HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Gilmour compared to Clarke

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-19-2013, 07:12 PM
  #126
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Off on what? The fact he was injured too much or the fact that he wasn't as strong defensively as Clarke? I've never heard someone suggest that Forsberg had a better career than Clarke, all things considered.
I have mentioned it before, when taking into account all of their entire resumes, both NHL regular and playoffs and internationally Foppa fares quite well beside Clarke, even with the injuries.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 09:11 PM
  #127
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
He also was not really given a shot at that until Toronto, even though he was fully capable of it.

In the 80's, coaches tended to think in terms of offense first and not every coach would let their players double and triple shift(Which was often where a large portion of their scoring came from).

Gilmour was passed up at the draft due to his size, and only went in the second year he was eligible for draft in the 7th round. Had to fight for every second of time he got and had to continually prove himself to disbelievers. Very limited power play time as everyone wanted him out against the other teams top forwards and they wanted him rested(he later proved he could do both in Toronto)

In Calgary, they definitely appreciated him more than St Louis did, but he was still not getting the icetime he deserved(Mostly due to the team being stacked).

Crazy as everyone makes it sound, being the "guy" on a less star filled team is usually a blessing to a player in terms of icetime and numbers.

In Toronto he got to put that team on his back and he made everyone better.
stacked or not, in calgary gilmour had the situation that clarke did from '73-'76-- excellent center depth below him-- and he didn't even come close to standing out the way clarke did in the regular season in those years. he won the same cup that clarke did twice, but he wasn't the beating heart of the team at both ends.

obviously we all agree that gilmour >>> nieuwendyk (except on the PP, where nieuwy was a rare rare breed), though i don't think gilmour was more valuable defensively than otto. but why didn't gilmour distinguish himself from nieuwendyk more in the '90 playoffs and '89 and '90 regular seasons, or why didn't he steal more of nieuwendyk's minutes? why does gilmour get a pass for basically being (peak) trevor linden in calgary just because he was on a stacked team? not to take anything away from '93 and '94 gilmour, who was an absolute marvel, but bobby clarke, like potvin, like messier, like beliveau, they were leaders of teams with all-time greats on them. and that puts them in a class above gilmour, who was the blood and guts leader of gartner and andreychuk, but reportedly sulked in '90 when he had competition for his alpha dog role. clarke would have forcibly taken the reins, not taken his toys and gone home.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I have mentioned it before, when taking into account all of their entire resumes, both NHL regular and playoffs and internationally Foppa fares quite well beside Clarke, even with the injuries.
i don't see it. clarke was the second best forward on the '72 canada cup team. for all his international accolades, which are fantastic, did forsberg ever take on that kind of role (and succeed) in a best on best tournament? as for the breadth of clarke's international resume, forsberg's portfolio is larger, but his career coincided with more tournaments. the 1976 canada cup team was maybe the greatest team of all time, and bobby clarke was their captain.

and the playoffs? forsberg was phenomenal, but by what measure can you put his playoff resume definitively above clarke's other than aging better (higher points totals in first round losses in his 30s) and playing in an era with 4, instead of 3, playoff rounds? clarke captained four teams to the stanley cup finals, and while he was not the man in either of the years they won the cup, neither was forsberg.

regular season: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 8, 10 vs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 9. and that's before clarke's sizable defensive edge, which is saying a lot because forsberg was an excellent two way player himself.


Last edited by vadim sharifijanov: 08-19-2013 at 10:12 PM. Reason: cut/paste error, misquoted forsberg's scoring finishes
vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 09:13 PM
  #128
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeBlondeDemon10 View Post
Another thing about Clarke is that he was able to maintain his ferocious intensity for a longer time than Gilmour. Now Gilmour may have been one of the most intense players I've seen play...for a 2-3 year period. He was just unreal for the Leafs. But I think he burnt out. Carrying the fortunes of that franchise on his back for a couple of years were really hard on him. So much pressure. Clarke did it in a much different environment. Nothing to lose, everything to gain. The fans in Philly really just beginning to embrace hockey in his era. In a city where baseball, football and basketball were first, not to mention college level sports. Plus, Clarke's coach was the level headed Shero. Gilmour had Burns who may be one of the most intense and ferocious coaches in history. He must have been extremely demanding and hard to play for. No wonder players tuned him out after 2-3 years.
what you say is true but the league wasn't getting any better with expansion and players leaving for the wHA either so it's hard to judge.

