Top ten players for each franchise?

[Soundgarden]

1. Rinne
2. Weber
3. Josi
4. Suter
5. Vokoun
6. Kariya
7. Forsberg
8. Sullivan
9. Arvidsson
10. Legwand


I think we've made a lot of progress in recent years, Kariya on the outside of the top5 I don't think that's the case 2-4 years ago. It's the little things, but we now have two players with award winning seasons in Rinne and Josi.

Actually had a bit of a hard time towards the end of the list, there's a case to be made for Erat, Smith, Timonen, Dumont, Arnott, Johansen, Ellis, Ekholm and Fisher.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Holik's advantage over Madden in the regular season isn't small, however.

i've never done a side by side analysis, but doing that right now,

madden: 712 games (297 pts)
holik: 786 games (472 pts)

madden: selke record of 1, 2, 2, 2, 5
holik: led the team in scoring (+ peak selke finish of 5)

madden: best offensive years are 20/50 (3x), typical year is 15/30
holik: best offensive years are 30/60 (3x), typical year is 20/50

we don't know holik's pre-'99 icetime, but from that point on, his last four nj years are pretty close to madden's icetime after his first three seasons

i might side with holik too, but what makes you see significant distance between them?

 

[Byron Bitz]

Flyers:
1. Bobby Clarke
2. Bernie Parent
3. Eric Lindros
4. Mark Howe
5. John LeClair
6. Bill Barber
7. Brian Propp
8. Claude Giroux
9. Eric Desjardins
10. Rick MacLeish

Not a Flyers fan but I would have thought Gagne would make the list.

 

[LeBlondeDemon10]

How is his resume not great? 3 Vezinas with Montreal. 2 CS's.

Yes good point. As I recall watching Roy in those years, you never knew what you were going to get from him. He had average seasons and playoffs sprinkled in with his greatness. An enigma some nights.

 

[Byron Bitz]

1. Howe
2. Lidstrom
3. Yzerman
4. Lindsay
5. Sawchuk
6. Kelly
7. Fedorov
8. Delvecchio
9. Datsyuk
10. Zetterberg

Fedorov should be higher, probably 4th

 

[Revolutionary]

If Rangers had won it in 2014, I think they would have been the worst cup winning team of the last decade, quite clearly. Think there's a good case to be made for them being the worst finalist, come to think of it.

The Rangers won the Presidents Trophy the next season and came within a game of going back to the Final. What did the Kings do in 2015? They missed the playoffs. If anything, the Kings winning the Cup was the fluke here.

 

[DeysArena]

Good list. Did you consider Eddie Girard over Alec Connell?

Connell had a much longer career.

 

[Fataldogg]

The Kings had a lead for exactly 0:00 minutes the first 2 games and the Rangers had multiple blown 2 goal leads. Would have hardly been a miracle if the Rangers went back to MSG up 2 games to zero. The 2015 Rangers won the Presidents Trophy and the 2012 Rangers came within a point of it.

1994 Rangers were a good team, but aging. If not for the heroics of Richter at key points in that playoff run Rangers would not have won that Cup. Lundqvist was a great goalie but to say he never had a shot at a Cup is silly. The Rangers made the Conference Final 3 out of 4 seasons between 2012-2015. He didn't get it done, no need to make excuses for him. Richter is ahead of him and the greatest Ranger goalie ever in my book.

The 1994 Rangers being a "good" team is an understatement. They were the best, by a clear cut margin in my opinion.

Serious question, where would you slate Zuccarello, Stepan, Richards, etc on the 1994 Rangers? What about McDonagh? McDonagh would be a 2nd pair defense man on the 93-94 Rangers.

The best 13-14 Rangers are depth players / complimentary players on the 93-94 Rangers.

Why did the 93-94 Rangers have a substantially higher goals per game than the 13-14 Rangers? They had A LOT MORE TALENT.

All things are not equal.

And serious question, why do you think the Rangers went to the Conference finals three out of four years? Because of their elite high end talent up front? Or their incredibly deep defensive core? It was because Lundqvist was at his peak and the best goaltender in the world.

Richter was never close to the best goalie in the world at any point in time in his career. He was rarely top-5.

