What's The Deepest And Most Competitive Period In NHL History?

[danincanada]

Suggest finding and understanding the difference between deepest - O6 era and widest -present day. Also population arguments are never logical facts just misdirected opinions clutching at the superficial. World population is much larger than during Shakespeare time but we are not awash in Shakespeare quality writers or playwrites today.

Specifically, modern goalies are very weak compared to O6 goalies.Presently there are maybe three future HHOFers, Luongo, Lundqvist, Price. No Americans, no Russians. None drafted in the last 10 years. O6 era you would have 3 to 6 future HHOF goalies playing in every post WWII season.

Defencemen nice wide selection today but they have to rely on handedness to shine in a short shift game. 1947-48 season saw two elite defencemen - Doug Harvey and Red Kelly make their NHL debut and this renewal continued thru Bobby Orr in 1966-67.

New talent. 1955-56 NHL Rookie Class featured Henri Richard, Norm Ullman, Glenn Hall, Dick Duff, John Bucyk, Pierre Pilote. Six future HHOFers. Produce an International class with such depth, positional variety and quality.

This is a terrible way to compare players from the O6 with current day. Luckily I don’t think anyone actually buys it, even you.

Was Yakushev suddenly a better player now that he’s a HOFer? Now those Soviets team had another HOFer so were they better than you realized up until Yakushev got nominated? The whole idea is ridiculous. You don’t have a crystal ball for which current players, or how many, will be HOFers, so stop pretending you do.

It’s very telling that every time someone points out the fact that hockey has grown in participation world wide since the O6 and the NHL gets elite players from several countries now instead of just one, you always trot out these silly arguments just to muddy the water and make noise to distract from the salient and truthful point.

 

[Canadiens1958]

This is a terrible way to compare players from the O6 with current day. Luckily I don’t think anyone actually buys it, even you.

Was Yakushev suddenly a better player now that he’s a HOFer? Now those Soviets team had another HOFer so were they better than you realized up until Yakushev got nominated? The whole idea is ridiculous. You don’t have a crystal ball for which current players, or how many, will be HOFers, so stop pretending you do.

It’s very telling that every time someone points out the fact that hockey has grown in participation world wide since the O6 and the NHL gets elite players from several countries now instead of just one, you always trot out these silly arguments just to muddy the water and make noise to distract from the salient and truthful point.

Just received long overdue recognition.

Your hockey population argument is slowly melting in the summer heat wave.

For population arguments to have any truth they must be true across the board.

So let's look at other sports in general. Hockey is part of the Olympic Games. Has the modern Russian Olympic medal count increased or decreased compared to the Soviets medal count in the 1950s and 1960s?No it has not, though the number of Olympic sports has increased and the Russian population has grown.


Soviet Union at the Olympics - Wikipedia

Russia at the Olympics - Wikipedia

So why would hockey be different. The Russians have not produced a viable women's hockey team nor have any of the European countries.

Conversely, Canada since 1952 and 1956 has multiplied the Olympic medal count seven and nine fold:

Canada at the Olympics - Wikipedia

Canada at the Winter Olympics - Wikipedia

beating the Russians at certain winter games. Yet the Canadian population has not tripled.

Rather clear that the population has no impact on performance.

 

[danincanada]

Just received long overdue recognition.

Your hockey population argument is slowly melting in the summer heat wave.

For population arguments to have any truth they must be true across the board.

So let's look at other sports in general. Hockey is part of the Olympic Games. Has the modern Russian Olympic medal count increased or decreased compared to the Soviets medal count in the 1950s and 1960s?No it has not, though the number of Olympic sports has increased and the Russian population has grown.


Soviet Union at the Olympics - Wikipedia

Russia at the Olympics - Wikipedia

So why would hockey be different. The Russians have not produced a viable women's hockey team nor have any of the European countries.

Conversely, Canada since 1952 and 1956 has multiplied the Olympic medal count seven and nine fold:

Canada at the Olympics - Wikipedia

Canada at the Winter Olympics - Wikipedia

beating the Russians at certain winter games. Yet the Canadian population has not tripled.

Rather clear that the population has no impact on performance.

