The Athletic Hockey Show - The Athletic NHL 99 roundtable: outliers, controversies and sure bets

Episode Date: February 7, 2023

Craig Custance and Sean Gentille welcome The Athletic writers Eric Duhatschek, Shayna Goldman and Dom Luszczyszyn who along with Sean were on the panel for The Athletic's NHL 99 project. The roundtable discusses taking on this massive project, they debate some of the more notable omissions and the controversial rankings, including where Mario Lemieux, Bobby Orr, Steve Yzerman, Connor McDavid, Kris Letang, Auston Matthews, Mike Bossy and Mark Messier ended up in the final rankings and who was left off the list, and why?Subscribe to The Athletic Hockey Show on YouTube: http://youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowGet a 1-year subscription to The Athletic for $2 a month when you visit http://theathletic.com/hockeyshowLinkedIn Jobs helps you find the qualified candidates you want to talk to, faster. Post your job for free at http://LinkedIn.com/nhlshowGet a FREE 1-year supply of immune-supporting Vitamin D AND 5 FREE travel packs with your first purchase at http://athleticgreens.com/NHLTry Peloton risk-free with a 30-Day Home Trial, New Members only. Not available in remote locations. See additional terms at http://onepeloton.ca/home-trial Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show. Hey, everybody. Welcome to an extremely special edition of The Athletic Hockey Show. This is one you're going to want to set aside, listen to, like, daily for the next year, I would say, at the very least. This one's going to be timeless. It's timeless because the NHL 99 project, which is the top players of all time, and we'll get into the details, as voted on by a prestigious panel of athletic hockey writers is coming to a conclusion. As we record right now,

Mario Lemieux came in at number two. Wayne Gretzky, of course, number one, it's the NHL 99 project. So no, no spoiler there. You don't,

you don't know that. All right. Yeah, number one will be released tomorrow of the NHL 99 project. Gretzky was actually, Groskey was actually 102. Spoiler, everybody.

He missed out. If you add your way, Sean. So, as you would expect, with something like this, people didn't agree with everything that was presented to them. From story choice to where people were slotted, this became a daily debate on the athletic website. I mean, that's the whole point, right? And so we wanted to get a roundtable of panelists on here to defend their outrageous votes.

I mean, just maybe even irresponsible in some cases. And it's a great, like, we handpicked them because these are our favorites. I'll do respect to the rest of the panelists. We got Shana and Dom and Sean and Eric, Eric DeHatchek, who really, he ran point on this project. And so we're going to start with Eric because he's done this before. Eric, you know, he's influential in the Hall of Fame voting. He's done that he did this in 1997 with the hockey news when they had a top, it ended up being, I think, top 100 players of all time. He voted on the NHLs.

If you remember, I think it was the All-Star game in L.A. where they did around their 100 year anniversary. Eric was part of that panel. And of course, in classic NHL fashion, we didn't want to offend any of the players. So they came out, I think, by height. I don't remember exactly how they did it. And now this.

So Eric, let's start with this. Did it get any easier on this one? We're talking about players of different eras. And you can kind of give some of the parameters that we set up to make this one a little bit different. But how did this NHL 99 differentiate itself for you? Well, to me, it was the most challenging, the ones that I voted on, Craig, because there were two sides of the divide that we had to debate. So, for example, in 1997, the Hockey News publication, there were a lot of players that were in mid-career.

Controversially, Eric Lindress is one of the big ones there because he was at the height of his NHL powers when this vote came out. And then soon after, he was voted 50-something on the list, you know, his career went into doing. decline because of the concussions. But we didn't have to worry about the starting point. Everybody started at the same point. The only controversy really was, you know, how far along does a player have to be in this career to qualify as one of the greatest players of all time?

But what we decided, what we decided, or the Edwards decided at the athletic, was that they wanted to do a different spin on it. And so it was the post-expansion NHL. So that eliminated all of the, you know, players and years before. 1967, and it also eliminated all of the WHA years. So that made it really complicated for players like Dave Keon, for Frank Mahavich, even Gordy Howe.

I grew up in Toronto as a big league fan. My favorite player was Dave Keon, and Frank Mahavich had an important influence in my life. But, you know, Dave Keon played 24 years. It was very, very easy for me to put him on the greatest, the hockey news list, the NHL list. But here, only 11 of the 24 years the Dave Keon play qualified under the parameters that we set. And three of those years were right at the end of his career when he was playing for the Hartford Whalers after having spent time into WHA. So if you isolated those 11 years, they were good. They were very good. They were, but not top 100 good.

And so players like Dave Keon, players like Frank Mahalbich, there were an awful lot of players who spilled over into experience. but probably had their best years just prior to expansion. And that, in addition to the complication of trying to figure out where an all-time great, like Conner, David, fit in at this early stage of his career, where someone like Leon Dyson, who's, you know, right there as the one B star of the Edmonton, where does he fit in? So I would have to tell you I spent more time on this list than the others. and I kept changing and trying different parameters

and even at the end of it, you're never completely satisfied with the list. But at some point, you know, you lock it in and you send it in and you hope for the best. All right, here's how we're going to do this. In this first segment, we're going to take a lap around the room, talk some generalities,

the voting was last year, so things have changed. Connor McDavid's overall ranking was a bit of a talker. Leon Dries Idol, not being on the list. I think was something people objected to. We're going to get into that. Second segment, we're going to talk about outliers on each of the panelists list.

Each one of them had at least one person. They ranked completely different than the rest. And there's some interesting names and discussions we had. And then third segment, we take your questions. We offered up our email address. We don't like to share it with too many people. But heading into this, we offered it up. And a few of you reached out and had some questions and comments,

even compliments for Sean, even one of them, surprisingly. So let's start with Connor McDavid. Connor McDavid, the voting, when was this? You all voted, let's say, what month? It was June. It was February of last year. February of last year. It's when the process started, yeah.

Okay. So let me start with this. Instead of specifically talking about Connor, who finished at number 16. Shana, let's, I'm going to start with you here and say, what would you have changed if you were voting today, if anything? probably would have had Connor McDavid higher because he has shown that his otherworldly play has somehow another level to it because he just wants to score goals now and can take over a game more so than before. Kilmokar probably would have been higher as well and like that was tough because we only had so many games to go with and we're docking players whose careers are done by like longevity. We don't have that with him but you know we knew he would rise just the extent I think was more than we expected. and yeah, players like Leon Dreisettle.

Like he had a standout moment in the playoffs playing on one leg. And we can't let one playoff series influence it, but it was his moment to like break out as more than just, he's amazing when he's with Connor McDavid. And that's when he's supposedly hard caliber. And he's horrible defensively. It's like, wait, he's a superstar in his own right. So those are like the changes, I think that we've noticed since we voted.

