TSN ranks the top 25 NHL players of all time

[bambamcam4ever]

6 gpg in the playoff bracket?

6.08 in playoff bracket

 

[bambamcam4ever]

That’s a neat idea, but it was literally disproven in reality when the league went from 6 to 21 teams and scoring went up steadily each time they added teams.

No need to take a poll, we have a hard factual disproof already.

Factually proven? You have to be kidding me. Please tell me how you were able to control all other factors that may have influenced league-wide scoring levels.

 

[Lebowski]

6.08 in playoff bracket

I'm genuinely surprised.

 

[MadLuke]

That’s a neat idea, but it was literally disproven in reality when the league went from 6 to 21 teams and scoring went up steadily each time they added teams.

No need to take a poll, we have a hard factual disproof already.

I do not necessarily agree with him, but the expansion do not clearly prove him wrong I think, often expansion added bad player but did not dilute the best team right away that kept their best player, making it certain to make scoring going up feeding against bad team.

But Canada team in the recent olympics when playing against good team do show that no, scoring would not necessarily go up, maybe even down if we would be going back to a smaller league, those best on best recent tournament had often low scoring game when 2 good team were playing each other, even if they were ridiculously stacked. When you are the best line you are trying to score against Bergeron line 1/5th of your games.... and other elite shutdown/possession unit all the time.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'm sure the larger ice had nothing to do with that. 2010 Olympics had 6.0 gpg by the way- wonder why you didn't mention that though.

Presenting this as some sort of evidence is intellectually dishonest.

Good lord.

He said he hasn’t looked at the numbers, I provided the numbers from the last tournament. I didn’t make an argument.

A number is a number, there’s nothing dishonest about it.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Good lord.

He said he hasn’t looked at the numbers, I provided the numbers from the last tournament. I didn’t make an argument.

A number is a number, there’s nothing dishonest about it.

Sorry about that, I wasn't aware that was part of the earlier quote.

 

[tarheelhockey]

-Scoring went up each time they added teams?

The numbers are here: NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Start in 1967, the last year of the 6-team league. Follow the trend till 1980, when the league hit 21 teams. Now follow the trend till 1991, the decade of no expansion.

Post-1991, structural changes in the game became more important than the 1-team-at-a-time expansions. You had butterfly goaltending, the trap, obstruction, then the countertrend after 2006. Numbers go up and down subtly, for reasons that transcend adding a team every couple of years.

But during that period of rapid expansion, it was extremely clear that introducing inferior players to the league led to a higher scoring rate. Just look at 1965-75 alone, look at the scoring records that got destroyed.

-In 1979 dilution started. 4 teams from the WHA were added to the NHL, the same year the Great One entered the NHL. Do you know how bad some of these new teams were? They didnt just cherry pick players like Vegas did. The Jets were -154 in goal differential, NEGATIVE 154 in goals against. The Whalers were -87, Devils -86, Wings -87, Nordiques -75. You call this competitive with parity? The talent was already secured by the Elite teams. Every team in the entire Smyth division had negative goal differential. You dont think the Oilers and Montrael having a stacked team killing these new teams had anything to do with it when they didnt have a prayer to survive? Its funny because they all relocated in due time.

-Hey, lets put the Pittsburgh Penguins with Lemieux and Jagr, Recchi, Stevens, Trottier, Paul Coffey and put them up against college teams and see how the stats go.

That’s exactly the point. Expanding the league introduces inferior players and teams, who get beat up on by the bigger fish.

Those lines you wrote about the Oilers and Habs feasting on weak competition is dead on target. You started this discussion saying players BEFORE expansion had inflated numbers. Now you’ve come around to arguing that players AFTER expansion were the ones with juiced numbers, which was my point.

-Dont make blind statements. The new teams that entered the league all got annihilated outside of the Oilers.

I assure you, I’m doing anything but making blind statements. This site has a useful search feature if you’re interested in seeing the research I’ve put into the topic.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Probably. Considering most euros weren't crossing over, that the US were barely in the picture, and that the league was 95% Canadian, I'd say it's possible.

As for hockey being popular among baby boomers, how many of them played professionally or where groomed the way young talents are today? The infrastructure wasn't the same then.

500% is a lot, I mean a LOT when we’re talking about Canada in the height of the Baby Boom. When you consider that the number of non-immigrant children in Canada today is about half what it was then, and consider that the hockey participation rate has fallen, the numbers become daunting. Maybe the addition of the Russian talent pool causes those numbers to break even, but I really doubt the addition of the other hockey countries equals 5x (or for that matter even 1x) the Canadian and Russian combined pools.

I do think there’s a larger talent pipeline than there used to be, but it’s more in the range of 1.5x or 2x. Meanwhile the NHL has added 25 teams. The ratios are way off — the league has expanded MUCH faster than the talent pool.

 

[PenguinSpeed]

The numbers are here: NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Start in 1967, the last year of the 6-team league. Follow the trend till 1980, when the league hit 21 teams. Now follow the trend till 1991, the decade of no expansion.

Post-1991, structural changes in the game became more important than the 1-team-at-a-time expansions. You had butterfly goaltending, the trap, obstruction, then the countertrend after 2006. Numbers go up and down subtly, for reasons that transcend adding a team every couple of years.

But during that period of rapid expansion, it was extremely clear that introducing inferior players to the league led to a higher scoring rate. Just look at 1965-75 alone, look at the scoring records that got destroyed.



That’s exactly the point. Expanding the league introduces inferior players and teams, who get beat up on by the bigger fish.

Those lines you wrote about the Oilers and Habs feasting on weak competition is dead on target. You started this discussion saying players BEFORE expansion had inflated numbers. Now you’ve come around to arguing that players AFTER expansion were the ones with juiced numbers, which was my point.



I assure you, I’m doing anything but making blind statements. This site has a useful search feature if you’re interested in seeing the research I’ve put into the topic.

-They did have inflated numbers. When you have 6 teams in the league in 1967, then push it to 21 teams in 1978, you completely diluted and crushed your product since there were simply not enough good players all from Canada to come anywhere close to this type of league expansion so quickly. The league wised up in the future as it didnt almost quadruple the league size in a little over a 10 year window. You simply cannot expand that fast. That is why the guys of that Era put up monster numbers. Then the league started taking players from the United State and Europe, and in time, things balanced out. From 1978 until 2018, 10 teams were added over a 40 year window as opposed to 15 teams being added over a 10 year window originally having 1 talent pool in Canada to get players from. You are comparing a 30% increase over the course of 40 years to over a 350% increase of the span of 10 years.

-Ive already read the link you posted, as with, the entire history of NHL expansion. Most people had no idea the Great One was beating up on garbage in the start of his career in a diluted league.

 

[Claypool]

Hasek as the 4th goalie is a bad, albeit unsurprising, take.

He's not Canadian and he's socially awkward.

 

[tarheelhockey]

-They did have inflated numbers. When you have 6 teams in the league in 1967, then push it to 21 teams in 1978, you completely diluted and crushed your product since there were simply not enough good players all from Canada to come anywhere close to this type of league expansion so quickly. The league wised up in the future as it didnt almost quadruple the league size in a little over a 10 year window. You simply cannot expand that fast. That is why the guys of that Era put up monster numbers. Then the league started taking players from the United State and Europe, and in time, things balanced out. From 1978 until 2018, 10 teams were added over a 40 year window as opposed to 15 teams being added over a 10 year window originally having 1 talent pool in Canada to get players from. You are comparing a 30% increase over the course of 40 years to over a 350% increase of the span of 10 years.

-Ive already read the link you posted, as with, the entire history of NHL expansion. Most people had no idea the Great One was beating up on garbage in the start of his career in a diluted league.

Ok, so I don’t disagree with anything you wrote here.

The only thing is, I can’t square it with your original statement: “Gets rid of most of the overrated old time players prior to 1970 that ran up the stats when they had 6-10 teams in the league.”

It seems pretty clear to me, and I may be wrong but I think you actually agree in the post above, that it would be the guys from the early part of the 21-team era (1980s) who had grossly inflated numbers. And that the guys who played post-1970 were playing in a much more diluted league than those a decade or two earlier.

 

[yababy]

Hasek, maybe. His peak was pretty insane.

Roy? How? Just how?

Patrick Roy...Mr clutch. Only player with 3 Conn Smythe trophies.

I forgot to mention Vezina and Dryden who I also put ahead of any active player

 

[yababy]

Dont make blind statements. The new teams that entered the league all got annihilated outside of the Oilers.

The Oilers were an expansion team. They played less than 20% of their games against teams than were less than 5 years old. Bobby Orr played 60%+ of his games against teams that were in the league less than 5 years

 

[yababy]

You think the number of hockey players in the world has grown by 500% in the past 50 years?

The better athletes are hockey players now. With big salaries came greater competition and athleticism

 

[yababy]

Who in the Top Ten doesn't have a Conn Smythe worthy run (s) on their resume?

Crosby.

 

[PenguinSpeed]

Ok, so I don’t disagree with anything you wrote here.

The only thing is, I can’t square it with your original statement: “Gets rid of most of the overrated old time players prior to 1970 that ran up the stats when they had 6-10 teams in the league.”

It seems pretty clear to me, and I may be wrong but I think you actually agree in the post above, that it would be the guys from the early part of the 21-team era (1980s) who had grossly inflated numbers. And that the guys who played post-1970 were playing in a much more diluted league than those a decade or two earlier.

-They both had clear advantages. You had stacked lines pre-1967. You had a diluted product in the 80's.

-In the 60's the Canadians were winning the Stanley Cup AND getting the #1 draft pick every year. That is comical. Thats like the Penguins winning the Stanleu Cup, then adding McDavid and Matthews to the Pens roster. This is exactly how hockey was back then. Until the NHL draft changes and the Salary Cap changes, and the goaltenders not being 5'8 160lb with minimal padding anymore. Its way harder to score today, the league is way more balanced today.




Pre-salary cap

Prior to the resolution of the 2004–05 lockout, the NHL was the only major North American professional sports league that had no luxury tax, very limited revenue sharing and no salary cap.
During the Original Six era through to the early years of the expansion era, the NHL's strict reserve clause negated the need for a salary cap. Player salaries first became an issue in the 1970s, after Alan Eagleson founded the NHL Players' Association (NHLPA) and the upstart World Hockey Association began competing with the NHL for players. Not all NHL owners were willing to engage in a bidding war, in particular, Harold Ballard of the Toronto Maple Leafs spent as close league minimum on rosters as he could, making his team the most profitable. There was little financial incentive for Ballard to spend money on star players to improve the quality of the on-ice product and attract fans, as all Maple Leafs games were sold out regardless of how poorly the team played. The Leafs, which had only ten losing seasons in its history before Ballard took control of the team in 1972, had twelve losing seasons up until his death in 1990.

 

[yababy]

Lemieux is not behind Gretzky... so, no, he is not behind Howe either. That is ridiculous. Crosby is way too high. Richard and some others too. This list is wonky, but then, it's just a list.

Lemieux was more physically gifted, but he didn't have Gretzky's head, hands, heart or health.

 

[MadLuke]

Crosby.

He had 31 points in 24 games while being +9 in 2008-2009 ?

Outside the 80s, Bure, Stevens-Reechi-Lemieux in 90-91, Gretzky, Malkin, Gilmour, Sakic, Leetch are the only one done that or better.

What percentage of year does a run like that does not win the Smythe on the cup winning team ? Must be less than 90%

he has 164 in 148 games, 1.11 ppg since 2005-2006

 

[yababy]

Overall a good list. My biggest gripe is Lafleur ahead of Ovechkin. No way!

Huh?
Guy has 5 Stanley cups and a Conn Smythe. Legends are made in the playoffs

 

[tom_servo]

As a Pens fan, I can't grasp how that many players are between Crosby and Malkin.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Top 4 should be
Gretzky
Lemieux
Should be top 2

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

As a Pens fan, I can't grasp how that many players are between Crosby and Malkin.

It's based on career that's why

Top 5 Hart finishes
Crosby 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5,
Malkin 1, 2 , 2

Top 10 Point finishes
Crosby 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 6
Malkin 1, 1, 2

 

[PenguinSpeed]

As a Pens fan, I can't grasp how that many players are between Crosby and Malkin.

-In reality, there aren't. Apparently winning an Art Ross when there are 6 teams in the league, and all the talent is stacked on 2 teams, is the same as when there are 31 teams in the league.

-Apparently beating up new expansion teams with no talent and running up the score 12-0 is impressive

-And apparently winning the stanley cup and gaining the #1 draft pick after winning the cup in the same year with zero salary cap had no influence

-Let's not bring goaltending and size of the goalies and pads from 1946 when Howe played, to the early 80's of Wayne, to today's goliath goaltenders and their padding.


-If a draft was done today and any player from any era could be drafted in their prime using todays rules, todays salary cap, todays goalie pads and the size of the goalies today, Everyone with any brain would have Crosby and Malkin Top 10 All Time. No other player born after 1975 can match them in points or playoff points at over 1 per game, and I dont think players like Howe would do it either.



-Here is a goalie when Howe played hockey

When Wayne played hockey

Todays Goalie

 

[Lebowski]

Patrick Roy...Mr clutch. Only player with 3 Conn Smythe trophies.

I forgot to mention Vezina and Dryden who I also put ahead of any active player

And Crosby has back to back Conny Smythes and another two Conn Smythe worthy runs... His individual legacy already far exceeds Roy's. And beyond legacy, he's just a much better player.

 

[Lebowski]

500% is a lot, I mean a LOT when we’re talking about Canada in the height of the Baby Boom. When you consider that the number of non-immigrant children in Canada today is about half what it was then, and consider that the hockey participation rate has fallen, the numbers become daunting. Maybe the addition of the Russian talent pool causes those numbers to break even, but I really doubt the addition of the other hockey countries equals 5x (or for that matter even 1x) the Canadian and Russian combined pools.

I do think there’s a larger talent pipeline than there used to be, but it’s more in the range of 1.5x or 2x. Meanwhile the NHL has added 25 teams. The ratios are way off — the league has expanded MUCH faster than the talent pool.

1.5x or 2x? Compared to the 06? A league that was, for all intents and purposes, a 100% Canadian?

No. I'm gonna say the talent pool has gotten a lot bigger than that. And if you look at how Vegas is performing after picking up bits and pieces around the league, I think it's a testament to just how much depth there's around, players that could play in bigger roles but that would otherwise just be stuck down the depthchart. You talk about the Russian talent pool, but the US play a much bigger role in the grand scheme of things.