Gilmour is pretty close to Clarke offensively in his first 15 seasons (the number of seasons Clarke played) and then he had an excellent age 36 season as well where he was a 78% on the vsX scale in points (85% among Canadians only).

Here is how Calrke and gilmour break down vsX in points for their 1st 15 seasons

Clarke 53,54,74,100,71,91,100,74,72,56,50,48,43,69,48
Gilmour 42,42,38,97,58,51,71,62,71,86,93,48,48,75,48

Totals after 15 seasons for each are 1003 for Clarke and 940 for Doug

Take out non Canadians and here is the apples to apples comp 1003-981 (Doug doesn't benefit most seasons due to the Wayne and Mario combo.

Add in Dougs 5 seasons after 15 and he adds in a


52 (59)
78 (85)
32 (40)
46 (48)
29 (31) (in brackets is vsX with of the 2nd best Canadian).

so in the end we are left with this between the 2 as a vsX versus the 2nd best Canadian everyone else, Wayne and Mario included).

Clarke

100,100, 91,74,74,72,71,69,56,54,53,50,48,48,43

Gilmour

99,98,90,85,83,71,71,62,61,60,59,58,53,51,48 (48,44,42,40,31) in his 5 other seasons

given that Mario and Wayne are not taken out doug and calrke fare up pretty close in terms of offense.

Defense, sure Clarke is better but not by a country mile or anything Doug was very good both ways and played

22:29
19:50
18:02
18:39
16:34 MPG in seasons age 35 and over (the 5 seasons after he and Clarke share so longevity goes to Gilmour.

Playoffs also go to Gilmour, even with Clarke 2 SC to Gilmours 1, Doug has the peak and career for playoffs between the 2.

On that 93 Maple Leaf playoff team there was Doug, a huge gap, and then Wendel Clark in terms of value and importance. Clarke quite simply never had that kind of individual performance and played on mostly better teams as well.

I can see why someone might take either guy but the 15-90 gap in terms of all time is out of line IMO. These guys are really clsoe.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 09:40 PM
  #129
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I have mentioned it before, when taking into account all of their entire resumes, both NHL regular and playoffs and internationally Foppa fares quite well beside Clarke, even with the injuries.
I can't see how Forsberg has a comparable career. Clarke has about 330 more points than him while playing better defense. Both players could have aged better, but Clarke at least played full seasons after 30. Took his team to the Cup final in 1980, captained a team with the longest unbeaten streak that year too. Won a Selke in his second to last year. After 2003 Forsberg did nothing of note. Won a Gold medal, but wasn't the reason behind it. You wouldn't pass on Clarke's overall game for Forsberg.

Say what you want about his Harts, but there isn't a year where Forsberg played better than a 1973 Esposito, 1975 Orr or 1976 Lafleur. You'd think Forsberg could snatch one of those Harts away, but I don't think he could have.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 10:11 PM
  #130
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
i don't see it. clarke was the second best forward on the '72 canada cup team. for all his international accolades, which are fantastic, did forsberg ever take on that kind of role (and succeed) in a best on best tournament? as for the breadth of clarke's international resume, forsberg's portfolio is larger, but his career coincided with more tournaments. the 1976 canada cup team was maybe the greatest team of all time, and bobby clarke was their captain.
The international play for Foppa is not to compare with Clarke, who had less opportunity but to dispel a bit of a myth about his lack of games.

Foppa played 4 Olympics for Sweden and had a 22-3-17-20 line.
-also played in 2 World cups having a 8-2-6-8 line
-also a 211-87-135-222 line in Sweden, almost all of it before the age of 20 and after 30
-WC line of 33-15-14-29 with 16 of those games as a junior aged player

Quote:
and the playoffs? forsberg was phenomenal, but by what measure can you put his playoff resume definitively above clarke's other than aging better (higher points totals in first round losses in his 30s) and playing in an era with 4, instead of 3, playoff rounds? clarke captained four teams to the stanley cup finals, and while he was not the man in either of the years they won the cup, neither was forsberg.

regular season: 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 8, 10 vs. 2, 4, 5, 9. and that's before clarke's sizable defensive edge, which is saying a lot because forsberg was an excellent two way player himself.
well Foppa never had a 4-0-0-0 line and Clarke also played in a 3 and 4 round playoff NHL with some easy 1st rounds but let's look at how Foppa was compared to Sakic (in direct years the 2 overlapped in Colorado).

from 95-04

Sakic 147-75-88-163 plus 9
Foppa 133-57-97-154 plus 47

Next best plus/minus over that time is Foote with a plus 22

I'm sorry but anyone saying that Clarke was better in the playoffs than Foppa was is clearly wrong IMO.

For his career only Sakic outscored Foppa in the playoffs and there is a really strong argument that Foppa was more valuable in the playoffs than Sakic was, but that's an argument for another day

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

Let's skip Clarkes first season, when his team didn't amke the playoffs and see how he stacks up


Clarke does well, he is 7th in points, but his performance isn't as good as Foppas.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points


As for the regular season finishes, yes Clarke had better health but Foppa also played in a fully integrated league and stacks up pretty well when we compare the 2 to Canadians only, in an apples to apples comp

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 10:15 PM
  #131
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
what you say is true but the league wasn't getting any better with expansion and players leaving for the wHA either so it's hard to judge.

Gilmour is pretty close to Clarke offensively in his first 15 seasons (the number of seasons Clarke played) and then he had an excellent age 36 season as well where he was a 78% on the vsX scale in points (85% among Canadians only).

Here is how Calrke and gilmour break down vsX in points for their 1st 15 seasons

Clarke 53,54,74,100,71,91,100,74,72,56,50,48,43,69,48
Gilmour 42,42,38,97,58,51,71,62,71,86,93,48,48,75,48

Totals after 15 seasons for each are 1003 for Clarke and 940 for Doug

Take out non Canadians and here is the apples to apples comp 1003-981 (Doug doesn't benefit most seasons due to the Wayne and Mario combo.

Add in Dougs 5 seasons after 15 and he adds in a


52 (59)
78 (85)
32 (40)
46 (48)
29 (31) (in brackets is vsX with of the 2nd best Canadian).

so in the end we are left with this between the 2 as a vsX versus the 2nd best Canadian everyone else, Wayne and Mario included).

Clarke

100,100, 91,74,74,72,71,69,56,54,53,50,48,48,43

Gilmour

99,98,90,85,83,71,71,62,61,60,59,58,53,51,48 (48,44,42,40,31) in his 5 other seasons

given that Mario and Wayne are not taken out doug and calrke fare up pretty close in terms of offense.

Defense, sure Clarke is better but not by a country mile or anything Doug was very good both ways and played

22:29
19:50
18:02
18:39
16:34 MPG in seasons age 35 and over (the 5 seasons after he and Clarke share so longevity goes to Gilmour.

Playoffs also go to Gilmour, even with Clarke 2 SC to Gilmours 1, Doug has the peak and career for playoffs between the 2.

On that 93 Maple Leaf playoff team there was Doug, a huge gap, and then Wendel Clark in terms of value and importance. Clarke quite simply never had that kind of individual performance and played on mostly better teams as well.

I can see why someone might take either guy but the 15-90 gap in terms of all time is out of line IMO. These guys are really clsoe.
I don't know what "VSX" points are, but I do know that Clarke does and should have a sizeable gap over Killer. I voted Killer somewhere in the 60's from what I remember.
Despite the attempt to make their offense look closer, I still think Clarke had a rather large gap in this area.

One thing I will say is both players made the most of their tools and did more than one would expect with their skills.

I feel reasonably certain if the trophy existed, Clarke would have at least 3-4 more Selke trophies. I consider him a top 3 defensive forward of all time. Strictly defense, not even counting offense. Doug was good, but strictly defensively, I would not have him in the top 40 all time. Not with so many strictly defensive forwards who were great out there. If we look at "two way play" rather than Strictly defensively(Which are a bit hard to separate), then Dougie Climbs the ladder a bit.


And heck, 3 Hart trophy wins, 2nd, 4th, 6th.....

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 10:57 PM
  #132
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
well Foppa never had a 4-0-0-0 line and Clarke also played in a 3 and 4 round playoff NHL with some easy 1st rounds but let's look at how Foppa was compared to Sakic (in direct years the 2 overlapped in Colorado).

from 95-04

Sakic 147-75-88-163 plus 9
Foppa 133-57-97-154 plus 47

Next best plus/minus over that time is Foote with a plus 22

I'm sorry but anyone saying that Clarke was better in the playoffs than Foppa was is clearly wrong IMO.

