HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   Brian Leetch or Al MacInnis? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1278943)

Puckgenius* 11-03-2012 02:02 AM

Brian Leetch or Al MacInnis?
 
Who was better? I say Macinnis, 100mph slapper with a heavy wooden stick and had the physical game of Adam Foote.

Rhiessan71 11-03-2012 02:30 AM

I go with Mac on this.

Mac had more longevity and Leetch's career was a bit of a roller coaster.


Can't say I agree with Mac having a physical game like Foote though.
Mac wasn't any where close to being as aggressive or as punishing as Foote was.

Oshie97 11-03-2012 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 (Post 55483019)
I go with Mac on this.

Mac had more longevity and Leetch's career was a bit of a roller coaster.


Can't say I agree with Mac having a physical game like Foote though.
Mac wasn't any where close to being as aggressive or as punishing as Foote was.

I agree, he was not as physical as Foote but he was not soft either. He was just more likely to strip the puck away then knock a guy off of it. Either way he was better than Leetch, who was a pretty good d-man in his own right. I miss MacInnis, don't think I'll ever see a player play quite like him.

tony d 11-03-2012 08:51 AM

This close but Al MacInnis.

MadArcand 11-03-2012 11:19 AM

Not close at all as far as I'm concerned. MacInnis by a mile.

Mike Farkas 11-03-2012 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadArcand (Post 55486129)
Not close at all as far as I'm concerned. MacInnis by a mile.

Yeah, as far as all-time greats go, I kind of lean this way...I didn't care much for Leetch's defensive game overall...MacInnis could do more than Leetch and be better at it for the most part...Leetch was really good, but MacInnis was better in my mind...

Big Phil 11-03-2012 02:59 PM

MacInnis had a lot more staying power. Leetch could rush the puck better, and even late in his career he would make the opposition nervous on a rush. As late as the 2002 Olympics I feared Leetch. MacInnis was just good for two decades with little drop in play. In 2003 he was a 1st team all-star and then retired after 2004.

MacInnis is arguably the best player in NHL history (with the exception of both Hulls) to use his hard shot effective in the context of the game. Lots of players have booming shots, but not all of them have a low and accurate shot that created havoc.

Psycho Papa Joe 11-03-2012 03:18 PM

Rushing the puck and passing I'll give to Leach. Everything else, Al Mac.

Both were great talents but I'll have to go with Mac here.

HockeyFan100 11-03-2012 03:36 PM

Big Mac for me.

Scimitars of Drizzt 11-03-2012 03:39 PM

Haha, I guess I'm one of the very few who would have to go with Leetch. It's definitely very close

JackSlater 11-03-2012 03:40 PM

I would rather have Leetch in the neutral zone, and that's about it. It helps that MacInnis developed into one of the NHL's best defencemen defensively, while Leetch never really improved significantly in this area.

agentblack 11-03-2012 03:41 PM

Leetch!

Big Phil 11-03-2012 05:16 PM

Just wondering, the poll is slanted significantly in MacInnis' favour. Very few have voted Leetch. Can the ones who picked him elaborate as to why? (not that you can't have a decent case)

thom 11-03-2012 05:20 PM

Very Very close but I will go with Al because of his physical and mean streak

PierreMcGuire* 11-03-2012 05:33 PM

MacInnis.

Preisst 11-04-2012 01:39 PM

I say MacInnis for the simple reason that in my opinion he was a better player.

vadim sharifijanov 11-04-2012 02:41 PM

not sure what people mean by macinnis' mean streak. i don't ever remember him being particularly physical, at least in comparison to his teammates mccrimmon, macoun, nattress, murzyn, or even suter.

but other than pure peak, i also can't see an argument for leetch. and even then, i don't think '94 leetch was any better than '89 macinnis. on top of that, leetch was an excellent rusher but i don't think i'd put him up there as the best of all time; he's definitely behind orr and coffey. whereas macinnis does have that one defining skill that is in the argument for GOAT status-- as a PP QB, he is the best i've ever seen, with only bourque as a contender. but then i didn't see the great QBs pre-80s.

when i weigh the entirety of macinnis' career against leetch's, i don't think it's close. especially given that macinnis evolved over his career and arguably had his best all-round season in '03, at the very end of his career, while leetch peaked early and then regressed in his late 20s when most defensemen would be hitting their peaks.

mrhockey193195 11-08-2012 01:00 AM

Leetch, but I am very biased as a Rangers fan. I also think that Leetch's defensive game gets very underrated around here.

Both these guys are easily in the 20-30 range of greatest defensemen on my list...perhaps even a little bit higher.