It’s not a population argument and you should know that by now. Avoidance door #2 of the real argument. It’s about the sport growing, and it clearly has.

Using the collapse of the soviet system to argue your straw man? That inadvertently lead to more elite players in the NHL.

I’m just not into pretending the NHL didn’t gain more elite players when everyone knows they watched it happen. Canada’s still Hockey crazy and producing loads of talent (aren’t we still considered the best?), the US may be neck and neck soon at the rate they’re going, and of course Europe produces lots of elite talent, with many players even getting an early jump on NA Hockey by coming over for Junior or College programs.

Look at the recent draft, lots of great talent coming from different countries. You pretending Canada produced more truly elite players for the O6 era than the whole world can now (or since the early 90’s when it became fully integrated) is not even worth talking about anymore because it’s so absurd.

Happy Canada Day

 

[Acallabeth]

Specifically, modern goalies are very weak compared to O6 goalies.Presently there are maybe three future HHOFers, Luongo, Lundqvist, Price. No Americans, no Russians. None drafted in the last 10 years. O6 era you would have 3 to 6 future HHOF goalies playing in every post WWII season.

New talent. 1955-56 NHL Rookie Class featured Henri Richard, Norm Ullman, Glenn Hall, Dick Duff, John Bucyk, Pierre Pilote. Six future HHOFers. Produce an International class with such depth, positional variety and quality.

Ughhh, do you understand using this metric will eventually make the current players look better than now, as HHOF values long successful careers over anything else?

If you want 6 future HOFers, the 2005-6 class off the top of my head? Ovechkin, Crosby, Keith, Weber, Rinne, Lundquist all will end up there. Plus a lot of other standout goalies: Miller, Ward, Fleury, Lehtonen and so on.

Also, why don't you consider Bobrovsky a potential HOFer? Sure, he's far from a lock, but he's the only active goalie with 2 Vezinas, and he's just a couple of strong playoffs from being a serious candidate.

 

[Canadiens1958]

It’s not a population argument and you should know that by now. Avoidance door #2 of the real argument. It’s about the sport growing, and it clearly has.

Using the collapse of the soviet system to argue your straw man? That inadvertently lead to more elite players in the NHL.

I’m just not into pretending the NHL didn’t gain more elite players when everyone knows they watched it happen. Canada’s still Hockey crazy and producing loads of talent (aren’t we still considered the best?), the US may be neck and neck soon at the rate they’re going, and of course Europe produces lots of elite talent, with many players even getting an early jump on NA Hockey by coming over for Junior or College programs.

Look at the recent draft, lots of great talent coming from different countries. You pretending Canada produced more truly elite players for the O6 era than the whole world can now (or since the early 90’s when it became fully integrated) is not even worth talking about anymore because it’s so absurd.

Happy Canada Day

You have never been able to quantify the sport "growing" claim without reverting to population arguments.

Europeans getting drafted, Americans getting drafted reflect the disparity in draft rules. Unsigned Canadiens gobackin the draft after two years - see Adam Mascherin.NHL teams have longer to sign Americans and Europeans so teams draft accordingly.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Ughhh, do you understand using this metric will eventually make the current players look better than now, as HHOF values long successful careers over anything else?

If you want 6 future HOFers, the 2005-6 class off the top of my head? Ovechkin, Crosby, Keith, Weber, Rinne, Lundquist all will end up there. Plus a lot of other standout goalies: Miller, Ward, Fleury, Lehtonen and so on.

Also, why don't you consider Bobrovsky a potential HOFer? Sure, he's far from a lock, but he's the only active goalie with 2 Vezinas, and he's just a couple of strong playoffs from being a serious candidate.

2005-06 combines two seasons since the 2004-05 season was not played. So 3 not 6 potential HHOFERS.

Sergei Bobrovsky 5-14 playoff record is a major obstacle. No Jennings, two 60+ game RS efforts.

 

[Acallabeth]

2005-06 combines two seasons since the 2004-05 season was not played. So 3 not 6 potential HHOFERS.

Sergei Bobrovsky 5-14 playoff record is a major obstacle. No Jennings, two 60+ game RS efforts.

