| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| willus3 |
Posted - 11/08/2007 : 11:36:04
No offence to mentally handi-capped people everywhere but, this list is retarded.
This is the voting committee. They probably should be committed
Brian Burke, Jim Rutherford, Jacques Demers, Harry Neale, Kévin-Paul Dupont (Boston Globe), Al Strachan, Mike Brophy, Ken Campbell, Adam Proteau and Jason Kay of the Hockey News.
60: Sergei Fedorov, Détroit, Anaheim et Columbus
59: Borje Salming, Toronto et Détroit
58: Darryl Sittler, Toronto, Philadelphie et Détroit
57: Sidney Crosby. Pittsburgh
56: Denis Savard, Montréal, Chicago et Tampa Bay
55: Glenn Anderson, Edmonton, Toronto, Rangers et St-Louis
54: Yvan Cournoyer, Montréal
53: Ed Belfour, Chicago, San Jose, Dallas, Toronto et Floride
52: Stan Mikita, Chicago
51: Luc Robitaille, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, Détroit et Rangers
50: Rob Blake, Los Angeles et Colorado
49: Brendan Shanahan, Détroit, New Jersey, St-Louis,Hartford et Rangers
48: Pat Lafontaine, Buffalo, Rangers et Islanders
47: Dale Hawerchuk: Winnipeg, Buffalo, Saint-Louis et Philadelphie
46: Chris Pronger, Hartford, St-Louis, Edmonton et Anaheim
45: Tony Esposito, Montréal et Chicago
44 : Pavel Bure, Vancouver, Floride et Rangers
43 : Frank Mahovlich, Toronto, Détroit et Montréal
42: Cam Neely, Vancouver et Boston
41: Bob Gainey, Montréal
40: Joe Nieuwendyk, Calgary, Dallas, New Jersey, Toronto et Floride
39: Brian Leetch, Rangers, Toronto et Boston
38: Scott Niedermayer, New Jersey et Anaheim
37: Grant Fuhr, Edmonton, Toronto, Buffalo, Los Angeles, St-Louis et Calgary
36: Brad Park, Rangers, Boston et Détroit
35 : Billy Smith, Los Angeles et Islanders
34: Serge Savard, Montréal et Winnipeg
33: Bobby Hull, Chicago, Winnipeg et Hartford
32: Chris Chelios, Montréal, Chicago et Détroit
31 : Al MacInnis, Calgary et St-Louis
30 : Peter Stastny, Québec, New Jersey et St-Louis
29 : Ken Dryden, Montréal
28 : Bernie Parent, Boston, Philadelphie et Toronto
27 : Gilbert Perreault, Buffalo
26 : Scott Stevens, Washington, St-Louis et New Jersey
25: Ron Francis, Hartford, Pittsburgh, Caroline et Toronto
24: Peter Forsberg, Québec/Colorado, Philadelphie et Nashville
23: Marcel Dionne, Détroit, Los Angeles et Rangers
22 : Brett Hull, Calgary, St-Louis, Dallas, Détroit et Phoenix
21 : Jari Kurri, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Rangers, Anaheim et Colorado
20 : Joe Sakic, Québec/Colorado
19 : Bryan Trottier, Islanders et Pittsburgh
18 : Larry Robinson, Montréal et Los Angeles
17 : Dominik Hasek, Chicago, Buffalo, Détroit et Ottawa
16 : Paul Coffey, Edmonton, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, Détroit, Hartford, Philadelphie, Chicago, Caroline et Boston
15 : Bobby Clarke, Philadelphie
14: Denis Potvin, Islanders
13: Guy Lafleur, Montréal, Rangers et Québec
12 : Jaromir Jagr, Pittsburgh, Washington et Rangers
11 : Mike Bossy, Islanders
10: Phil Esposito, Chicago, Boston et Rangers
9: Niklas Lidstrom, Détroit
8: Raymond Bourque, Boston et Colorado
7 : Martin Brodeur, New Jersey
6 : Steve Yzerman, Détroit
5: Patrick Roy, Montréal et Colorado
4: Mark Messier, Edmonton, Rangers et Vancouver
3 : Mario Lemieux , Pittsburgh
2 : Bobby Orr, Boston et Chicago
1: Wayne Gretzky, Edmonton, Los Angeles, St-Louis et Rangers
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest5052 |
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 13:44:57
The list itself is surely open to some debate, and there are a few things I'd change, but in general I don't think its that far off.
