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.

Jean Beliveau vs. Bobby Hull

View Poll Results: Jean Beliveau or Bobby Hull?
Hull 54 40.60%
Beliveau 79 59.40%
Voters: 133. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-25-2012, 03:48 PM
  #1
Fred Taylor
The Cyclone
 
Fred Taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,565
vCash: 500
Jean Beliveau vs. Bobby Hull

Who do you rank higher on an all-time list, and why?

Fred Taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:03 PM
  #2
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,548
vCash: 500
Beliveau. He basically has a flawless resume in all respects.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:06 PM
  #3
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,357
vCash: 500
Hull- just a much more dynamic offensive threat. Also not as dependent on teammates for his personal success.

Beliveau beats him in intangibles and playmaking, but hull's strength, goal scoring, was just so much more outstanding that it more than makes up for the edge's Beliveau had.

That said I have hull as the 4th best forward ever and Beliveau 5th.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:16 PM
  #4
DJ Man
Registered User
 
DJ Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: East Central Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 297
vCash: 500
Hull. He was almost regarded as a force of nature. He actually made some goaltenders fearful, and you can't underestimate the effectiveness of that.

DJ Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:20 PM
  #5
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,804
vCash: 500
Hull was not dependent on teammates, but he didn't make them better either. Beliveau did

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:27 PM
  #6
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,373
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hull was not dependent on teammates, but he didn't make them better either. Beliveau did
I don't really have a horse in this race, but that seems a bit far-fetched. Maybe he didn't intentionally make them better, but I would guess his presence helped them (for instance, less defensive attention and more space on the ice for them).

I went with my heart and picked Beliveau. I'm not really one to favor a player primarily for being an important part of a dynasty. Probably the main reason I think Beliveau and Hull are close is that Beliveau was so much more versatile. If Hull was a better playmaker, I think I'd be forced to pick him. I still think the numbers are on his side though.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:36 PM
  #7
Andros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 40
vCash: 500
Voted for Hull because I value offense and peak the most when it comes to forwards, and Hull seems to beat Beliveau in those categories. Though they are numbers 4 and 5 on my all time forwards list, and further analysis could easily make me swap them.

Andros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 05:38 PM
  #8
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hull was not dependent on teammates, but he didn't make them better either. Beliveau did
Bingo. The importance of those qualities cannot be over-stated (nor should they ever be under-estimated) enough, and Im a big Hull fan. Ya, he was a "force of nature" as eloquently described above, however, Id be picking Beliveau ahead of Hull if I was putting together a "team" hands down. However, if I was playing shinny out on the pond, Id be pickin Bobby....

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 06:08 PM
  #9
DJ Man
Registered User
 
DJ Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: East Central Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 297
vCash: 500
True, the Black Hawks weren't a "dynasty," but they were respectible and competitive for most of Hull's career (though they were terrible before he got there). Beliveau's guys certainly couldn't afford to take Hull's guys for granted.

DJ Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 06:36 PM
  #10
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,017
vCash: 500
I've always picked Beliveau in this situation. In fact, I have Beliveau #5 all-time as a player after the big 4. There was just nothing he couldn't do. He was the entire package. He was also the entire OFFENSIVE package. If you want to Cup count Beliveau had 10 to Hull's 1. That doesn't do any justice for Hull because he was a great playoff performer as well but as far as I am concerned Beliveau is the only player in NHL history (I am SURE of this) that was the best player on two different dynasties. He's the best player for the Habs from 1965-'69. And personally I think he was the best in the 1956-'60 although he has better competition from his teammates. So that counts for quite a bit.

I believe Killion said if he were picking a TEAM then he goes with Beliveau. I do too, hands down this is the guy I want that can not only score the big goal but will automatically elevate the play of his linemates

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 08:27 PM
  #11
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
I don't really have a horse in this race, but that seems a bit far-fetched. Maybe he didn't intentionally make them better, but I would guess his presence helped them (for instance, less defensive attention and more space on the ice for them).