Yeah, those are, I mean, those are all good ones. Tom, what about you? When you look back, what would you have done differently or change, with time. Well, with the McCar thing, I would agree. It's just we had a games played cutoff and McCar didn't fit on it. And if we did this in the summer, I would have made a much bigger stink about it. I remember at the draft, I was talking with Sean saying, should McCar be on here? Should we, well, we look silly without him? And he's only played, I think it was less than 200 games, but what he's already done has been incredible. And we talk a lot about how we valued peak years

during this process and Macar's peak is already with some of the all-time greats. I just checked. I had Leon Drysettled the highest. I would have put him higher after that playoff run because he should have been on this list, I think. If you have Matthews, if you have McKinnon, I think Drysidal is right there. And I did put a lot of a lot of bit more reverence to the newer players and what they're doing. Because I think this might be one of the best stairs as the Angel has ever seen in terms of skill.

and I think there should have been a better representation of that with how their peak is already looking and tricycle is one of those guys. Sean, how about you? You have a year to kind of stew over your list and what's happened since. Any changes? Generally, no. I don't think those are the terms that we can. Wow, okay. I don't think those are the terms that we can think about this in, honestly.

Like, there's got to be a cutoff at some point. Like, we can't predict what's going to happen. we couldn't predict that Kilmacar was going to go out and do what he did in the in the playoffs we couldn't predict

that Drysido was going to have the maybe the individual in terms of an individual takeaway you know from last season's playoff

it was it was him it was him on one leg right but we don't we don't know that that's going to happen we can't predict the future that said

I feel like personally I feel like I screwed up on Drysidal just in general right like he should have been there he should have been there you should have been on my list regardless of what happened in the playoffs.

But as far as letting games played over the last year push us in one direction of the other, I don't think we can really exist in that sphere because you have to end it at some point. And the way to guard against that for me when I was thinking about this, it's of course you know that unless something crazy happens, by the time it's all said and done, Connor McDavid's going to be four. He's going to be top four and he might not be fourth, right? So you need to account for that.

You need to accept the fact that in 15 years, if people care enough to look at this list, stuff's going to look bad. That's the way it goes. That's an occupational hazard of doing this kind of stuff. But you have to keep some kind of internal logic, I think, with the way you approach it to set it up in a way that you can defend.

These lists are only as good as what we can defend, right? So that was the approach that I took. I'm not worried about Connor having a great playoff last year and blah, blah, because that's just, that's the way it goes. And the way I guarded against that was I really did try, because we had numbers courtesy of Dom and Shannon, we had peak scores, we had like one year, three year, five year peaks.

I try to incorporate that a lot. because I thought that at least if I put real shrift in that, and you could say Connor McDavid's five-year peak is here in relation to everybody else, I thought that was the fail-safe generally against giving short shrift to the current players. But with all that being said, dry sidle is the one where I feel like I just dropped the ball out of the gate. Like he should have been on there for me. Eric, what did you, Sean talked about kind of peak years. And when you're doing these lists, what do you value most when you,

you start ranking players over time and eras. Is there an element that you value most? No, because I think there's so many factors that go into it. You know, area justice stats are a good example. So I started covering hockey full-time in 80, 81. And I was based in Calgary, and the team that played eight times games a year against the Hauri was the Amnichinoids.

And I think 1985 was the highest scoring year in that in the child. history, you know, certainly for most of the arc of my career. So you do have to adjust for the fact that they were scoring 400 plus goals at a time when, you know, 10, 15 years later, that puck era came in and it just changed the parameters for everyone. You know, I think about the great superstars to come through Calgary. And where does Jerome McGinnle apply, you know, to the, you know, the Gen. The Newen Dikes and the Hocken Blubes and the Julians and the Doug that came a generation before him because he played in an era when it was just so much harder to score goals. So he's winning scoring titles with 92 points when others were scoring 130.

So that was a factor too. But I have to say that everybody comes into these projects with a bias. And I'm not sure what the opposite of the recency bias is. But that was my bias. What is the opposite of a recency bias? Is it a word for that? what I was trying to figure out. And I could not come up with the...

Distance bias. Distance bias. Distancy. Distancy is a word. Maybe like nostalgia bias. Like I think that might be... Longevity bias. But again, I was, you know, like I was conscious of the fact that, you know, that I'm old enough to be everybody's dad or even older than that. And, but I did, I watched, I, you know, I started watching the 1960s,

1964 and I was a hardcore fan right up through my teen years and I've been a professional paid sports writer since 1978 so I did watch a lot of these guys play for a long time and I felt that I probably gave a little bit

maybe I gave too much weight to the performances of the Michelle Goulets and the Yves and the Roby bashons and the Doug Wilson's vice I saw their impact. I saw their impact in the dressing room. Sometimes those things are hard to measure. Stats matter. Of course, they matter. Championships, matter.

Playoff performances matter. All those things matter. But sometimes you just form an impression of a player from dealing with them and watching them against their peers at that time. And I was trying to bring that perspective because I knew we would get a great perspective from everybody to vote. I mean, you're not on this panel because you don't know hockey. You know a lot about hockey. Everybody who was on this panel deserves to be on the panel.

But I felt that that was the one thing that I could maybe bring that others who haven't been around as long might not be able to. So, you know, I think I was surprised. I figure people go into this readers knowing there's going to be debate or whatever. And people were really like, I mean, they would get worked up in the comments about where people were placed and who was off the list. And I love that like, you know, Daniel Nugent Bowman's bringing the list into the Oilers dressing room and asking about dry a lot. That would make this fun. And so I did want to see if there was a reaction. I didn't realize he did that.

Oh, yeah. There was a good. I mean, there was a lot of offshoots to this package provided plenty of content. But was there a, I'll go with you, Dunn, was there a reaction from the readers that surprised you in terms of anything from the story angle to the players ranking that you were like, oh, wow, I didn't, I didn't think people would react that way. I try to stay away from the comments lately. Mine are particularly bad. I let Sean text me the bad ones. You're that guy, Sean. Hey, did you see this? Did you see this one, buddy?

I think I've pivoted in the last few ones, yeah. Away from cameras. Yeah. Yeah, it's been tough. But I think the Matthews one was interesting. I guess I expected it to be the way it was because he's a leaf. And that's just the way it is. And with the context of Leon Drysidl not being there, I totally understand. But when you read the intro and see what the games played cutoff is, you know why that

game's played cutoff is. It's to make sure Matthews is on there. because he, when I'll send done, might be the best American-born player of all time. I think so. He's on that trajectory, right? So he's got to be on there. And I think looking back, maybe that game's played cutoff should have been lower to include McCar.

