HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Paul Henderson

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-14-2006, 10:39 PM
  #1
terreur
Registered User
 
terreur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,742
vCash: 500
Paul Henderson

Paul Henderson probably scored the most important goal of the century. But I wasn't even born when he played his last game in the NHL... I was having a discution with one of my friends and we were wondering what kind of player was he in the NHL. My friend was saying he was a star since he was in the Canadian line up. But i recall earing that they didn't bring the best roster available. And since I have never heard of him except for this goal, I thought he was a marginal player in the NHL... like a Kris Draper or something like that. I he got lucky and scored when it was the time to get remembered.


SO if you had to compare him to a player in the NHL who would it be?

terreur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2006, 11:23 PM
  #2
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by terreur
Paul Henderson probably scored the most important goal of the century. But I wasn't even born when he played his last game in the NHL... I was having a discution with one of my friends and we were wondering what kind of player was he in the NHL. My friend was saying he was a star since he was in the Canadian line up. But i recall earing that they didn't bring the best roster available. And since I have never heard of him except for this goal, I thought he was a marginal player in the NHL... like a Kris Draper or something like that. I he got lucky and scored when it was the time to get remembered.


SO if you had to compare him to a player in the NHL who would it be?
I never saw him play (except for the DVDs of the 8 game series) but, his numbers were like those of Brendan Morrison.

BTW, he was phenomenal in the 8 game series vs the USSR. He did a LOT more than just score the winning goal, he was excellent. Most likely the best hockey of his career.

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 12:24 AM
  #3
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,908
vCash: 500
Here is his bio at the HHOF:
http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/...p?player=12910

He was one of the fastest skaters in the NHL and was a consistent 20+ goal scorer (back when that meant something) and was very good defensively. He would likely have been a Selke nominee for a top defensive forward if the trophy was being awarded in those years.

He played his first few years with the Red Wings and was part of the blockbuster deal (with Normie Ullman, Floyd Smith and Doug Barrie ) that sent Frank Mahovolich (along with Garry Unger, Pete Stemkowski and the rights to Carl Brewer) to the Wings from the Leafs.

On some abysmal Leafs teams he played very well often on a line with Ullman and Ron Ellis. On some bad Leafs teams he was very consistent offensively and defensively. He never had a minus season in 7 seasons with the Leafs - quite a feat for playing during the Ballard Reign of (T)Error.

He finally was fed up with Ballard and jumped to the WHA where he scored 140 goals in 5 seasons. He returned to the NHL for half a season with the Atlanta Flames when the WHA merged with the NHL.

In terms of a player today - think Jere Lehtinen with a bit more speed.

IMHO Paul henderson should be in the HHOF.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 01:24 PM
  #4
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster
IMHO Paul henderson should be in the HHOF.

Whoa man slow down! Look I love Henderson too, I've met him twice in my life a real nice man. And I'm obsessed with the Summit Series of '72 just like others are, but he isnt a HOFer. Yes he had a huge tournament in '72 where other than Phil Espostio he was the best Canadian, but he had 477 points in 707 NHL games. He also was in the WHA too, but even still that was a floaters league. Henderson had a career high of 38 goals, and his highest point total is 60. That's not HOF numbers even his greatest backers have to admit. But my question is if he hadnt of had the biggest tournament of his life would he have ever been mentioned in the HOF? My comparison is this: Tony Amonte scored a huge goal for the US in the '96 World Cup. Not as big as Henderson's mind you but it was huge. Now I think Amonte was at least as good as Henderson. He had a career high of 44 goals and 84 points. In his prime he was a very legitimate 35-40 goal scorer. Never was a post seaosn all-star though and has well under a point per game for his career not to mention weak playoff stats. Is Amonte a HOFer? No. I think we agree on that. So IMO Henderson isnt either. I just wish people would enjoy what happened in 1972, its not like his legacy will ever die.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 02:20 PM
  #5
ClassicHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
If you make comparisons to players like Gillies, Pulford, Boivin and the like, then maybe Henderson could be in the HHOF. If you make comparisons to Tretiak, who by the way was the loser in '72, then Henderson could be in the HHOF. You might say that Tretiak was put in for all those World Championships but I doubt many of the selection committee knew much about those events.

If you add the entire tournament in 1972, including not one, but three game winning goals, then a case can be made.

If you go by strict criteria of greatness in certain offensive categories, then maybe looking at the NHL career of Henderson means he doesn't make it. But the HHOF doesn't elect people that way.