For his career only Sakic outscored Foppa in the playoffs and there is a really strong argument that Foppa was more valuable in the playoffs than Sakic was, but that's an argument for another day

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

Let's skip Clarkes first season, when his team didn't amke the playoffs and see how he stacks up


Clarke does well, he is 7th in points, but his performance isn't as good as Foppas.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points
* well, like i said, there's no doubt forsberg had more productive playoffs after the age of 30. but being both guys kept getting swept in the first round, who really cares?

1971 to 1980, clarke is third in playoff points, behind only lafleur (superstar on a dynasty) and lemaire (his linemate)

clarke's prime ('72-'80), he is second behind lafleur.

meanwhile, '95 to '04 (same nine years of forsberg's career, exact same ages) forsberg is second behind sakic (his own teammate).

pretty comparable, no?



* and also, can you even begin to imagine what clarke's playoff +/- would have been had they kept that stat when he played? i mean, you do realize that he is fifth all-time in regular season +/- right? and that in his back-to-back-to-back finals yeares clarke's regular season +/- was a combined +197?



* and forsberg's first round opponents in his prime: the '96 canucks (terrible), '97 blackhawks (mediocre), '98 oilers (lost), '99 sharks (do i need to continue with the parentheticals?), '00 coyotes, '01 canucks, '02 kings, '03 wild (lost), '04 stars (jumped the shark). a real murderer's row there, right?



* the 3/4 round playoff thing, okay, but the flyers had a first round bye in '75, '76, and '77 and it was a three round playoffs before that. clarke never had the chance to play four rounds until the tail end of his prime ('78), after his peak was over.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 11:15 PM
  #133
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I can't see how Forsberg has a comparable career. Clarke has about 330 more points than him while playing better defense.
Foppa also lost 1 and 1/2 seasons due to lockouts so the difference is much less and all of it is due to injuries.

PPG Foppa was much more dominant offensively in games he did play.

No one is going to take Clarke over Foppa offensively in their regular season and playoff play.


Quote:
Both players could have aged better, but Clarke at least played full seasons after 30.
Yes both could have aged better but Foppa played in a time period when lots of star players missed time, large chunks of it, due to injuries and concussions specifically. Clarke just retired, at least Foppa had a ready excuse his body was literally broken down.

No way to tell but if Clarke comes into the league in 95 like Foppa did he misses some games due to imjuries with his style of play.


Quote:
Took his team to the Cup final in 1980, captained a team with the longest unbeaten streak that year too.
The streak is an excellent trivia question but it wasn't just the Clarke show that year in 80, like it was in his 2 sC years where he had more of an impact.


Quote:
Won a Selke in his second to last year. After 2003 Forsberg did nothing of note. Won a Gold medal, but wasn't the reason behind it.
Selke voting from 79 when it came in

79
Bob Gainey, Mtl LW 170
Don Marcotte, Bos LW 92
Craig Ramsay, Buf LW 66
Don Luce, Buf C 25
Mike Polich, Min C 16
Clark Gillies, NYI LW 12
Nick Libett, Det LW 8
John Marks, Chi LW 7
Doug Jarvis, Mtl C 7
Bobby Clarke, Phi C 7
Jean Ratelle, Bos C 6
Butch Goring, LA C 5

80

1. Bob Gainey, Mtl LW 184
2. Craig Ramsay, Buf LW 102
3. Don Luce, Buf C 42
4. Rich Preston, Chi RW 38
T5. Walt Tkaczuk, NYR C 18
T5. Doug Jarvis, Mtl C 18
T7. Aders Kallur, NYI RW 15
T7. Bobby Clarke, Phi C 15
9. Mike Polich, Min C 10

81

Bob Gainey 142
Craig Ramsay 125
Larry Patey 99
Steve Kasper 70
Bob Bourne 31
Robbie Ftorek 15
Dave Taylor 9
Mel Bridgeman 7
Bryan Trottier 7
Don Lever 6
Butch Goring 6
Anders Kallur 6
Mike Zuke 6
Terry O’Reilly 5
Tony Currie 4
Paul Holmgren 4
Paul Woods 3
Bobby Clarke 3
Wayne Merrick 3
Don Marcotte 2
Jerry Butler 2