Additionally, if you remember, Mike Richter had to be sent down to the AHL for "conditioning stints" multiple times in his NHL career. AKA he was lousy and they needed him to get some confidence back and some of his fundamentals down. Lundqvist was never sent down for a "conditioning stint" because Lundqvist at his worst was still better than Richter most years.

I do not understand what argument Richter has beyond that he won a Cup on a stacked team.

You said the Rangers were capable of winning the Cup. True, they were "capable" under Lundqvist. Capable and likely are two different things. Any of the 16 teams that make the dance are capable, but there are only a handful that are competitive, and the Rangers were a mid-level playoff team that couldn't score made great by a peak Henrik Lundqvist.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Fedorov should be higher, probably 4th

Lindsay, Kelly, and Sawchuk all had significantly more elite seasons.

Even a guy like Delvecchio becomes an argument when you weigh peak vs career. While Delvecchio didn’t have the peak Fedorov did, very few players in the history of hockey have more Top 10 scoring finishes than the 11 Delvecchio had. For comparison, Fedorov only had 2.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

The Rangers won the Presidents Trophy the next season and came within a game of going back to the Final. What did the Kings do in 2015? They missed the playoffs. If anything, the Kings winning the Cup was the fluke here.

I just think that if you remove Lundqvist from that team, we’re not looking at a Stanley Cup finals roster. The Kings had a very good team, and a very impressive cup run.

 

[Byron Bitz]

Lindsay, Kelly, and Sawchuk all had significantly more elite seasons.

Even a guy like Delvecchio becomes an argument when you weigh peak vs career. While Delvecchio didn’t have the peak Fedorov did, very few players in the history of hockey have more Top 10 scoring finishes than the 11 Delvecchio had. For comparison, Fedorov only had 2.

Right but Sergei dominated a much higher level of competition. Wayne Gretzky was once asked who the best hockey player in the world was and his reply was Sergei Fedorov.

 

[Revolutionary]

The 1994 Rangers being a "good" team is an understatement. They were the best, by a clear cut margin in my opinion.

Serious question, where would you slate Zuccarello, Stepan, Richards, etc on the 1994 Rangers? What about McDonagh? McDonagh would be a 2nd pair defense man on the 93-94 Rangers.

The best 13-14 Rangers are depth players / complimentary players on the 93-94 Rangers.

Why did the 93-94 Rangers have a substantially higher goals per game than the 13-14 Rangers? They had A LOT MORE TALENT.

All things are not equal.

And serious question, why do you think the Rangers went to the Conference finals three out of four years? Because of their elite high end talent up front? Or their incredibly deep defensive core? It was because Lundqvist was at his peak and the best goaltender in the world.

Richter was never close to the best goalie in the world at any point in time in his career. He was rarely top-5.

Additionally, if you remember, Mike Richter had to be sent down to the AHL for "conditioning stints" multiple times in his NHL career. AKA he was lousy and they needed him to get some confidence back and some of his fundamentals down. Lundqvist was never sent down for a "conditioning stint" because Lundqvist at his worst was still better than Richter most years.

I do not understand what argument Richter has beyond that he won a Cup on a stacked team.

You said the Rangers were capable of winning the Cup. True, they were "capable" under Lundqvist. Capable and likely are two different things. Any of the 16 teams that make the dance are capable, but there are only a handful that are competitive, and the Rangers were a mid-level playoff team that couldn't score made great by a peak Henrik Lundqvist.

Lundqvist played for much better teams than Richter and benefitted greatly under Tortorella's defensive system. Lundqvist has the edge for longevity but Richter won over 300 games in the pre-shootout era and was a better "big game" goalie than Lundqvist. His 96 World Cup performance and 94 Cup win attest to that.

Richter was to this day the most flexible goalie I've ever seen. Theo Fleury calls him "Gumby" and he had tree trunks for legs. At his best I'd take him in a big game any day over Lundqvist.

Lundqvist will be remembered as the better goalie, but Richter will always be the better Ranger. That's what it boils down to at the end of the day. Fair or not, it is what it is.

 

[The Panther]

1. Howe
2. Lidstrom
3. Yzerman
4. Lindsay
5. Sawchuk
6. Kelly
7. Fedorov
8. Delvecchio
9. Datsyuk
10. Zetterberg

Your lists seems about right to me. I can't criticize anything about it!

