View Single Post
02-20-2013, 07:46 PM
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,378
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Marotte Marauder View Post
Regarding Moose Moheen, a contemporary of Baker's, Baker was selected to the Hall over him. Maybe his 3 national titles at Princeton, maybe his estimated 3 goals and 3 assists per game in college, maybe leading his High School teams to wins over Universities.

Perhaps: Baker had a blend of talent, courage and passion that had not yet been seen on a campus. He was a fearless halfback who brought crowds to their feet whenever he came near the ball; he dominated every game when he switched to play hockey. A dazzling skater, his raw speed seemed to mesmerize fans. When the puck found his stick, a buzz wound through a crowd anticipating a charge up the ice. He was once credited with 30 shots on goal in a game against Yale. As a sophomore, he had 92 points and led Princeton to an unbeaten season. Describing one of his goals, the New York Times wrote, “He carried the puck to every part of the ice surface without being stopped.” But then the Times seemed particularly smitten by the Baker Phenomenon and it chronicled all his accomplishments with colorful prose. Times writers made it clear that they liked every layer of Baker, from the flashy way he moved on the ice to the noble manner with which he conducted himself when the game was over. In their eyes, the blonde bombshell was easily a prototype of the all-American boy.

Wherever Baker was scheduled to play, fans would line up to see him. To them, seeing Baker play hockey was like watching a magic show. They saw him perform acts of athleticism that simply could not be explained, like the time he seemed to run along the top of the boards to escape a defender. He controlled the puck as if it was attached to his stick by an invisible length of rope, as if he was running the-pea-and-the-shell game and the puck was the pea; now you see it, now you don’t.

A legit argument, I submit.
So he was better because he was elected to the Hall of Fame before Goheen? Surely you see how this is just repeating what you said before.

All I'm getting from your underlined is a small bit of substance and a lot of "fluff". Let's take it all at face value, you're saying he was a phenom in college hockey in the 1910s. What makes that impressive? Were they churning out legitimate NHL talent out the time? Was he playing against anyone we care about 100 years later? Why is that more impressive than being a phenom in American amateur hockey at the same time? Which doesn't seem particularly impressive either.

What did 6 points per game mean for college hockey at that time? What did 92 points in a season mean for that league and era?

It seems to be me like at best you can argue he was a big fish in a small pond. Throw in his apparent charisma and heroic death and I smell a guy being seriously overrated in an all-time sense. Much more work needs to be done to establish him as a top 5 American.

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote