Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Top 100: 2000s: Henrik and Daniel Not on LIst?


gameburn2

Recommended Posts

Unless I am mistaken, the top 100 players of all time has a 2000 forward section.  Toewes is on the list...  e.g., why not Daniel and Henrik?  Will they be included later?  These are two of the most innovative, important players to come along.  Easily in the Jagr, Sundin class.  Maybe higher.   Are they being under-rated?  Again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are too many super old timers in the mix honestly, none of us ever saw them play, and they were not really the best 100 ever. I mean, come on now.

 

Its kind of like the top 100 guitarists of all time lists, with 25 guys from the 1920's.  I can't pin down whatever it is about these lists, but its am unfortunate combination of virtue signaling and corner of the eye peer pressure focus grouping.

 

These kinds of lists are straight up click bait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, gameburn2 said:

Unless I am mistaken, the top 100 players of all time has a 2000 forward section.  Toewes is on the list...  e.g., why not Daniel and Henrik?  Will they be included later?  These are two of the most innovative, important players to come along.  Easily in the Jagr, Sundin class.  Maybe higher.   Are they being under-rated?  Again?

I love the Sedins. But that's homerism at its finest 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toews is 28 years old, has 3 cups 2 olympic gold medals 592 points and more. Kane is 28 years old has 712 points 3 cups etc etc etc

 

Hank and Danny WILL round out the top 100 NHL players list for their uniqueness, but there's a reason Toews/Kane are already listed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bur14Kes17 said:

I felt like a lot of players from the 70's and 80's got a little bit too much love due to how high scoring hockey was back then. Hugely inflated numbers makes it hard to compare to the modern game. 

Agreed.  How did Brendan Shanahan end up on there?  He was a pretty good player, but top 100?

 

I'm fine the Sedin's didn't make the top 100.  Should be in the discussion but can understand they didn't make it.  Joe Thornton not making it is a pretty good parallel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, xereau said:

There are too many super old timers in the mix honestly, none of us ever saw them play, and they were not really the best 100 ever. I mean, come on now.

 

Its kind of like the top 100 guitarists of all time lists, with 25 guys from the 1920's.  I can't pin down whatever it is about these lists, but its am unfortunate combination of virtue signaling and corner of the eye peer pressure focus grouping.

 

These kinds of lists are straight up click bait.

If you learned more about these guys you might change you mind.  My grandfather's generation was full of guys who would eat today's men for lunch mining 14 hours a day six days a week.  Read Gretzky's book it would give you a little insight into how good the original stars were. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Justdean10 said:

Kane and Toews have two cups. I think it's why they are considered on the top 100 list over the Sedins. Least that's my opinion.
It's like Joe Thorton not being on the list either, no cup. 

Malkin was left off so you can't use cups as an arguement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Justdean10 said:

Kane and Toews have two cups. I think it's why they are considered on the top 100 list over the Sedins. Least that's my opinion.
It's like Joe Thorton not being on the list either, no cup. 

I agree with this. The 2000's list is heavily influenced by the number of Stanley cups hence, Kane, Toewes, and Keith making the list. They are great players but they are still in the middle of their careers and have not really shattered any existing standards like Ovechkin and Crosby, who in my opinion, are the only players that deserve to be their among the active players. 

 

Looking back, the Sedins can be credited as having almost (re-)invented the cycle game and the ways to carry out half court offence, in a controlled fashion. They can probably write a textbook on it.

 

The ways in which they create shots, like slap pass for re-direction to moving to empty spaces without the puck and creating passing lanes... it's at a legendary level in the sense that they rely mostly on their IQ to generate chances unlike some of the other great players that rely heavily on physical attributes/skills. In my opinion, Sedins are the true descendants of Gretzky's style of hockey -- not saying he is as good as Gretz, but in the way they rely on their IQ to best the opposition and create new methods for creating offence.

 

Only regret is the change of standards in officiating in the playoffs that prevented the Sedins from having success with their brand of hockey in the playoffs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xereau said:

There are too many super old timers in the mix honestly, none of us ever saw them play, and they were not really the best 100 ever. I mean, come on now.

 

Its kind of like the top 100 guitarists of all time lists, with 25 guys from the 1920's.  I can't pin down whatever it is about these lists, but its am unfortunate combination of virtue signaling and corner of the eye peer pressure focus grouping.

 

These kinds of lists are straight up click bait.

I sort of agree but some of those guys are pioneers so I also get why they are on the list. For example, Bob Gainey would just be a pretty good player now, but his style of play changed the game in the way that the game is played now and hence, he is on the list. If such list was made while Gainey was in the middle of his prime (70's), he may not be on it.

 

I think the Sedins will be on it after they retire and as the cycle game and their ways of controlling offence becomes more prevalent in hockey, which is sure to happen with all this analytics stuff going on and with the importance of continually holding on to the puck in the offensive zone to generate multiple shots. 

 

To be honest, until the Sedins, the cycle game was not very prevalent in the NHL, to my knowledge...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2000's list dates from 2000-2009... Sedin's best years were outside that time frame.

 

Also for those complaining about the oldtimers...  remember, a player has to be judged against his time period.

 

In the 1920's, the training and conditioning techniques were basically non-existent... players back then trained themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, *Buzzsaw* said:

2000's list dates from 2000-2009... Sedin's best years were outside that time frame.

 

Also for those complaining about the oldtimers...  remember, a player has to be judged against his time period.

 

In the 1920's, the training and conditioning techniques were basically non-existent... players back then trained themselves.

 

same with Kane,Toews and Keiths best years outside of 2009.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...