View Single Post
08-31-2009, 03:44 PM
Registered User
FissionFire's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 11,010
vCash: 500
Out of curiosity, if Henri Richard's game can't be appreciated by "bogus stats" why did the writers who did watch him year after year never give him much Hart consideration? Why did he have such a poor All-Star record relative to his contemporaries? I'd think it was because of Believeau but the writers twice voted Richard 2nd behind Jean so they didn't seem to have some bias against voting players from the same team into the 1/2 spot.

While Richard did lead the league twice in assists, don't try overstating it. Outside of those two 1sts he finished higher than 7th only once.

Why is Richard's pedestrian Hart record and average All-Star record enough to place him far above a player like Earl Seibert, who had more All-Star berths and a similar Hart record as a defenseman? I don't see how Richard can be highly ranked unless Seibert is right there with him.

One more hockeyreferece correct that Henri Richard never scored a shorthanded goal in the final 12 seasons of his career (when the stat started being tracked)? For a player who was such a key part of the PK as I've been told and who played many minutes on it that seems like a statistical impossibility. Richard was only 27 in the first year it was tracked so it's not like he was well past his prime. It might be possible that his "prime" (1957-58 to 1962-63) is being remembered as the norm for his career. I can't believe that a player who was a primary PK option would go 12 years without a shorthanded goal. Maybe his role on the PK might be exaggerated?

Last edited by FissionFire: 08-31-2009 at 03:58 PM.
FissionFire is offline   Reply With Quote