It's still 6, but I get your point.
Well, I randomly picked 2009-2010, and got Jamie Benn, John Tavares, Victor Hedman, Erik Karlsson and PK Subban. A very strong class as well. I don't think your point stands, as modern players aren't in the dynasties era with little parity, and it's quite obvious that 11-time Cup champion, 7-time AS goalie, a top 25 scorer and 3-time Norris winner weren't entering the league just every year at the O6 era too.

Regarding Bob, these are all team obstacles.

 

[Canadiens1958]

It's still 6, but I get your point.
Well, I randomly picked 2009-2010, and got Jamie Benn, John Tavares, Victor Hedman, Erik Karlsson and PK Subban. A very strong class as well. I don't think your point stands, as modern players aren't in the dynasties era with little parity, and it's quite obvious that 11-time Cup champion, 7-time AS goalie, a top 25 scorer and 3-time Norris winner weren't entering the league just every year at the O6 era too.

Regarding Bob, these are all team obstacles.

Team obstacles?

Bobrovsky, RS .920 SV%, playoffs .891 SV%. Did his teams change that much in the few days between the end of the RS and the start of the playoffs?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Bobrovsky very, very clearly reverts to his old style in the playoffs for whatever reason (the issues that Philadelphia couldn't solve with him)...first and foremost, not keeping his shoulders upright on his pushes. He is the worst playoff goalie vs expectation in the league right now and has been. How many games has he given up less than 3 goals in? One? Two? He just flat out gets bad in the playoffs, soft goals all the time...talented goalie, but you can't hit him with a puck in the postseason...

 

[danincanada]

You have never been able to quantify the sport "growing" claim without reverting to population arguments.

Please quantify the sport not growing since the O6 then. A public skating article where thousands of people go skating, a source that states the Soviet Union was training millions of hockey players who, if true, were barely old enough to play in the O6 even if they could cross over? I've seen your sources and arguments so maybe it would be better if you left out the details and just kept pretending hockey is actually on it's way to shrinking down to nothing from it's peak in 1962. The end must be near.

It's not worth my time to convince you of something that is common sense.

Europeans getting drafted, Americans getting drafted reflect the disparity in draft rules. Unsigned Canadiens gobackin the draft after two years - see Adam Mascherin.NHL teams have longer to sign Americans and Europeans so teams draft accordingly.

That's why the first 3 picks were all European born? I guess you know something everyone else doesn't and there were really better Canadians but the draft rules forced the Sabres to settle with Dahlin.

Just to entertain the rest... If teams don't want to sign a player to an ELC two years after being drafted they probably don't have any long range plans for him anyways. If the Panthers really wanted to sign Mascherin they would have made it happen. At the same time, some European players are actually good enough to play in the NHL but prefer to play in Europe so drafting them can be risky as well. Recently, the Stars are just getting Nichushkin back because he decided he'd rather play a couple seasons in the KHL. They are fortunate because at least this top draft pick is coming back over.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Please quantify the sport not growing since the O6 then. A public skating article where thousands of people go skating, a source that states the Soviet Union was training millions of hockey players who, if true, were barely old enough to play in the O6 even if they could cross over? I've seen your sources and arguments so maybe it would be better if you left out the details and just kept pretending hockey is actually on it's way to shrinking down to nothing from it's peak in 1962. The end must be near.

It's not worth my time to convince you of something that is common sense.



That's why the first 3 picks were all European born? I guess you know something everyone else doesn't and there were really better Canadians but the draft rules forced the Sabres to settle with Dahlin.

Just to entertain the rest... If teams don't want to sign a player to an ELC two years after being drafted they probably don't have any long range plans for him anyways. If the Panthers really wanted to sign Mascherin they would have made it happen. At the same time, some European players are actually good enough to play in the NHL but prefer to play in Europe so drafting them can be risky as well. Recently, the Stars are just getting Nichushkin back because he decided he'd rather play a couple seasons in the KHL. They are fortunate because at least this top draft pick is coming back over.

No one is denying that hockey has a wider international reach. Problem you face is showing that the quality of the talent is deeper. First goalie chosen was 39th - no goaltending depth in the NHL. Trend continues.

