egroen 384 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 I doubt any other player from 1984-2006 would have seen a stretch with seven in a row and ten of 14 years on the postseason All-Star team, with six first-team selections, though. It's rare to even see that many total in a 22-year career, at ANY position. A good case can be made that Yzerman is much more than what his individual awards show, but you have to make a case for him being above the others he is in there with.... Mike Bossy - 9 50+ goal seasons (5 60+ seasons); 8 times in the top 6 for points; Conn Smythe Bobby Clarke - 2 Harts; 7 times top 10 in scoring and would have numerous Selke awards Viacheslav Fetisov - the russian Bobby Orr Glenn Hall - equivelent of 7 Vezinas Jaromir Jagr - 5 Art Rosses; Hart Valeri Kharlamov - russian Gretzky (though more like LaFleur) Edouard "Newsy" Lalonde - Pre-NHL legend; also led the newly formed NHL Ted Lindsay - 9 times top 6 in goals; 6 times top 4 in points Mark Messier - 2 Harts; incredible playoff performances; excellent post-season all-star selections, despite competing against Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman Larry Robinson - 2 Norrises; Conn Smythe; career +/- leader Joe Sakic - 10 seasons top 10 in points; Hart; Conn Smythe; excellent playoff numbers Terry Sawchuk - Peak comparable to Hasek; equivelent of 3 Vezinas; incredible playoffs Fred "Cyclone" Taylor - Another pre-NHL legend Bryan Trottier - One of the greatest all-around players ever; Conn Smythe, Hart and Art Ross Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GordieSid&Ted Report post Posted August 12, 2009 A good case can be made that Yzerman is much more than what his individual awards show, but you have to make a case for him being above the others he is in there with.... Mike Bossy - 9 50+ goal seasons (5 60+ seasons); 8 times in the top 6 for points; Conn Smythe Bobby Clarke - 2 Harts; 7 times top 10 in scoring and would have numerous Selke awards Viacheslav Fetisov - the russian Bobby Orr Glenn Hall - equivelent of 7 Vezinas Jaromir Jagr - 5 Art Rosses; Hart Valeri Kharlamov - russian Gretzky (though more like LaFleur) Edouard "Newsy" Lalonde - Pre-NHL legend; also led the newly formed NHL Ted Lindsay - 9 times top 6 in goals; 6 times top 4 in points Mark Messier - 2 Harts; incredible playoff performances; excellent post-season all-star selections, despite competing against Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman Larry Robinson - 2 Norrises; Conn Smythe; career +/- leader Joe Sakic - 10 seasons top 10 in points; Hart; Conn Smythe; excellent playoff numbers Terry Sawchuk - Peak comparable to Hasek; equivelent of 3 Vezinas; incredible playoffs Fred "Cyclone" Taylor - Another pre-NHL legend Bryan Trottier - One of the greatest all-around players ever; Conn Smythe, Hart and Art Ross Did I read that right that Brodeur was 6th among goalies? What do you think about that? Too high? Based on our earlier discussions I never really got a feel for where you would put Brodeur. My guess was like 12-16 amongst goalies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 (edited) Did I read that right that Brodeur was 6th among goalies? What do you think about that? Too high? Based on our earlier discussions I never really got a feel for where you would put Brodeur. My guess was like 12-16 amongst goalies. Outside of the top 5, inside of the top 10... not in the ballpark for "best ever". Edited August 12, 2009 by egroen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sputman 1,268 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 I actually did a comparison of Lidstrom and Bourque (and Potvin) offensively, adjusted for era to 6 GPG. My point was that Lidstrom was not so far of Bourque offensively, though I would still have a hard time putting him ahead (Bourque's longevity and sheer amount of years at the top of the league is unbelievable): GO OUTSIDE. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 GO OUTSIDE. The sun... IT BURNS!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sputman 1,268 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 The sun... IT BURNS!!! lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
numberthirtynine 0 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 Did someone just defend HFBoards? AND say they're relatively schooled on players we're not? Wow... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T-Ruff 47 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 Did someone just defend HFBoards? AND say they're relatively schooled on players we're not? Wow... Those history of hockey voters on that list most certainly are more than 99% of this board, and its nothing to be ashamed of either... Just try reading some of the debates in the voting threads... I learned a lot just from reading a bunch of pages there in the round 2 (11-20) voting.... for example, I used to think that Brodeur was going to go down as consensus #3 goalie of all time and Lidstrom as the consensus #2 defenseman...Over the years of reading debates such as these I came to realize that this is not the case.... For the most part logical, thorough, and objective in their arguments.... These are guys who look up old newspaper articles and quotes, watch ancient footage, pay to subscribe to websites that provide all kinds of hockey data, read tons of hockey books new and old, create spreadsheets and formulas to adjust for certain factors, etc... Although I'm not going to blindly believe everything they say before looking at the work behind it, I'm certainly not going to do much significant questioning of a list compiled by votes from 36 knowledgeable hockey people, especially when their research and debates are in the open for all to see.