But, I mean, it is what it is. And Matthews ended up being the got the least experience. And he had to show him somewhere. But, I mean, I don't disagree with where he is. I had him lower than he was on the list. but what he's done to date is up there. His peak is up there with some of the best players of all time already. It's just a matter of getting that longevity.

We should have put the games cut off at zero so we could get badard on there. Really project. Austin Matthews came in at number 64 on the list, Connor McDavid number 16. Shana, let's say hypothetically we were to bound all of these fine stories that you all wrote and put it into a book and it was coming out in a couple of years. So we have to re-rank them to show for time, time passed. Austin Matthews is at 64 now. Connor McDavid is at number 16.

Two years from now, where do you see that ending up? Okay, so I see Connor McDavid absolutely is top 10 because I think you could honestly make the argument for him being top 10 now. I'm going to say he is probably in two years. God, he probably is scoring a ton and as miserable as ever. in Edmonton. I don't think he asks out of there yet, so he still doesn't have a championship to his name. And that's going to impact his ranking right there. Already got the only living at all. Yeah. Okay. Good. Everyone's favorite team, the Edmonton Oilers. Joyce Idol's begging to get out of there. So now McDavid's really alone. And that's going to impact him.

But I'm going to say he's going to be, I'm going to say he's number seven there because everyone's going to complain that he doesn't have a championship to his name. He doesn't have a cons might that he probably should. And there's nothing he can do to will his team unless he starts playing goal. When he does that, top five. But two years for now, yeah, I'm going to say, he's seven. Stu Skinner, Stu Skinner Slander there, by the way. I know,

wow. We love Stewart Skinner. It's just Jack Campbell's cap hit just sitting there. He's nice, though. He's a nice locker room present, so he can't be too many to him. We can be mean to him. I won't take any Jack Campbell slander on this podcast. You know the American edition will not allow it.

Continues. Awesome Matthews goes from 64 to, I didn't mind Austin Matthews at 64. I mean, maybe it's the bias, but I agree. like best, he'll end up being the best American player of all time. I believe that. Yeah.

Yeah. So again, for him, championship's going to be a problem, playoff success, going to come into the equation. And like, for me, that's secondary, honestly. Like trophy points, playoff success is secondary. It's a consideration just as longevity is. But it's not the primary thing. I think, you know, one year peak, three year peak, five year peak, whole career, what you're

doing. Like, that's first and foremost. So with that in mind, I think he's going to be like a top. 25 player in two years. The rate he's scoring goals, the variety in his game, the shot creation, how much he can do by himself, how much he can set up his teammates too. And there's the defensive acumen too. If he can start killing penalties even more, I think that's just going to keep pumping him up higher because then he'll legitimately be in the selfie conversation because I think he could be right now, but the penalty killing is going to hold him back. So I'm going to say I could see

in two years, him being in that like 20 to 25 range. And I think a couple years later can, you know, slide even higher. You're also going to have the intangible benefit of, in two years, whenever Austin Matthews brings a Stanley Cup to the Arizona Coyotes. That's going to be huge. That's true. That's going to raise him way, way up in the estimation of our panel here. And the vibes of a college party that he's going to bring, just like we respected it when it's McKinnon partying, Ovecgan partying, those are the intangibles that we don't talk about enough. I want to see him at Arizona State University just having the best time. No, that's tough.

I don't know, no, like. I don't think it's unreasonable that Austin Matthews wins a Stanley Cup in the next two post seasons. I mean, I don't. And with that, with Toronto, I don't think. Okay. Yeah, I don't think, I don't think it's theirs on it. I don't think it's unreasonable that he has a cons. Like, I think, I think this gap closes because all of these intangibles that we talk about, we talk, we're already talking about Kail Makar's playoff performance and all, all these huge stages that, that impact.

where people vote. Connor's going to do whatever Connor does in Eminton. I'm not optimistic about that as much. But I don't think, I think it's, I think the Leafs will make a run at some point in time in the next two years. And that's going to really close that gap. And I don't think 64 is going to look bad at the end of the day on Austin if anybody had an issue with that.

You know, I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong on that one. I had him at 80th, by the way. I was at 75. I think 20 to 25 might be a little bit. high for Matthews even in two years we have Malkin 26 Wow why are you too biased against the leagues?

I know that's what they say about me If you want to So who voted like someone must have had Austin at like 10 or something Who can we throw the bus right now? Well I mean we have to list here I hope it's Mendez Yeah I mean's 152 is Scott Wheeler's the highest

And then Myrtle Of course it's Wheeler Oh 60 Oh, man. Everyone else in that 70, 80 range, really? So I think biases are interesting. And, you know, Eric talked about his bias for maybe players of a different era. Even with that, I'm going to throw Scott Powers under the bus here because he can't defend himself.

But, you know, Scott's close with Daryl Belfrey, who, you know, he wrote a book with great book. Here's a plug. Go get Daryl's book with Scott Powers. but Darrell will have you convinced Austin Matthews is the best player who ever lived within 20 minutes of talking to him.

He talks about his work ethic and how he'll get in the detail about the skills he improves on every second. So I want to talk about bias a little bit. Eric, you kind of, you copped to yours. Sean, if we're giving some truth serum, did you have any biases that went into your assessments here that you can admit?

I mean, there's no way to cut it that I had Chris LaTang in the 60s, and I'm in Pittsburgh, and I'm the same age as Chris LaTang, and that guy's career has lasted from when I was in college until now. He's a close personal friend. Yeah, that's a good one. He's got a great kid, great kid.

He's like four or five now. Love him. Babysitter. But, I mean, like, I, you, everyone wants to think that they, that they don't bring in some kind of preconceived, you know, notion into these things, and it's just, it's just not true.

And it's born out in the, voting. Like I did I since I did not go out and say me Dom and Shane all three of us had Latang on our list and nobody else did and then that was enough to drag him into the top 100. I I've joked about it. I I've just because it's funny right but I I've joked about it but I didn't I didn't go into this thing thinking like I'm going to single handedly drag Chris Latang into the into the top 100. I looked at it and thought okay I think he's I think he's a step behind Duncan Keith and Drew Dowdy, like, in terms of defensemen for this era, right? So I dropped him down a little bit.