So, take the comparisons to Gillies & Tretiak and add the heroics in 1972 and add the role he played in the Memorial Cup in 1962 and add the important clutch playoff goals he scored with the Detroit Red Wings and add the offensive contributions of 30 & 38 goals & other offensive seasons with the Leafs and add his post hockey career work with the Teen Ranch and ambassador for the game etc. etc.

and consider that its a Hockey Hall of FAME, and he did famous things, why is it such a stretch that Henderson be in the HHOF?

You just can't take his NHL career by looking at the stats. Its too simplistic.

Could Henderson play when the pressure was on? I think so.

Take all of those factors above (and the comparison factors count) and then see if its so far-fetched.

With all due respect to you and Tony Amonte, Tony Amonte couldn't carry Henderson's skates as a hockey player. Henderson was faster, was more involved in the play, played when goals were tougher to come by and in a much more rougher game. And Henderson did score those goals in '72 which elevates him certainly more than an Amonte type.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil
Whoa man slow down! Look I love Henderson too, I've met him twice in my life a real nice man. And I'm obsessed with the Summit Series of '72 just like others are, but he isnt a HOFer. Yes he had a huge tournament in '72 where other than Phil Espostio he was the best Canadian, but he had 477 points in 707 NHL games. He also was in the WHA too, but even still that was a floaters league. Henderson had a career high of 38 goals, and his highest point total is 60. That's not HOF numbers even his greatest backers have to admit. But my question is if he hadnt of had the biggest tournament of his life would he have ever been mentioned in the HOF? My comparison is this: Tony Amonte scored a huge goal for the US in the '96 World Cup. Not as big as Henderson's mind you but it was huge. Now I think Amonte was at least as good as Henderson. He had a career high of 44 goals and 84 points. In his prime he was a very legitimate 35-40 goal scorer. Never was a post seaosn all-star though and has well under a point per game for his career not to mention weak playoff stats. Is Amonte a HOFer? No. I think we agree on that. So IMO Henderson isnt either. I just wish people would enjoy what happened in 1972, its not like his legacy will ever die.


Last edited by ClassicHockey: 04-15-2006 at 02:39 PM.
ClassicHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 05:09 PM
  #6
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil
Whoa man slow down! Look I love Henderson too, I've met him twice in my life a real nice man. And I'm obsessed with the Summit Series of '72 just like others are, but he isnt a HOFer. Yes he had a huge tournament in '72 where other than Phil Espostio he was the best Canadian, but he had 477 points in 707 NHL games. He also was in the WHA too, but even still that was a floaters league. Henderson had a career high of 38 goals, and his highest point total is 60. That's not HOF numbers even his greatest backers have to admit. But my question is if he hadnt of had the biggest tournament of his life would he have ever been mentioned in the HOF? My comparison is this: Tony Amonte scored a huge goal for the US in the '96 World Cup. Not as big as Henderson's mind you but it was huge. Now I think Amonte was at least as good as Henderson. He had a career high of 44 goals and 84 points. In his prime he was a very legitimate 35-40 goal scorer. Never was a post seaosn all-star though and has well under a point per game for his career not to mention weak playoff stats. Is Amonte a HOFer? No. I think we agree on that. So IMO Henderson isnt either. I just wish people would enjoy what happened in 1972, its not like his legacy will ever die.
Based on the induction by-laws and criteria, Henderson's moment in the sun during Septemeber 1972 is worthy of HHOF induction.

Quote:
Playing ability, sportsmanship, character and their contribution to the team or teams and to the game of hockey in general.
Seems to fit Paul Henderson and in particular the latter criteria. YMMV.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 10:20 PM
  #7
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,200
vCash: 500
If the HOF had appropriate standards, no way Henderson should be in the Hall of Fame but they don't so why not. On a personal note, I like the guy. He & I were born in the same town. My aunt was a nurse and was present at his birth. I never met him but did see him speak at the CHIN picnic at Toronto Island in 1972. He was very cocky about the series & said Canada would demolish the Russians but we were all cocky going into that tournament.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 10:30 PM
  #8
Epsilon
#TeamRaccoon
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 39,716
vCash: 500
No way is Henderson a Hall of Fame player, and some of the arguments being brought up in the thread are pretty weak (the Memorial Cup? come on). If he's a Hall of Famer, is Mike Eruzione? How about Pavel Bure, who had one of the all-time greatest single game international performances (assuming that he doesn't get in just on his NHL merits)? There are many others who could also be brought up here.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 10:46 PM
  #9
ClassicHockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
I'm not saying that he should be in the Hall of Fame but could be in the Hall of Fame based on past selections and of the varied success and accomplishments of what Henderson's did in all hockey aspects.

As for Memorial Cup not being important? Remember that this is the HOCKEY Hall of Fame and not the NHL Hall of Fame. ALL of a player's or builder's hockey accomplishments should count. Murray Costello got in the Hall as a builder and it certainly wasn't for his NHL work. Tretiak never played in the NHL. By the way, winning the Memorial Cup is considered one of the most difficult championships to win. That success absolutely should count when considering achievements. How would it not? I'm not talking Junior B or Pee Wee here. In the 60's, the calibre of Junior hockey was extremely high.

Mike Eruzione? Not a good comparison if you compare ALL of each player's accomplishments and career.

Why do people think that Henderson wasn't a very good player in the NHL? He really was. He was a dangerous player with speed that other teams feared and was so highly thought of, he was a key player in a trade that sent some pretty good players the other way. He had a better NHL career than some HHOF inductees.

If you take his NHL career and add on the International accomplishments, he has done enough to be considered.

I suppose most people on this board just weren't around to see him play in the 60's & 70's.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon
No way is Henderson a Hall of Fame player, and some of the arguments being brought up in the thread are pretty weak (the Memorial Cup? come on). If he's a Hall of Famer, is Mike Eruzione? How about Pavel Bure, who had one of the all-time greatest single game international performances (assuming that he doesn't get in just on his NHL merits)? There are many others who could also be brought up here.

ClassicHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2006, 11:23 PM
  #10
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
An HHOFer? No. Not in my books. The reason that Gillies got in the HHOF is four Stanley Cups. Henderson, I believe, never won a Cup. I don't agree with Gillies being in the HHOF (as long-time posters in this section of the forum can attest), but that's why Gillies is there and Henderson isn't. Boivin was a veterans committee inductee. That committee has been wiped out. Pulford is widely regarded as a political inductee.

I believe Henderson is in the Canadian Sports Hall of Fame. That's a fitting honour for him, with all that he meant to Canada in 1972. I'm predicting that some of the other top contributors for Canada on the international stage in recent years, who won't likely have a chance at getting into the HHOF, will be inducted into the Canadian Sports Hall of Fame. (Adam Foote and Ryan Smyth come to mind).

The Memorial Cup doesn't mean anything when it comes to voting for players. In fact, the HHOF rarely takes international accomplishments into consideration when it comes to players who spent their entire career in North America.

But nobody can deny Henderson's contributions in 1972. It might be the single greatest example of a player elevating his game to previously unimaginable levels. On a star-studded Canadian team, loaded with HHOFers, Henderson was the second leading scorer on the team, while playing a strong all-round game. And he scored the GWG in three straight one-goal games.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 12:10 AM
  #11
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada
An HHOFer? No. Not in my books. The reason that Gillies got in the HHOF is four Stanley Cups. Henderson, I believe, never won a Cup. I don't agree with Gillies being in the HHOF (as long-time posters in this section of the forum can attest), but that's why Gillies is there and Henderson isn't. Boivin was a veterans committee inductee. That committee has been wiped out. Pulford is widely regarded as a political inductee.

I believe Henderson is in the Canadian Sports Hall of Fame. That's a fitting honour for him, with all that he meant to Canada in 1972. I'm predicting that some of the other top contributors for Canada on the international stage in recent years, who won't likely have a chance at getting into the HHOF, will be inducted into the Canadian Sports Hall of Fame. (Adam Foote and Ryan Smyth come to mind).

The Memorial Cup doesn't mean anything when it comes to voting for players. In fact, the HHOF rarely takes international accomplishments into consideration when it comes to players who spent their entire career in North America.

But nobody can deny Henderson's contributions in 1972. It might be the single greatest example of a player elevating his game to previously unimaginable levels. On a star-studded Canadian team, loaded with HHOFers, Henderson was the second leading scorer on the team, while playing a strong all-round game. And he scored the GWG in three straight one-goal games.
The problem is you are being NHL centric - the HHOF is not just based on NHL performance.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 12:18 AM
  #12
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,690
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster
The problem is you are being NHL centric - the HHOF is not just based on NHL performance.
in theory.

