HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

NHL Award and All-star Voting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-18-2010, 06:32 PM
  #326
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Ice time means different things to different players. In Chicago the problem was not the amount of minutes that Hull, Mikita and Pilote received during the Rudy Pilous years but how the minutes were distributed.

I'll illustrate with the power play. The Hawks power play was potent when Hull, Mikita and Pilote were on at the same time. If only one or two of them played the power play it was significantly weaker.

Illustrating with the power play.If the power play with Hull, Mikita and Pilote ran long or the full two minutes, Pilous had serious problems. The next shift had to be played without Hull, Mikita or Pilote on the ice while they rested producing a net disadvantage to the Hawks since Hull and Mikita hardly ever played on the same line.Fringe shift. Next shift Pilote would then play with the Hull or the Mikita line followed by Hull or Mikita with the 3/4d-men pairing.
Interesting. In 61 when they won the cup, they had a strong 3rd line with former first liners Litzenberger & Sloan. However they traded Litz for inferior players & Sloan retired & hawks never had that depth again. Meanwhile Habs had a 3rd line of Provost/goyette/Pronovost and Johnson on D so they didn't have a depth problem.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2010, 10:23 PM
  #327
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
The Montreal Canadians weren't the only team winning cups in the 60's, The leafs won 4 too. Doug Harvey won 8 norrises and was the best defensive d-man ever, that impresses me more than winning goal scoring titles by being a puckhog.

As for Patrick Roy, he lead the league in save% 4 times and was top 5 10 times. If that isn't dominance, then what is? The 3 playoff mvp's alone should be enough to consider him greater. Bobby Hull would easily trade his hardware for conn smythe's.


Last edited by ushvinder: 07-18-2010 at 10:58 PM.
ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2010, 12:09 AM
  #328
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
The Montreal Canadians weren't the only team winning cups in the 60's, The leafs won 4 too. Doug Harvey won 8 norrises and was the best defensive d-man ever, that impresses me more than winning goal scoring titles by being a puckhog.



As for Patrick Roy, he lead the league in save% 4 times and was top 5 10 times. If that isn't dominance, then what is? The 3 playoff mvp's alone should be enough to consider him greater. Bobby Hull would easily trade his hardware for conn smythe's.
I guess all great goal scorers should be considered puck hogs then?

I wonder, did you actually watch Doug Harvey play?

Maybe the level of competition wasn't as great back then and it was easier to look better?

I'm guessing maybe it was since we have some excellent defensive Dmen to day like Duncan Keith and Glen Searbrooke playing on the same team.

Lidstrom isn't a bad Dman either.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 09:36 AM
  #329
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I guess all great goal scorers should be considered puck hogs then?

I wonder, did you actually watch Doug Harvey play?

Maybe the level of competition wasn't as great back then and it was easier to look better?

I'm guessing maybe it was since we have some excellent defensive Dmen to day like Duncan Keith and Glen Searbrooke playing on the same team.

Lidstrom isn't a bad Dman either.
And maybe it was better.

It would only make sense that with less players there would be less stiffs to play against.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 01:23 PM
  #330
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
And maybe it was better.

It would only make sense that with less players there would be less stiffs to play against.
So you want to make an argument that the Original 6 was better than when Hull played, then Orr in the 70's, then Gretzky in the 80's to today where the level is extremely high due to training and the influx of more top level talents from an increase in the parts of the world that produce hockey players now?

I have no doubt that Harvey was the best Dman of his time but I doubt that he would be nearly as great in a later era and today he would be considered small in the NHL for a Dman.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 01:59 PM
  #331
Devils Mike*
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 6,989
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Devils Mike*
It's hard to adjust defensive stats like that

Devils Mike* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 04:34 PM
  #332
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
So you want to make an argument that the Original 6 was better than when Hull played, then Orr in the 70's, then Gretzky in the 80's to today where the level is extremely high due to training and the influx of more top level talents from an increase in the parts of the world that produce hockey players now?

I have no doubt that Harvey was the best Dman of his time but I doubt that he would be nearly as great in a later era and today he would be considered small in the NHL for a Dman.
Hull did play in the original 6 era.

Keith Duncan & Brian Rafalski are small for Dmen today too. They do OK, being around the same size as Harvey.

Charlie Simmer & Tim Kerr played in the 70s & 80s. They make Hal Gill look like a speed skater. Both multiple 50 goal scorers.

Gretzky was perhaps the weakest player in the league as well as one of the lightest. Didn't seem to hurt him.

Ron Francis couldn't skate well and you could stop his shot with spit. Only the Great One has more helpers in his career.

In the original 6, no one carried a goon. Today some teams carry more than 1. 4th liners were usually penalty killers who rarely played much at even strength. Today some teams play a 4th line for 10 minutes a night. Original 6 had the top 6 goalies there were. Much more consistent than today's top 60.

What I hear is bigger, stronger, faster means better. I don't buy it. I believe the top players in the game would be top players in any era they played in.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2010, 11:51 PM
  #333
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Hull did play in the original 6 era.

Keith Duncan & Brian Rafalski are small for Dmen today too. They do OK, being around the same size as Harvey.

Charlie Simmer & Tim Kerr played in the 70s & 80s. They make Hal Gill look like a speed skater. Both multiple 50 goal scorers.

Gretzky was perhaps the weakest player in the league as well as one of the lightest. Didn't seem to hurt him.

Ron Francis couldn't skate well and you could stop his shot with spit. Only the Great One has more helpers in his career.

In the original 6, no one carried a goon. Today some teams carry more than 1. 4th liners were usually penalty killers who rarely played much at even strength. Today some teams play a 4th line for 10 minutes a night. Original 6 had the top 6 goalies there were. Much more consistent than today's top 60.

What I hear is bigger, stronger, faster means better. I don't buy it. I believe the top players in the game would be top players in any era they played in.
*clap clap clap*

Nice post.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 12:31 AM
  #334
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Hull did play in the original 6 era.

Keith Duncan & Brian Rafalski are small for Dmen today too. They do OK, being around the same size as Harvey.

Charlie Simmer & Tim Kerr played in the 70s & 80s. They make Hal Gill look like a speed skater. Both multiple 50 goal scorers.

Gretzky was perhaps the weakest player in the league as well as one of the lightest. Didn't seem to hurt him.

Ron Francis couldn't skate well and you could stop his shot with spit. Only the Great One has more helpers in his career.

In the original 6, no one carried a goon. Today some teams carry more than 1. 4th liners were usually penalty killers who rarely played much at even strength. Today some teams play a 4th line for 10 minutes a night. Original 6 had the top 6 goalies there were. Much more consistent than today's top 60.

What I hear is bigger, stronger, faster means better. I don't buy it. I believe the top players in the game would be top players in any era they played in.
Yes I know that you are, for the most part preaching to the converted here with this post, but comments like you could stop Ron Francis shot with spit?

Comparing 6 goalies with the starters and backups in the NHL today? Some really good goalies not playing in the NHL like Nabokov next year but that's besides the point isn't it?

It's not just the size and speed of the players (but that is a part of it) it's everything from coaching to training to the systems that teams play today compared to past times is like night and day.

Tthis is the frustrating part of people that make these comparison on here and do not take into account the full differences form any year to nay other year and make the assumption that everything from talent to the % chance of winning anything stays the same in 1960 6 team NHL of 2010 30 team NHL.

Back to the thread, the bottom line is that it is much easier to win an award in a 6 team league than a 30 team league and that's the point i was trying to make with Harvey and the assertion that he was the best defensive Dman of all time. That and the fact that most people on these boards probably never saw him play during his career and are just reading "reports and "hockey history books" which are lacking behind baseball in objectivity and research behind some of the assertions made.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 01:13 AM
  #335
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Back to the thread, the bottom line is that it is much easier to win an award in a 6 team league than a 30 team league and that's the point i was trying to make with Harvey and the assertion that he was the best defensive Dman of all time. That and the fact that most people on these boards probably never saw him play during his career and are just reading "reports and "hockey history books" which are lacking behind baseball in objectivity and research behind some of the assertions made.
It's not the bottom line, because it isn't true... Unless we are talking about an award that only one player per team has a shot at, aka an award for goalies.

Just because you keep repeating it, doesn't make it true. If a forward or defenseman was good enough to win an award, don't you think it's highly likely that he would get a shot in one of the 36 scoring line positions or one of the 24 positions as a Top 4 defenseman? In other words, if a player was good enough to be the best in the league at his position, don't you think his NHL club would probably give him a shot as one of their top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 01:28 AM
  #336
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
It's not the bottom line, because it isn't true... Unless we are talking about an award that only one player per team has a shot at, aka an award for goalies.

Just because you keep repeating it, doesn't make it true. If a forward or defenseman was good enough to win an award, don't you think it's highly likely that he would get a shot in one of the 36 scoring line positions or one of the 24 positions as a Top 4 defenseman? In other words, if a player was good enough to be the best in the league at his position, don't you think his NHL club would probably give him a shot as one of their top 6 forwards or top 4 defensemen?
Yes of course they would but each team plays 60 minutes in every game in a season and with more teams there is a greater chance for player A from one of 6 teams to win than player B from 30 teams to win.

This is especially true when comparing the 6 team league from past days to today 30 team league.

You answered the question up above in that if every team has one scoring line and one number 1 power play then in a 6 team league that would be about 18 forwards getting the prime time as opposed to 90 in a 30 team league.

I'm sure a math guy could put up a formula but to me it's pretty simple, we have to take 1st, 2nd team all stars and top 10 in scoring and awards ect from different times, let's say a 6 team league or even 10-12 teams compared to 30 and treat them differently because they are different.

It is more likely that a guy from one of the other 29 teams could win the scoring title as happened this year with Hank Sedin.

There is simply more competition, in sheer numbers, for all awards in the NHL in a modern 30 team league than there was in a 6 team league period.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 01:39 AM
  #337
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Yes of course they would but each team plays 60 minutes in every game in a season and with more teams there is a greater chance for player A from one of 6 teams to win than player B from 30 teams to win.

This is especially true when comparing the 6 team league from past days to today 30 team league.
Why is true? You've been asked this repeatedly and have yet to come up with a satisfactory answer. If the best players are highly likely to be in the league no matter what, why does it matter how many teams they are spread out among? How does bringing in 24 teams worth of players who weren't good enough to make a 6 team league make it harder for the best players (who were already in the 6 team league) to win awards?

Quote:
You answered the question up above in that if every team has one scoring line and one number 1 power play then in a 6 team league that would be about 18 forwards getting the prime time as opposed to 90 in a 30 team league.
Yes, but you're acting like NHL coaches are stupid. If a guy is good enough to be the best in the league at his position, don't you think his coach would quickly realize this and give him prime minutes?

Honestly, you are describing a Henri Richard situation, where he barely got any PP time. But that was the most stacked team of all-time and such a unique situation. And I think history recognizes how great Henri Richard was.
Quote:

I'm sure a math guy could put up a formula but to me it's pretty simple, we have to take 1st, 2nd team all stars and top 10 in scoring and awards ect from different times, let's say a 6 team league or even 10-12 teams compared to 30 and treat them differently because they are different.

It is more likely that a guy from one of the other 29 teams could win the scoring title as happened this year with Hank Sedin.
So you really believe that Hank Sedin wouldn't have been in the league if there were only 6 teams?

Quote:
There is simply more competition, in sheer numbers, for all awards in the NHL in a modern 30 team league than there was in a 6 team league period.
Again, I agree that there is a small chance that a player who wouldn't be in a 6 team league might emerge to win an award. But it's highly unlikely and not anything close to a 30-6 ratio.

There's a historical way of looking at this actually: The NHL doubled in size in 1967. If your theory is correct, it should have been twice as hard to win awards after the expansion, as it was before. Did any players suddenly become threats to win awards who might not have been regulars in the league before? Well, Al Arbour was 5th in Norris voting after being a journeyman (basically stuck behind the most stacked D ever of the 60s Leafs). Dennis Hextall finished 7th in Hart voting one year and thought he might not have gotten a chance without expansion. I can't think of anyone who actually came close to winning an award, though.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 01:56 AM
  #338
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
I never said that it was a 30-6 ratio and in a previous thread that we discussed this before I made that point as well. Maybe it's only 2 times as hard or maybe 4, or somewhere in between but is is not the same.

Its not just a simple math formula because there are other things at play and I realize this but there is a greater likely hood to win or place in the top 5 in one era, the 6 team era, than the 30 team era.

Why is that so hard to see?

Also to Hank, I never said that he would not have played in a 6 team current NHL but your comment got me to thinking about how he would have been allowed to develop in a 6 team league given his early struggles in the NHL and i think that a strong argument that he never would have been given the opportunity in a 6 team current NHL than the current 30 team system we have.

Given his relative success, or lack of it, on the Swedish National team, when he is actually selected, one can make a very strong argument that Hank just would not see the prime time minutes in a 6 team league that he does in a 30 team league.

Maybe that's why Sweden didn't win in Vancouver but IMO I think they thought, and I agree with them , that they had better players than Hank.

To sum up on Hank I highly doubt that he ever develops into a top 20 scorer in a 6 team NHL, never mind winning the scoring title and Hart trophies.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 02:40 AM
  #339
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I never said that it was a 30-6 ratio and in a previous thread that we discussed this before I made that point as well. Maybe it's only 2 times as hard or maybe 4, or somewhere in between but is is not the same.

Its not just a simple math formula because there are other things at play and I realize this but there is a greater likely hood to win or place in the top 5 in one era, the 6 team era, than the 30 team era.

Why is that so hard to see?

Also to Hank, I never said that he would not have played in a 6 team current NHL but your comment got me to thinking about how he would have been allowed to develop in a 6 team league given his early struggles in the NHL and i think that a strong argument that he never would have been given the opportunity in a 6 team current NHL than the current 30 team system we have.

Given his relative success, or lack of it, on the Swedish National team, when he is actually selected, one can make a very strong argument that Hank just would not see the prime time minutes in a 6 team league that he does in a 30 team league.

Maybe that's why Sweden didn't win in Vancouver but IMO I think they thought, and I agree with them , that they had better players than Hank.

To sum up on Hank I highly doubt that he ever develops into a top 20 scorer in a 6 team NHL, never mind winning the scoring title and Hart trophies.


You are just as wrong on this as you've always been.... you should give it up.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 05:47 PM
  #340
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Yes of course they would but each team plays 60 minutes in every game in a season and with more teams there is a greater chance for player A from one of 6 teams to win than player B from 30 teams to win.

This is especially true when comparing the 6 team league from past days to today 30 team league.

You answered the question up above in that if every team has one scoring line and one number 1 power play then in a 6 team league that would be about 18 forwards getting the prime time as opposed to 90 in a 30 team league.

I'm sure a math guy could put up a formula but to me it's pretty simple, we have to take 1st, 2nd team all stars and top 10 in scoring and awards ect from different times, let's say a 6 team league or even 10-12 teams compared to 30 and treat them differently because they are different.

It is more likely that a guy from one of the other 29 teams could win the scoring title as happened this year with Hank Sedin.

There is simply more competition, in sheer numbers, for all awards in the NHL in a modern 30 team league than there was in a 6 team league period.
By this simplistic thinking guys like Shane Hnidy and Hal Gill have the same chance of winning the scoring title as Parise or Kane. Using "sheer numbers" is assuming everyone has an equal chance. And all the goons that play today make the game somehow more competitive also.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 10:18 PM
  #341
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post


You are just as wrong on this as you've always been.... you should give it up.
Ya maybe i should given your enlightened response but someone has to put some discussion on in here and for the Hall Gill arguement, I think somewhere a point was missed.

All 30 teams are going to have top lines and top PP minutes and in a 6 team laegaue some of those players roles simply would not be as they are now in a 30 team league and Hank is a prime guy.

The point here is in 15 years, or sooner, my enlightened friend will add to the discussion by saying that Crosby and AO are overated becasue Hank won a scoing title from them.

I guess that if some peopel are going to argue and think that a 30 team league and 6 team league and awards top ten scoring ect are fair comparilbes then it's easy to see why Morenz is the 10th best player of all time on your lists.

I obviously wasn't here at the time but I guess most guys who acknolwedge the level of play today as being better than in the past simply got fed up and left, but I can only specualte on that.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2010, 11:48 PM
  #342
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Ya maybe i should given your enlightened response but someone has to put some discussion on in here and for the Hall Gill arguement, I think somewhere a point was missed.

All 30 teams are going to have top lines and top PP minutes and in a 6 team laegaue some of those players roles simply would not be as they are now in a 30 team league and Hank is a prime guy.

The point here is in 15 years, or sooner, my enlightened friend will add to the discussion by saying that Crosby and AO are overated becasue Hank won a scoing title from them.

I guess that if some peopel are going to argue and think that a 30 team league and 6 team league and awards top ten scoring ect are fair comparilbes then it's easy to see why Morenz is the 10th best player of all time on your lists.

I obviously wasn't here at the time but I guess most guys who acknolwedge the level of play today as being better than in the past simply got fed up and left, but I can only specualte on that.
You have yet to make a valid point in this matter.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 12:46 AM
  #343
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
really, I'm not sure if you are joking or just becasue you don't share my opinion, which I back up with some kind of arguement, you feel free to gvie short flipant responses.

I'm starting to see why the other guy, his named has escaped me, stopped posting in here as your responses are infelxible and do not encourage serious discussion.

If you really think that you can evaluate players from a 6 team NHL in 1955 to players in a 2008 30 team NHL then IMO it really discredits your overall list, which for the most part is pretty good but it has it's flaws IMO and I always try to say why I think so when making an arguement for discussion here.

If you can't see a valid point here then i'm truly sorry for your narrowmindedness in these discussions.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 01:37 AM
  #344
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
really, I'm not sure if you are joking or just becasue you don't share my opinion, which I back up with some kind of arguement, you feel free to gvie short flipant responses.

I'm starting to see why the other guy, his named has escaped me, stopped posting in here as your responses are infelxible and do not encourage serious discussion.

If you really think that you can evaluate players from a 6 team NHL in 1955 to players in a 2008 30 team NHL then IMO it really discredits your overall list, which for the most part is pretty good but it has it's flaws IMO and I always try to say why I think so when making an arguement for discussion here.

If you can't see a valid point here then i'm truly sorry for your narrowmindedness in these discussions.
The reason I'm down to "short, flippant" responses is because all the arguments about this have been made, both by me and by a handful of other users. You don't have a leg to stand on.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 01:53 AM
  #345
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
So much for discussion of the issues raised I guess, well maybe someone else will step in since "I don't have a leg to stand on" whatever that means

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 01:59 AM
  #346
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
So much for discussion of the issues raised I guess, well maybe someone else will step in since "I don't have a leg to stand on" whatever that means
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source...5iForJ0gi_wKXw

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source...1AlCTeX9Rrmxlg

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=419488

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 02:08 AM
  #347
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
I guess I could post a link for Sarcasm but that would be getting away from the thread.

I'll just put you down for "considering the ideas presented camp" instead of the "no leg to stand on camp"

Back to one of the questions, do you honestly beleive that Hank would have reasonably ever had the chance to be the NHL scoring leader last year if the current NHL was a 6 team league, given what we know about his performance for Sweden in international play?

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 02:17 AM
  #348
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Back to one of the questions, do you honestly beleive that Hank would have reasonably ever had the chance to be the NHL scoring leader last year if the current NHL was a 6 team league, given what we know about his performance for Sweden in international play?
Yes.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 03:02 AM
  #349
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,392
vCash: 500
Really, given his 1st 4 years in the league (I lived through those vancouver years and swa him game in game out) and the influx of more stars per team via the draft in a "fantasy 6 team modern NHL." He is an good to excellent player but hardly in Crosby's class IMO.

I'm just wondering if you watch him at the Olympics in Vancouver and his status on the Swedish team for the last 2 Olympics. He was hardly a star with 6 points in 12 games.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2010, 03:24 AM
  #350
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Really, given his 1st 4 years in the league (I lived through those vancouver years and swa him game in game out) and the influx of more stars per team via the draft in a "fantasy 6 team modern NHL." He is an good to excellent player but hardly in Crosby's class IMO.
Of course he isn't. But for 82 games he managed to produce at that level.

Metro Prystai wasn't as good as Elmer Lach, but for about 70 games he produced at his level.

Quote:
I'm just wondering if you watch him at the Olympics in Vancouver and his status on the Swedish team for the last 2 Olympics. He was hardly a star with 6 points in 12 games.
I care much less about his 12 games than I do about the 300+ that he played in the NHL during the last five seasons.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.