And I fully anticipated that there were going to be more people who had him in the 70s or the 80s or whatever. I did not think I was going to have him at 68th and be the outlier. So whenever the results come out and you look at it, I mean, that's just, that's a great example of me being like, okay, clearly like I'm like, I value what he's done more than anybody else because. it's happened in the city that I live. We are of the same age group and I've covered this team on and off for the last however many years, right? Like, that's like clearly it had, it had some sway with me that it didn't with other people. You got to be honest about it. Like, there's no way around it. But the good part about the panel and about the way we did it and about the discussions that we had is that it kind of acted as a fail safe, right? Because Crystal Teng shouldn't be the 68th best

hockey player of the modern era. But if he's 98 or 99 or wherever he ended up, that seems a little bit more reasonable. And it's because of the counterbalance of everybody else who submitted ballots as well. Craig, if I could just jump in for a second. One of the things that I did in terms of the process was that before I put the final ranking together, I broke everything down by position. So I had centers, I had wingers, and then I had defensemen, and I had gold. So the reason I wanted to do that was because I wanted to have fair representation for every position in the game. I used to serve on the Hockey Hall of Fame Selection Committee for 15 years.

And I don't think it's a big secret that Goldies are notoriously underrepresented in the Hockey Hall of Fame. These are the position players. And that's always been a point of contention for me that if we put such an emphasis on goaltenders, why aren't there more goaltenders? So, for example, I had, you know, John McQuig and Rovey Bashan on my life. But in terms of this specific conversation about defensemen, I think Chris Lattang is a great player. But when I ranked the defenseman from one to Haulemanian ethic at 20 or 22 on my list, I had him behind Doug Wilson and Larry Murphy. So Doug Wilson and Larry Murphy, two Hall of Famers on my list, slightly ahead of Chris Lattang. And when we got to 100 names, Lattang wasn't in my top 100.

And I think that's a real important point that, you know, we could have had a hundred. names. I think I had 10 people on my list that worked on the final list. Probably all 10 of those players would have been on my list if we'd been able to rank 120. But then our discussion would be about who's

121. And I think to rank 150, we wouldn't have been having a discussion about who didn't make the cut at 151. So you have to have a cutoff somewhere and you have to approach it in as rational a way that we can. And I will tell you this. I don't have a spreadsheet in front of me. But I was

probably spent more time moving guys up and down that list by position. And then once I had it in my head, how I wanted the defenseman rank, then whoever missed the cut missed the cut. So that, and I thought that was a fair way of handling. Before we go to the next segment, I do want, my bias would have been certainly towards the era where I was at all the finals, you know, the Red Wings, Blackhawks, Penguins, King's era. and I thought Copatar got slighted. Like that was my,

if I was, you know, in the comment section, which I was under a name, we don't, you know, it's not my own name in going after you all. Like that,

that King's team was so dominant and Copatar was so good. And I know, like everyone's got probably has a version of that. And that's, so that was my, I'm like, if we're in this span of time, he was as good as any center in the league and both sides.

I like, I force him through. Like I, I like, I was like, But that was one of the revisions that I made. I was like, I need to get this guy on there. Absolutely.

Yeah. And Craig, six out of the nine of us had Boca Tar on the list, six out of the night. But because he says, seven, sorry. Yeah. I'm blind. Yeah, I could be. Yeah. So only two people got them.

Yeah, let's. Because he's not. Mendezze and Wheeler. He finished 100 second. I think we're allowed to say that. Oh, did he really? He finished two. He finished two out of the top 100.

And most of us had him in our top 100. So you can, your point is well taken, right? He should have been on the list. Most of us thought the same thing. I think the issue is that aside from me and Shana, putting him 76 and 72nd, everyone else had him just at the cusp around 95 to 100. And that hurt. That's similar with Brad Martian, with the two of us, right?

Like you had him 70s and 80s. I had him on mine. I didn't make it. I had him on mine. Oh, wait. I'm sorry. I did not scroll all the way to the right. I wanted to call you out.

Yeah. For being wrong. It's once again, the youth trifecta. You have a 99, though. That's like, that's like you didn't care to him. Yeah,

you know what I was trying to talk shit to want to be a lot of you're going to deserve it. I was just trying. I was playing four D-chess there and wanted like a big like a big, like controversial name at 99 or 100 on the list. That's all. That's what I do it for the content. I do it for the readers.

ship. That's what I was true. But if you put him at 99 on yours, that's your way of like, you're like, I don't want to get shit from Brad Marsham when he reads this. So he's on my list when it gets revealed, but I don't actually want him on there. You need him in the 70s. You have to fight for him. My 90s list is just full of people, full of guys that I put on there. So, so Eric wouldn't be mad at me. Yeah. Well, that's just don't. I don't want to, I don't want to disappoint Eric. I don't care about their readers. Come on. I don't want to look like, I don't I don't want to look like a dummy with Eric. I can't wait till you have a...

The 90s to 100 was the hardest part of the list, honestly. It was brutal. It was like, you could literally go, I could have them off. I could have them on. And you knew, too, like, if I vote this person 90 and no one has him, he's not making it. It doesn't fucking matter. So sorry. Am I allergic to.

Yeah, you can. Yes. You are. Just a put explicit on it now. That's fine. A little like extra work for... I'm sorry. I realize, like, as it comes out of my mouth, like, wait.

Quick, bye, shotgun. But no, if you... you, if you put someone in the 90s, like, it's like Sean with Marshan, you want him so you look good that he's on your list, but you don't actually care if he makes it. Right. Okay. Well, so we'll get in. I like that as I set up for the next segment. We're going to get into your personal outliers.

I think we touch on a little bit, but we have some good debate coming up. So we'll be right back for segment two. We are back with segment two where we are going to talk about each one of our panelists on this podcast. I don't want to say mistakes Let me think for the right word here You can skip mine I've already I've already talked about it Well we get I've got we've got

We've got another one of yours Sean We'll let Chris LaTang That conversation stand We've got another one for you to get into We've got a good Mark Messier debate to come But I'm gonna start And we're gonna lead off with the big one to me With Shana

On this one I knew you were going to do So Here's what happened on this one one. Bobby Orr, who finished number three overall, you know, the greatest defenseman who ever played, I guess arguably we have to say now. No, you're, you are, you are by the way. Greatest defensemen you've ever played, you're clearly ignoring Crystal Tang.

Obviously, Chris. a tang aside. And I come in with a Nicholas Lidstrom bias, but anyways, Shana had him eighth. Now, thankfully, they didn't knock him out of the top ten or anything, like some of these other ones. It didn't seem to move Bobby or too drastically. But Shana, I'm sure, I don't know if you revealed this or shared it anywhere, but,

you know, what went into that thought process? I'm not saying you were wrong, but it was a bold stance. I'm not saying you're right either, though. I see where you're going. You know, I just hate defensemen and I hate older players. So I was just like screw him. One of those things is true. Yeah.

I love defense and I'm like the defenseman defender over here. No, like I knew that I could vote him literally. I knew I could like not even have him on my list and it wouldn't affect him. So let's start with that. Like he would be fine. But I just think that I think we have to talk about longevity. I think we held against Mike Bossy the fact that his career were shortened by injuries, which is fair.

