eva unit zero

He crossed my mind for the Rangers on building my list; but realistically even as good as he was for them can you argue him over guys like Bathgate, Leetch, Giacomin, Bill Cook, Brad Park, Frank Boucher, Rod Gilbert, Jean Ratelle, or even either of John Vanbiesbrouck or Mike Richter? Messier is down near the bottom, if not at the bottom, of that group. At least in my mind. Which is what really matters.

I stripped away the Selke, for best defensive forward, as well as awards given to Canadians. Howe would likely have won a Selke during his career had he stayed at forward; he was certainly good enough defensively even when he played the wing. As for the Norris argument, Clarke would have been ineligible. Howe would also likely receive First-Team selections in those seasons, making it a double-tap to include it (same for Vezinas since 1983) as there is no "Best Forward" or "Best Center" award other than the postseason All-Stars.

So, it's like an Orr situation? Nobody for the rest of time will ever be a better Flyer than Bobby Clarke? I don't understand why certain things "aren't arguable" for some reason. Is it that people don't want to consider the possibility? Around here, Lidstrom is considered the second-greatest defenseman to ever play. Pretty much universally. THN ranked him fifth. HFBoards, aside from a few dissenters, agreed with that - that he belonged behind Orr, Bourque, Harvey, and Shore. But suggesting Lidstrom isn't top-two All-Time is another "not arguable" thing around here. What exactly IS arguable? The number Mike Commodore should wear? Because if that's it, maybe LGW should shut down.

Eaves is more productive, and has significantly better offensive tools should the need arise for one of them to be promoted into a scoring role. Eaves is faster. The difference in their defense and PK is negligible. It's like comparing Draper and Maltby in 1999. Except Eaves has a cannon shot, and unlike the Draper/Maltby scenario, Eaves is easily a superior skater. Miller is the most expendable regular roster player; he's a non-vital defensive specialist on a team which has two others currently in a checking role who are five years younger, as well as four top-six forwards who are better than Miller at all of his key skills. The only other Wing it could be said of is Emmerton, and he's not even a guarantee to make the team.

That list, published in 1998, also includes Jaromir Jagr at 37 and Eric Lindros at 54. Yzerman is at 78, and Hasek is at 95. Now I find that odd; Yzerman was the only one of those players considered a lock for the Hall at that point. Hasek had just won two Harts and was the best goalie in the world, so his future was looking good. Jagr had just won his second Art Ross and would win the Hart the next season. Lindros had won the Hart in 1995 and played well, but he had also missed considerable time due to concussions and other injuries. It's kind of hard to take an argument seriously when that list is posted as a source; it's akin to posting Eklund as a source. Are you next going to tell me about the Top 100 list THN released in 2010, which was really five top-20 lists, and has Bobby Clarke ranked 9th? He was ranked 8th among centers on the earlier list (same order for the top 7 - Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Messier, Morenz, Mikita, Esposito) and Yzerman has now passed him up. Sidney Crosby managed to pass up Joe Malone somewhere along the way also, and is now in 18th between Forsberg and Malone. Also, Sawchuk-Roy-Brodeur for goalies. Plus, Scott Niedermayer is ranked 16th; above Scott Stevens, Brian Leetch, Chris Pronger, and Pierre Pilote. You also might want to know that American-born goaltender Frank Brimsek is ranked twelfth among goalies. Missing from the list: Russian players, Cyclone Taylor. The Russian players are answered by the assumedly NHL bias of the list. But Newsy Lalonde is on the list, and he played the majority of his career out west in the same league Taylor was dominating. Currently active players included in the list are: Crosby, Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, Zetterberg, Iginla, Pronger, Brodeur So I'm not terribly impressed with THN's ability to assemble a list for reference. Entertainment, sure. Reference, no.

