7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I figured I needed a new thread to be told why Lemieux > Gretzky so here we go!1. Bobby Orr2. Wayne Gretzky3. Gordie Howe4. Mario Lemieux5. Bobby Hull6. Maurice Richard7. Doug Harvey8. Eddie Shore9. Jean Beliveau10. Howie Morenz11. Dennis Potvin12. Mark Messier13. Ray Bourque14. Terry Sawchuk15. Jacques Plante16. Patrick Roy17. Guy Lafleur18. Phil Esposito19. Mike Bossy20. Red Kelly21. Glenn Hall22. Stan Mikita23. Ted Lindsay24. Larry Robinson25. Bryan Trottier26. Bobby Clarke27. Martin Brodeur28. Dominik Hasek29. Newsy Lalonde30. Niklas Lidstrom31. Joe Sakic32. Steve Yzerman33. Chris Chelios34. Scott Stevens35. Valery Kharlamov36. Brad Park37. Ken Dryden38. Viacheslav Fetisov39. Tim Horton40. Bernie Geoffrion41. Jaromir Jagr42. Jari Kurri43. Pierre Pilote44. Paul Coffey45. Bill Durnan46. Charlie Conacher47. Milt Schmidt48. Bernie Parent49. Frank Mahovlich50. Billy Smith51. Dit Clapper52. Max Bentley53. Vladislav Tretiak54. Dickie Moore55. Peter Forsberg56. Turk Broda57. Henri Richard58. Earl Seibert59. King Clancy60. Cyclone Taylor61. Brett Hull62. Andy Bathgate63. Scott Niedermayer64. Syl Apps Sr.65. Ted Kennedy66. Joe Malone67. Sprague Cleghorn68. Serge Savard69. Brendan Shanahan70. Johnny Bower71. Bill Gadsby72. Al MacInnis73. Marcel Dionne74. Bill Cook75. Elmer Lach76. Johnny Bucyk77. Bob Gainey78. Guy Lapointe79. Chris Pronger80. Sergei Fedorov81. Aurel Joliat82. Sergei Makarov83. Gilbert Perreault84. Borje Salming85. Doug Bentley86. Cam Neely87. Brian Leetch88. Jacques Laperriere89. Ron Francis90. Sid Abel91. Toe Blake92. Peter Stastny93. Bill Cowley94. Bill Quackenbush95. Georges Vezina96. Teemu Selanne97. Boris Mikhailov98. Frank Boucher99. Cy Denneny100. Alex Delvecchio Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I think Jagr should be way higher , thats the first thing i see after a quick look.I think he proved he was really dominant and one of the greatest RW of all-time.He's gonna retire as one of the best scorer/pts and the best europeen with lidstrom.But dude , its all good you made that list but if god could anwser me the truth , i'll bet 10 000$ that you havent seen all this guys played 10 games.I mean HOWIE MORENZ. How old are you dude 110? Link to post Share on other sites
fryer98 30 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 41. Jaromir JagrI had a pretty long argument with someone at the bar over the wekend about where Jagr currently stand on the all time raking list and where he will stand after his retirement.This guy was trying to tell me a current top 15 and for sure top 10 at retirement.Comments? Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 top 20 for sure.Ok he had a bad attitude but the guy proved he was one of the best.15 years consecutive with 30 goals. Link to post Share on other sites
7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 But dude , its all good you made that list but if god could anwser me the truth , i'll bet 10 000$ that you havent seen all this guys played 10 games.I've never seen the pre-NHL guys or some of the guys who overlapped the O6 era, for sure. There's no video of Morenz, Shore, Lalonde, etc but to leave them out because video doesn't exist of them would be ridiculous. You simply have to look at the fact that Eddie Shore won a million Hart trophies as a defenseman and read how he was the most feared human in the sport to see how great he was. Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I've never seen the pre-NHL guys or some of the guys who overlapped the O6 era, for sure. There's no video of Morenz, Shore, Lalonde, etc but to leave them out because video doesn't exist of them would be ridiculous. You simply have to look at the fact that Eddie Shore won a million Hart trophies as a defenseman and read how he was the most feared human in the sport to see how great he was.wow , so you listen to old people who always put the old player like they were all gods and all and you calculate this and compare them to the player of the 1990 era?This is ridiculous man.You have no credibility with your top 100 if you havent seen them.Why not just say : Here's a top 100 of the player i have seen played which include * insert years - 2008 * Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Also , imo , jagr was better than Sakic & Yzerman.But i understand someone who put them before him.I find it way mroe scandalous to put Gordie Howe Before Mario Lemieux.Mario Lemieux should invariably be in the top 3.i can take if you put orr & betzky before but howe its hard to take.its like a pimp slap in the face of mario. Link to post Share on other sites