I went with my heart and picked Beliveau. I'm not really one to favor a player primarily for being an important part of a dynasty. Probably the main reason I think Beliveau and Hull are close is that Beliveau was so much more versatile. If Hull was a better playmaker, I think I'd be forced to pick him. I still think the numbers are on his side though.
I pretty much agree with this post and on different days would take one over the other only slightly but I prefer well rounded guys a bit more so it's Jean today.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 08:45 PM
  #12
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,357
vCash: 500
I remember as a kid, pre-Gretzky that Howe was considered the best forward ever and Hull was 2nd with Richard 3rd by most hockey people. The memories of those players was a lot fresher back then so I'm wondering if the elevation of Beliveau into that group might be revisionist. Basically has he risen up the rankings because of the classy gentleman he developed into post-retirement.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 09:14 PM
  #13
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Bernie Geoffrion was a superstar well before beliveau hit his peak, beliveau also got to play with the rocket for 3 years. Beliveau had the better career but Hull was the better offensive player.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 09:23 PM
  #14
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,702
vCash: 500
my first reaction is to go with beliveau. by reputation, he is the most complete center there ever was. greatest leader in hockey history, won goal scoring titles, assist titles, hart trophies, was the best player on two dynasties. big huge guy, took on challengers early on and was mostly left alone after that.

but my question is, how was he defensively? again, by reputation beliveau was good. but was he selke good, or close to it?

because i also remember reading that bobby hull used his speed and strength to neutralize beliveau the year the hawks won the cup. on the other hand, hull's hawks certainly lost to beliveau's habs in the playoffs more often than they won.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 09:32 PM
  #15
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
my first reaction is to go with beliveau. by reputation, he is the most complete center there ever was. greatest leader in hockey history, won goal scoring titles, assist titles, hart trophies, was the best player on two dynasties. big huge guy, took on challengers early on and was mostly left alone after that.

but my question is, how was he defensively? again, by reputation beliveau was good. but was he selke good, or close to it?

because i also remember reading that bobby hull used his speed and strength to neutralize beliveau the year the hawks won the cup. on the other hand, hull's hawks certainly lost to beliveau's habs in the playoffs more often than they won.
I've always wondered how good he actually is on the defensive side too. Everything seems to indicate he was good but not on the level of a clarke, mikita or henri richard.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 09:46 AM
  #16
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
Not So

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hull was not dependent on teammates, but he didn't make them better either. Beliveau did
Bobby Hull was very dependent on teammates. Evidenced by the way the Canadiens and Leafs defensed the hawks to reduce Hull`s effectiveness.

The key was the forechecking of Henri Richard, Dave Keon and the other defending centers. Preventing Pilote and the other Hawk dmen from getting the puck to Hull quickly and in stride impacted Hull's effectiveness.

Make the puck go to Hull via another Hawk player or with a longer pass slowed Hull down or craeted offside situations.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 09:50 AM
  #17
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
Beliveau Defensively

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
my first reaction is to go with beliveau. by reputation, he is the most complete center there ever was. greatest leader in hockey history, won goal scoring titles, assist titles, hart trophies, was the best player on two dynasties. big huge guy, took on challengers early on and was mostly left alone after that.

but my question is, how was he defensively? again, by reputation beliveau was good. but was he selke good, or close to it?

because i also remember reading that bobby hull used his speed and strength to neutralize beliveau the year the hawks won the cup. on the other hand, hull's hawks certainly lost to beliveau's habs in the playoffs more often than they won.
Close to it but on the Canadiens he would always be behind Henri Richard in this regard. Better on faceoffs,more geometric defensively than Henri Richard who relied more on quickness and speed plus leveraging.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 03:19 PM
  #18
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Close to it but on the Canadiens he would always be behind Henri Richard in this regard. Better on faceoffs,more geometric defensively than Henri Richard who relied more on quickness and speed plus leveraging.
Ya, very true. Beliveau of course had a size advantage over Henri, wasnt close to being the same hair-pin type skater, much more "loping", played the angles defensively forcing incoming wide, stood them up & if back deep never afraid to block a shot.

Richard was smaller, quicker, "crafty" and in Junior a goal scorer with 53 & 33 in 2yrs with the Jr. Canadiens. In the NHL however, he wasnt really able to "close the deal" quite so much, instead, leading the league in assists while playing a defensive role against the oppositions top lines.

Quite a feat really when you consider his size disadvantage against a Bobby Hull for example. Perhaps the most pronounced commonality between Beliveau & Richard was in their abilities to retain their composure. Never panicked, got caught, or if they did, wouldnt get fooled again. Consistency, intelligence, both had Class to burn, Henri in particular always well worth the price of admission, Beliveau somewhat more under-stated.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 04:06 PM
  #19
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,629
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
I remember as a kid, pre-Gretzky that Howe was considered the best forward ever and Hull was 2nd with Richard 3rd by most hockey people. The memories of those players was a lot fresher back then so I'm wondering if the elevation of Beliveau into that group might be revisionist. Basically has he risen up the rankings because of the classy gentleman he developed into post-retirement.
I believe it is.

Also, a lot of people can only base their arguments on numbers (including Cups). If you lived through the era Bobby Hull played in there was little doubt he was the best player in the league in the 60s before Orr came in.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 04:16 PM
  #20
tony d
Thanks for memories
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,022
vCash: 500
Jean Beliveau

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 04:55 PM
  #21
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post

Also, a lot of people can only base their arguments on numbers (including Cups). If you lived through the era Bobby Hull played in there was little doubt he was the best player in the league in the 60s before Orr came in.
I have read on this board the same thing about Jean Beliveau in the late 50s

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 05:34 PM
  #22
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 50
Mr Beliveau for me.

Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 06:10 PM
  #23
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 684
vCash: 500
I am always amazed when I see how incredibly close Beliveau was to prime Howe in PPG, even besting him over some periods (and they are only separeated by 3 years). I think that either Howes peak is overrated or Beliveaus is underrated.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 06:39 PM
  #24
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I believe it is....Also, a lot of people can only base their arguments on numbers (including Cups). If you lived through the era Bobby Hull played in there was little doubt he was the best player in the league in the 60s before Orr came in.
Ya, I agree that for some (myself included) it may well be revisionist, and having lived through the era absolutely, Hull was the brightest Star in the league. If youd asked me as a 10yr old back then which of the two Id have picked as being "superior", no question it wouldve been #9. As one matures & learns things about the game, we often "revise" our opinions on such matters. Therefore, "upon revision" comparing these two players over-all "team play" I think Beliveaus' was superior, more well rounded, better leadership, much more successful obviously. Though that in and of itself opens the door to even further speculation & debate in terms of Chicago's player personnel, Coaching, Management & Scouting weaknesses of the era. They seemed to have had all of the ingredients to have won a lot more Cups', yet repeatedly fell short....

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2012, 06:47 PM
  #25
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,629
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Ya, I agree that for some (myself included) it may well be revisionist, and having lived through the era absolutely, Hull was the brightest Star in the league. If youd asked me as a 10yr old back then which of the two Id have picked as being "superior", no question it wouldve been #9. As one matures & learns things about the game, we often "revise" our opinions on such matters. Therefore, "upon revision" comparing these two players over-all "team play" I think Beliveaus' was superior, more well rounded, better leadership, much more successful obviously. Though that in and of itself opens the door to even further speculation & debate in terms of Chicago's player personnel, Coaching, Management & Scouting weaknesses of the era. They seemed to have had all of the ingredients to have won a lot more Cups', yet repeatedly fell short....
Agreed.

But I also think most 30 or 40 year olds at the time would also have considered Hull superior.

Dennis Bonvie 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 04:09 AM.

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.