd take Savard over Langway any day. Perhaps going forward from 1974-75, Bobby Orr was too fresh of a memory and voters wanted the next Orr, but Orr had been gone for less than a decade when Langway won. When comparing Savard to Langway, Savard certainly wins in my book

I enjoy discussions about awards that I think voters got wrong, and as we've seen -- in my opinion, at least -- the quality of voting decline, I think those discussions become more valuable. So, I wonder two things about Savard's voting record. 1) Was he a victim of a decline in the quality of voting because of an expanding league? I mean, it wasn't as pronounced in 1974-75 as today, but 18 teams made it a lot harder to actually observe everyone accurately than six did. 2) How much pushback is there to an incorrect record? I don't mean to cast any question on anyone's motives, but I still can't help but wonder if a slight overreaction has occurred over time in trying to fix the legacy.

Just my two cents, and it might look like rambling to everyone else, but I think all of that has to be addressed if we really want to understand the gap between the two players' recognition at the time and the gap between how they were compared now and then.

I agree about having Lapointe over Savard.

Perhaps my eye test was tainted by the fact that Lapointe always seemed to come up big against my Bruins. If I were a Montreal fan maybe I'd see it differently.

But Dryden's depiction of Lapointe in the "The Game" also had a big influence. Dryden saw him as the player that would turn games around when the Canadiens weren't performing to their standard level. He also saw him as a bigger influence in the locker than either Robinson or Savard.

Then, of course, there are the numbers and the awards.

And I would never rank Savard over Langway.

 

[ted2019]

Early Monday I have this as my breakdown, I'm sure it will change.
Quackenbush/Savard/Langway/Vasiliev/ Bentley
Stewart/Bure/Busher/Datsyuk/Lapointe
Francis/Bernie/Stastny/Delvecchio/Perreault

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Early Monday I have this as my breakdown, I'm sure it will change.
Quackenbush/Savard/Langway/Vasiliev/ Bentley
Stewart/Bure/Busher/Datsyuk/Lapointe
Francis/Bernie/Stastny/Delvecchio/Perreault

Bure moves up!

But defense dominates.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Doing the same thing for Stewart, he finished 2nd (1943*), 2nd (1948), 2nd (1949), 3rd (1947) and 4th (1946). Two notes - first, Stewart missed two prime years (1944 and 1945) due to World War II. It's also tough to figure out exactly how 1943* would translate into modern voting results. There were separate year-end spots for left and right D. Stewart decisively led left D in voting, but it looks like there was weaker competition there, so I've put him at second to be conservative.

Stewart did eat into a lot of the RD votes too, taking half of Seibert’s winning total.

DEFENSE: FIRST TEAM: RIGHT D: Earl Seibert, Chi 10; Flash Hollett, Bos 6; Jack Stewart, Det 5; Jack Crawford, Bos 4; Dit Clapper, Bos 1
LEFT D: Jack Stewart, Det 15; Babe Pratt, Tor 3; Flash Hollett, Bos 3; Jack Crawford, Bos 3; Earl Seibert, Chi 2

And as we looked at in the last round, because Norris voting and All-Star voting is not necessarily analogous, Stewart could theoretically have been ranked 1st in a 5-3-1 or 10-7-5-3-1 vote in 1948 as there was just a 2-point gap between him and Quackenbush on a 5-5-3-3-1-1 vote.

In a 5-3-1 or a 10-7-5-3-1 vote (which is the comparison point for Norris voting), Quackenbush and Stewart would have been close: 31-45 points vs. 27-40 points or 12-21 points vs. 9-17 points.

1947 had a 3-3-2-2-1-1 system, and it actually played out similarly to 1948 where the results of a 5-3-1 or 10-7-5-3-1 Norris system cannot be predicted.

10-7-5-3-1

Reardon: (4x 1st) 28-40 pts, (3x 3rd) 0-3 pts
Bouchard: (2x 1st) 14-20 pts, (3x 2nd) 9-15 pts
Stewart: (2x 1st) 14-20 pts, (2x 2nd) 6-10 pts, (1x 3rd) 0-1 pts
Quackenbush: (2x 1st) 14-20 pts, (2x 2nd) 6-10 pts, (1x 3rd) 0-1 pts

It’s possible that any of the 4 would have come out ahead in a 10-7-5-3-1 ballot system.

Stewart could have a record of 1st (1943), 1st (1947), 1st (1948), 2nd (1949), and 4th (1946) - with a top-5 Hart placement in the year he was 4th! (we should dig into 1946) - and we would not know because the question was not posed that way.