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eva unit zero 271 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 A good case can be made that Yzerman is much more than what his individual awards show, but you have to make a case for him being above the others he is in there with.... Mike Bossy - 9 50+ goal seasons (5 60+ seasons); 8 times in the top 6 for points; Conn Smythe Bobby Clarke - 2 Harts; 7 times top 10 in scoring and would have numerous Selke awards Viacheslav Fetisov - the russian Bobby Orr Glenn Hall - equivelent of 7 Vezinas Jaromir Jagr - 5 Art Rosses; Hart Valeri Kharlamov - russian Gretzky (though more like LaFleur) Edouard "Newsy" Lalonde - Pre-NHL legend; also led the newly formed NHL Ted Lindsay - 9 times top 6 in goals; 6 times top 4 in points Mark Messier - 2 Harts; incredible playoff performances; excellent post-season all-star selections, despite competing against Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman Larry Robinson - 2 Norrises; Conn Smythe; career +/- leader Joe Sakic - 10 seasons top 10 in points; Hart; Conn Smythe; excellent playoff numbers Terry Sawchuk - Peak comparable to Hasek; equivelent of 3 Vezinas; incredible playoffs Fred "Cyclone" Taylor - Another pre-NHL legend Bryan Trottier - One of the greatest all-around players ever; Conn Smythe, Hart and Art Ross I guess I'll put it this way. Every one of the players you mentioned, as well as Yzerman, is one of the 20 best players in history at his position. However, only a few are among the top 10 ever at their position as I would rank them. C: Yzerman, Lalonde LW: Lindsay, Kharlamov RW: Bossy, Jagr D: Fetisov, Taylor G: Hall I suppose much of my opinion on Yzerman comes from watching him his entire career and feeling that he was always an excellent defensive forward, something few offensive stars can claim and none who were as offensively prolific as Yzerman. His defensive skill is proven by his having played in a shutdown role and tons of time on the PK for his entire career. Yzerman's defense in his early career is very under-recognized due to the change in the team's defensive system under Bowman as well as Yzerman's clashing with Bowman. Yzerman also suffered a major neck injury during Bowman's first season as coach, and due to the emergence of Sergei Fedorov as a superstar Yzerman became the team's second line center on a team that began to utilize the third and fourth lines more, rolling all four lines much more equally rather than riding primarily on the top two lines. Other teams sent their top lines out to score, while the Wings expected all of their lines to play defense first and then think about scoring. Think about the quotes from Bryan Murray regarding Yzerman and the 1993 Toronto playoff series where he was playing too defensively, where Murray felt Yzerman needed to stop being so concerned with stopping the Leafs and start attacking. Later, in Game 6, Murray asked Yzerman to shadow Gilmour and he did so as well as Zetterberg shadowed Crosby in these past finals. Yzerman is perhaps one of the most underrated players in hockey, past or present, due very much to the fact that he was so incredibly skilled offensively-and recognized for it-yet was also one of the league's top defensive centers and was never recognized for it, simply because he was such a great scorer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 I guess I'll put it this way. Every one of the players you mentioned, as well as Yzerman, is one of the 20 best players in history at his position. However, only a few are among the top 10 ever at their position as I would rank them. C: Yzerman, Lalonde LW: Lindsay, Kharlamov RW: Bossy, Jagr D: Fetisov, Taylor G: Hall I suppose much of my opinion on Yzerman comes from watching him his entire career and feeling that he was always an excellent defensive forward, something few offensive stars can claim and none who were as offensively prolific as Yzerman. His defensive skill is proven by his having played in a shutdown role and tons of time on the PK for his entire career. Yzerman's defense in his early career is very under-recognized due to the change in the team's defensive system under Bowman as well as Yzerman's clashing with Bowman. Yzerman also suffered a major neck injury during Bowman's first season as coach, and due to the emergence of Sergei Fedorov as a superstar Yzerman became the team's second line center on a team that began to utilize the third and fourth lines more, rolling all four lines much more equally rather than riding primarily on the top two lines. Other teams sent their top lines out to score, while the Wings expected all of their lines to play defense first and then think about scoring. Think about the quotes from Bryan Murray regarding Yzerman and the 1993 Toronto playoff series where he was playing too defensively, where Murray felt Yzerman needed to stop being so concerned with stopping the Leafs and start attacking. Later, in Game 6, Murray asked Yzerman to shadow Gilmour and he did so as well as Zetterberg shadowed Crosby in these past finals. Yzerman is perhaps one of the most underrated players in hockey, past or present, due very much to the fact that he was so incredibly skilled offensively-and recognized for it-yet was also one of the league's top defensive centers and was never recognized for it, simply because he was such a great scorer. I largely agree -- and have compiled some quotes from Yzerman's early years that back this up -- he was taught sound defensive hockey in juniors. Over the years Yzerman has taken on this martyr persona as someone who completely sacrificed his offense in order to become a better team player and a defensive stalwart upon Bowman coming to town. While true to a degree, I believe it is a bit romanticized. "I think he was always a complete player it's just that the circumstances have changed," says Carolina coach Paul Maurice. "Steve Yzerman's emergence as a total player has been seen by the media as a change in his game but I think it's more a case of moving forward. The Detroit Red Wings got to the point where they don't have to rely on him for his offense every night. He's always been a complete player but the team was not as good over the years and had to rely on him every night to provide offense. The Detroit Red Wings have the supporting cast and while Steve Yzerman is a great offensive player, he is also a great defensive player." "I wouldn't say he's a different player," Mike Keenan said. "I see a player who's always been an excellent player and a threat. I see a player playing on a better team than he had in the past." Larionov commented on Yzerman's defensive play in the 1985 World Championships: Yzerman was always capable of playing defensive hockey, said Igor Larionov, a 37-year-old center from Russia. Larionov recalled playing for the Soviet Union in the world championships of 1985, when Yzerman took a role on Team Canada's checking line. In the medal round, against the famous KLM line, Yzerman held Larionov off the score sheet as Canada won, 3-1. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