The issue that I would take with this thread is the insistance that Mike Gartner is somehow one of the greatest 60 players since 1967. That is ludacris. He was never a top 10 forward in the league and he disappeared in the playoffs. Yes, he scored a ton of goals in his career (700) and yes his consistency was great, but he was consistently good, he was never great. No GM would have ever traded anyone on that list for Gartner. He had two years that were very good (94 and 102 points) other than that his high was 85 points. he had more than 80 points 5 times in his illustrious 20 year career. Great career, but he was never a great player. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 02/19/2008 : 07:53:02
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
How did Crosby make the list and Brodeur did not. That is the single biggest problem with this list
I might just have missed Marty's name.. But in any case, how can Sid the Kid make that list I will never know.
Brodeur is 7th on the list, and how a player that has only been in the NHL for a couple of seasons makes the list is beyond me.
[img]http://www.maldesigns.ca/top%2050%20since%201967%20banner.jpg[/img] |
| Alex |
Posted - 02/18/2008 : 10:44:00
How did Crosby make the list and Brodeur did not. That is the single biggest problem with this list
I might just have missed Marty's name.. But in any case, how can Sid the Kid make that list I will never know.
Habs get number 25 this year |
| PainTrain |
Posted - 02/18/2008 : 10:39:25
Teemu Selanne isn't even on the list. I find that kinda surprising. The 2nd all time leader for Finland and he didn't even play with the Great One like Jari Kurri. Don't you think he should be on the list? |
| andyhack |
Posted - 01/29/2008 : 04:45:27
Another guy who perhaps should be on this list is Jacques Lemaire. Here is a Hall of Fame guy, very good BOTH offensively and defensively, tremendous in the playoffs AND played his whole career from '67 on. Take a look - http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/LegendsMember.jsp?mem=p198402&type=Player&page=statsawards&list=#photo
Nothing against the Big M, but when you line up his eight NHL seasons from '67 on (he had some good ones though, no doubt) against the post-67 careers of Lemaire (and Ratelle  - couldn't resist - bet you Jean never realized he had such a big fan!), I think that the Big M is the one that should have been left out.
By the way, I saw the book with this list in the bookstore the other day and read the forward about the criteria. The pre-67 stuff (when the Big M had all those great years for the Leafs, for example) was NOT supposed to have been taken into account.
Cournoyer makes it to the list, and that is probably right as most of his career is from '67 and he has that Conn Smythe in '73. But it raises an interesting question - what pushed Yvon and Frankie in the judges' minds ahead of Jacques and Jean?. Are we dealing with the same old story that is true in high school, university, business and politics? The name/popularity thing? Those guys have an aura - "The Big M", "The Roadrunner". Is that what did it?
You can see I like the quiet guys. Jacques and Jean, you got screwed here! For what it's worth, another quiet guy out there recognizes that. |
| andyhack |
Posted - 01/17/2008 : 13:42:17
Just a further note on my Ratelle comments in the "Is Espo overrated' thread. Once we finish our list, assuming we acknowledge Ratelle's career at least a little better than the way these guys did, if I can track down Ratelle's address, I'm gonna write a letter to him and show him our list. Anyone else who wants to put their name to the letter can do so.
I mean, what in the world were these guys thinking? Leaving him off the list has to be one of, if not THE, worst things about this list.
Okay, back to work. |
| andyhack |
Posted - 01/06/2008 : 15:04:05
quote:
Originally posted by fly4apuckguy
Dumbest position on the list - Denis Potvin at 14. If Denis Potvin is the 14th best player in the NHL since 1960, I think the game is screwed. No offence to Denis (whom I like and respect), but ahead of Trots? Heck no.
Really slow reaction on my part, but I have to disagree with the first part of this point. Potvin at about 14, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad rating. To say, generally, that he was near the very top of the players who played in the last 40 years, is not at all outrageous in my opinion.
I do agree that Trottier probably belongs ahead of Potvin on this list, but even this question is probably closer than Flyguy-san is indicating here. That question might depend a bit on one's view of the value of superstar defensmen in general. With these types of lists, and with this site and hockey fans in general, I personally believe that not enough attention is paid to the fact that in the history of the NHL there have been fewer superstar (really special) great defensemen than there have been forwards. Moreover, not enough attention is given to the point that the position of a defenseman may simply be, overall, a more difficult one than the position of a forward (what I mean is that the position may simply just entail more). It certainly would appear to be more difficult to really excell at being a defenseman than being a forward. That has probably been the case throughout history and really appears to be the case today.
