View Single Post
11-11-2010, 10:50 AM
Registered User
pluppe's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
I think they were in the right place at the right time AND the best offensively. They are a product of the environment to some extent. Pre-Orr even the most offensive defenseman was probably much more conservative than most of the guys on these lists.

You're right in that there may be other defensemen from other eras which are more dominant compared to their competition than some of the more modern ones.. and the finishes might show that.

I just think that TDMM hit the nail on the head in that the position fundamentally changed from an offensive perspective when Orr put rushing and attacking into vogue.

It has settled back down now but I think there is a pretty clear marker there with pre-Orr and post-Orr offensive defensemen, at least in the NHL.

I mean sure the finishes are still interesting but to me its like comparing goaltenders now to goaltenders before they were widely using a mask. So hard to compare when so much has changed.
I disagree to a certain extent. then you could argue that Ron Francis was better offensively than Jean Beliveau. he created more offence due to changes in the game.

or that Bure was a better Goalscorer than Bobby Hull since the times had changed and he was allowed to float more. I donīt think you could argue that way.

so what if defencemen were less offensively allowed in earlier or later periods. someone was still the best and to me that means something.

I think your analogy about goaltenders could be done better. I would instead of comparing to pre/post mask make a parallell to pre/post butterfly. should we not be able to call Plante better than Belfour, even though the position had changed in a way so that Belfour was probably better at stopping the puck.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote