Tretiak

VMBM

And it didn't even bring me down
Sep 24, 2008
3,797
754
Helsinki, Finland
Until the 1985 car accident that claimed the life of Fetisov's younger brother the only issues in the Bourque / Fetisov debate were the lengths of the respective seasons and constant level of challenging competition.

Post accident Vyacheslav Fetisov was never at the previous level. Not the same fluid or explosive movement.

Still pretty darn good. The 1987 Canada Cup could be used as an example.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Problem. Your question is being asked under the assumption that Fetisov wasn't on the level of Bourque, Coffey or Potvin.
You want to go back to the 80's? Fine. Read contemporary articles and sources from the 1980s. Fetisov is regularly considered one of, if not the the best defenseman of that era.
And simply watching his play at the various tournaments vs NHLers verifies this. He was always on a level equal (if not better) than Bourque.

I do think Bourque was a better career player. However, in terms of peak performance, Fetisov is right there with Bourque.

You can make an argument for Fetisov's peak value being at the same level as Bourque's. Of course, we can only speculate (probably good educated guesses around here) that he'd snag a Norris. My issue is putting him on the top 10 d-men list when all of the other ones aged very well and into their 30s. Run down from the Soviet system or not, we can't give Fetisov brownie points for that. I tend to always put him in the top 10-15 of all-time. Nothing wrong with that
 

raleh

Registered User
Oct 17, 2005
1,764
9
Dartmouth, NS
Nope, nothing wrong with that at all. I would have him 6-10, but those guys are all SO close. I think that with Dmen, it comes down to personal preference as early as 2nd/3rd.

And as for your earlier question, I would personally take Broda over Tretiak, but I think an argument could be made for Tretiak. All I was saying is that after the big 5, Tretiak enters the conversation.


You can make an argument for Fetisov's peak value being at the same level as Bourque's. Of course, we can only speculate (probably good educated guesses around here) that he'd snag a Norris. My issue is putting him on the top 10 d-men list when all of the other ones aged very well and into their 30s. Run down from the Soviet system or not, we can't give Fetisov brownie points for that. I tend to always put him in the top 10-15 of all-time. Nothing wrong with that
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
29,206
17,561
Connecticut
Red Fisher, the great Montreal hockey writer also wrote in the early 80s that "most people" thought Fetisov was the best defenseman in the world. I could see Fetisov winning any of the Norrises from 1981-1984, and probably more than 1. Ray Bourque was very good in the early 80s, but not as good as he'd become by the late 80s.

I'm pretty sure Fetisov would have won them all from 81-84, as long as he played every game with Makarov, Krutov, Larionov and Kasatonov.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
You can make an argument for Fetisov's peak value being at the same level as Bourque's. Of course, we can only speculate (probably good educated guesses around here) that he'd snag a Norris. My issue is putting him on the top 10 d-men list when all of the other ones aged very well and into their 30s. Run down from the Soviet system or not, we can't give Fetisov brownie points for that. I tend to always put him in the top 10-15 of all-time. Nothing wrong with that

Nothing wrong with that at all. It comes down to valuing peak performance vs longevity.
As contemporary sources has shown, a good case could be made that Fetisov was the best d-man in the world for almost a decade. There's only a handful of players that can claim that impressive of a peak.
I'd rank him 6-10.
 

Pear Juice

Registered User
Dec 12, 2007
807
6
Gothenburg, SWE
On Fetisov it should be noted aswell that towards the end of the 80s he had a conflict with Alexei Kasatonov regarding whether to go play in the NHL or not. Fetisov along with Larionov were probably the most open on leaving the Soviet Union and criticizing Tikhonov for his hard training camp approach. Kasatonov on the other hand always maintained a great friendship with Tikhonov and contemplated not leaving for the NHL at all. This caused a schism between Fetisov and Kasatonov which I believe still isn't resolved to this day (it wasn't in 2005 at least). They apparently hardly speak to each other aside from in professional matters.

I just have to assume that such a break-up with your life-long defensive partner has to affect your on-ice performance in some way as well.

Breaking up from the CSKA Moscow environment and leaving Soviet for the US was very demanding on these players in many different aspects. The difference in how hockey was played in the NHL was probably the least of those.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,958
1,774
Rostov-on-Don
On Fetisov it should be noted aswell that towards the end of the 80s he had a conflict with Alexei Kasatonov regarding whether to go play in the NHL or not. Fetisov along with Larionov were probably the most open on leaving the Soviet Union and criticizing Tikhonov for his hard training camp approach. Kasatonov on the other hand always maintained a great friendship with Tikhonov and contemplated not leaving for the NHL at all. This caused a schism between Fetisov and Kasatonov which I believe still isn't resolved to this day (it wasn't in 2005 at least). They apparently hardly speak to each other aside from in professional matters.