82

Steve Kasper 178 (26-12-12)
Bob Gainey 157 (17-19-15)
Craig Ramsay 76 (4-15-11)
Doug Jarvis 37 (7-0-2)
John Tonelli 22 (3-2-1)
Larry Patey 11 (1-1-3)
Dale Hunter 8 (1-0-3)
Ryan Walter 6 (1-0-1)
Dave Keon 5 (1-0-0)
Jorgen Pettersson 5 (1-0-0)
Don Marcotte 4 (0-1-1)
George Ferguson 4 (0-1-1)
Neal Broten 3 (0-1-0)
Al Secord 3 (0-1-0)
Terry O’Reilly 3 (0-1-0)
Keith Acton 3 (0-1-0)
Morris Lukowich 3 (0-1-0)
Butch Goring 3 (0-1-0)
Bob Bourne 3 (0-1-0)
Bill Barber 3 (0-0-3)
Al MacAdam 2 (0-0-2)
Michel Goulet 1 (0-0-1)
Bobby Clarke 1 (0-0-1)
Bobby Smith 1 (0-0-1)
Ric Seiling 1 (0-0-1)
Dave Christian 1 (0-0-1)
Anders Kallur 1 (0-0-1)
Lindy Ruff 1 (0-0-1)

83

1. Bobby Clarke, Phi C 125 (18-)
2. Jari Kurri, Edm RW 63 (10-)
3. Bobby Gould, Wsh RW 51 (6-)
4. Tom Lysiak, Chi C 43 (2-)
5. Doug Risebrough, Cgy C 27
6. Bob Gainey, Mtl LW 26 (2-)
7. Craig Ramsay, Buf LW 25
8. John Tonelli, NYI LW 23
9. Rick Middleton, Bos RW 20
10. Stan Smyl, Van RW 15
Barry Pederson, Bos 14

84

Doug Jarvis 153 (22-12-7)
Bryan Trottier 110 (15-10-5)
Jari Kurri 62 (5-10-7)
Rick Middleton 55 (6-7-4)
Craig Ramsay 22 (3-2-1)
John Tonelli 18 (3-0-3)
Dale Hunter 16 (0-4-4)
Michel Goulet 14 (2-1-1)
Bob Gainey 12 (0-3-3)
Barry Pederson 10 (2-0-0)
Bobby Clarke 9 (1-1-1)
Doug Risebrough 9 (0-1-6)
Mike Foligno 8 (0-2-2)
Bengt Gustafsson 6 (0-2-0)
Al MacAdam 6 (0-2-0)
Clark Gillies 5 (1-0-0)
Brian Sutter 5 (1-0-0)
Mats Naslund 5 (1-0-0)
Glen Currie 5 (0-1-2)

Maybe Bobby deserved that Selke and the voters were out to lunch all those other years, maybe he didn't and people though he might retire soon. I personally have no idea the Selke voting is really kooky and voters were doing weird things in the 80's in regards to voting, and in the 70's with the Hart as well.

I wouldn't take too much stock in that Selke and then say Forsberg did nothing of note after 03 when

1) he led the league in APG with .91 and PPG in 1.41 (albeit it in only 39 GP)

2) lost the entire 05 campaign

3) Had a 60-19-56-75 plus 25 line in 06


Quote:
You wouldn't pass on Clarke's overall game for Forsberg.
Even with Calrke's edge on defensive play, Foppa was extremely effective in his overall game and yes I would take it over Clarkes, when everything is considered..

Quote:
Say what you want about his Harts, but there isn't a year where Forsberg played better than a 1973 Esposito, 1975 Orr or 1976 Lafleur. You'd think Forsberg could snatch one of those Harts away, but I don't think he could have.
Well let's leave Orr out of it as well all know that he should ahve won that hart in 75, Foppa and his Hart season in 03 is better than Phil and guy and his 96 season as well.

98,99 and 01 would do just fine against those 2 guys as well, if the voters would treat Foppa and his 2 way game as they did Clarke.

97,04,06 if not for the injuries but it is what it is.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2013, 11:43 PM
  #134
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
* well, like i said, there's no doubt forsberg had more productive playoffs after the age of 30. but being both guys kept getting swept in the first round, who really cares?

1971 to 1980, clarke is third in playoff points, behind only lafleur (superstar on a dynasty) and lemaire (his linemate)

clarke's prime ('72-'80), he is second behind lafleur.

meanwhile, '95 to '04 (same nine years of forsberg's career, exact same ages) forsberg is second behind sakic (his own teammate).

pretty comparable, no?
not really as you are downsizing the sample to get the desired result.

I mean I could check game logs and we could only include games where both guys scored but what's the point there?

At some point the larger result becomes more meaningful and let's not forget that Detroit had their dynasty going on as well as those excellent Star teams and that's just in the western conference.



