I'd say they are pretty much equal. Not much separating them although they were two completely different players.
I will take the minority view here and say Brian Leetch. It's more Aesthetics for me than anything. I prefer the puck moving, free dangling guys like Leetch. Their effectiveness is pretty much a wash. I think Leetch reached a higher peak, but Al lasted longer at his peak. Both were a treat to watch. Al had the most intimidating slap shot I have ever seen from a dman and Leetch had the skating ability and puck possession of very few. Obviously Al was better defensively, but if you give credence to the idea that puck possession is also a form of defence, I think Leetch closes the gap some.
Leetch drove the play to the oppositions end as well as any dman in a long time, to me, that has as much value as being solid in your own end.
It's the same reason I value Jagr above some of the lesser talented, but more defensively polished guys who are somewhat close. It's hard to make up the gap, Jagr's defensive short comings are overblown imo, because the puck was always on his stick, puck possession and the ability to drive the play towards the opponents goal is just as valuable as being solid in your own end, maybe even moreso, and you can't win without scoring as the game starts 0-0. I'd take an offensively talented guy over a Rod Langway type most of the time.
Not to say leetch was miles ahead of Al on the stats sheet, but I believe in a controlling the game sense, he was more effective at their best. I guess it comes down to what you prefer and your roster makeup.
Last edited by habsfanatics: 11-09-2012 at 08:46 AM.
i'd like to hear arguments from those who have them about how '94 leetch was better than '89 macinnis. both teams beat my team in the playoffs, and in those years, i didn't see leetch as any more unstoppable a force than peak macinnis.
as for puck possession, macinnis was a phenomenal puck possession player. he was also phenomenal at controlling the game. leetch had the puck on his stick more, but macinnis was an elite puck mover, and moreover he was ridiculously good at running a "half court set" to borrow from basketball in the offensive zone. in terms of keeping the puck in the offensive zone (holding the blueline), not only on the PP, i'd argue that macinnis controlled the game and maintained his team's possession of the puck at least as well as leetch did carrying it (and also, of course, managing the offensive zone from the blueline, which he was very good at).
First off, this is a good comparison. Two closely matched contemporaries.
My initial reaction was Leetch and then I opened the thread, read some responses, and had to re-evaluate a little.
I've always been awed by Leetch's skillset, so perhaps I tend to overvalue him a little. In my mind, as pure rushing/offensive defensemen go, he's a solid third behind only Orr and Coffey. He really had it all. Silky-smooth skater, great vision, could make plays, and had a rocket of a shot. Like someone mentioned above, if you were rooting for the other team, you feared Leetch because he could create something offensively from anywhere. Pretty rare quality in a defenseman. I never feared Lidstrom that way. Or Bourque. MacInnis either, but that shot was, of course, one of the great intimidators in hockey history.
So both guys put up a 100-point season. Both won a Conn Smythe. But Leetch won three Norris trophies to MacInnis' one. And Leetch did it against Bourque, Coffey, Chelios and MacInnis himself. That MacInnis did it all at such an advanced age is impressive, and he completely deserved it. But I'm not sure that the competition was as tough that year as it was when Leetch won his (granted, Leetch was still in the league when Mac won and wasn't even in the conversation...).
Secondly, Mac seems to be getting some traction for longevity and that`s fair. But MacInnis also spent his later years playing with Chris Pronger who ate up a ton of the tough minutes and took on a lot of the tough assignments. Did having a 30-minute-a-game monster on his team help MacInnis age a little more gracefully? Its worth considering especially in light on how Leetch was often a man on an island on some pretty porous and often dysfunctional Ranger teams. Who was the second best defenseman in New York post-1995 or so? Beukeboom? Lefebvre? I don't know if I can even name another one off the top of my head. (And yes, I'm aware that Pronger was injured the year that Mac won the Norris, but it doesn't change the general premise that having Pronger to split the heavy lifting with, allowed MacInnis to extend his time as premier player).
Defensively, I'd agree that there's a solid edge in MacInnis' favour. Mac did the dirty work in front of the net, blocked shots, and could shut guys down. Leetch, at the top of his game, was pretty effective defensively because he could get the puck out of his zone so quickly, and could do it any number of ways. But if you were defending a lead in game seven, you'd probably want MacInnis.