7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 I had a pretty long argument with someone at the bar over the wekend about where Jagr currently stand on the all time raking list and where he will stand after his retirement.This guy was trying to tell me a current top 15 and for sure top 10 at retirement.Comments?I think that's way too high, everything's subjective but strictly measuring him against other RW's currently (which is a much deeper talent pool than LW) for example I don't think you can put him ahead of guys like Bossy and Lafleur (who I think are somewhat similar contemporaries in terms of being pure scorers) who elevated their teams more. Jagr's numbers are fantastic but he won 1 Hart trophy and like Montreal Serge says, his situation has to be to his satisfaction which I think turns a lot of people off. He is one of the most talented players I'll ever see in my lifetime but I don't think he squeezed enough out of it. I also think he can be taken out of the game mentally. Link to post Share on other sites
7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 You have no credibility with your top 100 if you havent seen them.I never said I desired any. Link to post Share on other sites
7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 wow , so you listen to old people who always put the old player like they were all gods and all and you calculate this and compare them to the player of the 1990 era?This is ridiculous man.You have no credibility with your top 100 if you havent seen them.Why not just say : Here's a top 100 of the player i have seen played which include * insert years - 2008 *Just to clarify, the oldest footage I have is from the 1953 playoffs so anyone whose career ended before 1953, I have not seen play which of course means they did not exist. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm gonna say this once and only once.Montreal_Est comes off like a complete retard, and is FAR more annoying than serge. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm gonna say this once and only once.Montreal_Est comes off like a complete retard, and is equally as annoying than serge.FYP Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm gonna say this once and only once.Montreal_Est comes off like a complete retard, and is FAR more annoying than serge.thanks Zach... thats why you are my favourite..Marshak, not so much... Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 sorry Zach but im not a retard and i know my hockey.Hockey is so important for me you just dont understand how i love this game and im getting emotionnally involve speaking in a language i know little about.I just find that rating player you never saw played is totally retarded , maybe thats retard but ok.im pretty sure i know a lot more about hockey than you and you insulting me saying im a COMPLETE retard is ridiculous.You gotta take into account that i play the little leafs/habs games a little over the top but it is for my own entertainment.So you think rating HOWIE MORENZ before , lets say ( watching his list ) MARK MESSIER is not retarded ?!Fact is , rating Mark messier before Howie Morenz is equally retarded as rating Morenz before Messier because nobody here's have a real experience watching Morenz play.You know when our parent salways said their generations were better and us we'll tell this to our childrens , well thats the same thing.The only people you know who saw Morenz are very old people , just to give you an idea Morenz was the father of Maurice Richard's wife ( dont know the word for that ).So people who have seen Morenz were old like richard or older or a little bit younger.Its getting old and since video didnt exist , yes we need to remember him as a great player and all , but hockey was soooo differant , i dont talk about differant in the way 50s or 60s or 70 s were differant , im talking about VERY VERY VERY OLD HOCKEY righjt there , so we just have to remember him but we cant compare him.I tend to say he was one of the best of his era , but thats it , its impossible to rate among other player while its possible to do it even if its difficult with players from 80s ect...60s...anyway the retard is gonna go to sleep. Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 The list is very interesting...However its very subjective...Top 100 statistically?Top 100 valuable players to their team?Top 100 pure talents?All equally great questions..I grew up watching Gretzky play and Orr was before my time....I cant imagine anyone being better at the game than Gretzky was , however a lot of my elders swear by Orr..I respect them...From my generation no one is better than Gretzky.. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 .You have no credibility with your top 100 if you havent seen them.So, everytime the Hockey News posts a 'greatest players of all time list', that list should be based on the visual recollection of the youngest person in the office..... good plan... Link to post Share on other sites
serge 904 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 So, everytime the Hockey News posts a 'greatest players of all time list', that list should be based on the visual recollection of the youngest person in the office..... good plan...lol..serious question to Chris..When they are making that list, what is the criteria??-stats-winning-talentor some formula that takes everything into considerationThanks Link to post Share on other sites
7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 The list is very interesting...However its very subjective...Top 100 statistically?Top 100 valuable players to their team?Top 100 pure talents?All equally great questions..I grew up watching Gretzky play and Orr was before my time....I cant imagine anyone being better at the game than Gretzky was , however a lot of my elders swear by Orr..I respect them...From my generation no one is better than Gretzky..I don't think it's any of the above. Greatest is very subjective and it's very tough to do, albeit a fun exercise and each person will have their own equation that makes up "greatest" to them I imagine. Whether you are a math guy who uses complicated formulas for adjusted stats to measure Joe Malone against Joe Sakic or you are a guy who looks at 2 similar players and values that one of them won a Conn Smythe over the other. I think it's always fun to do lists like these if for nothing else than they create not only debate, but usually someone will say something like I remember the playoff year so and so had, etc and thus it also creates a little bit of time where you can remember some good times you had watching this great game of ours. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 lol..serious question to Chris..When they are making that list, what is the criteria??-stats-winning-talentor some formula that takes everything into considerationThanksIt's a little from column A, a little from column B..... but usually it breaks down to a long series of arguments followed by a vote.. Link to post Share on other sites
gruven 530 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 lol..serious question to Chris..When they are making that list, what is the criteria??-stats-winning-talentor some formula that takes everything into considerationThanksIt's a little from column A, a little from column B..... but usually it breaks down to a long series of arguments followed by a vote.. Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 So when someone make his list , he should also give HIS DEFINITION of greatest. Link to post Share on other sites
7s7c 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Author Share Posted January 23, 2008 So when someone make his list , he should also give HIS DEFINITION of greatest.I can't speak for THN but mine is a combination of things so vast you would need Professor John Frink to decipher it. Actually it's basically what Gruven said, but I will say that I obviously weigh something like playoff performance or being a complete player higher than if someone can stick handle through 20 players. This is why you will not see someone like Pavel Bure who spent the entire time waiting for an outlet pass when his team was shorthanded, on my list. Some one-dimensional players like Mike Bossy were so dominant at that dimension that it trumps the fact that they weren't as complete a player as others, but everything's subjective man. Link to post Share on other sites
Montreal_Est 0 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 Mike is a cool guy though , like i said in the other thread , we won his *tournament* when i was a kid and he chilled with us after the victory in the lockerroom it was magical.We won a trophy , and we were drinking 7up in it like it was some champaign lolBossy was a sick scorer , 8 consecutive 50 goals season i think ?. Link to post Share on other sites
Untilted 158 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 To exclude all the old timers just because you have not see them play is a diservice to the past. All you can do is use your best judgement based on the information available (stats, awards, other peoples accounts etc.) To put together lists like these are fun and to crticize somenone for doing so does not make any sense.A couple of thoughts:I think Bossy and especially Trottier were more important to the Islanders run than Potvin. I would certainly move Potvin down and Trottier and Bossy up a few notches. Espo is the product of your #1 so I think he is overrated. I watched him enough as a Ranger to come to that conclusion. Broduer and Roy are equal in my mind. You have Roy about right so Marty should be bumped up, I think. Never a big fan of Leetch, especially his defensive play, so I do not think he belongs on this list. Sacrilege coming from a Ranger fan 1 day prior to the retiring of his number. Messier definetly needs to be put ahead of Potvin at the very least. Link to post Share on other sites
digitalmonkey 929 Posted January 23, 2008 Share Posted January 23, 2008 I'm gonna say this once and only once.Montreal_Est comes off like a complete retard, and is FAR more annoying than serge.Agreed. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now