Like when we get to these top 20 players, we have to. It's not a player's fault that their body can't hold up. But like, if you didn't play as long, it should impact your score. His peak years were outstanding. Yeah. But like, we also should look at the league at that time and the quality of competition around him. And like, it's nice to see someone dunk on like the Minnesota North Stars and the Detroit Red Wight Wings who weren't very good.

But like, I don't know. take that into consideration as well. Like you were dominating bad teams. You were part of a very good team. So I just wanted to like knock him down a peg. I didn't not. I mean, eight is still very respectable, especially when you consider how short his career was. I think that we underappreciate Nick Litchstrom, who to me is the best defenseman of all time. Um, I'm not going to, I mean, that's, that's defend. Certainly something you can defend. Did anybody in this group here have Bobby or number two overall? I know some voters did. I did, yeah.

Okay, so I'll give the floor to you, Eric, for a counterpoint here. Since you had Bobby is number two overall on your list, what was it about him that you thought put him in that top? Well, I thought the top three were Wayne Gretzky, Mary, and Bobby Orr. So basically, because I voted on these projects previously, I already had that discussion in my head about, you know, is Gretzky number one? And I concluded that he was. So I had him at one, and then I stared at Oremne M.

Lemieux, Rourne in Llemy, back and forth. And, you know, you have two of the giants of the game, both of whom had their careers shortened by engine. So there were a lot of parallels between the two. And the reason that I tipped it in favor of Orem was because I felt that he revolutionized the game. So, you know, if you take all of the, strip all the other factors out, what did Bobby Hore do that Mary LeMew didn't? and that was he changed the way the game of hockey was played.

So up until Bobby Orr came along, defenseman defended. You know, once in a while, the Doug Carley would go up on the rush, but they were completely outliers. And then Bobby Orr came along, and Harry Sinman gave free reign to play. And that created a style of play that other teams copying and other players coming through the ranks were able to piggyback on. You know, I had a quick discussion with Paul Coffey in my profile, Bobby Orr about that. And Paul was great, by the way. Paul was like, Eric, yeah, I said, I said, Paul, you know, you broke Bobby's single season goal scoring record. I said, you were the one of the few guys that, you know, conversational in when it comes to pure stats, we can talk about it in the context of Bob the Orr. And he said, no, no, don't. That was Bobby Orr, you know. And for me to try and prepare myself to Bob Yor would be like if a young quarterback came to the NFL and tried to draw comparisons to Tom Brady, Tom Brady impossible to do.

But I think that he fundamental, his presence in the game and what he was able to do on the ice tip the scale slightly for me when it came to decide between 4 and Lemieux at

2 or 3. And I have to tell you, if you talk to the people who played against, or even came behind, I thought Al McKinness called a really great anecdote too, because Al was a different type of player, not a great skater. So, you know, he was very careful

to say that he changed the game for the coffees and the Brian Leachers and the ante on McCart's, but not for me because I was, you know, more of a plotter. He said, but he said the first time, I watched his highlights throughout his entire career, and then I walked out onto

the bench at Maple Leaf Gardens the first time I ever played at Maple Leaf Gardens. And I looked at one in the ring, I looked at the other end of the ring. And I thought, that ice is so small, so small. And then when you look at the highlights of how Bobby Orr played. He said he made it look like the St. Lawrence River. He's going up and down the ice. He's dropping a glove and picking it up and still in control of the

puck. He's behind the net. John Davidson had this cut out of the story but told a very similar anecdote about a time in St. Louis where they were a pretty good defensive team and Bobby Orr killing a penalty just had the puck for 90 seconds and no one could take it off them. It was on a strain. So it was more of the kind of thing you see in Rackpotomy or your son's pee-wee team when there's that one kid that just, you know, that it's just so much better than everybody else that he just dominates on every shift. That's really what Bobby Or was.

So, you know, again, it's as much the eye test and the fact that, you know, he was the Norostroki winner for, you know, basically every year that he played at a reasonable level of health. I mean, he was just, you know, the difference between him and the next best defenseman in his era was, was a chasm, a chasm.

And so, yeah, it was not very difficult for me to put before at that point. But again, you know, I watched him play. I met him, like I was a 12-year-old when he was still, that brush cut kid from Perry Sound. I thought he changed the way the game was played. And we still see ripples of that in today's game. All right, Dom, you're up. You had Mark Messier, who finished number 17, I believe, on our list.

Not high enough for some people. I will say that one drew. People didn't like that we had Mark Messier that low. They thought he was disrespected. I think including former employees of the athletic carpey didn't like it. He covered Mark Messier closely. You know what we're calling him, you know what we're calling his placement on the list, actually? The 17th greatest player in the history of the post-expansion NHL presented by Mark

Messier. Hmm. Well, you didn't think he would have gotten higher. Dom, you didn't, he didn't crack your top 25, barely cracks your top 30. Mark Messier came in at number 29 on your list, I believe. Why do you hate Mark Messier? I don't. I don't hate anyone on this list.

I just think he is a bit overrated. I think he played in an era where it was really easy to score. And I think with a lot of my list, you'll see a lot of guys from the 80s who are significantly lower than I think some people would want because it was such a high-flying time where your grandma could have scored 15 goals. And Messier played on the best team of that era. Don't drag Marge Custin's into this. Mary Beige and Tilly would have pot at 25. Let me tell you. I'm not even going to tell you what Teresa Jujan. Yeah, I don't know.

I thought his biggest claim is his longevity and that he scored a lot in the 80s. And it didn't really do it for me in terms of making him, putting him in the top 20. I respect and understand why he would be. And maybe I'm wrong for being a bit more biased towards peak years and players who did it in a more difficult era. But it just doesn't do it for me. I think he's a bit overrated for just playing a lot. How much did, I mean, so much of what surrounds Mark Messier is, is some of the leadership stuff.

There's a lot of lore around Mark Messier. And I think there are, you know, there's Steve Eisen has a bit of that and people didn't love where he was on the list. How much, did you, and I don't know if anybody feels strongly about this question. So I'll open it to the floor, which I shouldn't do. But the lore around players, did you try to just block that out completely? or do you factor in some of that, you know, the leadership and some of the off-ice stuff

that people love to tell? Sometimes, like I blocked it out mostly, especially for Messier. I was two years old when he made his promise that they would win and it'll just, I love that he did that and that he backed it up. It's just that it is just a moment in a long career and it doesn't really make me want to say

he's 28th or 27th because of it. I think I try to focus on the body of work and the peak body of the work. Yeah. So, and this is a good segue to another former oiler. Glenn Anderson didn't make the list, but Eric, you had them at number 72.