This is very, very close. I think Leetch's A-game was better than MacInnis at his best. And Leetch brought that A-game for no short amount of time. A 100-point season, three Norrises, and a Conn Smythe in the space of what? Seven years? (can't look it up right now). All told , if the 100-point seasons and Conn Smythes cancel each other out, you're left with Leetch's superior Norris-winning prime versus MacInnis' stronger defensive game + his Pronger-aided longevity. And heck, what about Leetch's play in the 1996 World Cup? An argument could be made that he was the second best player in that tournament next to Richter doing his God impression. MacInnis was solid internationally, but never that good.
I think I have to go with Leetch, by the slightest edge. But honestly, I could probably be convinced to change my mind.
First off, this is a good comparison. Two closely matched contemporaries.
My initial reaction was Leetch and then I opened the thread, read some responses, and had to re-evaluate a little.
I've always been awed by Leetch's skillset, so perhaps I tend to overvalue him a little. In my mind, as pure rushing/offensive defensemen go, he's a solid third behind only Orr and Coffey. He really had it all. Silky-smooth skater, great vision, could make plays, and had a rocket of a shot. Like someone mentioned above, if you were rooting for the other team, you feared Leetch because he could create something offensively from anywhere. Pretty rare quality in a defenseman. I never feared Lidstrom that way. Or Bourque. MacInnis either, but that shot was, of course, one of the great intimidators in hockey history.
So both guys put up a 100-point season. Both won a Conn Smythe. But Leetch won three Norris trophies to MacInnis' one. And Leetch did it against Bourque, Coffey, Chelios and MacInnis himself. That MacInnis did it all at such an advanced age is impressive, and he completely deserved it. But I'm not sure that the competition was as tough that year as it was when Leetch won his (granted, Leetch was still in the league when Mac won and wasn't even in the conversation...).
Secondly, Mac seems to be getting some traction for longevity and that`s fair. But MacInnis also spent his later years playing with Chris Pronger who ate up a ton of the tough minutes and took on a lot of the tough assignments. Did having a 30-minute-a-game monster on his team help MacInnis age a little more gracefully? Its worth considering especially in light on how Leetch was often a man on an island on some pretty porous and often dysfunctional Ranger teams. Who was the second best defenseman in New York post-1995 or so? Beukeboom? Lefebvre? I don't know if I can even name another one off the top of my head. (And yes, I'm aware that Pronger was injured the year that Mac won the Norris, but it doesn't change the general premise that having Pronger to split the heavy lifting with, allowed MacInnis to extend his time as premier player).
Defensively, I'd agree that there's a solid edge in MacInnis' favour. Mac did the dirty work in front of the net, blocked shots, and could shut guys down. Leetch, at the top of his game, was pretty effective defensively because he could get the puck out of his zone so quickly, and could do it any number of ways. But if you were defending a lead in game seven, you'd probably want MacInnis.
This is very, very close. I think Leetch's A-game was better than MacInnis at his best. And Leetch brought that A-game for no short amount of time. A 100-point season, three Norrises, and a Conn Smythe in the space of what? Seven years? (can't look it up right now). All told , if the 100-point seasons and Conn Smythes cancel each other out, you're left with Leetch's superior Norris-winning prime versus MacInnis' stronger defensive game + his Pronger-aided longevity. And heck, what about Leetch's play in the 1996 World Cup? An argument could be made that he was the second best player in that tournament next to Richter doing his God impression. MacInnis was solid internationally, but never that good.
