Round 2, Vote 6 (2009 update)
View Single Post
08-31-2009, 11:17 PM
Join Date: Jun 2007
Originally Posted by
Yes, but unlike Richard he has far more statistical numbers to support his case. Also, he was from a different era in Hart voting where the award criteria was very different from that during Richard's time. My primary point here really was a couple of the most vocal critics of Lindsay's Hart record before are some of the biggest supporters of Richard now so I was trying to use their own arguments against them to point out their hopefully unintended bias. If you are gonna bag on players before for that reason, how can you ignore it now?
I just do not think the criteria for Hart voting was much different for these two players at all, nor do I think Lindsay has a decided statistical advantage given the fact that he was given much more PP time(Or at least, it is not so large given the fact that I consider Henri Richard one of the greatest defensive forwards of all time, as opposed to Lindsay, who was merely good defensively)
I often look at Henri Richard and wonder just how great he would have been had he not been stuck behind Beliveau with the lesser linemates and lesser PP time. PP time is always a huge + for player statistics, and Henri Richard's coaches loved using him ES to shut down opposing forward lines. Heck, he outperformed Beliveau at ES.
Originally Posted by
Even though a few times he did get 2nd team selections behind Beliveau, I would say there definitely was a bias regarding selecting 2 members of the same team to a 1st and 2nd all star spot at the same position. How often has that happened in History really?
I really wonder how often that has happened. Does anyone have a list of players who took all star spots for the same position while on the same team?
How often in history can you look at the league and say the two best players at one position were on the same team? Unless you can point to some pattern of this being the case and the voters shunning one of the players I don't see how you can say there was any bias with credibility. I've already proven that the voters of Richard's era were willing to vote him and Beliveau 1/2 on two occasions. Can you point out times that Richard was a victim of bias where he was clearly a top 2 center in a season without earning a spot because Beliveau got one?
Sure, the voters gave Henri the 2nd team spot when he was a surefire pick. But there were a few other years in which he deserved it(Or at least was very close).
59-60 for example. He was outscored by Beliveau and Horvath, yet played 10 more games than Beliveau and was better defensively. Truly, defensive specialists are not given the credit they deserve in these earlier years.
Sure, He missed several games a few years, and thus, was not given the same credit. But on a per game basis, I would take HR over Ullman a few years. Being up against Mikita and Beliveau hurt his chances a few years as well. Lindsay by comparison had awful competition at LW for all star selections many years.
Granted, while I slag Lindsay down and do not think he belongs in the top 25, I defend him if he is still around for the top 35, but I do not think he is a far cry ahead of Henri Richard. Certainly not 30 spots.
Yes that could be true, but there are other excellent two-wat forwards who were far better offensively and equal to slightly worse defensively (Nighbor, Fedorov, D.Bentley, Keon) IMO and they likely won't make this list until the 70s or 80s. Aside from Cup counting I don't really see 20-30 place gap between him and those players. Throw in the comments from posters who watched Richard play from the last discussion who felt he was on the level of a Keon or Ullman and that just reinforces my thoughts. While player and coach quotes are useful, they can also be misleading. As reckoning stated, quotes can be found for any player and more can be found for Richard because he was a dynasty player in the most ravenous hockey market in the world. You can find a slew of quotes on every single player on those teams so the fact that there is a large quantity is nice, but not really relevant.
Keon and Ullman? Sure. But there are extenuating circumstances as to why each is not rated as highly(Keon was slightly better defensively, but not as good offensively. Ullman the opposite. not near as good defensively, but in the same area offensively). Henri Richard was at least as good, and IMO, better than Fedorov defensively, and Fedorov had a much shorter prime. D Bentley I can only go by accounts of his defensive play, but he was rated similarly, which is why I think so highly of him.
If you do not see a 20-30 spot gap between Richard and those players, then I do not possibly see how you can advocate a 20-30 spot gap between him and Ted Lindsay. I consider him closer to Lindsay than Keon or Ullman.
Nighbor is a guy I have rated too low in the past(And on my master leading up to this project), but I intend to correct it.
Last edited by Dark Shadows: 08-31-2009 at
View Public Profile
Dark Shadows's albums
Visit Dark Shadows's homepage!
Find More Posts by Dark Shadows