So that's a pretty, I think he ended up at 112 overall in the rankings. So it wasn't even like, you know, a Kopitar snub. It was pretty far down. Did you, do you feel like everyone else got it wrong? Or why do you, why do we have a big Glenn Anderson gap here? Yeah. Well, and that's my big outlier. That's my Chris LaTang. And that has everything to do with this playoffs.

That's the ruling stick by what? By outliers, the Chrysletang? The Crystal Teng. Yeah, I just think that what would we value in talking in the NHL. What do we value? We value winning in the playoffs. You know, we can talk on all you want about regular seasons statistics. But once the puck drops in April, and somebody raises the Stanley Cup two months later. At the end of the day, we're talking about that team and those players. And why are we having to kill a car discussion? It's because of how well he played in that particular playoff. Yeah.

And he was fantastic. He is going to be one of the greatest events in the history of the game. So then you look at Glenn Anderson. And I remember Glenn Sandler. Well, first of all, I covered Glenn Anderson in 7980 on the Canadian Olympic team before he ever got to the NHL. So I was aware of who this guy was. That Russian team that lost the Americans,

the miracle on ice. The Canadians almost beat them in that turn. I was out of the three-class of covering the Canadian team. And the one play that they were worried about on that, not that talented Canadian team was blind Anderson, because he skated so well and he was so fearless going to the name. The number of times that he turned those Soviet defensemen inside out, beating them by driving to them, that was extraordinary.

So if you watch the way he played, he had this recklessness about it. Now, the downside of Glenn Anderson was that he was somebody that couldn't get focused for every game. So if you look at his career numbers, you know, very good. You know, I think almost a point of game player, I wrote it down somewhere, I think 1100 points and a little over 1100 games. But in the playoffs, when it mattered, and when he was focused, he was diving. I mean, he's fourth in playoff roles, fourth in playoff points, I think 214 and 225. He won six damage cups. He has the most

game winning goals in Everton, Ineus history, more than Gretsky, more than Nessia. I mean, he was a guy that rose to the occasion. And so, you were asking earlier about mythology. Well, to me, I don't know if mythology is the right word there, but I will tell you that, you know, watching this guy

from April until June, what was extraordinary. He was at another level. Now, if he could have brought that in the regular season, I don't think we would be having this discussion. But I felt that, I mean, playoffs matter to hockey fans, playoffs around the hockey reporters. You know, Craig Duh and I used to go to the finals all the time. That was just, you know, part of what we did in our generation. And whenever I saw Glenn Anderson play

in the playoffs, he was off in there by this player. And so that was why I rated him as highly as I did. I just flat out think that that matters. We'd go to playoff games, we'd sneak into concerts. We did a lot. Are we going to tell that story? Time has passed. I got kicked out. You got it. I had to be your, I distracted the security guards.

Sean. Shawnee, Sean. So besides Chris LaTang, I actually don't mind. I'm on board with this one. Marion Hosa finished 84th overall on the list. You had Marion, one of my three favorite players of all time to cover and deal with at number 58. So you love your defensive wingers, like your two-way wingers, right? Yeah, I do. I do.

I think it's an undervalued, I think it's an undervalued player profile. And I think there was probably some level of, I don't want to say retribution, because that sounds like it was a little bit more thought out than it was. But it might have been some unconscious, you know, desire on my part to place him to do right by Marion Hillis after a career. like he should have won you should have won selkees you know like that's just always the way that i that i that i that i felt about him um so yeah i i is i've the way i looked at it was his his career was maybe undervalued on a larger scale in the type of player he was i think is maybe undervalued on a larger scale so i don't know if that if this is me you know again trying to

make up for that or whatever but that's a that's a gap again that's That's another one. That's a significant one where I was surprised. And I was surprised to see it because I, because as I'm going through the process and you're looking at a guy like Nikita Kuturov or whatever, I think he's maybe a decent comparison because I had him in the same, you know, the same tier. But I'm like, okay, well, Kuturov, great as he is. His career, his career A isn't over yet. Hosa did it over a longer span of time and was a more complete player, even though he wasn't, you know, obviously wasn't a scoring champion or anything. So I gave. him the edge on that based on body of work and just the overall idea that now it seems possible for a winger to win a Selke in a way that it just didn't, you know, to me 15 years ago, right? So I was giving him credit for the, in a weird way, in a very minuscule way, it's sort of the same rationale that, you know, leads to Bobby Orr getting placed at, you know, second, right? Because you're like, he sort of opened the door to make things possible and made people think a little bit differently about wingers, at least in this century, right? I can't speak to the way people

treated them in 1969 or whatever, but I think there was a little bit of a paradigm shift that came with Hosa, right? And that's something that I clearly valued a little bit more than the other folks did. All right, before we go to segment three, quick lap around the room. You have a playoff run. You get peak Copatar or peak Marion Hosa, who you got? Copter. It's Copatar. You go, see, see, see, This is, this is, I'm like, you're still going to go with the center. It's, it's, it's not like I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm ignoring my own rule, right?

But I had copacar on my list, so it's on my business. I'm going to go copatar. Yeah, I, I say copatar. I feel like hosa, the knock against him is going to be that he wasn't like the star of his team. And copatar was that defensive presence and yet the star of his team. I think that's like, he's the driver of the kings in their championship. very well, Hosa was a key piece who I think I had the next best vote for him behind Sean. So I love him.

I agree with the reasoning. But I give Coppatar the edge. So I have, sorry. Sorry, go ahead. No, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to jump back in. But this was a point that we're making, like, we're releasing our ballots. Like everyone's going to see where we put everybody.

This is going on the site in the next couple of days. It'll be probably up by the time. Folks, you're listening to this. Copatar got screwed by not. winning that second con smith in the king's in the king's playoff run the justin williams con smith run i don't even want to say that jesson williams because like what at mr game seven and blah blah blah you had big moments and memorable stuff and like i don't want to take a take a take a leak on justin williams for this right but if copatara wins that he's he's it which he should probably should

have he's in the 80s i'm convinced of that so and that's so while you're parsing it out and you're you're doing your internal math and you're coming up with your own individualized list before you send in your big spreadsheet. That was a consideration for me. Like this guy kind of got screwed in a in a round of trophy voting and it's going to stop him from, you know, ultimately making the list. I have the two very close and I want to make sure that I stayed true to my list when I made this decision. And I have Kopitar at 76 and Hosa at 79. So I'm good with sticking with Kopitar and not doing some provisionist history now that the question's out there. I just go because because Gmail saves everything.

