View Single Post
06-19-2013, 05:44 PM
Registered User
Greg02's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,019
vCash: 500
I don't think anyone has posited the PIMs as a positive yet- the only argument has been how much of a negative it should be. Johnson also was physical by the anecdotes- speaking of which, here's a great one by Frank Boucher:

Ching loved to deliver a good hoist early in a game because he knew his victim would probably retaliate, and Ching loved body contact. I remember once against the Maroons, Ching caught Hooley Smith with a terrific check right at the start of the game. Hooley's stick flew from his hands and disappeared above the rink lights. He was lifted clean off the ice, and seemed to stay suspended five or six feet above the surface for seconds before finally crashing down on his back. No one could accuse Hooley of lacking guts. From then on, whenever he got the puck, he drove straight for Ching, tring to outmatch him, but every time Ching flattened poor Hooley. Afterwards, grinning in the shower, Ching said he couldn't remember a game he enjoyed more.
So basically, he was a nasty SOB.

RE: Park vs. Johnson: Both of them have three years as the clear second best defenseman in the game (well, for two of them, Ching would have possibly been the best; especially in 1932 when he was runner-up for the Hart after Morenz). They both clearly were top end players at the time. Park was definitely better at offense, but the game was different back then. Regardless, I don't think Park was a stronger runner up than Ching was (aka I don't think Park would have been beating Shore out for Norrises if the two players' top end competition was swapped). On top of that, Ching beats out Park on longevity and won a pair of Stanley Cups. It's kind of funny how much of a difference a day makes; when I first saw Crease's post I said no way in hell, then accepted it but expected to change my mind, and by now I'm pretty much convinced that at least on my list, Ching needs to be above Park.

RE: Park vs. Howell: Park was indubitably a far higher end player than Howell. Outside of Howell's Norris win, he either wasn't considered for the Norris or was in the 5-10 range (mind you in a very strong 6 team league). Extrapolate that out and figure that he's good enough to be a very good number one defenseman- I never saw him play, but I'm imagining that he's the equivalent of Ryan McDonagh being on the Rangers for 17 years and having one big offensive year where he wins the Norris. If you're ranking Howell over Park, then your list probably looks something like Leetch, Howell, Johnson, Park, Heller, Coulter, Gadsby, Greschner, Seibert, Pratt.

Gadsby vs. Howell and Seibert vs. Heller are the same issue, in my opinion. It's probably either Gadsby and Seibert or Howell and Heller.

Last edited by Greg02: 06-19-2013 at 06:23 PM.
Greg02 is offline   Reply With Quote