Originally Posted by Gunslinger
I guess I'll throw my 2 cents in even though I'm not a big fan of lists. They are always subjective and tend to end in pointless debate but what the hey, I'll give it a go. I am willing to discuss why I put a certain player where I did in my list but I'm not gonna have a pissing match as to why my list/your list is better, more legit, etc. My criteria was based on # of fights, winning percentage, strength of card and I also took into account in some cases a "prognostic" approach as too how well a fighter would have done if they would have had a longer career. Thats why I have some guys with short careers higher than some lists do. My winning percentages are from DYG so take them for what they are worth. Comments are welcome, insults and a rope to piss up are not.
1)Bob Probert-302 NHL fights 58%
2)Dave Brown-202 NHL fights 62%
3)Behn Wilson-98 NHL fights 63%
4)Donald Brashear-278 NHL fights 60% record vs. Laraque 2w/3d/1l
5)Joey Kocur-262 NHL fights 60%
6)Georges Laraque-153 NHL fights 60%
7)Chris Simon-129 NHL fights 60%
8)Tony Twist-136 NHL fights 61%
9)Larry Playfair-117 NHL fights 63%
10)Jim McKenzie-212 NHL fights 55%
11)Bob Nystrom-139 NHL fights 61%
12)John Kordic-125 NHL fights 60%
13)Clark Gillies-73 NHL fights 60%
14)Tie Domi-333 NHL fights 57%
15)Marty McSorley-273 NHL fights 56%
16)Dave Richter-62 NHL fights 61%
17)Glen Cochrane-107 NHL fights 59%
18)Bob Gassoff-44 NHL fights 67%
19)Stan Jonathan-84 NHL fights 58%
20)Sandy McCarthy-165 NHL fights 57%
21)Craig Berube-295 NHL fights 56%
22)Nick Fotiu-65 NHL fights 58%
23)Terry O' Reilly-223 NHL fights 54%
24)Stu Grimson-270 NHL fights 54%
25)Garry Howatt-237 NHL fights 54%
There you go boys.
SImon at #7?? Please, lets not get BBBB's hopes up!
Nice list and thankfully this thread didn't just die out with only a couple of them. I thought for sure this thread would fade away. Funny how we debate rankings all the time and yet we only have a handful of lists. I'm going to use this thread to move up and down fighters on my list as i go along, rather then make a new one every week or two.
The reason I don't favor the short term guys like Richter, Gassoff or even Cochrane is because we honestly don't know how they would fare if they played longer. Yet we sure do know about guys like Mckenzie, Berube, mcsorley, probert, grimson etc etc. That's really the difference. We KNOW what they could do because we saw it all. We can only speculate on how richter, gassoff, or cochrane would do over longer careers. I used to have richter very high on my list but he faded-more like droppped like a stone-as I watched more footage and saw the great great careers of other great fighters. When I see a guy like Brash go a decade as an elite HW-I'm impressed. Same for Grimson, Marty mac etc. Much more impressive than a guy with a nice two year run. Or even a guy like Gassoff who gave us 4 years in a no-video market and era (i think only a few of his fights are on video). When I see a short termer and compare him to a long term great-it's no comparison. In most cases the long termer gives you so much more to go on. So many more fights to judge them. His career is fleshed out from beginning to end. You see if they stumble a bit as a rookie then gather momentum into a white hot prime and then fade away or completely break down as they near the end.
I think Richter and cochrane were already showing signs of what would have happened had they kept playing or had lengthy careers. Cochrane was not the same fighter in VAn/Chi/EDM. Richter already began to fade in Van/Stl Just my opinion.
lets get some more lists going, guys!