View Single Post
05-11-2012, 04:59 PM
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,415
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Rangers GAA in 1960: 247
Rangers GAA in 1961: 248

37 year old Doug Harvey replaces 33 year old Bill Gadsby as Rangers #1. Rangers got Harvey for Lou Fontinato and dumped Gadsby for Les Hart - both stupidly uneven trades.

Rangers GAA in 1962: 207 (Harvey's last Norris)
Rangers GAA in 1963: 233

Gump Worsley was the Rangers starter all 4 years, though 1960 was more of a platoon
So Aging Doug Harvey = prime Rod Langway. I'm not sure what this says about Gadsby other than he's no Doug Harvey. By the same token, Bill Cook, Pat Verbeek and Mariusz Czerkawski are all no Gordie Howe.

Bill Gadsby is victim of a Brad Park situation Park's career overlapped with 3 top 10 defencemen and he was clearly not as good as them. Gadsby's with the #2 and #7 defencemen of all time. He was clearly weaker defensively than the #2 and clearly weaker offensively than the #7. But, seeing as #2 is the best defensive d-man ever, and #7 is probably the #3 offensive defenceman ever, does that in ani way mean Gadsby isn't top 15? No.

And lets not forget that coaching changes can have the most significant impact on goals against. And Alf Pike is hardly a coach that would get any claim towards being good.

Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Nalyd I wasn't questioning Gadsby, I'm a pretty big fan of his myself. I totally agree with you that Lidstrom like isn't the only way to play defense, I was simply trying to make a point of reference on the WAY he played defense, not on how effective he was doing it by mentioning Nik early. I have Gadsby in my top 20 D all-time, and actually ahead of Clapper.

He was a very good defensive defenseman later in his career as he proved, but isnt this in many ways similar to a Scott Stevens situation, who having looked back on it would have been a MUCH stronger comparison than Blake. Gadsby produced great offense early in his career, then was worse later in his career as his defense got stronger as he focused on it more. Which Gadsby do you get here? I think it's somewhere in between. Gadsby was never bad on defense, but he clearly got much better as he aged and his offense went down. So basically what I'm saying you get here is above-average everything (read: both offense and defense) with Gadsby, but not a master at anything.
His defence did improve when his offence went down, but keep in mind he ran a lot of miles on his body and was in years 16-20 when he really locked it down. And over that period of time, he was 7th among defencemen for scoring.

I have no doubt that a prime Gadsby could have been a high end point producer and defensive ace with the right coach. And I believe Al Arbour is that coach.

Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
although minnesota's d-men are very big, i think they are also relatively slow. although jagr famously struggled with the big, slow behemoth hal gill,
They are actually very mobile.

Gadsby and Duncan were noted as very strong to excellent skaters. Clapper was a strong skater early in his career, but had declined as he became a defenceman. I found no tangible quotes about his skating other than it was less than it used to be. Hatcher had excellent mobility for his hulking size. Too often people remember post-knee injury Hatcher at the expense of the ten years where he was the ideal combination of size and skating. Mummery had excellent top speed, his acceleration and agility are unknown. And Tikal's mobility was never an issue in European play, where it would have faced styles that would exploit it if he couldn't compensate.

Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.

Last edited by Nalyd Psycho: 05-11-2012 at 05:20 PM.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote