View Single Post
09-11-2013, 12:12 AM
1for the other thumb
billybudd's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 20,207
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Yeah but we are comparing two specific players here. Fact is that Hull was more prominent in all important physical aspects in the game. Otherwise it's like saying Peter Popovic had anything on Scott Stevens physically, although there it might actually be that Popovic in fact might have for example benched more. He did not show that on the ice though and Bobby Hull has the physical edge over Beliveau no matter how tall the latter where. Hull was stronger, faster and more nasty.
Career point per game

Beliveau 1.08
Hull 1.10

Stevens .56
Popovic .15

Not that Stevens was particularly known for his offense, but this is the quickest way I could think of to demonstrate that my preference for large players over smaller ones (and there are more advantages to to size than strength, which, I should not, I never mentioned) and centers over wings pertains only to two players of similar talent and effectiveness in their roles, which Stevens and Popovic in no way constitute.

I said I'd take Beliveau over Hull, not Crabb over St Louis, so I'll thank you to stop pretending I'm implying something other than I obviously am.

billybudd is offline   Reply With Quote