Rasmus Dahlin was the first overall pick. First Swede taken first overall since 1989. In the interim Canada has produced 17 players drafted first overall, covering all positions. Big difference.

European 18 year olds and younger have the advantage of playing in adult leagues for the most part or like Svetchnikov, Zedina and Hischer,playing in the CHL. Helps their development short term.

 

[Silky mitts]

I think the 1992-93 season and last season just because of the 3 year influxes of talent: Fedorov + Jagr, Lidstrom + Bure, Teemu + Lindros for 92-93, McDavid + Eichel, Matthew + Laine, Barzal for this past year.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I think the deepest period for talent is the early to mid-90s. For the most competitive I want to say the O6 just because of how condensed things were but there are a few ways to slice it. The mid-late 90s had some real powerhouses all at the same time for example. Today it seems like any team can win any year so that is also "competitive" but I also think there is a lack of talent right now in comparison to the past.

 

[danincanada]

No one is denying that hockey has a wider international reach. Problem you face is showing that the quality of the talent is deeper. First goalie chosen was 39th - no goaltending depth in the NHL. Trend continues.

Rasmus Dahlin was the first overall pick. First Swede taken first overall since 1989. In the interim Canada has produced 17 players drafted first overall, covering all positions. Big difference.

European 18 year olds and younger have the advantage of playing in adult leagues for the most part or like Svetchnikov, Zedina and Hischer,playing in the CHL. Helps their development short term.

Like a pond, as it gets "wider" it also gets deeper. The bottom of the pond doesn't change but the shores get wider so overall the pond consists of more water. Like a pond, the talent pool is both wider and deeper and it's no longer a pond, it's a lake or an ocean now because it's gotten far wider and therefore far deeper with more volume. Are you really disputing that other countries supplying players to the NHL didn't make a difference? The competitiveness of the league didn't see it this way and GMs realized right away that they need to target non-Canadian talent as well in order to be competitive with the rest of the league. We've seen with our very eyes elite non-Canadians join the already present Canadians.

Got the crystal ball out again so you're calling for this past draft to have no impact goaltenders. You should go into scouting with that crystal ball. It has nothing to do with goaltenders generally being riskier picks and take longer to develop? Do you really believe the NHL lacks quality goaltending now? Most argue it's too good and too hard to score but I guess in this case everything that's black is apparently white and vice versa.

Yes, Canada still produces the most players and has the most first overall picks. That's key, we're still at it but now we at least see non-Canadians get picked high and even go first overall. You're not looking very hard if you fail to see how this means more elite players. If Sweden can produce a few superstars and several star level players every generation how is this reducing the amount of high end players compared to when we had no Swedes in the league? I know, you won't actually answer any of this with straightforward and reasonable responses. I'm still trying to figure out what you're actually trying to sell here. Did Canada stop producing true superstars around the same time that the rest of the world started producing stars? What a coincidence! That must be it, we got much worse and they only got a little better instead of giving every nation credit for having good programs to develop incredible hockey players. What makes more sense is Canada kept producing superstars and the rest of the world is too so we have more than ever. That's what most people who watch the sport realize but it usually doesn't need to be said because it's very obvious. I don't think you'll find too many other places that resist this concept, other than this wacky sub-section where so many cling to denial because it would make them have to rethink how they approach everything in an all-time sense.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Like a pond, as it gets "wider" it also gets deeper. The bottom of the pond doesn't change but the shores get wider so overall the pond consists of more water. Like a pond, the talent pool is both wider and deeper and it's no longer a pond, it's a lake or an ocean now because it's gotten far wider and therefore far deeper with more volume. Are you really disputing that other countries supplying players to the NHL didn't make a difference? The competitiveness of the league didn't see it this way and GMs realized right away that they need to target non-Canadian talent as well in order to be competitive with the rest of the league. We've seen with our very eyes elite non-Canadians join the already present Canadians.