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 12:27 AM
  #13
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez
in theory.
Bingo. In reality, the HHOF has been very NHL centric for many years. It took Kharlamov 24 years to get into the Hall, and his induction coincided with the opening of an expanded international wing. Makarov has been passed over five times. I can't think of one European-born player, who spent the majority of his prime years in North America, who was pushed over the top on HHOF balloting based on his international play.

The only times that the HHOF has not been based on NHL success are in the following circumstances:
1) Those who starred in leagues that pre-dated the NHL. (Cyclone Taylor, Frank McGee, Hobey Baker, etc.) And those players were selected in the early days of the HHOF.
2) Builders who thrived on non-NHL stages, such as Brian Kilrea, and even then, it's been incredibly difficult. (Witness Herb Brooks).
3) European-born players who spent their entire career in Europe (witness Vladislav Tretiak) or who played their prime years in Europe. (Witness Slava Fetisov, who many consider to be one of the top 10 defencemen of all-time). Again, it's still difficult for these players to gain admittance.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 07:26 AM
  #14
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil
Whoa man slow down! Look I love Henderson too, I've met him twice in my life a real nice man. And I'm obsessed with the Summit Series of '72 just like others are, but he isnt a HOFer. Yes he had a huge tournament in '72 where other than Phil Espostio he was the best Canadian, but he had 477 points in 707 NHL games. He also was in the WHA too, but even still that was a floaters league. Henderson had a career high of 38 goals, and his highest point total is 60. That's not HOF numbers even his greatest backers have to admit. But my question is if he hadnt of had the biggest tournament of his life would he have ever been mentioned in the HOF? My comparison is this: Tony Amonte scored a huge goal for the US in the '96 World Cup. Not as big as Henderson's mind you but it was huge. Now I think Amonte was at least as good as Henderson. He had a career high of 44 goals and 84 points. In his prime he was a very legitimate 35-40 goal scorer. Never was a post seaosn all-star though and has well under a point per game for his career not to mention weak playoff stats. Is Amonte a HOFer? No. I think we agree on that. So IMO Henderson isnt either. I just wish people would enjoy what happened in 1972, its not like his legacy will ever die.
Certainly his numbers are not that inpressive, but you have to put them in perspective of the time. Those 38 goals were good for 10th in the league.

65-66 22 goals T18th NHL 4th Detroit 46 points 26th NHL 6th Detroit
66-67 21 goals T14th NHL 4th Det 40 pts 31st NHL 7th Det played only 46 games
67-68 18 goals T46th NHL 5th/6th Det/Tor 44 pts 47th NHL 5th/7th Det/Tor
68-69 27 goals T24th NHL T2nd Tor 59 pts 29th NHL 3rd Tor
69-70 20 goals T45th NHL 4th Tor 42 pts 61st NHL 6th Tor
70-71 30 goals T18th NHL 3rd Tor 60 pts 34th NHL 3rd Tor
71-72 38 goals 10th NHL 1st Tor 57 pts 35th NHL 2nd Tor

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 08:03 AM
  #15
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,714
vCash: 500
Henderson was an underrated player who played on terrible teams. You got to see the real Henderson in '72. I said it on another thread and I'll say it again: had he played for Montreal or Boston, he'd be in the Hall today.

It's hard to say who I'd compare him to today. He could skate, had a good shot and touch around the net. Maybe Patrice Bergeron?

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 08:10 AM
  #16
reckoning
Registered User
 
reckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,541
vCash: 500
Here`s a question: For the last Olympics, Canada named 13 forwards to their roster, with a couple more on the taxi squad.

If the number of invitees had been that low in `72, would Henderson have been among them? Was he considered one of the top 13 forwards in the game prior to that camp?

I know it`s not likely, but I`d like to see the jobs won in a short camp instead of awarded. I read somewhere that the 1984 Canada Cup mvp, John Tonelli, was the last player chosen for camp. Clarke got invited in `72 because Walt Tkachuk couldn`t go. Rogie wasn`t expected to be the starter in `76 but won the job in camp. Maybe someone who could`ve helped Canada in February didn`t get the chance.

reckoning is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 08:29 AM
  #17
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning
Here`s a question: For the last Olympics, Canada named 13 forwards to their roster, with a couple more on the taxi squad.

If the number of invitees had been that low in `72, would Henderson have been among them? Was he considered one of the top 13 forwards in the game prior to that camp?

It's unlikely. Team Canada '72 was more about who was a friend or client of Alan Eagleson's than a true reflection of the best players in the country. We figured the series was going to be a cakewalk so it really didn't matter who we brought. There's no way guys like Bill Goldsworthy, Ron Ellis, J.P. Parise and Rod Seiling should have been there ahead of Bobby Hull, Dave Keon, J.C. Tremblay, Jacques Lemaire and Norm Ullman.

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 12:39 PM
  #18
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
Henderson was an underrated player who played on terrible teams. You got to see the real Henderson in '72. I said it on another thread and I'll say it again: had he played for Montreal or Boston, he'd be in the Hall today.

It's hard to say who I'd compare him to today. He could skate, had a good shot and touch around the net. Maybe Patrice Bergeron?
Henderson was very good defensively (Selke trophy good) - he was a plus player his entire career in Toronto in the Ballard era and those were some very bad teams for most of his time there.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 06:17 PM
  #19
Nihilism
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,196
vCash: 500
The fact the likes of Tumba Johansson, Vitali Visilev, Alexander Yakschev, Boris Mikhailov, Alexander Maltsev, Vaclav Nedomansky, Vsevolod Bobrov and other legendary European players aren't in the "Hockey Hall of Fame" proves it believes the NHL is the only league that matters. The only reason Tretiak and Kharlamov are in the Hall is because of the 72 series and the fact they were Russian's two most high-profile players,

Nihilism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2006, 06:40 PM
  #20
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
if the original question was about the style of player and comparing him to a present day player, I find Martin Rucinsky to be asimilar player. Nice skater, good shot, had up and down years. I think both players may have been expected to be a little bit better NHL players than they ended up. Both liked to use speed on the outside. Murray Wilson was simialr to both in style and build too. I think Henederson was the better player but to picture style, I think Martin R.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2006, 05:37 PM
  #21
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
Henderson was an underrated player who played on terrible teams. You got to see the real Henderson in '72. I said it on another thread and I'll say it again: had he played for Montreal or Boston, he'd be in the Hall today.

Terrible teams? Not all the time. He was on the Red Wings at one time in his career. he made the Cup finals twice. Both times he lost the WIngs gave up untimely OT goals. But he still isnt a HOFer. Good speed, yes. He seemed to come through in the clutch as well. But so did Bill Barber, and people cry about his HOF induction even though he was on two Cup winning teams and was a big part of the Flyers two other Cup final appearances. But as a winger, Henderson never had any first or second all-star selections. You need to have those to at least be recognized as an elite player unless your Glenn Anderson with 6 Cups and over 200 playoff points.

Henderson was a good player, he did a great thing in September of 1972 but it was too short lived. Throw in a couple of 40-50 goal seasons and Henderson is in. Put it this way I'll bet some people assume that Roger Maris is in the Baseball HOF right? Wrong. He's not. Despite an MVP season in 1960 and then beating Ruth's record with 61 Home Runs in '61 and another MVP award he's never been inducted. Why? His prime was too short. but his was at least two seasons, Henderson's was two weeks. I'll put Maris in baseball's HOF before Henderson in Hockey's.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-18-2006, 10:36 PM
  #22
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil
Henderson was a good player, he did a great thing in September of 1972 but it was too short lived. Throw in a couple of 40-50 goal seasons and Henderson is in.
My point is that Henderson likely would have had a couple of 40 or 50 goals seasons had he played during his prime with those great Boston or Montreal teams instead of one ravaged by an incompetent boob. Put Bob Gainey on those Toronto teams and there's no chance in hell he'd be in the Hall today.

Macman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2006, 05:23 PM
  #23
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman
My point is that Henderson likely would have had a couple of 40 or 50 goals seasons had he played during his prime with those great Boston or Montreal teams instead of one ravaged by an incompetent boob. Put Bob Gainey on those Toronto teams and there's no chance in hell he'd be in the Hall today.

In Henderson's time Toronto wasnt TERRIBLE. they werent greast but for the most part just average. Let's not lower the standards even more for the HOF by even debating this. Bob Gainey was a four time Selke winner, in fact they invented the Trophy because of him. Throw in 5 Cups and a Conn Smythe Trophy and he's a sure fire HOFer. Now if Marcel Dionne was a Hab would he be as good as Lafleur? Maybe. But he wasnt. The fact is he was still a legit HOFer wihtout being on a Habs team. And believe me the Kings were not any better than the Leafs.

Big Phil 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 09:18 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.