Kurri played 100 fewer games for the Oilers yet outscored Messier AND was a Selke contender. Messier was a secondary offensive force except for the early years on Gretzky's Wing, and after the Gretzky trade. Kurri also posted better playoff numbers, and is the all-time postseason goals leader for the Oil. Crosby has more points in fewer games compared to Jagr at the same point in his career, and Jagr played on Lemieux's wing. Crosby has a hart and captained the team to consecutive final appearances, winning once. Fedorov was the best player on a stacked Red Wings team, while Lindsay was anywhere from second to fifth. As for Orr. What makes him the best defenseman ever? He was a great defenseman, the best of his day. But was he better than Doug Harvey, Red Kelly, Eddie Shore, Ray Bourque, Nick Lidstrom? Orr has 8 Norris trophies. That makes him the best. He scored a lot of points? So did Paul Coffey; maybe he's the best defenseman ever. It's not a coincidence that the two highest scoring defensemen played their best seasons with a center who scored over 150 points. Do you know how many players have scored 150 points? Five. Phil Esposito, Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Steve Yzerman, and Bernie Nicholls. Nicholls did it as Gretzky's right winger in 88-89, the same season Yzerman finished third with 155. How would Orr's numbers have looked without Espo there? I'm not saying he isn't the best ever. I'm asking WHY. Your response was "he just is" the way a ten year old holds on to hope that his favorite player, who missed all of the previous year with an injury/surgery/diaper rash, will come back and be the best in the league again. If there's not a why, it's not a rational decision. Why don't we take out things like the awards Howe was ineligible for, or awards that are not solely for on-ice play. Finally, it's unfair to use captaincy as a measure given that Howe joined the team when Clarke was captain. So that leads to: Clarke: GP - 1,144, PTS - 1,210 (reg season), GP - 133, PTS - 116 (playoffs) Hart - x3 Lester Pearson NHL allstar - x8 NHL 1st or 2nd team allstar - x4 Flyers team MVP - x2 Howe: GP - 594, PTS - 480 (reg season), GP - 82, PTS - 53 (playoffs) NHL allstar - x4 NHL 1st or 2nd team allstar - x3 Flyers team MVP - once It does look a little weighted in Clarke's favor. But this is where things get messy; Howe was a Hart finalist with the Flyers and nearly won the Norris in 1986, Paul Coffey's best year points-wise. But he was beaten for the Hart by Gretzky. In fact, if you switch their places, I think Howe would succeed much better against Clarke's opposition than Clarke would against Howe's. If Clarke plays for the Flyers starting in 1983, he wins no Hart trophies or Pearson awards. Howe would still earn achievements, whether it be at forward or on defense. So, as I said before. I'm probably not going to change anyone's mind, and you're probably not going to change mine.

Conner only makes the team at Miller's expense. Why take him over Brunnstrom or Emmerton when you already have what he brings, only better? Johnson's faceoff skills might help him into a spot, but if he doesn't earn that 4th line center job out of camp he doesn't get a contract. If you take the lines that have been used this preseason, it was shaping up as Cleary/Dats/Hudler, Filppula/Zetterberg/Franzen, Abby/Helm/Bert, and Homer/???/Eaves. Johnson likely has to earn that spot over Bruno and Cory to get a contract at all.

This. His 2009-10 season was a great example, but he only played 55 games that year. He has had long stretches like that before, but over 82 games they always have ended up countered out with some lows. What we need to see is more of the 2009-10 Flip, and I think we'll get that this year. His main thing I think is, with regards to the killer mentality is as follows: When he plays third line he views himself as a checking center and plays like it, his offense is significantly reduced due to conservatism. When he plays wing on the first or second line, he views himself as "secondary" to the top goal scorer on that line (Hank, Dats, or Franzen usually), and plays much less aggressive on the net. If he's centering the second line, it's almost a perfect storm for him in recent years; except that despite the Wings' overload of quality centers, they can't play him there and have the best results. Hank and Dats are both far better than Flip, and more effective at center than on the wing. So Flip would have to play at that level to make putting Hank/Dats back together the right decision. Which leaves it down to Flip having to change his mindset. Right now he views himself as a playmaker who can occasionally score goals, which needs to change if he's playing on the wing. He needs to be more aggressive, get down low, and bang away. He needs to get into scoring positions more, instead of setting up like a playmaker he needs to make himself a goal scorer. It's the same thing as Hudler's speed and strength issues; if Hudler is going to stick in the top six for Babcock, he needs to have the strength to fight in the corners and come up with the puck, instead of losing most battles. He needs to improve his speed to overcome his lack of size, so that he has an advantage against the big, slow defensemen a lot of teams like to populate their PK units with - Scott Hannan, anyone? For the record, I picked 60+ as breakout and 55-60 for this season (assuming he stays as a top-six winger, of course) because I think that's his skill level and he's just coming into his prime.

Your second point is a huge thing. It's like putting Lindsay ahead of Fedorov, Messier ahead of Kurri, or Jagr ahead of Crosby. It's not argued for; it's just accepted as fact. Orr as the best defenseman ever is another thing like that; why not Harvey, Bourque, or Lidstrom? Because.

I would trade Franzen for Edler. Now and then.

Soft in what way, exactly? He's not a guy who is constantly looking to slam his opponents into the wall, but he's a talented offensive player and solid defensively. He was one of the best UFAs heading into the summer; Carolina was lucky to keep him, especially for what they did.

Incorrect. The Wings attempted to draft Bure the previous round and were told by the league he was ineligible. Vancouver then provided information showing otherwise.

Using the "instrumental" view you just stated, Kevin Dineen should rank in the top three for the WhalerCanes, Peter Stastny should be in the top three for Quebec/Colorado, and David Legwand belongs on the Nashville list. Being more associated with that team's history (Clarke and the Cup wins, in particular; Howe's teams were far weaker) does not make you a better player. An excellent example is John Vanbiesbrouck vs. Mike Richter. Beezer was the better goalie, but Richter is more associated with Rangers history because he had a great playoff run in 1994, he won the Cup that year, and he played his entire career as a Ranger.

Howe was a Hart contender throughout his prime in Hartford and Philly, in an era with Gretzky and Lemieux. This is despite the fact that defensemen and especially goaltenders are typically given much less consideration for the Hart than they deserve. Lidstrom, Bourque and Hasek are excellent recent examples of this. Ray Bourque deserved the Hart in 1990 and 1999, but received neither. Nicklas Lidstrom deserved it in 2004, but did not receive it. And Hasek deserved it for 1996 (didn't win), 1997 (won), and 1998 (won) and should have been a finalist every year from 1994 through 2001.

Howe was always very good defensively, even after his offense tapered off into the 90s. And Clarke wasn't even the best defensive forward of his era; it's pretty much agreed upon that Bob Gainey deserves that spot - he won the Selke a few in a row when it was created, and people say that it was created FOR him because of how good he was defensively. That's a pretty strong argument in the Gainey vs. Clarke debate. Clarke was an elite center, Howe was an elite defenseman. It's really a matter of who you think was better. I think it's Howe. You think it's Clarke. We're probably not going to change each other's minds.

For the span Howe was a Flyer, only Bourque and Coffey were better, and not by much. And Howe's best years were the early 80s in Hartford, and the mid 80s in Philly. As for the comparison to Clarke, I'll put it another way. Clarke averaged 1.06 points per game as a Flyer. Howe averaged 0.81 as a Flyer. This of course doesn't speak to defensive performance. Modern day comparables to their styles and career performance with the Flyers would be, IMHO, Jarome Iginla and Nicklas Lidstrom. Iginla is of course a little bit goal-happy compared to Clarke, but other than that it takes a shoehorn and a lot of force to find modern examples that fit. Ryan Getzlaf is another good example, but he is a bit too pass happy, and his scoring numbers are well beyond the provided information.

Modano a better skater than LaFontaine? You get a big fat <HELL NO> stamp on that one. LaFontaine, not Modano, is who you should be applying that "as well as any player in hockey history" tag to. Modano had raw speed. LaFontaine had better speed than Modano, and he had ridiculous ability to change direction unexpectedly at full speed. People talk about the way Bure could skate; LaFontaine did it first. Modano was never able to do that kind of stuff at full speed. As for other skills; okay, I left out his slap shot. As for his backhand, I don't know that I would rank it "best of all-time" but that is beside the point. Whether he can fire a puck over 90 m.p.h., perfectly place a backhand, or use psychic powers to will the puck from center ice into the net without any player making contact, none of it means he WAS a better player unless it helped him score more goals. In 634 more games, Modano scored 561 goals - 93 more goals than LaFontaine's 468. You say that LaFontaine got his numbers because of the 80s. Well, how about this? At www.hockey-reference.com you can view neat statistics called adjusted goals/assists/points. They are adjusted to account for the difference in scoring in a given season to a base goals-per-game average of 6. Using this, Modano still ends up scoring fewer goals per game, although the gap is smaller. Modano is also still under a point per game, while LaFontaine is still over. Longevity matters, but both players played for such a long time that it's not a logical argument to say "Modano played a bunch more years at a lower level, so he's better." because that would be like saying Steve Yzerman is better than Mario Lemieux because Yzerman had more points and was better defensively. I also realized while looking at the numbers that I had forgotten another American player who was better than Modano. Brian Leetch. And Jeremy Roenick could easily be included as well. Or maybe Joe Mullen. Possibly Phil Housley. I'll have to remember this for the next time an Osgood HHOF argument breaks out; Original Six goalies are now worthless, due to the fact there were only six teams. Welcome to the Hall, Guy Hebert, Arturs Irbe, and Jocelyn Thibault!