numberthirtynine 0 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 Those history of hockey voters on that list most certainly are more than 99% of this board, and its nothing to be ashamed of either... Just try reading some of the debates in the voting threads... I learned a lot just from reading a bunch of pages there in the round 2 (11-20) voting.... for example, I used to think that Brodeur was going to go down as consensus #3 goalie of all time and Lidstrom as the consensus #2 defenseman...Over the years of reading debates such as these I came to realize that this is not the case.... For the most part logical, thorough, and objective in their arguments.... These are guys who look up old newspaper articles and quotes, watch ancient footage, pay to subscribe to websites that provide all kinds of hockey data, read tons of hockey books new and old, create spreadsheets and formulas to adjust for certain factors, etc... Although I'm not going to blindly believe everything they say before looking at the work behind it, I'm certainly not going to do much significant questioning of a list compiled by votes from 36 knowledgeable hockey people, especially when their research and debates are in the open for all to see.... It's not a bad site. It's just big. Thus it will attract some knowledgeable folks but for the most part, the vermin arrive in droves. Compared to here though it's a sanctuary of enlightenment. Here we're just all so damned afraid someone will tag us a homer that our "opinions" just start to sound incredibly stupid. That and if you don't go along with the crowd, you're attacked in groups who fear differing opinions. But I guess most things in life are like that when people are gathered in large amounts long enough. But the thing is here, on this board, it's done in such a condescending manner. It's one thing to not really know much, it's another to smell your own farts while you do it. HFBoards just had either too much Red Wing hate(which was never truly justified, but just petty agendas) or just far too many casual fan opinions which if you tried to point out their inaccuracies would take you a lifetime. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 Those history of hockey voters on that list most certainly are more than 99% of this board, and its nothing to be ashamed of either... Just try reading some of the debates in the voting threads... I learned a lot just from reading a bunch of pages there in the round 2 (11-20) voting.... for example, I used to think that Brodeur was going to go down as consensus #3 goalie of all time and Lidstrom as the consensus #2 defenseman...Over the years of reading debates such as these I came to realize that this is not the case.... For the most part logical, thorough, and objective in their arguments.... These are guys who look up old newspaper articles and quotes, watch ancient footage, pay to subscribe to websites that provide all kinds of hockey data, read tons of hockey books new and old, create spreadsheets and formulas to adjust for certain factors, etc... Although I'm not going to blindly believe everything they say before looking at the work behind it, I'm certainly not going to do much significant questioning of a list compiled by votes from 36 knowledgeable hockey people, especially when their research and debates are in the open for all to see.... Agreed! It's rare to have transparency into what goes into the voting for these lists. Original lists and then actual voting records each round are also published, to further discourage agendas. I think I know a fair amount about hockey history, but did not apply to vote because I am comparably woefully uneducated in many areas of hockey history and would probably overvalue Red Wings players. Some of these guys are pro scouts, journalists, analysts and have been watching hockey since the 50s. Compared to every other list I have seen - this is the best on many levels. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
egroen 384 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 It's not a bad site. It's just big. Thus it will attract some knowledgeable folks but for the most part, the vermin arrive in droves. Compared to here though it's a sanctuary of enlightenment. Here we're just all so damned afraid someone will tag us a homer that our "opinions" just start to sound incredibly stupid. That and if you don't go along with the crowd, you're attacked in groups who fear differing opinions. But I guess most things in life are like that when people are gathered in large amounts long enough. But the thing is here, on this board, it's done in such a condescending manner. It's one thing to not really know much, it's another to smell your own farts while you do it. HFBoards just had either too much Red Wing hate(which was never truly justified, but just petty agendas) or just far too many casual fan opinions which if you tried to point out their inaccuracies would take you a lifetime. He's just talking about the 'History of Hockey' forum --- you're right the general forums can be a nightmare. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
numberthirtynine 0 Report post Posted August 12, 2009 Oh yeah, I was just talking about HFBoards in general, all areas included. I think the main problem is many major sports are so complex, so deep and so many intangibles make up some a huge part of the game that not many people can properly judge it. Not to mention we've got numerous s***-for-brains media sources constantly whispering in our ear who to root for, who to respect, who to hate and most of the time it's just dead wrong anyway. We'd be confused enough even without that. I think it's why we rely on stats so much. We're like politicians who rely so heavily upon demographics. It's our way of judging when it's too hard without them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