I think I have to go with Leetch, by the slightest edge. But honestly, I could probably be convinced to change my mind.
leetch had two norris trophies, not three. macinnis only has one, but finished second three times, and third two other times. leetch's only other top three finish was a third place in '96. when you add up the top seasons, it's hard for all the times macinnis came close to not tip the scales over leetch's second norris.
third best rushing defenseman of all time? i don't have a list in my head, but that seems wrong to me. i think you'd rank leetch higher than, say, park or bourque. but shore, kelly, harvey? and i think there's an argument for pilote as well. i will say, though, that of players i've seen with my own two eyes, leetch is second behind only coffey.
as for the pronger effect, i don't know about that. i mean, he played 29 minutes a game at age 35 (35 minutes in the playoffs), and between 26-27 for the four years after that (and invariably more when pronger was hurt; and that number jumped to 29-31 in the playoffs). i don't have the TOI numbers pre-'99, but it seems like macinnis was likely a near-30 minutes defenseman in his st. louis years. in any event, i don't think he took fewer or easier minutes because of pronger anymore than niedermayer did in anaheim.
leetch had two norris trophies, not three. macinnis only has one, but finished second three times, and third two other times. leetch's only other top three finish was a third place in '96. when you add up the top seasons, it's hard for all the times macinnis came close to not tip the scales over leetch's second norris.
third best rushing defenseman of all time? i don't have a list in my head, but that seems wrong to me. i think you'd rank leetch higher than, say, park or bourque. but shore, kelly, harvey? and i think there's an argument for pilote as well. i will say, though, that of players i've seen with my own two eyes, leetch is second behind only coffey.
as for the pronger effect, i don't know about that. i mean, he played 29 minutes a game at age 35 (35 minutes in the playoffs), and between 26-27 for the four years after that (and invariably more when pronger was hurt; and that number jumped to 29-31 in the playoffs). i don't have the TOI numbers pre-'99, but it seems like macinnis was likely a near-30 minutes defenseman in his st. louis years. in any event, i don't think he took fewer or easier minutes because of pronger anymore than niedermayer did in anaheim.
My mistake on the Norris. . .every time I post without checking my facts it bites me in the ass.
Personally, as a pure rushing defenseman, I put Leetch ahead of Shore, Kelly, Harvey, Pilote. If Orr did indeed revolutionize the position then, by definition, those guys weren't true rushing defensemen despite their impressive skills and accomplishments. Note that I'm not saying that Leetch is better than those guys; just that as a pure, puck-on-his-stick, winding-up-to-go-end-to-end blueliner, I consider him the best behind Orr and Coffey.
You have a good point with Niedermayer, but I still think if you're going to give credit to MacInnis for longevity over Leetch, you have to consider that he had a fellow HOF'er to rely on during his twilight years while Leetch was being asked to carry one of the league's worst bluelines (and, in fairness, Leetch completely flopped in that task).
MacInnis for everything but rushing the puck and passing/powerlay qb'ing.
I'm not so prepared to give that one to Leetch, actually. Puck always went through MacInnis at the top at some point during the powerplay because of that bomb threat. You can say that Suter handled the puck and started more rushes, but when you're the second highest PP goal scoring defenseman of all time (only 7 behind Bourque, and 28th overall all-time), I'd say that's at least going to hold up against the best attribute Leetch ever brought to a powerplay.
MacInnis for everything but rushing the puck and passing/powerlay qb'ing.
MacInnis is definitely the better powerplay defenceman. One of the best of all time, and it wasn't just because of his huge shot. MacInnis was great at distributing the puck on the powerplay.
My mistake on the Norris. . .every time I post without checking my facts it bites me in the ass.
Personally, as a pure rushing defenseman, I put Leetch ahead of Shore, Kelly, Harvey, Pilote. If Orr did indeed revolutionize the position then, by definition, those guys weren't true rushing defensemen despite their impressive skills and accomplishments. Note that I'm not saying that Leetch is better than those guys; just that as a pure, puck-on-his-stick, winding-up-to-go-end-to-end blueliner, I consider him the best behind Orr and Coffey.
You have a good point with Niedermayer, but I still think if you're going to give credit to MacInnis for longevity over Leetch, you have to consider that he had a fellow HOF'er to rely on during his twilight years while Leetch was being asked to carry one of the league's worst bluelines (and, in fairness, Leetch completely flopped in that task).
if we're not going to count pre-orr puck carriers (and i don't disagree that comparing what shore, or even pilote, did against what leetch did is necessarily useful given the differences in what was possible in the game), then calling leetch the third best rushing defenseman of all time is really just saying third best rushing defenseman since expansion. which in and of itself is very impressive; but doesn't carry the same kind of weight as the somewhat misleading "of all time." (not that you used those words, but it seems that was the implication.)