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

Richter won over 300 games in the pre-shootout era and was a better "big game" goalie than Lundqvist. His 96 World Cup performance and 94 Cup win attest to that.

Henrik Lundqvist is 6-2 in Game 7s, and didn’t allow more than one goal in any of the wins. His stats in elimination games are stunning, and he was also instrumental for Sweden winning gold at the 2006 Olympics, so don’t imply that he wasn’t a big game goaltender.

I know he was great in them, but Richter only won three elimination games out of the eight he ever played in, if I counted it right. Henrik had four elimination wins in 2015 alone. I like Richter, but he’s receiving a lot of credit over a surefire Hall of Famer based on one good playoffs and the 1996 World Cup.

 

[buffalowing88]

1. Rinne
2. Weber
3. Josi
4. Suter
5. Vokoun
6. Kariya
7. Forsberg
8. Sullivan
9. Arvidsson
10. Legwand


I think we've made a lot of progress in recent years, Kariya on the outside of the top5 I don't think that's the case 2-4 years ago. It's the little things, but we now have two players with award winning seasons in Rinne and Josi.

Actually had a bit of a hard time towards the end of the list, there's a case to be made for Erat, Smith, Timonen, Dumont, Arnott, Johansen, Ellis, Ekholm and Fisher.

Can I ask you what Kariya is doing that high? I am honestly just curious of your justification, as we all have different metrics that we turn to. I just cannot see him above the guys beneath him on that list besides maybe Arvidsson. Not saying that my opinion is right, just wondering how he got to that point based off of two seasons.

 

[buffalowing88]

Lundqvist is a Hall of Fame goalie but Richter stood on his head for 4 rounds and delivered the Cup. Lundqvist had a better career but Richter was a better Ranger.

Richter had some nice moments but he is not the better Ranger. This is ridiculous. What advanced stat would you like to prove that to you? Or if it's the eye-test, I can tell you for a fact that Richter was great but Henrik was on a different level. I watched probably 50 of their games every season because the NYR are my other team and I promise that he was better. I think the year Richter took them to the Conference Finals is honestly better than his SC run. He has some great games in him, but he was not as good as Lundqvist and the analytics will support this.

 

[buffalowing88]

Henrik Lundqvist is 6-2 in Game 7s, and didn’t allow more than one goal in any of the wins. His stats in elimination games are stunning, and he was also instrumental for Sweden winning gold at the 2006 Olympics, so don’t imply that he wasn’t a big game goaltender.

I know he was great in them, but Richter only won three elimination games out of the eight he ever played in, if I counted it right. Henrik had four elimination wins in 2015 alone. I like Richter, but he’s receiving a lot of credit over a surefire Hall of Famer based on one good playoffs and the 1996 World Cup.

There is a strong Richter contingency in HF Boards in general, I think the History boards are more discerning, but it will always be there. Just like with Leetch. Both amazing, Leetch was obviously a transcendent talent, but they both are hyped up a lot.

 

[DeysArena]

Your lists seems about right to me. I can't criticize anything about it!

This is the internet. If you can't find something to criticize, I'm going to have to ask you to leave.

 

[psycat]

This is the internet. If you can't find something to criticize, I'm going to have to ask you to leave.

I can "help" him by saying Zetterberg > Datsyuk and both of them should be above Delvecchio(and arguably Fedorov) in my opinion but really it's mostly splitting hairs.

 

[The Panther]

I can "help" him by saying Zetterberg > Datsyuk and both of them should be above Delvecchio(and arguably Fedorov) in my opinion but really it's mostly splitting hairs.

Mm... I could maybe see Zetterberg over Datsyuk, but I think that's splitting hairs.

I don't think they should be above Delvecchio or Fedorov, though. For Delvecchio, he was basically a point-per-game player from 1954 to 1970, and was good before and after those years, too. He won three Cups (was a big part of two of them), as well. Maybe the peak couple of seasons of Datsyuk or Zetterberg are above his, but when you factor in the longevity, the winning, and the consistency, I think Delvecchio edges them both, but I concede it is close.

