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.

Summit Series

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-25-2012, 10:41 AM
  #1
BigFatCat999
I love GoOoOlD
 
BigFatCat999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Campbell, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,993
vCash: 500
Summit Series

I have a question, if the Canadian team took it seriously and practiced have and built a team what would have been the result?

BigFatCat999 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-25-2012, 10:57 AM
  #2
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,459
vCash: 500
I would say probably around the same but game 1 might have been a win.

Elever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-25-2012, 07:39 PM
  #3
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,531
vCash: 500
If they took it seriously, and I mean the entire NHL, then Hull would have been there. J-C Tremblay would have been there as well as Cheevers. You'd have three goalies - Dryden, Cheevers and Espo - all near their primes. Lots of options there. The Russians couldn't figure out Phil Esposito all series so if that is the case they'd go nuts with Hull as well.

The training camp was pretty tough though. Phil Esposito said he had never trained harder in his life. But this was also by our standards in the middle of the summer. The Russians were more prepared.

I also think there are better players that could have been picked. Hard to imagine Dave Keon or Lemaire left off a team like this if they were taking it seriously. Two proven winners right there. I don't think there are 35 guys invited either. Plus one of the biggest mistakes they made was not letting Perreault play more games and allowing him to leave. He was spectacular. I don't know if he just wasn't an Eagleson suck up and that was the reason, but to this day I can't comprehend why they let him walk.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-25-2012, 09:55 PM
  #4
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,978
vCash: 500
Well, if Canada resolved some of the selection issues like those Big Phil listed above (I disagree on Perreault though), put forth the necessary training effort beforehand and the players actually scouted properly and listened to Sinden I can't imagine the results would get worse. I'm thinking something like 6-2, particularly if the Canadians had experience in playing against Europeans as part of the preparation for 1972.

JackSlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-25-2012, 11:18 PM
  #5
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
Well, if Canada resolved some of the selection issues like those Big Phil listed above (I disagree on Perreault though), put forth the necessary training effort beforehand and the players actually scouted properly and listened to Sinden I can't imagine the results would get worse. I'm thinking something like 6-2, particularly if the Canadians had experience in playing against Europeans as part of the preparation for 1972.
Perreault played in Game 4 and Game 5. He got a goal and an assist. Here are his two points:

A lovely end to end rush like only Perreault could do (1:50)


A couple of nice dekes and then a beautiful pass to Parise (starting at 0:50)


Now honestly, can you believe this is a player they told wasn't going to play anymore games?

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 05:29 AM
  #6
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I don't think there are 35 guys invited either.
The 35 men roster was actually a result of improved seriousness. In the original agreement with the Soviets there were 30 players allowed, but Harry Sinden felt that was not enough, he said no player should play in all 8 games because they would get exhausted skating with the Russians, so Canada called for 35 men instead and the Soviets approved.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:24 AM
  #7
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,978
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Now honestly, can you believe this is a player they told wasn't going to play anymore games?
I know Perreault was great internationally, but I mainly disagree that they shouldn't have let him go. To me, if a player wants off the team, that isn't a player worth keeping. Now it's possible that if Canada had been preparing for the series for a while they may have seen that Perreault was more effective in international hockey than most others, but maybe not.

JackSlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 11:03 AM
  #8
Preisst
Party On!!
 
Preisst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Western Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,178
vCash: 500
Just my opinion but I think if Canada would have taken the series more seriously that they would have won either 7 -1 or 7 - 0 - 1. It's a reality that they took them lightly and paid for it early but as the series progressed the better team/country prevailed.

Preisst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 04:48 PM
  #9
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
I know Perreault was great internationally, but I mainly disagree that they shouldn't have let him go. To me, if a player wants off the team, that isn't a player worth keeping.
But the players only wanted off because they didn't play much. Play Perrault more and he doesn't even want to leave.

Theokritos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 08:49 PM
  #10
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
I know Perreault was great internationally, but I mainly disagree that they shouldn't have let him go. To me, if a player wants off the team, that isn't a player worth keeping. Now it's possible that if Canada had been preparing for the series for a while they may have seen that Perreault was more effective in international hockey than most others, but maybe not.
After those two games, how do you not commit to the guy? Perreault, just like Rick Martin, was a young man at the time. I understand there was pressure in Buffalo from then GM Punch Imlach that they should come home for training camp if they weren't going to play. Both men not realizing the long term consequences probably felt it was better to leave. Vic Hadfield, who was in his early 30s at the time, probably should have known better than to leave.