as for pronger, between when pronger became an elite defenseman ('98 season) and when macinnis retired (for all intents and purposes '03), pronger missed 131 games. macinnis missed some games himself, and occasionally both were out of the lineup at the same time. macinnis and pronger played in 315 games together out of a possible 492 in those six years. even if we discount '03, when pronger missed almost the entire year, pronger and macinnis are playing an average of 62 games together in those four years when pronger was in his prime and macinnis was still in the league. so again, i'm not sure macinnis got quite the boost you say he did, particularly when you look at his icetime numbers between 35-39.
but i'd also add that pronger becomes pronger when macinnis is 34. leetch only played three seasons after the age of 33. so those years where, as you say, leetch "completely flopped" were actually from 29 on, years when macinnis' best defense teammates were: suter in his last calgary year, frank musil, trent yawney (29); musil, yawney, michel petit (30); steve duchesne, murray baron, 34 year old doug lidster, bill houlder (31); baron, 21 year old pronger, 36 year old jay wells (32); 22 year old pronger, igor kravchuk, marc bergevin (33); and then five years with prime pronger, but averaging 20 games lost between them a year. not saying pronger didn't help at all, but the defensemen listed above are all defensemen on macinnis' teams in those years who played close to a full year (65+ games, adjusted for the lockout year of course). after those guys, hardly a sterling bunch (and leetch had kasparaitis, older ulf samuelsson, schneider, malakhov, lefebvre, young kim johnsson, poti, and others. none of them were as good as prime pronger, obviously, but generally as good if not better d corps than macinnis had at the same ages between '93 and '97 or when pronger was out of the lineup '98 and after.
MacInnis is definitely the better powerplay defenceman. One of the best of all time, and it wasn't just because of his huge shot. MacInnis was great at distributing the puck on the powerplay.
I never said MacInnis was a bad pp qb, but Leetch moved the puck around more effectively. A lot of the time, Macinnis had someone else to be the main passer on the pwerplay, like Suter in Calgary. He was often the trigger man, albeit one who could still pass the puck around. Leetch was used more as the powerplay quarterback, running the play and finding the best passing option. Macinnis did it too, but not as well.
I never said MacInnis was a bad pp qb, but Leetch moved the puck around more effectively. A lot of the time, Macinnis had someone else to be the main passer on the pwerplay, like Suter in Calgary. He was often the trigger man, albeit one who could still pass the puck around. Leetch was used more as the powerplay quarterback, running the play and finding the best passing option. Macinnis did it too, but not as well.
MacInnis generally was the main passer on the PP. Teams would try to negate his shot, which would open up passing lanes that wouldn't be open to other players. MacInnis' teams consistently had strong powerplays, even when he switched teams and as other players were sorted in and out. Suter was certainly no PP slouch though.
The biggest advantage that MacInnis has over Leetch when it comes to powerplay contributions, once again, is longevity.
I think MacInnis is clearly the better PP player here...the PP is probably the strongest part of his entire game. Not that Leetch isn't good also, he was a great PP player, but not as good as MacInnis.
I think macinnis is one of the more under-appreciated great players of all-time. One of nick lidstroms' norris trophies should be resting on macinnis' mantle-piece. Great player and marginally better than leetch.
Though leetch was very good - just not the second coming of bobby orr like some were suggesting around the time of the 1994 cup finals
MacInnis for overall body of work but Leetch was the better player when they were both in the prime.
Since Mac's peak was longer, he gets the edge, but during Leetch's peak (1989-1997), Leetch has the advantage (2 x Norris, 5 x post season AS selections, a CS and a Calder) compared to Mac's 1 x CS and 4 x postseason AS selections.
Macinnis was outstanding and elite defensively where Leetch was average to above average. But let's be honest -- the bulk of his points were because of his bomb. Leetch had an average shot but was far more creative with the puck.
Macinnis was outstanding and elite defensively where Leetch was average to above average. But let's be honest -- the bulk of his points were because of his bomb. Leetch had an average shot but was far more creative with the puck.
Actually, let's be honest. MacInnis has almost as many assists in his career as Leetch has total points. There was a LOT more to him than just that bomb.
