Guy Carbonneau HOF
View Single Post
07-27-2013, 02:59 PM
Join Date: Dec 2010
Originally Posted by
Your final assertion is not supported by history or results. Recently, the Bruins with
shut down Crosby and Malkin.
has more SCs than Crosby and Malkin,
has more SCs than the Sedin twins combined. Historically, Keon has more SCs than Phil Esposito, Ted Kennedy has five, more than Ullman and Mikita who have one between them yet were well above average defensively. Henri Richard an elite defensive center has the most SCs of all 11 yet he was never the #1 center on the Canadiens unless Beliveau was injured. He didn't have to be. All he had to do was be better than the center he was facing - B.Hull in 1959, Mikita, Esposito, Ullman, Clarke and others which he did more often than not, 11 times in a 20 season career. Teams hardly win with Roenick type centers alone.Lemieux needed Francis, Gretzky never won a SC when he lacked excellent defensive forwards.
Those bolded guys are all better than Carbonneau. They are defensively strong and produce offense.
Jeremy Roenick was not a one-dimensional player. He was a very good defensive player who's kind of like a poor man's Toews. Not that Toews would have a lot of fun with Mario Lemieux circa 1992. If Roenick had Patrick Roy and two centres ahead of him who were better than him, Chicago would have been a little better off too.
Few teams win Cups without solid defensive guys, but it's just as true that few teams win without players who can score goals. We can't just take it for granted that Muller/Damphousse will score goals because it's their job. The value of a two-way centre who can score goals should easily eclipse the value of a checking centre who doesn't, because even if he's great at being a 1-way checking centre the actual value provided over an average 1-way checking centre is marginal.
And I understand why DF doesn't like me saying Carbonneau was a 2nd/3rd liner, but what am I supposed to do when confronted with Cup Counting to say 2nd/3rd liners are better than first liners? Is Henri Richard > Beliveau? No! (Although again, Richard provided offense, unlike Carbs. Perhaps you want to compare Ralph Backstrom?)
Originally Posted by
Carbonneau managed to shutdown or reduce the effectiveness of the opposing #1 center. This was his role, it was not his role to be the #1 center and avoid being shut down. Your attempted point is like positing that a screw driver is a bad hammer so it should not be recognized as a necessary piece of construction equipment.
Failing to recognize that certain screwdrivers are much better than others and deserve recognition as great construction tools
Sure, if by "reduce the effectiveness" you mean the #1 centre scored at the exact same rate. The series was won even though Gretzky scored at the same pace. When he was off the ice the Kings were less effective, as non-Gretzky Kings goals dropped from 12 in 7 games vs Toronto to 5 in 5 games vs Montreal. When you're stuck producing >50% of your team's offense while playing ~35% of the minutes, you have issues with your teammates not the opposition's 3rd best centre.
And they're not construction tools, they are hockey players who have to perform multiple functions. Even we did use the construction tool analogy, the DatsyukDriver is a comparable screwdriver to the CarboDriver model, and Dats also functions as a very good hammer. So he is much more valuable than the screwdriver who is only a screwdriver like David Backes or Jay McClement.
Datsyuk, Bergeron, and Toews all brought offense to the table and ruin your screwdriver analogy. Because unlike Carbs, they're not one-dimensional. Carbo is not Toews. He's Frolik or Bolland. At his best he's about as valuable Mikko Koivu.
I want Begeron and Toews on Team Canada (Datsyuk has the wrong passport). Carbonneau was never invited to Team Canada, not even the defensively-focused 1991 team. Because a 2-way Steve Larmer is better than a 1-way Carbonneau who wasn't even invited to camp. Not a "need-to-have" guy.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by blogofmike