Quote:
* and also, can you even begin to imagine what clarke's playoff +/- would have been had they kept that stat when he played? i mean, you do realize that he is fifth all-time in regular season +/- right? and that in his back-to-back-to-back finals yeares clarke's regular season +/- was a combined +197?
Pretty sure it would be pretty good, as you would ahve to go to vlad and his 60ish spot all time to find a guy not in the 70's or 80's on the all time list, more of a function of the league at teh time.

It's pretty hard to argue, with whatever the number would be that is would be contextually as impressive as Forsberg compared to Sakic.



Quote:
* and forsberg's first round opponents in his prime: the '96 canucks (terrible), '97 blackhawks (mediocre), '98 oilers (lost), '99 sharks (do i need to continue with the parentheticals?), '00 coyotes, '01 canucks, '02 kings, '03 wild (lost), '04 stars (jumped the shark). a real murderer's row there, right?
Any worse than BlackHawks 71 (where Clarke went 4-0-0) and flyers got swept and outscored 20-4,
- 72 missed
- 73 won 4-2 versus Minny
- 74 won 4-0 versus Atlanta
- 75 won 4-0 versus Toronto
- 76 won 4-3 over Toronto
- 77 won 4-2 over Toronto
- 78 won 2-0 over Colorado
- 79 won 2-1 over Vancouver
- 80 won 3-0 over expansion Oilers
- 81 won 3-2 over Quebec
- 82 lost 3-1 to NYR
- 83 lost 3-0 to NYR
- 84 lost 3-0 to Washington

Sure the bookends are okay but man a lot of filler in the middle as well

Quote:
* the 3/4 round playoff thing, okay, but the flyers had a first round bye in '75, '76, and '77 and it was a three round playoffs before that. clarke never had the chance to play four rounds until the tail end of his prime ('78), after his peak was over.
I think taking the whole of their playoff careers and opponents it's pretty hard to argue that Clarke had the higher % of more difficult games or a harder road.

Let's also keep in mind that Philly and their travel schedule, even in playoffs was very much less taxing than Colorado had.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 01:06 AM
  #135
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
not really as you are downsizing the sample to get the desired result.

I mean I could check game logs and we could only include games where both guys scored but what's the point there?

At some point the larger result becomes more meaningful and let's not forget that Detroit had their dynasty going on as well as those excellent Star teams and that's just in the western conference.





Pretty sure it would be pretty good, as you would ahve to go to vlad and his 60ish spot all time to find a guy not in the 70's or 80's on the all time list, more of a function of the league at teh time.

It's pretty hard to argue, with whatever the number would be that is would be contextually as impressive as Forsberg compared to Sakic.





Any worse than BlackHawks 71 (where Clarke went 4-0-0) and flyers got swept and outscored 20-4,
- 72 missed
- 73 won 4-2 versus Minny
- 74 won 4-0 versus Atlanta
- 75 won 4-0 versus Toronto
- 76 won 4-3 over Toronto
- 77 won 4-2 over Toronto
- 78 won 2-0 over Colorado
- 79 won 2-1 over Vancouver
- 80 won 3-0 over expansion Oilers
- 81 won 3-2 over Quebec
- 82 lost 3-1 to NYR
- 83 lost 3-0 to NYR
- 84 lost 3-0 to Washington

Sure the bookends are okay but man a lot of filler in the middle as well



I think taking the whole of their playoff careers and opponents it's pretty hard to argue that Clarke had the higher % of more difficult games or a harder road.

Let's also keep in mind that Philly and their travel schedule, even in playoffs was very much less taxing than Colorado had.
re: first round opponents, both guys played on powerhouses. naturally they will both have weaker first round opponents. not sure what bonus points forsberg should get here.

re: +/-, in clarke's best two seasons, he was +50 over his second line center. not seeing how being inflated by era applies when clarke blew everyone except orr away in +/- in his peak. in two of his finals years he had 19 and 22 ES goals against in the entire regular season... while putting up superstar numbers offensively. his linemate reggie leach alone put up 17 ES goals in the 76 playoffs. clarke's playoff +/- likely would have been staggering.

see this thread, particularly hockey outsider's post: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=621645

re: years after 30, you can say you're looking at the whole body of work, but i place more emphasis on years that mattered. which i don't think is cherry picking. we're talking about a guy who was a top five scorer in the playoffs while being the best defensive forward in the world, maybe all time, a playmaker who helped his linemate to the greatest goal scoring postseason of all time, captained two cup winners, then a runner-up to a dynasty (please don't compare the 90s wings to the 70s habs dynasty btw, that demeans both teams, and all members of this discussion), and captained the 76 canada cup. that's a three year peak that leaves forsberg's admittedly great peak in the dust. forsberg was briefly the best player in the world, maybe even for more than one spell, but he wasn't even at his best 74-76 bobby clarke.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 03:19 AM
  #136
21
Peter The Great
 
21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Clark was sometimes dirty, yes, you can even call his behavior unsportsmanlike which I never will forget.

Can't believe even mentioning Clark and Forsberg in the same sentence.

21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 06:24 AM
  #137
ot92s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21 View Post
Clark was sometimes dirty, yes, you can even call his behavior unsportsmanlike which I never will forget.

Can't believe even mentioning Clark and Forsberg in the same sentence.

seriously guys forsberg was a fairly classy player as i remember it.

lol, clarke not so much...i would LOVE to have him wearing the "C" on my team though. Priceless interview...


remember too, he was a player-coach for several years and walked straight from the ice into the GM-chair at the end of his career. Very rare breed.

ot92s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 11:52 AM
  #138
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
why does gilmour get a pass for basically being (peak) trevor linden in calgary just because he was on a stacked team?
I'm on the Clarke side here, but... wut?

Gilmour was 22nd, 25th and 26th in scoring these three seasons, which are the least impressive seasons of his prime. In Linden's best season, he was 34th in scoring.

I mean, technically, 26th isn't THAT much better than 34th, and technically that WAS Linden's peak, but still...

You could use the same logic and say Mats Sundin gets a pass for basically being a (peak) Donald Audette for ten years.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 12:11 PM
  #139
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
re: first round opponents, both guys played on powerhouses. naturally they will both have weaker first round opponents. not sure what bonus points forsberg should get here..
Thanks, I was going to add this as well.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 03:20 PM
  #140
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,509
vCash: 500
[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Yes both could have aged better but Foppa played in a time period when lots of star players missed time, large chunks of it, due to injuries and concussions specifically. Clarke just retired, at least Foppa had a ready excuse his body was literally broken down.

No way to tell but if Clarke comes into the league in 95 like Foppa did he misses some games due to imjuries with his style of play.
Well you can't base it on that either. Clarke would also be wearing a helmet had he entered the NHL in 1995. These are apples and oranges here. Too much of a "what if" concept.

Quote:
Maybe Bobby deserved that Selke and the voters were out to lunch all those other years, maybe he didn't and people though he might retire soon. I personally have no idea the Selke voting is really kooky and voters were doing weird things in the 80's in regards to voting, and in the 70's with the Hart as well.

I wouldn't take too much stock in that Selke and then say Forsberg did nothing of note after 03 when

1) he led the league in APG with .91 and PPG in 1.41 (albeit it in only 39 GP)

2) lost the entire 05 campaign

3) Had a 60-19-56-75 plus 25 line in 06
The Selke voting has always raised questions. Does it go to Bob Gainey types or Fedorov/Gilmour types? Either way, that award has been that way forever, including Forsberg's time.



Quote:
Well let's leave Orr out of it as well all know that he should ahve won that hart in 75, Foppa and his Hart season in 03 is better than Phil and guy and his 96 season as well.

98,99 and 01 would do just fine against those 2 guys as well, if the voters would treat Foppa and his 2 way game as they did Clarke.

97,04,06 if not for the injuries but it is what it is.
Well that's a story for another day here. I don't think Forsberg in 2003 is as good as Lafleur in 1976 or Espo in 1973. He needed until the final game of the season to surpass Markus Naslund. Take a gander of the names below Lafleur in 1976 and it is much different. Espo dominated the scoring race despite Orr missing 15 games. Unless you think Clarke in 1973 is worse than Naslund in 2003.

Look, I pick Orr in 1975 as well. But It doesn't take anything away from Clarke that he was leading first place teams who went on to win the Cup. That tied into it. Someone may have posted this already but here is where they finished in scoring:

Clarke - 2, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 10
Forsberg - 1, 2, 4, 5, 10

Give Clarke the edge on this one. Throw in the defensive superiority as well. Not to mention something that hasn't been said a lot and that's intangibles. Clarke was a better leader, would take your head off to win and was given more space because of that.