But from the stories I've heard there were certain players that were told they weren't going to dress again. Perreault was among them which caused him to leave. Why on earth they did that is still a mystery to me. We all know how he played in the 1976 Canada Cup, but he looked good in the 1972 games too and I don't know how they couldn't see that.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 11:02 PM
  #11
leeaf83
Registered User
 
leeaf83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,881
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to leeaf83 Send a message via Yahoo to leeaf83
the problem is the rangers GAG line was floating heavily in games 1 and 4 as well as the sweden games. Sinden was getting sick of it and not playing them.

Also keep in mind it was an 11 game series (2 more against sweden and 1 against the czechs). Every player who stuck with the team and was healthy got into at least 1 game. It should be noted Bobby Orr was on that 35 man roster but not clear to play.

It's hard to say if Canada would have won game 1; they lost by 4 goals and by all accounts Dryden did take it seriously. surely by the time it got to russia, canada took it seriously and all 4 of those games were decided by 1 goal. I can't imagine it would have been a sweep unless the WHA was allowed to play.

leeaf83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-27-2012, 03:46 AM
  #12
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,978
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
But the players only wanted off because they didn't play much. Play Perrault more and he doesn't even want to leave.
Yes, maybe if Canada was better prepared for international competition they would have given Perreault more ice time. Maybe they wouldn't have. I mainly disagree that letting Perreault leave was a mistake, given what did happen. If a player wants to leave the team in a situation like that you can't keep them.

JackSlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2012, 09:29 AM
  #13
Hockeynomad
Registered User
 
Hockeynomad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 518
vCash: 500
Remember this was not a real team that was iced in Game one in Montreal.

The focus of the NHL was its 14 individual teams at that time. When selecting this team, they had no idea what would work, as the NHL never iced one All-Star team.
Selections of one-way players like Hadfield, REdmond was a big mistake, they didn't last past game one. Yes, two way players like Keon and Lemaire were off the team, but then who knew the benefit of two way players.

Players like Esposito came in overweight 20 pounds, and he expressed it succinctly, they treated the whole affair like an All-star game exhibition.

There were no exhibition games, the intra-squad games, as Esposito told me, they were just fooling around.

I honestly still believe the team by series end still weren't near their peak and the player selection still wasn't optimal, this was plainly not Canada's best team: and am excluding the WHA stars.

Hockeynomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 01:51 PM
  #14
cam042686
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeaf83 View Post
the problem is the rangers GAG line was floating heavily in games 1 and 4 as well as the sweden games. Sinden was getting sick of it and not playing them.

Also keep in mind it was an 11 game series (2 more against sweden and 1 against the czechs). Every player who stuck with the team and was healthy got into at least 1 game. It should be noted Bobby Orr was on that 35 man roster but not clear to play.

It's hard to say if Canada would have won game 1; they lost by 4 goals and by all accounts Dryden did take it seriously. surely by the time it got to russia, canada took it seriously and all 4 of those games were decided by 1 goal. I can't imagine it would have been a sweep unless the WHA was allowed to play.
The GAG line only played in Game 1. They were all benched in Game 2, Ratelle played in Game 3 (and played well), was benched for Game 4 while Gilbert and Hadfield moved back into the lineup. They played in Sweden together.

I watched Game 1 a few times. The GAG Line wasn't great defensively (nobody on Team Canada was) but Ratelle and Gilbert created some offensive chances. They were not as bad as Sinden made them out to be.

And think about this. Sinden kept throwing Frank Mahovlich and Ken Dryden back out there. Mahovlich's play ranged from mediocre, to absurd. He plain stunk. And Dryden kept getting chances even though with the exception of his play in Game 6, he didn't deserve them. And yet Sinden wouldn't give the GAG Line a chance of redeeming themselves.

Craig Wallace

cam042686 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 03:55 PM
  #15
leeaf83
Registered User
 
leeaf83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,881
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to leeaf83 Send a message via Yahoo to leeaf83
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
The GAG line only played in Game 1. They were all benched in Game 2, Ratelle played in Game 3 (and played well), was benched for Game 4 while Gilbert and Hadfield moved back into the lineup. They played in Sweden together.

I watched Game 1 a few times. The GAG Line wasn't great defensively (nobody on Team Canada was) but Ratelle and Gilbert created some offensive chances. They were not as bad as Sinden made them out to be.

And think about this. Sinden kept throwing Frank Mahovlich and Ken Dryden back out there. Mahovlich's play ranged from mediocre, to absurd. He plain stunk. And Dryden kept getting chances even though with the exception of his play in Game 6, he didn't deserve them. And yet Sinden wouldn't give the GAG Line a chance of redeeming themselves.

Craig Wallace
Do you think Sinden was overly happy about Hadfield blowing up and being selfish after finding out he'd be sitting game 2? And as you mentioned they all got 1 more game in canada plus both sweden games. Also one of the players they were benched for was Wayne Cashman whom got that tongue injury in sweden. So I'm led to believe that they likely would have gotten back in had they stayed in Russia. Even if they didnt could you blame Sinden? Goal scoring wasn't a problem for Canada, they scored 3 or more in all 8 games, it was goal prevention that was their issue.

Dyden maybe got 1 more start than he deserved; 2 bad games and Sinden went back to him yet he had a great game in game 6 and did not get the next start.

leeaf83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 11:45 PM
  #16
Mats86
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,209
vCash: 500
After reading Brad Park's new book and gaining some inside insight, I hauled out my DVDs and re-watched Game 7. For first time in ten years. Park said this series was a war! Mentioning some of dirty tactics the Soviets played, I wanted to view a game again in different view. Yes, the refereeing was shoddy in Moscow. CCCP scored two powerplay goals in this game which came off of clear dives. On the plus side, without it Henderson's solo dash for a goal with 2 minutes left, would not have meant anything.

Canada had great chemistry in Russia. The line of Henderson/Clarke/Ellis was outstanding. Espo was primarily between Roadrunner and Parise. Occassionally doubled shifted between Peter Mahovlich and Goldsworthy. The third line was NY Rangers Ratelle and Gilbert with Dennis Hull. Rod Gilbert was outstanding in this game. Clarke and Ellis main penalty killers, Espo and Parise the second unit. Unimaginable how many minutes Espo logged in these games.

On defense Canada when with familar pairings. Montreal's Savard and Lapointe, Black Hawks' Stapleton and White, Park with Bergman. Unimagineable how good this team would be with Orr and Park pairing up. Tony O played a great game. If not for lopsided officials this would be 4-1 and not close. Sinden paced about 20 miles in this game, back and forth behind Canada's bench.

I have no doubt, with Sinden coaching Park, this series led to "The Trade", a couple of years later involving Park and Espo. Park was taking regular shift, and powerplay and penalty kill. Sinden knew Park well after this and said in his book he wanted top defenseman in game because Orr he thought was likely done.


Last edited by Mats86: 11-16-2012 at 09:01 AM.
Mats86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2012, 07:17 PM
  #17
darkhorse686
Registered User
 
darkhorse686's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
After those two games, how do you not commit to the guy? Perreault, just like Rick Martin, was a young man at the time. I understand there was pressure in Buffalo from then GM Punch Imlach that they should come home for training camp if they weren't going to play. Both men not realizing the long term consequences probably felt it was better to leave. Vic Hadfield, who was in his early 30s at the time, probably should have known better than to leave.

But from the stories I've heard there were certain players that were told they weren't going to dress again. Perreault was among them which caused him to leave. Why on earth they did that is still a mystery to me. We all know how he played in the 1976 Canada Cup, but he looked good in the 1972 games too and I don't know how they couldn't see that.
I read Sinden's book on the series (which was released not long after it concluded). According to Sinden, he benched Perreault in the 3rd period of game 5 because he was proving a liability on defense. Perreault later asked to leave. Sinden considered the NHL training camp thing an excuse

Sinden was really ticked off at the 4 guys (Hadfield, Martin, Guivermont, and Perreault) who left. He considered the 3 young guys a bunch of sulking cry babies who left so they could go to their own teams and feel wanted. He contrasts them to Marcel Dionne and Dale Tallon. Neither of these guys played but they stuck it out with the team.

As for the original post: with better preparation, I think it still ends 4-3-1 to Canada with the Canadian victories being more decisive as opposed to narrow, 1 goal victories and the 3 losses are closer

darkhorse686 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2012, 01:55 AM
  #18
double5son10
Registered User
 
double5son10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 295
vCash: 500
If Canada takes things seriously they would have turned team selection, organization and training over to Pollock and Bowman, the two best minds in the game. Instead it was run by Eagleson, a non-hockey man, and Sinden, who'd been out of hockey the previous two years. Not the finest choices.

double5son10 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 12:33 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.