For Fedorov -- and it's a bit like when someone thought I ranked Draisaitl too high for Edmonton -- I take into account a Hart trophy / Art Ross season. That is really big, for me. If you reached that level, you are at the level of "best player in the world", at least briefly. Now, Fedorov didn't win the scoring race in 1993-94, but he was close, and 1st-team All Star, Hart trophy, Pearson, and Selke in the same season is crazy. Sometimes there is just a point where the peak is so high, it gives the player extra weighting (by contrast, the peaks of Zetterberg or Datsuyk aren't as high).

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

There is a strong Richter contingency in HF Boards in general, I think the History boards are more discerning, but it will always be there. Just like with Leetch. Both amazing, Leetch was obviously a transcendent talent, but they both are hyped up a lot.

Well I can certainty sympathize with that, being a fan of the game myself, however I try to leave my most ridiculous opinions at the door when entering these forums.

Not necessarily saying Richter>Lundqvist is a ridiculous opinion, it’s valid enough to hear out.

 

[Soundgarden]

Can I ask you what Kariya is doing that high? I am honestly just curious of your justification, as we all have different metrics that we turn to. I just cannot see him above the guys beneath him on that list besides maybe Arvidsson. Not saying that my opinion is right, just wondering how he got to that point based off of two seasons.

He changed our franchise.

His short tenure here was one of the big steps to losing the "baby franchise" tags and those two seasons are still the most offensively productive years anybody's ever had on our team.

Even after 15 years he still ranks:

5th most goals scored in a season 05-06
1st and 2nd most assists in a season
1st and 2nd most points in a season
3rd and 7th highest PPG

 

[GMR]

Your lists seems about right to me. I can't criticize anything about it!

Damn. I knew I should have rated Fedorov higher.

 

[GMR]

Mm... I could maybe see Zetterberg over Datsyuk, but I think that's splitting hairs.

I don't think they should be above Delvecchio or Fedorov, though. For Delvecchio, he was basically a point-per-game player from 1954 to 1970, and was good before and after those years, too. He won three Cups (was a big part of two of them), as well. Maybe the peak couple of seasons of Datsyuk or Zetterberg are above his, but when you factor in the longevity, the winning, and the consistency, I think Delvecchio edges them both, but I concede it is close.

For Fedorov -- and it's a bit like when someone thought I ranked Draisaitl too high for Edmonton -- I take into account a Hart trophy / Art Ross season. That is really big, for me. If you reached that level, you are at the level of "best player in the world", at least briefly. Now, Fedorov didn't win the scoring race in 1993-94, but he was close, and 1st-team All Star, Hart trophy, Pearson, and Selke in the same season is crazy. Sometimes there is just a point where the peak is so high, it gives the player extra weighting (by contrast, the peaks of Zetterberg or Datsuyk aren't as high).

All good points and pretty much reflect my reasoning. I'll also add that Fedorov's popularity around the league, his style of play, and being a star player on three Cup teams (as opposed to one for Datsyuk and Zetterberg) gives him the edge. He had a higher peak with the Hart trophy. Yes, Zetterberg has a Smythe and Datsyuk has one more Selke, but Fedorov's Hart is more impressive. Also, he probably should have the Smythe in 1997. It's easy to forget after the breakup with the franchise, but his popularity was huge in Detroit. If he retired after the 2003 season, his jersey would have been retired not long after. This topic is looking at who accomplished the most with the franchise. He clearly accomplished more than Datsyuk or Zetterberg, both individual and team accomplishments. He also ranks higher all-time than either player among NHL centers.

Delvecchio vs. Fedorov is close, but Fedorov was a better player with more individual accomplishments. Higher peak. Flashier player as well. Delvecchio has Sergei beat on longevity, but Delvecchio beats almost everyone on longevity. Delvecchio was largely overshadowed by his teammates. I don't believe Fedorov was overshadowed by anyone.

 

[GMR]

Fedorov should be higher, probably 4th

That would likely be too high. I can see him passing Kelly, but Lindsay and Sawchuk are bigger NHL legends and ultimately more important players for the franchise. Sawchuk was probably the best goalie in history when he retired. I'd only rank Hasek and Roy ahead of him. Lindsay was six times All-NHL in Detroit. He was also one of the game's most influential players.

Kelly played the same number of seasons in Detroit as Fedorov. He had six all NHL 1st team selections. I'm not sure Fedorov was a better player than him. I know most posters here would say no.