I was just looking at my cons smite vote from that was that was June 13th, 2014. I had Justin Williams, Dowdy to Kopitar 3. So here I am. Justin Williams won the consmithe in the Blackhawk series. Like once that once that once that playoff series unfolded the way that it did like you could have you wrote it in pen that Williams was getting. end up is the is the is the is the is the is the is the is the is the is actually you know finish the job all right coming up next we go into the email inbox and we get some

questions from you dear listener and we'll get some responses we will be right back all right we are back for the final segment as Sean and I always like to do we turn segment three over to you all because at that point we are done doing any of the work and in this case we took on a few emails to talk about the list. And I'm going to dive right into them instead of going to the comments that we normally do because that's way too hard and complicated. This first email comes from Christopher Boyd. Christopher, thanks for sending in this question. It just goes right into the attack. First, how you put sackic ahead of Steve Eisenman is beyond me. Stevie had an extra cup, a selfie, and in my book the Pearson Heart for each are equals because Gretzky and Lemieux exist in the 80s.

but whatever. Clearly there's some pro-Colorado bias in the athletic. Would anybody agree with that? Do we feel like we've got pro-Colaro? Of course, not. I've never heard that before. This is the first accusation. I'm going to go out on the limb and say this is a Detroit-based email.

But my real gripe is how are these guys not back-to-back on the list? Great captains, great ambassadors of the game. The only two guys on either side of that historic rivalry, the other team, the other team didn't really hate. Okay, maybe Lidstrom 2. That's true. Anyways, we'll get to this. Someone should check their birth records and see if they're fraternal twins separated

at birth. If you've done this right, they would have been tied for 14, Chris Boyd. I don't know if we can respond to this. Insane, Chris. You want us to manipulate the voting panel. But first of all, Craig, he answered his own question. Because what he said is splitting hairs. And I think that all of us that looked at this,

I don't have my ballot friendly, that I know I had Sackick ahead of Eisenman, but they could have gone either way. They both contributed so much over the course of their careers. And I'm trying to think of why I had Sacki ahead of Eisenman. I think simply because towards the end, Stevie was so beat up that he wasn't the player that he was at his peak towards the end of his career.

And I think a little bit at the start of his career, you probably remember better than anyone, Craig, that it took a while for Stevie Eisenman to morph into that presence that we all think as the great leader, the two-way player, the guy that just got done was the driving force behind one of the great dynasty teams of all times.

So if you subtract, you know, first few years of Eisenman, the last few years of Isam, when you look at Sackick, who maybe, you know, was more of an impact player right away and lasted a little bit longer at the other end. You know, you slightly tilted towards Sacki. But again, it's splitting hairs.

And I think the reader, I acknowledge that in the way you frame that question. I do want to get specifically say though, like Sackick was 13 and Eisenman was 15 and he's saying they should be tied for 14th.

I don't think he really means we should have manipulated the vote. I don't you'd be so, I don't know man, you never know. And Gila Fleur is 14. So good luck choosing between the three of those guys. It's crazy. Joe Sackick won an Rort Ross. That's why I picked

and how with that. You won't like an actual answer? I'm like Ty goes, yeah, tie goes to the guy who won a scoring title in a heart, whatever. Yeah. It's such a slight edge, but there is, it's there. It exists. Yeah, I looked back and Joe Sackett had three first team all-stars, a heart trophy, Pearson, Art Ross. Steve Isman had the Selke, which the reader mentioned, failing to mention what Sackic really did. So it's just, they are very close. Their career stats are very close. When we looked at their total win value, their peak, one year, three, or five year, very close.

But the edge was usually sackic, and he had the more prestigious awards. You can make your... You hate defense. You hate defensive awards. No one cares. Like, Heart Selky, you're going with the heart. Everyone wants the heart. Okay, were you in the dressing room that...

I'm trying to remember. I think it was the second Colorado Stanley Cup. When Belan Pate's father was standing there, in the celebration. And that was the one where Sack had scored the goal between the legs of the defensemen. And it was just like, and he said to him in broken check,

you are the greatest player ever. And Joe was there. And he was touched, but he was kind of embarrassed in that Joe Sack gig. You know, don't look at me, don't look at me kind of way. And I mean,

it was one of those moments where, you know, like, hated his father. Because Joe, you know, I hated to that chance. I mean, it was great. And he was just, he was so important on, on that team. He carried himself with, you know, class and dignity.

And I think, honestly, you could have Joe a little bit higher if it wasn't for the fact that he was so self-faced. And he kept trying to direct attention to everybody around him. I mean, he was just one of the flat-out best players I've covered in my life. And I have no problem having to work where we had. I think the point Chris makes that, I mean, that rivalry was as good as any have ever lived through in any sport in terms of just the hatred. Like it was blood loss, like literal, like the Draper stuff and all that. And Chris is right to say like Sackick and Iism seem to be above it all.

Right? Like the fan base is kind of like, oh yeah, sackick's actually really good. And I'm not mad at it. Like love the music. I hate, but sack it's great. And I think that says something about each of the players that they kind of were excused from that, that hatred from the other side. All right. Second email comes from Sam says, Hey, Tuesday boys. This is Sam from Indiana. Hey, Sam. Two comments, no bitching. I loved the Patrick Kane story, though as Blackhawks faithful since birth, it made me incredibly sad. I can already tell that my future kids will be really sick of hearing about the good old days of when the Blackhawks had Kane and Taves and Hosa and Keith.

Connor Bedard. He'd be able to it. Maybe they'll grow up seeing Bedard race cups for my Hawks, but we all know that pick is going to Arizona. so they can ruin his career. Wow, this is great. It's better than anything we're up. So Austin Matthews wants to go there. Arizona, Arizona has Logan Cooley. They don't need anybody else. West Mifflin, Pia, let's go.

Let's go. Number two, he even numbered his thoughts. Number two, I might publish it. This is good. Sean, this may potentially be a refreshing comment about the Federoff story, but I actually like the angle you took. I'm going to pause and explain to the listener who hasn't been part of this trope that's dominate our discussion.

Sean, we asked everyone to, you know, find a unique angle that hadn't been told ideally or tell stories about these players in a way that hadn't been told, which is hard to do for a lot of players. Sean Gentile had Sergey Federoff and he wrote about skates, which I loved. It was so memorable for me, you know, growing up in Detroit, those skates were, it was a cool story.

99% of the readers hated it. Right, John? 99. wait a second. 99% of the Red Wings fans who read that probably hated it. What are you going to do? Sam from Indiana.

Go watch the Russian 5 if you want a great look at, you know. Go to Wikipedia. Read the book. Watch the doc. Like, there's, that's been done already. I'm not, I'm not going to be able to top that one. Sorry, sorry, folks. Sam from Indiana continues.