Got the crystal ball out again so you're calling for this past draft to have no impact goaltenders. You should go into scouting with that crystal ball. It has nothing to do with goaltenders generally being riskier picks and take longer to develop? Do you really believe the NHL lacks quality goaltending now? Most argue it's too good and too hard to score but I guess in this case everything that's black is apparently white and vice versa.

Yes, Canada still produces the most players and has the most first overall picks. That's key, we're still at it but now we at least see non-Canadians get picked high and even go first overall. You're not looking very hard if you fail to see how this means more elite players. If Sweden can produce a few superstars and several star level players every generation how is this reducing the amount of high end players compared to when we had no Swedes in the league? I know, you won't actually answer any of this with straightforward and reasonable responses. I'm still trying to figure out what you're actually trying to sell here. Did Canada stop producing true superstars around the same time that the rest of the world started producing stars? What a coincidence! That must be it, we got much worse and they only got a little better instead of giving every nation credit for having good programs to develop incredible hockey players. What makes more sense is Canada kept producing superstars and the rest of the world is too so we have more than ever. That's what most people who watch the sport realize but it usually doesn't need to be said because it's very obvious. I don't think you'll find too many other places that resist this concept, other than this wacky sub-section where so many cling to denial because it would make them have to rethink how they approach everything in an all-time sense.

Since 1976.

 

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

I really thought we were in for a similar era of hockey coming out of the lockout. You had the older generation of HOFers still dominating (Sakic, Forsberg, Jagr, Selanne, Sundin, Lidstrom, etc.) and a new group coming in with incredible talent and, in some cases, incredible personality (Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Lundqvist, Spezza, Kovalchuk, etc.). The league seemed to be going in the right direction. For some reason, it never materialized the way I expected, and things got neutered down right around 2009 or 10.

Id argue it was 2011-2012, especially once the Capitals and other teams started to go overboard with the shot-blocking in the playoffs. It was the first step towards coaching and systems spiraling out of control with how much influence they have over how the game is played

 

[Troubadour]

True. But even him had a few minor injuries and he didn´t play a full season after his fantastic 93/94. To me one of the best and most underrated PO players.

Mogilny is another one. He only played over 70 games in 6 of his 16 seasons. And that includes me counting his lock out season with Buffalo as a 70+, as he played 44/48. Have a wage memory that he had a quite serious leg injury in the end of his (and Lafontaines... what a duo...) incredible 92/93 season. Maybe the PO:s?

Mogilny suffered a badly broken leg in the 1993 playoffs vs Montreal.

He suffered two fractures about a year apart. First he broke his left leg in the PS 92:



Aaand then he broke his right leg in 93, as @Canadiens1958 already pointed out:





Especially the second fracture was baad. You can see him screaming and gulping for air. I think that was the end of the best of him. I know he had a couple of good-great years after that, but he was not the same.

 

[Canadiens1958]

He suffered two fractures about a year apart. First he broke his left leg in the PS 92:



Aaand then he broke his right leg in 93, as @Canadiens1958 already pointed out:





Especially the second fracture was baad. You can see him screaming and gulping for air. I think that was the end of the best of him. I know he had a couple of good-great years after that, but he was not the same.

After the 1992 broken leg Mogilny came back to score 76 RS goals, in 1993 leading the NHL. Second broken leg took away his movement and quickness.

 

[Troubadour]

After the 1992 broken leg Mogilny came back to score 76 RS goals, in 1993 leading the NHL. Second broken league took away his movement and quickness.

Yes. If the right leg was his dominant one, the second fracture was much more devastating for speed. Anyway, I think the biggest damage was mental. If you suffer from fractured legs two playoffs in a row, it has to have some mental effect on you, and I don't think it's a positive one.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Probably right now. Speed and strategic play are at an all time high. An expansion team full of castoffs almost won the Stanley Cup. And a garbage team like the Sens were a shot away from the cup last year.

 

[VanIslander]

The question is skewed.

Greatest and Deepest are two very different questions if you are talking about hockey history (even if you just look at NHL history).

But if by deepest you mean in terms of number of depth pro and developmental/amateur leagues, rather than talent spread out through the NHL, then the Original-6 era and 1970's (with many all time greats in other leagues like WHA, Soviet, and Czechoslovakian leagues.)