View Single Post
11-19-2012, 08:44 PM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I think that's important to know about him, but how does it make him better than if his innovations had been eagerly accepted? Or if they hadn't been his ideas at all?

In a sense, is it any bigger a deal than inventing the butterfly or the slap shot? Those are important innovations, but they don't vault Glen Hall and Bernie Geoffrion (or whoever is getting credit for inventing slap shots this month) over the competition on an all-time list. Shouldn't Harvey be judged on what his innovations allowed him to achieve, rather than on the fact that they were innovative?
This is how we should treat innovations, if they really are good they will translate into an advantage for that said player.

To do more than that is to double count but of course some traits and honors do spill over to others for most great players..

To make too much of them is folly IMO, earlier players already have a huge advantage with the interpretation of the Sticky here.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote