View Single Post
09-07-2011, 08:16 PM
Student Of The Game
seventieslord's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,175
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
In his profile, I don't talk about Evans' "12th place" finish in 1957 with 1 point - I always omit seasons with only 1 voting point, I'm talking about his 12th place finish in 1961 with 3 points. (His name is spelled wrong in the thread for that year, so I don't blame you for missing it).
gotcha. ok, it's legit.

I have no idea where the 13th place finish you have for Armstrong comes from - not on the HOH board.
recently released:

and this one is for all-star voting... same thing, really.

According to the thread on the HOH board, Evans has 19 points for the Norris over the course of his career (15+3+1). Armstrong also has 19 points for the Norris over the course of his career (12+4+3). I don't see how you can say that they aren't close - they played at the same time so point totals can be directly compared.
no, they are close. You're right, my search didn't yield the word "Evens" so I got confused.

Still, we're talking three significant seasons in voting versus two. It is advantage Armstrong, even if it's close.

When you drafted Armstrong after we drafted Evans, didn't you say you had wanted Evans more? What happened?
more info came out... plus I was not done compiling the info that had already come out.

I wouldn't call the 4 to 0 difference in seasons in the 70th percentile "marginal." Isn't one of those Roberts seasons a crude conversion for the WHA?
the two with asterisks, they are likely only his 5th and 6th-most significant offensive seasons.

Contributing more on offense doesn't make Portland a better overall player, it just shows that Buswell must have been better defensively to have a similar All-Star record. I can't believe you're actually trying to say that the 381-368 difference in games between the two players is meaningful. It's nice that Portland contributed to a Stanley Cup as a secondary player, but IMO, it's countered by the fact that Buswell was captain of the Canadiens for a season (a more individualized accomplishment than being a secondary player on a Cup winner IMO).
ok on the GP. Secondary player? no, that was the year Portland was 5th in voting, so although that still placed him behind teammates Shore and Clapper, he was hardly a "secondary player" if his league-wide standing was that high.

Is this misdirection to attempt to distract us from the fact that Campbell's 2nd best season was a lot better than any season Gibbs ever had?

Campbell was the #1 defenseman on the President's Trophy winner in 2007. By your own methods, that was a great season!
Absolutely, it's a great season. But was he really a top-4 d-man? Better than Pronger, for example?

Yes, I do think it's very reasonable to think the #1 on the President's Trophy winner was the 9th or 10th best defenseman in the NHL that season.
20th would be reasonable. He was still considered very suspect defensively at this time. Regardless, I said myself that this was better than any Gibbs season (which means I'm being pretty fair to you, acknowledging that the stuff from the 70s should be effectively doubled)

Campbell played in 3 straight All Star games (2 more than Gibbs with tougher competition to make the games than Gibbs), so I think that saying he only had 2 good seasons is a bit... wrong, don't you? Over a 5 year stretch, he had over 90% as many points as prime Niedermayer or Pronger. Only 2 good seasons, my ass.
1. Campbell in 2009 was not an ASG-caliber player, this was just a carryover from the previous season, which happens a lot. He was his own team's 3rd-best defenseman.

2. Take a look at that 1973 ASG roster. All bonafide ATD top-2 pairing guys, plus Dallas Smith, a 3rd-pairing guy, plus Manery and Gibbs. Look at 2009. Chara, Bouwmeester, Kaberle, Komisarek, Markov, Streit, Boyle, Robidas, Souray, Campbell - that's, by my count, an all-time great, four 3rd pairing ATD players, three legit MLD players, one AAA guy, and one who won't get drafted.

3. You're descending into dreakmur territory, getting a little too caught up with point totals here.

"Career paths notwithstanding," nice way to give yourself an out when called on this crap. Do I really need to go through those guys one by one and show how many were past their primes when they played with Gibbs?
sure, go for it. I did the exact same thing for Zhitnik, and only Galley was anywhere close to his prime among those three.

So the highlight of his career was being the #1 on a team that was a little bit over 0.500 3 times. Yeah, he's not even close to as good as Campbell.
no, five times. (3+2)

as opposed to twice #1 of a great team, three times #3 of good/great team, once #5 and PP specialist, otherwise a fringe player.

Not sure why that looks like such a stretch to you.

Who cares? Zhitnik isn't in this series and he's hardly "my boy." Is this another attempt to try to distract us from the fact that Campbell is a much better defenseman than Gibbs?
No, I just know that you think Zhitnik is a top-1000 player (as do I) and if Zhitnik was in this draft you'd surely consider him one of the top-10 defensemen here.

If you're "honest with yourself," you'll admit that Campbell had 2 seasons that absolutely blow Gibbs out of the water - 2006-07 when he was the #1 on a President's Trophy winner and finished 10th in Norris voting, and 2007-08 when he was a 2nd Team All Star. I would take his 2008-09 season over anything Gibbs did quite easily as well.
He was a #3 defenseman! Let's clear the air here: where do you think Campbell truly ranked among all NHL defensemen in overall value delivered in the 2009 season?

And I'd probably take Campbell's 2005-06 season over any of Gibbs - he scored more points than Gibbs ever did playing in a lower scoring league. So by my count, that's 2 seasons where Gibbs can't hold Campbell's jock and 3-4 total seasons for Campbell better than anything Gibbs ever did. And of course, Campbell's 2010 postseason is better than anything Gibbs did in the postseason.
dreak, is that you?

A #5 defenseman in total TOI (but first in PP TOI) capitalizes and scores 44 points and doesn't get a sniff of recognition as an elite player, and that's better than placing 11th or 13th in all-star voting in the 70s?

The only insanity is attempting to discredit Brian Campbell for not being as good as Duncan Keith.
seventies passes to TDMM.... and it skips off his stick and out of play.

want to try again? It's a legitimate question about the differences between the leagues and it's worth looking into. How bad can the defenseman of a .500 team be in a league with poor parity? How good can the #3 defenseman of a good team be in a league with incredible parity? Where is the overlap? You seem to act like there isn't any but I think you know there is some.

Do you actually expect anyone to believe that Gibbs' had 5 seasons better than one when Campbell played in the All Star game and finished 16th in postseason All Star voting? (That would be 2008-09). Oh and Campbell scored 52 points that season. Gibbs' career high is 40, in a higher scoring league. And it's not like Gibbs was a defensive stalwart.
wow, you're really milking that superfluous 16th, aren't you?

How many voting points did he have? I have Bouwmeester at 15th with 7 points. And do you think he deserved to be ahead of Seabrook?

If he was truly the league's #16 defenseman I would agree it was more impressive than anything Gibbs did, but I don't think he was really the league's #16 defenseman.


2009-10 was probably Brian Campbell's 5th best season. He scored 38 points in 68 games. In Gibbs' best offensive season, he scored 40 points in 76 games in a higher scoring league. There is a massive offensive difference between the two. And Gibbs wasn't exactly a defensive stalwart - in his second best season, he scored 38 points (same as Campbell's 5th best only in more games in a higher scoring league), but was on the ice for more goals against than any other defenseman in the league.
Ok, first, why are points so important now all of a sudden? shouldn't we be concerned with overall value?

And yes, a defensive stalwart is exactly what Gibbs was. He played a ton for bad (and slightly over average) teams and yes, he was clearly stretched too thinly by them, but that doesn't make him any worse. Do you think he really went from getting all-star votes in 1973, to being abysmal in 1974 - even though five years after that, he was still a #1 defenseman?

Definte "most." Your only argument is that Campbell didn't deserve his votes in 2006-07... when he was #1 of the best team in the league.
"more than otherwise". I think that most people in the HOH section, for example, if asked, would not name Campbell among their own top-4 for the 2007 season.

Well, it's definitely better to be #1 out of a rotten bunch than #2....
*sigh*... no, not necessarily, but it's an indication at least. I realize there's gray area between "#1 on a .500 team in the 1970s but not an all-star" and "#3 on a good team in modern times" but you don't seem to be willing to work with me on this one, at all. Everything's just "not even close" at this point... regarding these two players, I fear your blinders are on.

And yet Ehrhoff has two seasons over overall play better than anything Sargent did.
That is certainly up for debate.

Ehrhoff has never even had the TOI in one season, that Sargent averaged in his career!

LOL, I knew you would bring this up. And I really don't think that you can use +/- numbers from Vancouver's run as a meaningful sample size. That was such a weird run - the team won lots of close games and lost a lot of blowouts, so every player's +/-s were bad.
true, but he was an outlier in this regard. And it wasn't him getting the tough matchups either, was it?

I think it's important to realize two things:
  • Ehrhoff played more playoff games in 2011 than Sargent played in his entire career!
  • What's worse? Ehrhoff having a bad plus minus as his team loses in game 7 of the SC finals? Or the trend of Sargent teams advancing farther in the playoffs when he was injured than when he was healthy?
that's just being cheap.

In 76, the Kings won a round without him. In 77, they won a round with him.

In 1980 the Stars got to the semis without him, but it was acknowledged that he would have been a big help, and his 50 games of all-star caliber play were still a part of them even getting there and getting the matchups they did.

In 1981 the stars got to the finals, and he didn't play at all. sounds very similar to the year before, in other words, when did they have him in the lineup and tank? You didn't mention that in 1982 they tanked without him.

Ehrhoff had 2 great seasons - one in San Jose and one in Vancouver. Calling him a PP specialist in San Jose is entirely inaccurate.
Surely you must be talking about 2008, when he was a #2. And they were a very good team. Yes, that is very good. I don't think it's as good as Sargent's three big seasons, or for that matter, Ehrhoff's two seasons as the #1 on a legit contender. Aside from three years, he was just a #4-5 PP specialist.

Okay how about this - Ehrhoff had the best 2 seasons, Sargent had the next best 3.5, then Ehrhoff had the next best 5 seasons (since Sargent wasn't exactly helping his team when he was constantly injured).
no, no, yes, yes.

It's not anywhere near as crystal clear as you think it is, that Ehrhoff was a better player in '10 and '11 as Sargent was in 77, 78, 79, and 80. The dude just finally played over 23 minutes a game for the first time last year.

This is a load of crap and you know it. Doughty had the best top season, but after that Campbell blows him away if we line up their top seasons. Other than Doughty's best season, nothing he did was even close to Campbell's second best.
only all-star voting supports this. I don't think that it passes the eye test.

we agree Doughty's best was better than Campbell's.

last year was Doughty's 2nd-best. He was a #1 in all situations and was definitely a top-10 defensemen in the NHL, likely higher. All-star voting says Campbell was in 2008 - I don't think he was.

as a rookie Doughty was not a huge offensive threat but was already a legit #1. Campbell's 3rd-best year has him as a #3 on a cup-winning Chicago team. Individually, I take the Doughty season every time.

naturally, his other three good post lockout years overtake Doughty in the end, but Doughty has peaked higher in his three years.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote