Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 6

[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 19th at midnight and continue through Sunday, February 21st at 8:59pm. Eastern time zone. I will release the results of the vote on Monday, February 22nd.


Vote 6 Candidates

• Adam Oates
• Alex Delvecchio
• Connor McDavid
• Doug Bentley
• Gilbert Perreault
• Guy Lapointe
• Hod Stuart
• Paul Kariya
• Pavel Bure
• Pavel Datsyuk
• Rod Langway
• Scott Niedermayer
• Tommy Phillips
• Vladimir Krutov

Click to read more...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Ugh, none of the guys I wanted (Kopitar, Stamkos, Lehman) made it.

Anyway, I guess it's good we can compare Phillips and Stuart, but none of the new guys really do it for me.

Delvecchio and Perreault are almost guaranteed to be my top 2. Bentley looks pretty good too, and I think Niedermayer?

 

[Professor What]

Bure is even more firmly entrenched in my number one spot, and I'm really strongly feeling that he needs to go very, very soon.

As for the newcomers, I'm most interested in seeing the discussions that play out for Stuart and Krutov, because I feel like I've got the best chances to learn from them.

 

[tarheelhockey]

• Connor McDavid
• Hod Stuart
• Paul Kariya
• Pavel Bure
• Pavel Datsyuk
• Rod Langway
• Scott Niedermayer
• Tommy Phillips
• Vladimir Krutov

*pours a stiff drink*

 

[ted2019]

We can have a McJesus debate now.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Just sorting through some first impressions.

• Adam Oates
• Alex Delvecchio

Without looking up numbers to verify, intuitively Oates is a better offensive player than Delvecchio. And while he’s not on that level defensively, he’s no slouch defensively either. Both of them played forever and were good late in their careers. I’m seeing Oates over Delvecchio at this early stage.

• Connor McDavid
• Hod Stuart
• Pavel Datsyuk
• Tommy Phillips

Being the best player in the world, even if very briefly, is a big deal when we’re this far down the list.

I may be wrong, but I think McDavid is the last 3x first All Star center we’ll see. The fact that he did this in a fully modern, integrated, international, analytically driven league is something we can’t overlook. Part of me wants to just pin his name as #1 until he’s in, but Datsyuk does have a full career and a ton of winning to his name. It’s close between them but I might have them both top-5.

At first glance I’m thinking Stuart over Phillips, but willing to hear arguments otherwise. But I don’t think either of these guys surpasses McDavid or Datsyuk for me. If we’re talking about only a brief spell of being on top of the world, I’ll take the modern guy over the guy from 115 years ago.

• Doug Bentley
• Guy Lapointe
• Rod Langway
• Scott Niedermayer

I’m not really loving any of these guys against this field. This round is full of guys whose peaks were short and sweet. By comparison, this group other than maybe Niedermayer doesn’t hit the same level. I guess Bentley has longevity on his side, but he’s surely below Delvecchio and probably Oates. The rest of them have fairly insignificant off-peak careers, which really makes it tough to advocate them over a McDavid, Datsyuk, or even a Stuart.

• Vladimir Krutov

Honestly he looks pretty good against this group. I’m not sure he’ll make my top-5 but he’s got a shot.

 

[ted2019]

Hod Stuart is the best Defensemen from the 1900's. but how does his play from the IPHL & WPHL go against the Langway/Niedermayer/Lapointe ? Also, the "best in the world debate with McDavid & Phillips. Looks like a fun group.

 

[ted2019]

Just sorting through some first impressions.

• Adam Oates
• Alex Delvecchio

Without looking up numbers to verify, intuitively Oates is a better offensive player than Delvecchio. And while he’s not on that level defensively, he’s no slouch defensively either. Both of them played forever and were good late in their careers. I’m seeing Oates over Delvecchio at this early stage.

• Connor McDavid
• Hod Stuart
• Pavel Datsyuk
• Tommy Phillips

Being the best player in the world, even if very briefly, is a big deal when we’re this far down the list.

I may be wrong, but I think McDavid is the last 3x first All Star center we’ll see. The fact that he did this in a fully modern, integrated, international, analytically driven league is something we can’t overlook. Part of me wants to just pin his name as #1 until he’s in, but Datsyuk does have a full career and a ton of winning to his name. It’s close between them but I might have them both top-5.

At first glance I’m thinking Stuart over Phillips, but willing to hear arguments otherwise. But I don’t think either of these guys surpasses McDavid or Datsyuk for me. If we’re talking about only a brief spell of being on top of the world, I’ll take the modern guy over the guy from 115 years ago.

• Doug Bentley
• Guy Lapointe
• Rod Langway
• Scott Niedermayer

I’m not really loving any of these guys against this field. This round is full of guys whose peaks were short and sweet. By comparison, this group other than maybe Niedermayer doesn’t hit the same level. I guess Bentley has longevity on his side, but he’s surely below Delvecchio and probably Oates. The rest of them have fairly insignificant off-peak careers, which really makes it tough to advocate them over a McDavid, Datsyuk, or even a Stuart.

• Vladimir Krutov

Honestly he looks pretty good against this group. I’m not sure he’ll make my top-5 but he’s got a shot.

I'm going this early as Oates over Delvecchio
McDavid over Datsyuk/Phillips/Stuart.
Phillips over Stuart
Datsyuk?

Bure is in.
Langway should've made it already.
Krutov maybe.

The rest, eh.

 

[MXD]

Urgh. At this point, other than possibly Hod Stuart, I'd have Hooley Smith and Marty Barry over just anyone in this group. I dont only mean the new entrants :
I mean, total.

And even it feels really early for ranking Stuart at the top.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

McDavid was my top ranked player.

Now that we are down this far, I don't think I will vote for him at all. Its really a mockery as he is so much better than all of these players.

Krutov will be in my top 5. He could be my number one, but my top 3 from last round didn't get in.

So why didn't Delvecchio go in last round?

 

[MXD]

On McDavid : I wasn't conflicted on what to do about him. Now I am. Hod Stuart and Tommy Phillipps are a big reason why.

 

[GlitchMarner]

So... anyone see an argument for still having Bure ahead of McDavid?

They seem fairly comparable at this point, I guess. Datsyuk seems to be in that range as well. Also quite flashy. Not as good offensively but much better defensively. Not a short career guy per se, but longevity isn't his strong suit, either.

Really, now that I think about it, it seems longevity is really the only thing Perreault has over McDavid at this point.

 

[bobholly39]

I feel we should all agree to vote McDavid #1 and move on. Seriously. Let's "fix it" and do so, as a group. He's the best player here. When we look back at this list 5, 10 years from now, his placement will be completely moot since we all know he's going to end up a top 50 player (at least). Instead of debating and arguing how different posters value 5 seasons vs longer careers - I say we all vote him #1 so as not to have him disturb rest of process.

He was my #1 overall in this project (at 101). We're now ranking #126. No one else listed here is anywhere close to as good as him.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

So... anyone see an argument for still having Bure ahead of McDavid?

They seem fairly comparable at this point, I guess. Datsyuk seems to be in that range as well. Also quite flashy. Not as good offensively but much better defensively. Not a short career guy per se, but longevity isn't his strong suit, either.

Really, now that I think about it, it seems longevity is really the only thing Perreault has over McDavid at this point.

Longevity is all anyone has on McDavid.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

So... anyone see an argument for still having Bure ahead of McDavid?

They seem fairly comparable at this point, I guess. Datsyuk seems to be in that range as well. Also quite flashy. Not as good offensively but much better defensively. Not a short career guy per se, but longevity isn't his strong suit, either.

Really, now that I think about it, it seems longevity is really the only thing Perreault has over McDavid at this point.

If we care about length of prime, McDavid's is horrible. Enough to make his 7-year VsX average 65... and that for a guy with no defensive or playoff record. Even someone like Kucherov has played enough seasons for a respectable 7 year average of about 80.