Ohashi_Jouzu 11-08-2012 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 55516365)
not sure what people mean by macinnis' mean streak. i don't ever remember him being particularly physical.

Oh, he was physical. Not many players stayed very long in areas they "weren't allowed", for example. But the bigger thing, I think, is that not too many impacts shook a leaf from the oak that was MacInnis (I sometimes need to be reminded that he was "only" 6'2" 200 lbs). Kind of the passive aggressive version of physical, lol. And he was a give-and-take, really chippy player when pushed. I don't think there was any better example of this than the entire season leading up to them beating the Habs for the Cup. Lots and lots of minor penalties (only 1 fight, I think), and I don't think too many of them were love taps, or holding the stick, if you catch my drift.

Morgoth Bauglir 11-08-2012 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 55516365)
whereas macinnis does have that one defining skill that is in the argument for GOAT status-- as a PP QB, he is the best i've ever seen, with only bourque as a contender. but then i didn't see the great QBs pre-80s

On You Tube you can see some Habs games from the '70s in their entirety. Look for #5 on the power-play: Guy Lapointe

Hawkman 11-08-2012 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrhockey193195 (Post 55614691)
Leetch, but I am very biased as a Rangers fan. I also think that Leetch's defensive game gets very underrated around here. Both these guys are easily in the 20-30 range of greatest defensemen on my list...perhaps even a little bit higher.

The board ranked them 18th and 23rd.

Quote:

18 2 Al MacInnis 6'2" 204 1963 1981-2004 Canada
19 4 Scott Stevens 6'2" 215 1964 1982-2004 Canada
20 44 Chris Pronger 6'6' 220 1974 1994-Present Canada
21 4 Bill Gadsby 6'0' 180 1927 1946-1966 Canada
22 21 Börje Salming 6'1" 193 1951 1970-1993 Sweden
23 2 Brian Leetch

pdd 11-08-2012 10:56 AM

Leetch had the higher peak, there is no question of that. But MacInnis' peak was close to that level, his prime was long, and he maintained a high level of play for a very long time. Leetch's play outside of his peak/prime was at a significantly lower level.

This is like comparing Paul Coffey and Ray Bourque. The same exact paragraph can be applied.

Elever 11-08-2012 12:04 PM

This is gona be Karlsson vs someone like Pietrangelo in a couple decades.

Fred Taylor 11-08-2012 04:52 PM

This is closer than the poll results indicate, but it's still MacInnis.

vadim sharifijanov 11-08-2012 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu (Post 55615163)
Oh, he was physical. Not many players stayed very long in areas they "weren't allowed", for example. But the bigger thing, I think, is that not too many impacts shook a leaf from the oak that was MacInnis (I sometimes need to be reminded that he was "only" 6'2" 200 lbs). Kind of the passive aggressive version of physical, lol. And he was a give-and-take, really chippy player when pushed. I don't think there was any better example of this than the entire season leading up to them beating the Habs for the Cup. Lots and lots of minor penalties (only 1 fight, I think), and I don't think too many of them were love taps, or holding the stick, if you catch my drift.

maybe i remember him as less physical than he really was due to his very physical teammates. in st. louis too, it's tough to stand out as a physical guy next to pronger and jackman.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eva unit zero (Post 55618801)
Leetch had the higher peak, there is no question of that. But MacInnis' peak was close to that level, his prime was long, and he maintained a high level of play for a very long time. Leetch's play outside of his peak/prime was at a significantly lower level.

can we really conclusive say leetch had the better peak?

in their best years, both finished 9th in points, 3rd in assists. macinnis had 103 points, leetch had 102. both also had a conn smythe within two seasons of the 100 point year. so if we are counting peak as best 2-3 year spike, macinnis has a career-defining playoff run, followed by two years where he was the consensus second best defenseman in the league after bourque, at top four all-time guy at his absolute peak (ridiculously close 2nd and 4th hart finishes in those two years for bourque).

leetch's best 2-3 year stretch has a doughnut hole in the middle. he was hurt, not his fault; and his team, which would win presidents trophies before and after that year, didn't even make the playoffs in '93 so it shows how valuable he was. but then he wasn't really in the running for the norris in '94; in fact, he wasn't even definitely the best defenseman on his team (he finished 3rd in all-star voting, barely ahead of zubov; zubov finished 3rd in norris voting, a little ahead of leetch who was 4th). so even with the norris, i find it really hard to say that leetch from '92-'94 was better than macinnis from '89-'91 win any degree of certainty.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:59 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.