Too bad the Howe/McCrimmon magic didn't work in 1992-93 when they were both Wings. Although if it had, the Coffey trade would probably have never been made. Which brings about all kinds of interesting "ifs" into the discussion. If Carson stays, do the Wings get Larionov? Perhaps Carson is traded with some other piece for a guy like Shanahan or maybe Gary Roberts and Primeau stays put? Maybe Lidstrom is traded?

I would completely love to agree with you. But history disagrees on this one. Brett Lebda. He in no way ever showed he was a better player than Derek Meech or Kyle Quincey, yet he remained on the roster while Quincey was waived, and Meech was demoted. Even when Meech was recalled, he outplayed Lebda in every respect. When Meech was the 7th defenseman, he outplayed Lebda, who was a regular. Yet Lebda maintained a spot on the roster somehow. Jonathan Ericsson isn't as bad as people here often suggest he is. But saying Kindl is better than Ericsson is not an unrealistic observation; Salei had a stretch of good games at the end of the year which kept him in the lineup for the playoffs. Otherwise, Kindl would have had his spot. Is Ericsson better than Salei was? Maybe. But Kindl improved a great deal last year over the course of the season, and Ericsson has basically stagnated over the past couple of years. Kindl might be better right now, Ericsson might be better. Who will be the better player three months from now? Or six months from now? Who will have the better season overall? I'm putting my bet on Kindl. It's like when the Sharks had Nabby, Kipper, and Toskala. Someone had to go. Toskala looked like he might be the best of the bunch, so they traded Kipper and kept Toskala, who was a good backup for them and did well for a while as Toronto's starter. But he was never Kipper, who carried the Flames to the Cup finals in year 1 and has been a top goalie for most of his time there, with 262 wins as a Flame and 276 overall.

There is none. It was a multiquote I had forgotten about, and I wasn't paying attention when I started typing so I forgot to delete it.

Actually, Richards is supposed to be second. I was throwing around what I felt the order should be, and forgot to change it. As for Howe, he was as good as Bourque or Coffey through the 1980s, and retired in the mid 1990s Parent had two great seasons, and was otherwise a very good goaltender. But he was not one of the top three goaltenders in the NHL during his career; Ken Dryden, Ed Giacomin, Tony Esposito, Gump Worsley, Jacques Plante all played through a significant portion of Parent's career and were considered better goaltenders. Parent was excellent, but ranking him based on his 74 and 75 runs would be equivalent to saying that Tim Thomas is one of the three best Bruins based on his two Vezina years and one Conn Smythe. Howe was one of the top three defensemen in the NHL during his career, and should have won the 1983 Norris. Parent was named First Team twice, and Second Team no times. Howe was named First Team three times, with no Second Team selections. As for other Flyers, I also thought about Tim Kerr and Ron Hextall in addition to Parent as guys who were left off. I was tempted to add Brad McCrimmon as well as a tribute, as well as the fact that he made up the second half of the best defensive pairing of the 80s.

Ah, you're right. I did leave Hull off. That does push Modano out of the top five. And btw, Frank Brimsek was one of the top two goaltenders in the NHL in the first eight of his ten seasons, missing two years during that span because of Coast Guard service. Modano is not even CLOSE to that. Modano scored more points than LaFontaine, but LaFontaine's career ended early due to concussions. LaFontaine was considered among the top few centers in the league for a long time when Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, and Messier were all in their primes. Modano didn't have competition nearly that stiff, and still spent less time near the top. His peak was also not as high. The only thing Modano might have had on LaFontaine is defensive play. And even that only came in a short five or six year span of Modano's career in the late 1990s and early 2000s; he was terrible defensively early on and for the last few years of his career. Howe played at the same level through the 80s as Ray Bourque and Paul Coffey, both generally considered top-ten all-time defensemen and both in their prime. Chelios won multiple Norrises and contended for many others, and was considered one of the league's top defensemen for fifteen years. Hull actually has more 17 points in 230 fewer games, but is not American-born so Modano is still technically the leader in that category. Hull also has a Hart trophy and a Pearson award, while Modano has a Calder trophy. So depending on whether you include Hull, Modano is either the fifth or sixth greatest American hockey player.