As someone who considers himself a shoe connoisseur, the shoe culture of the other sports, primarily basketball is a subject of conversation with the biggest stars seemingly having their own designs, etc. Taking an equipment-based approach to talk about someone wearing skates that stand out from the rest was unique in my opinion. If I could skate worth a shit, I would try and find some to buy for myself. So we found your defender, Sean. There we go. Thank you.

Now if there's a shoe angle, I might have to become a defender too. I love it. It's true. I mean like that is I and I think there's who was who wrote that email again that was Sam from Indiana your biggest man from Indiana thank you welcome welcome to the Sean Jensile army of champions yeah you get it no I just I mean yeah it's uh I I I obviously feel the same way like I'm a I'm a sneaker guy I'm a shoe guy like I like aesthetics when it comes to other sports and yeah I wanted to bring a little bit of that no to it but all due respect to

Sergey Federov, who, like, I hope that came through in the Federov piece. Like, he was the, he was the guy for someone who was born in 1986 or 1987 or that, that generation of person specifically, like, I came of age when Sergey Fedrov was the coolest hockey player on the planet, right? And I think that's, I think that was true for a lot of people. So, thank you. Craig, can I make a shout out to Ian Denny who's one of the anonymous editors at the athletic, who babysat this project and did a great job. I think it took over his life. Probably didn't see his kids for most of the last 12 months.

But I will tell you, we all gathered together in June, in Montreal, at the draft, and Ian made a presentation of the NHL-99 project. And I can repeat exactly what his words were. And you referenced it in the question that you asked. It was, tell me something I didn't know about a player, It's been written about hundreds and thousands of time. And the fact that he gave us enough lead time to do that, right? So you said that in June, and then you had the whole summer to think about it.

Okay, what can I tell you about Paul Korea, you don't already know? Everybody shows the concussion history. Everybody. By the way, I loved your Korea story, Eric. I think that's a top 10 easy piece that ran alongside all those. I loved it. Well, thank you very much. But I'll tell you how it happened.

I was having lunch with Paul and Tustam, and he ate and Val, his partner over there, and they brought their dog, Wyatt. And for two hours, Wyatt was going back and forth between Paul and Val.

And you're talking about hockey, you know, we were talking about all the normal things. And finally, it was like, what's the story with the dog? You know, and I was going to ask Shayna that,

by the way. As we were as we were happy. We have a friend. Which one is, which one is that? Which one is that, Chena? This is Kona.

Conan is the stretch. She can't find Zook. Oh, hi, Kona. So she's been crying, walking around the house because Zook's sleeping in a spot that Kona doesn't know about. Anyway, at the end of an hour and a bunch of conversation about hockey and life and everything else, Paul started talking about Wyatt and 10-year-old Maltese. And, you know, I had Ian's voice and his admonition in my head when I sat there and I thought,

well, I can go this way or I can go that way. It's like, I'm going with Wyatt the dog. So I think that was important. I think that that set this project apart. I mean, Luke Robatai talking about walking the Camino. You know, Rob Blake, you know, Craig, you profiled Rob at head of the Hall of Fame so you know the story. You know, picking tobacco as a 50-year-old kid and having to take time off from his summer job to try out for a junior team, junior B team and his father stepping in on the tobacco. Pickle-picking crew for Rob to go and try out to that team.

He doesn't try up to that team. He doesn't have an NHL. He doesn't have a college group. You know, he's basically out of hockey. And, you know, so unschool that thread to get from that tobacco farm is a 15-year-old to June to rugby, to bowling range, to the NHL, to the Hall of Fame, to the manager of the Kings. I mean, it's the classic road not taken. These stories were so much fun to write.

They were so much fun, right. Honestly, it gave me so much energy at this very late stage of my career to be able to to participate in this. And I loved writing them and I loved reading them. It was great. It was just really fun. You loved writing them so much that you wrote 35 of them, in fact. This doesn't, this project doesn't get done without Eric DeHatch. My gosh, the amount of work you put in was just in the caliber of it was through the roof.

Thank you very much. It was great. And I'm glad you mentioned Ian Denemy, assisted by Rich Hammond, so many of you know covering the Kings. Rich also had a hand in the editing process. And I know a lot of work went into this. I think we can give shoutouts at the end here. I just wanted to ask this one last question. I might have been Chris Boyd circling back saying on this list, most of these players are already in the Hockey Hall of Fame.

But some are still playing. and a few just finished and are coming up on their first chance. Zetterberg is one of those. Should they all get in? Is everybody in the NHL-99 project an eventual Hall of Famer? Oh, yes. Chris Lutang definitely will be, right? Should be.

But no, I'm going to say a big yes to like. I'll be on the committee by that point. Right? Yeah, for sure. Right, right? Right, Eric? It's like the players who just finished like the Zetterberg and the Lundquist, I think, are sure things.

And then it's like, if you're good enough to make this list and still playing, the Matthews, the Kutrov, Hedman, Kopit, like those players, I think all are, all our yeses. And the players who we're talking about, should we have changed the rules for, like, Kill McCar. It's like, yeah, yes to them too. All right. It's really funny.

What's really funny is when you look at current players, it's almost like everybody is either in the top 100 and with some with some or very very close to it in the case of copatar and Brad Marchand or not in the discussion it's interesting like like I think there was kind of whether we realize it or not it was like if these guys are going to be Hall of Famers if they're really on track for it they're going to be in the top 100 otherwise you know let's see what happens pretty much big gals

though. All right. Last, last, I'll open the floor to anyone who has any parting shots here. Any thoughts about the project? Shoutouts or anything else. And I really want to echo what Sean said about Eric's work on this. I mean, everybody put a ton of work into it. But Eric, it was, your perspective, I think was invaluable. The work was awesome. It was just a treat to wake up and see what was on the site that day and so much what was your work. So that was great. Thank you. Very much. All right. Well, then I'm going to of wrap up the podcast. Thank you all for doing this, for explaining your picks. I'm sure as we release ballots over the next couple days, the debate will continue. So this is valuable perspective.

Jeff, producer Jeff, for setting this up. Always great. A quick plug to wrap up. We got Mike Rupp is going to be on the show with Granger, Russo, and Piso, and the roundtable show this week. Don't forget to review and do all the things you should do about a good podcast. Give it five stars. and then you can write whatever you want after that. And if you want to subscribe to The Athletic and read all of this fine work, if somehow you're in, I think, the small minority of hockey fans

who are not subscribers, you can go to theathletic.com slash hockey show and you get in for $2 a month for a year. It's a great deal. Sean and I will be back next week with our regular scheduled programming. Thank you all. And happy New Year. Very dramatic by the end of it.

Happy New Year. A very dramatic, happy New Year.