I just have to assume that such a break-up with your life-long defensive partner has to affect your on-ice performance in some way as well.

Breaking up from the CSKA Moscow environment and leaving Soviet for the US was very demanding on these players in many different aspects. The difference in how hockey was played in the NHL was probably the least of those.

Not to mention much of the NHL (including many of his own teammates) didn't readily accept him from the beginning.
I recall Brendan Shanahan claiming that referees would intentionally turn a blind eye to penalties committed against Fetisov.
 

cam042686

Registered User
Sep 26, 2011
352
3
Hamilton, Ontario
With the exception of Vasiliev, I'm not too high on any Soviet defenseman of the early/mid-1970s; not even Vladimir Lutchenko, who has those numerous all-star selections in the Soviet league.

In many games, they indeed look very poor in their own zone; can't get the puck out even if their life depended on it, lots of giveaways etc. And there were only a couple of good defensive forwards (Petrov and Shadrin) IMO. Around 1978, though, the whole team seemed to get a lot better defensively. I'm not sure if the dmen got that much better per se, but rather their defensive play as a whole improved. The team rarely got beaten post-1978, and VERY rarely more than 2-3 goals were scored on them, despite some mediocre goalies like Mylnikov. Most notable exception was the 1987 Canada Cup, of course, but hey, Gretzky and Lemieux playing on the same line much of the time...

Yes, Czechoslovakia often seemed to play their best hockey against USSR. I don't think it's a coinsidence that they started winning those games more consistently after the happenings of 1968.

I have always felt that Valery Vasiliev was one of the best defensemen I have ever seen. Not Bobby Orr, or Brad Park, but I think he was a close 3rd -better in my eyes than Denis Potvin or Larry Robinson. (Now that should stir the pot, lol....)

Craig
 

cam042686

Registered User
Sep 26, 2011
352
3
Hamilton, Ontario
I will admit for one that Dryden was not good against the Russians. But keep in mind, that is a small sample size. We have the first two games in the 1972 Series, the 1975 Red Army game and the 2nd game of the 1979 Challenge Cup. Those are when he played noticeably bad against the Russians - 4 games. It can be a little bit of a knock on him, but I think the sample size of how great Dryden was is bigger than Tretiak's.

And in the 1970s the Swedes, if they were good enough, could make the NHL. The Russians and Czechs could not, but there is still little doubt that the NHL was the cream of the crop in the world even in the 1970s. Also, by my count, Dryden was 3-3-1 against Tretiak in the big tournaments. So while his international resume isn't sparkling, it isn't as if Tretiak blows him out of the water in head to head matches



Yes, 1973-'74 is a perfect example. The Habs had very much the same team in 1974 as they did in 1973. Except for one thing, Dryden sat out the whole year. The Habs finished 4th in the NHL with 99 points and were bounced out of the first round.

The next year Dryden is back and they tied for the lead in points (113) and made the semi final. Then 4 straight Cups, all with Dryden. There is little doubt he was integral to that team. When you are getting Hart trophy votes with Guy Lafleur on your team the public thinks you are doing something right.



But you are getting into "what ifs" when it comes to Fetisov. We saw how Bourque and Chelios and Robinson and co. did year after year after year in an 80 game schedule. We didn't with Fetisov. Just like we didn't with Makarov in the 1980s either. We can only speculate that over a full season after full season he would have been as valuable as Bossy. Its tricky. But when you look at Chelios vs. Fetisov the big thing is longevity too. Chelios stayed great for so long.

You are forgetting that the Soviets put 10 past Dryden in 1969 in one game while he was a member of Father Dave's "Nats." I am not suggesting Dryden wasn't a great NHL goalie. But he couldn't "kick it up a notch" in International play.

Craig Wallace
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
You are forgetting that the Soviets put 10 past Dryden in 1969 in one game while he was a member of Father Dave's "Nats." I am not suggesting Dryden wasn't a great NHL goalie. But he couldn't "kick it up a notch" in International play.

Craig Wallace

Well that is true that he didnt excel for some reason against the Russians, but keep in mind of how poor those Canadian National teams were in 1969. Everyone was in the NHL. It was tournaments like this, and the Olympics that prompted the NHL to say "sure, you can do that to our amateurs, but what about our best?" Then 1972 shocked us all
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->