The depth chart I want to see if Ericsson doesn't improve dramatically: Lidstrom Kronwall Stuart White Kindl (breakout year, playing "edgy" and improved defensively) Ericsson/Commodore This would pave the way for the Wings to trade Ericsson while he still has value. Deal him off, perhaps with one of Tatar/Pulkkinen/Jurco/Jarnkrok and maybe a high (1st or 2nd) pick to get a quality defenseman. Preferably under 30. Maybe a guy like Yandle or Pitkanen, but I don't see either of those guys being traded unless their teams look to dump salary.

Bure had a lot more than Linden; Geoff Courtnall and Cliff Ronning were his linemates most of that year (one of the fastest lines ever put together) and they both were bigger offensive forces than Linden. Murray Craven was just as solid offensively as Linden, and both Craven and Linden were among the league's top two-way players. Jyrki Lumme and Jiri Slegr were playing the blueline, and the team acquired Jeff Brown late in the season in an interesting situation; Petr Nedved had refused to report to Vancouver, and late in the year signed with St. Louis - because the Blues were ALWAYS off signing RFAs, like Scott Stevens and Brendan Shanahan. The league awarded Craig Janney to Vancouver as compensation. Janney refused to play in Vancouver, so he was traded back to St. Louis for Jeff Brown, Bret Hedican, and a pick. Brown was one of the top offensive defensemen in the league, and scored 15 points in the playoffs that year. If that deal isn't made, Vancouver is out in the first round. Nieuwendyk doesn't make Calgary's top three. He doesn't even make the top three if you narrow it down to the time he was with the team; he might not even be in the top five. Roberts and Fleury were better, MacInnis was better, and Suter and Vernon could be argued for. Suter was a top defenseman for a while and Vernon was an elite goalie. Nieuwendyk was never a top-end forward. As for Derian Hatcher... seriously? Top three in Stars history? I would have taken Zubov, Sydor, and even Matvichuk over Hatcher. And that's just defensemen who were on his team in his best years. There's also Mark Tinordi, who has a case. Forwards, you've got Modano and Broten, plus you can't leave out Dino Ciccarelli or Brian Bellows. Bobby Smith could be tacked on as well. In goal, you've got Marty Turco with a strong 500 games and Ed Belfour with a very good 300 games and a Cup. Does Hatcher even crack the Stars' top TEN? I can't justify it. One season where he had some offensive production and people thought he was some kind of wunderkind does not make him one of the best players in franchise history. It would be like calling Kris Draper one of the league's best two-way players in his prime. He simply wasn't. One good offensive year doesn't make an excellent defensive player into a two-way player.

Avalanche/Nordiques 1. Sakic 2. Forsberg 3. Roy Blackhawks 1. Mikita 2. Hull 3. Esposito Blue Jackets 1. Nash 2. Klesla 3. Vyborny Blues 1. Hull 2. MacInnis 3. Federko Bruins 1. Orr 2. Bourque 3. Esposito Canadiens 1. Beliveau 2. Harvey 3. Richard Canucks 1. Naslund 2. Bure 3. McLean Capitals 1. Ovechkin 2. Bondra 3. Gartner Coyotes/Jets 1. Hawerchuk 2. Numminen 3. Steen Devils 1. Brodeur 2. Stevens 3. Elias Ducks 1. Selanne 2. Niedermayer 3. Kariya Flames 1. MacInnis 2. Iginla 3. Fleury Flyers 1. Lindros 2. Howe 3. Clarke Hurricanes/Whalers 1. Francis 2. Whitney 3. Ward Islanders 1. Trottier 2. Potvin 3. Bossy Jets/Thrashers 1. Kovalchuk 2. Hossa 3. Kozlov Kings 1. Dionne 2. Gretzky 3. Robitaille Leafs 1. Broda 2. Conacher 3. Apps Lightning 1. St. Louis 2. Richards 3. Lecavalier Oilers 1. Gretzky 2. Coffey 3. Kurri Panthers 1. Jokinen 2. Bure 3. Vanbiesbrouck Penguins 1. Lemieux 2. Jagr 3. Crosby Predators 1. Vokoun 2. Timonen 3. Weber Rangers 1. Bathgate 2. Leetch 3. Giacomin Red Wings 1. Howe 2. Yzerman 3. Lidstrom Sabres 1. Hasek 2. Perreault 3. Housley Senators 1. Alfredsson 2. Redden 3. Phillips Sharks 1. Marleau 2. Nabokov 3. Thornton Stars/North Stars 1. Modano 2. Zubov 3. Broten Wild 1. Gaborik 2. Backstrom 3. Koivu