Edit - Anyone have any thoughts on this? Am I the only guy a bit disappointed in how so few of the Hart winners over the history of the NHL have been defensemen? Doesn't that seem a bit out of whack considering all the things a defenseman is doing in the course of a game, particularly one who is gifted both offensively and defensively - not to mention time on the ice?
I know - the Hart is judged in a weird way. On this, and on the question of guys on low ranked teams not having much of a chance at the Hart, I am commenting on the way I think the Hart SHOULD be judged, not the way it IS judged.
Edit 2 - I also really respect anyone who can skate backwards well as I Struggled with a capital S at it |
| Guest6896 |
Posted - 12/29/2007 : 18:04:04
What about Mike Modano? Terry Sawchuk? Gordie Howe? |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 12/22/2007 : 11:57:00
Okay, are we all ready?
Two threads have been started.
One for nominations, and voting by the committee members.
http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3235
The other for comments by everyone.
http://www.pickuphockey.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3236
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| MSC |
Posted - 12/22/2007 : 02:22:32
Lyle Odelin played over 8 years so that means he's still eligible. As long as he has a shot I'm happy. |
| leigh |
Posted - 12/21/2007 : 22:07:40
Hey guys, I'd love to participate on the committee if it's not too late. My availability is a little low but I'll put in where I can. Let me know if that's ok Pucknuts.
I agree that Crosby should not be eligible. I have no doubt that he'll make it eventually but due to the fact his career is too short at this time I say no way! Maybe a certain amount of years minimum (or retired) Say 6 or 8 years or so. Just a thought. |
| MSC |
Posted - 12/21/2007 : 21:42:40
Vacation is over, I'm ready to Rock and or Roll |
| OILINONTARIO |
Posted - 12/12/2007 : 17:56:04
Let's do this bitch!
The Oil WILL make the playoffs. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 12/04/2007 : 11:13:14
quote:
Originally posted by MSC
So I'm guessing this idea either fell through or everyone forgot about it?
Pucknuts, are we going to do this?
Our panel may be a little thin but I think we could still come up with a decent list.
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| MSC |
Posted - 11/21/2007 : 06:03:27
I'm going back to canada on vacation soon so I'll be scarce for the next 3 weeks or so. |
| irvine |
Posted - 11/21/2007 : 04:20:12
i've just been waiting for the last three members of the committee.
Irvine |
| MSC |
Posted - 11/20/2007 : 19:32:35
So I'm guessing this idea either fell through or everyone forgot about it? |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 11/13/2007 : 09:49:57
I can see the point of the guest. Crosby could get hit by a bus tomorrow and never play hockey again. Would you hold a spot on the best of the last 40 years for a guy who played 2.25 seasons??
Crosby would belong on this list in 5 years. Not today. 3 seasons does not a GOAT make.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 18:53:39
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9591
Crosby should NOT be on there- he's wayyyy to young, and he hasn't proven himself longterm yet
This appears true, except when you consider that Crosby has a Hart Trophy, a Lester Pearson Trophy, and an Art Ross Trophy already. Those are things many of the players on that list do not possess, and never will. |
| Leafs Rock Planet |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 18:24:29
Sounds really interesting guys. Im not going to join because I dont feel that I am old enough to make knowledgable choices. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 17:26:23
Anyone else interested in joining the "Greatest of All Time Selection Committee"?
Committee Members so far
1.) PuckNuts
2.) willus3
3.) Beans15
4.) OILINONTARIO
5.) MSC
6.) irvine
7.) PainTrain
8.) andyhack
9.) fly4apuckguy
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| Guest9591 |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 14:13:33
Crosby should NOT be on there- he's wayyyy to young, and he hasn't proven himself longterm yet |
| Guest4637 |
Posted - 11/12/2007 : 13:22:42
I agree about Oates, but then again he has always been "under the radar" all his career. The list looks agreeable to me. Lidstrom higher than Coffey = The student has become the teacher. No one would have guessed that 13 years ago. |
| Guest5024 |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 22:53:12
hey why isnt gordie howe in the top 10? |
| Guest6235 |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 19:08:34
Adam Oates should be on the list too. Sakic and Hasek are too low, and Yzerman should be ahead of Roy. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 13:25:57
I was hoping for a few more, this is who we have so far on the committee.
Committee Members
1.) PuckNuts
2.) willus3
3.) Beans15
4.) OILINONTARIO
5.) MSC
6.) irvine
7.) PainTrain
8.) andyhack
9.) fly4apuckguy
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 19:50:38
quote:
Originally posted by MSC
I think that's the beuty of this, everyone has their own opinion of what makes a great player. Whether it's 20 good healthy seasons that totalled alot of points or 8 amazing seasons followed by injuries that leaves so much room to the imagination. With a commitee set up it should be able to find a medium of the two, so people should recommend players based on their own criteria not a pre determined criteria....just my thoughts...
That's a good way to look at it, for sure. |
| MSC |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 19:28:26
I think that's the beuty of this, everyone has their own opinion of what makes a great player. Whether it's 20 good healthy seasons that totalled alot of points or 8 amazing seasons followed by injuries that leaves so much room to the imagination. With a commitee set up it should be able to find a medium of the two, so people should recommend players based on their own criteria not a pre determined criteria....just my thoughts... |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 16:10:32
I think you rank them by what they have accomplished in their careers, otherwise a guy could make a case for putting Gary Leeman on the list for having a 50 goal season. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 14:46:46
When we are ready I will open up two threads, like we did with the GOAT draft.
One for posting our nominations, and selections. This will also be used for the voting.
The other could be used for conversation, chit chat, etc...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 10:35:09
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Are we going to set up some kind of criteria? What I mean is are we going to base this exclusively on the play of the player on the ice or are we going to include things such as leadership, off ice benefit to hockey, changing the shape of the game, etc. This might not matter much for the top 10 or 20 guys, but when it gets past that, the arguements will be interesting.
For example, Lindros is on this list without question based excusively on play on the ice. The rest of it leaves a questions mark is the eyes of some.
Let's also keep in mind play off production. I'm sure stats are going to come up through this, and I personally find if comparing two players with similar regular season stats and skills, the tie break usually is their ability to win in the play offs and produce under pressure.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!!
I don't think, when rating a hockey player, anything other than what they did on the ice should be considered. We aren't talking about the HHOF here. We just want to know who the best hockey players of the last 40 years are.
It will also be interesting because people rate players differently. For instance I rate players on their peak because that, I feel, is the best way to judge what they were capable of.
Now others will rate players by career.
I wonder if we should make the distinction? Are we judging careers or peak values?
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 10:15:27
Are we going to set up some kind of criteria? What I mean is are we going to base this exclusively on the play of the player on the ice or are we going to include things such as leadership, off ice benefit to hockey, changing the shape of the game, etc. This might not matter much for the top 10 or 20 guys, but when it gets past that, the arguements will be interesting.
For example, Lindros is on this list without question based excusively on play on the ice. The rest of it leaves a questions mark is the eyes of some.
Let's also keep in mind play off production. I'm sure stats are going to come up through this, and I personally find if comparing two players with similar regular season stats and skills, the tie break usually is their ability to win in the play offs and produce under pressure.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 07:36:05
I thought that it would be good to get Greg Smith's input also...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 07:10:11
Admin, Leigh, Bigshow, Pickles. You guys interested?
Where's TCTitans?
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 06:02:36
Committee Members, so far...
1.) PuckNuts
2.) willus3
3.) Beans15
4.) OILINONTARIO
5.) MSC
6.) irvine
7.) PainTrain
8.) andyhack
9.) fly4apuckguy
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| PainTrain |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 20:23:27
I'll be in !
Goalies is the best for a different category.
This should be fun! |
| andyhack |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 20:12:18
I'm in but may not be available too much in the next couple of weeks.
Good move dealing with the goalies separately!
I'll try to control my Bruin bias. Stan Jonathon will not be nominated!
|
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 18:05:39
Am I missing something or is Lindros not on the top 60 list? Okay, we can argue the attitude thing at length, but the guy won a Hart Trophy. How can you win a Hart Trophy and not be on the list?
For those of you thinking Jose Theodroe, buzz off, you know what I mean. |
| fly4apuckguy |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 17:59:53
I'm in. No Russians on my list, though. |
| OILINONTARIO |
Posted - 11/09/2007 : 17:40:19
OK. Greg Smith, Fly, Paintrain. Are you guys in? This sounds like a lot of fun.
The Oil WILL make the playoffs. |
|
|