I honestly don't know what to do with McDavid and he's the reason I thought we should have a minimum-age limit for guys eligible for the project. No matter what we do with him, it's going to look strange in even 5 years.

 

[MXD]

So... anyone see an argument for still having Bure ahead of McDavid?

If I deem McDavid "eligible" for this thing, I can't possibly rank him behind Bure.
Which raise question why I ranked Kucherov behind Bure in the first place.

 

[bobholly39]

So... anyone see an argument for still having Bure ahead of McDavid?

They seem fairly comparable at this point, I guess. Datsyuk seems to be in that range as well. Also quite flashy. Not as good offensively but much better defensively. Not a short career guy per se, but longevity isn't his strong suit, either.

Really, now that I think about it, it seems longevity is really the only thing Perreault has over McDavid at this point.

The only thing anyone has over McDavid at this point is longevity, not just Perreault.

Mcdavid was the best player in the league a few seasons....top 2 at the very least. Bure's never done that, he was never #1 nor even #2. I don't see the case really.

 

[bobholly39]

If we care about length of prime, McDavid's is horrible. Enough to make his 7-year VsX average 65... and that for a guy with no defensive or playoff record. Even someone like Kucherov has played enough seasons for a respectable 7 year average of about 80.

I honestly don't know what to do with McDavid and he's the reason I though we should have a minimum-age limit for guys eligible for the project. No matter what we do with him, it's going to look strange in even 5 years.

To the bolded - for McDavid I agree, excluding him would have been fine too for lack of years. But since he's part of the process - I really think we should just vote him #1 and move on.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

To the bolded - for McDavid I agree, excluding him would have been fine too for lack of years. But since he's part of the process - I really think we should just vote him #1 and move on.

But that would put him at 126th. Which to me seems absurd.

 

[MXD]

I'd personally rather leave the McDavid candidacy up to anyone. Colluding would do no good. And there are people who didn't even rank McDavid (I was one of them, though I'm open to reconsidering because the longevity line between McDavid, Stuart, Philipps and Bure is too small to consider the last three fair game and not the first one... especially with the first one being the significantly better player).

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

If we care about length of prime, McDavid's is horrible. Enough to make his 7-year VsX average 65... and that for a guy with no defensive or playoff record. Even someone like Kucherov has played enough seasons for a respectable 7 year average of about 80.

I honestly don't know what to do with McDavid and he's the reason I thought we should have a minimum-age limit for guys eligible for the project. No matter what we do with him, it's going to look strange in even 5 years.

No defense?

How about not great defense. He's a plus player on a bad team. The guy isn't on the level of, say, Perreault in terms of bad defense.

I will agree now that there should have been a minimum age limit.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

On McDavid : I wasn't conflicted on what to do about him. Now I am. Hod Stuart and Tommy Phillipps are a big reason why.

Stuart and Phillips had weak longevity, but it wasn't crazy weak for their era. Like, I don't even know if it was worse than Bure when you compare them to their eras.

Whereas McDavid is in a totally unique position

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Stuart and Phillips had weak longevity, but it wasn't crazy weak for their era. Like, I don't even know if it was worse than Bure when you compare them to their eras.

Whereas McDavid is in a totally unique position

Bure was in the league for 12 seasons. More seasons and games than Bobby Orr.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

No defense?

How about not great defense. He's a plus player on a bad team. The guy isn't on the level of, say, Perreault in terms of bad defense.

I will agree now that there should have been a minimum age limit.

McDavid's defensive and possession "advanced stats" are horrendous. I mean... he clearly has the best 4-year period of regular season hockey of anyone in this continuation of the project, regardless, but if there is ever a guy for whom "offense-only" applies.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

McDavid's defensive and possession "advanced stats" are horrendous. I mean... he clearly has the best 4-year period of regular season hockey of anyone in this continuation of the project, regardless, but if there is ever a guy for whom "offense-only" applies.

Do you watch him play at all?

If those advance stats are saying his defensive play is horrendous, I don't buy it.