I think with Forsberg it is the romanticizing and "what if" theories with him. Once you start an argument with what a player "may" have done when healthy then it's game over.

I mentioned 1980 because it was a great run by the Flyers. There was no Bernie Parent anymore but for that Cup run you'd have to say it was Clarke's team (Barber did his part as well). Colorado never won the Cup with Forsberg playing the staring role at forward and that hurts him a bit with the playoff ranking.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 08:41 PM
  #141
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm on the Clarke side here, but... wut?

Gilmour was 22nd, 25th and 26th in scoring these three seasons, which are the least impressive seasons of his prime. In Linden's best season, he was 34th in scoring.

I mean, technically, 26th isn't THAT much better than 34th, and technically that WAS Linden's peak, but still...

You could use the same logic and say Mats Sundin gets a pass for basically being a (peak) Donald Audette for ten years.
fair enough. i was thinking lindens 94 playoffs and gilmour's 89 playoffs as comparables, as well as intangibles, defensive play, and out-valuing one's offensive numbers. but yeah, regular season is a big disparity.

maybe the playoffs thing was homery of me too. hard for me to tell, though, because i do believe it. (which i guess makes me see better the POVs of certain other homery posters here better.)

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2013, 11:36 PM
  #142
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
re: first round opponents, both guys played on powerhouses. naturally they will both have weaker first round opponents. not sure what bonus points forsberg should get here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Thanks, I was going to add this as well.
I only pointed out Clarke's first round opponents in response to Vadim inferring that somehow Foppa's superior playoff stats were 1st round related or something, not really sure what that point was as all teams play generally weaker 1st round opponents.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 12:46 AM
  #143
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I only pointed out Clarke's first round opponents in response to Vadim inferring that somehow Foppa's superior playoff stats were 1st round related or something, not really sure what that point was as all teams play generally weaker 1st round opponents.
my original point was forsberg scored more career playoff points because clarke played fewer rounds due to era, even though his teams had more deep runs.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 12:49 AM
  #144
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Big Phil;70367871]
Quote:

Well you can't base it on that either. Clarke would also be wearing a helmet had he entered the NHL in 1995. These are apples and oranges here. Too much of a "what if" concept.
I think the point of the matter is that the difference in the NHL is indeed apples and oranges and this often gets glossed over, like it did in the Habs dynasty versus the Detroit 90-early 00's one.

When one looks at it closely it doesn't hold alot of weight and there is a ton of subjective guesswork holding up the Habs were vastly superior notion.

also a lot more top end stars were getting injured in the 90's than in the 70's and guys with Clarke aggressive style of play, Wendel Clark, Lindros, Forsberg were among the causalities, it's fair to speculate that perhaps switching Clarke to Foppas' era or Foppa to Clarke's era (he certainly wouldn't have cowered to Clarke like other European's did in the 70's for example.



Quote:
The Selke voting has always raised questions. Does it go to Bob Gainey types or Fedorov/Gilmour types? Either way, that award has been that way forever, including Forsberg's time.
I really think that if one reads too much into that Selke win and doesn't take into account how poorly he did in voting other years it raise questions of consistency, just like his Harts. the reality is that Orr should have a a 6 year run on Harts from 70-75...period.

Even in 76 if healthy he projects as winning another. he wasn't and voters were kinda goofy with their consistency and Clarke has 3 Harts, which over inflates him, if Orr is healthy and he has no harts is there any argument for 15th of all time?

Even as the best defensive player of all time (which is really really subjective BTW and even then it's not like Wayne or Mario dominant on the offensive end of the ice either, comparatively speaking)

Quote:
Well that's a story for another day here. I don't think Forsberg in 2003 is as good as Lafleur in 1976 or Espo in 1973. He needed until the final game of the season to surpass Markus Naslund. Take a gander of the names below Lafleur in 1976 and it is much different. Espo dominated the scoring race despite Orr missing 15 games. ]Unless you think Clarke in 1973 is worse than Naslund in 2003.
Foppa didn't narrowly beat Naslund in the hart that year so the "is Clarke worse than Naslund in 73 thing is really irrelevalnt. what is relevant is that in 73 was that Philly was still in 9th place overall in the league, the same spot they were in the year before, yes they won 11 more games but guys like Barber (62 points)and Bladon (42 points) had great rookie campaigns and Rick Macleish went from a 17-1-2-3 to a 78-50-50-100 line.

Heck Orr in 15 less games only scores 3 less points than Clarke (who was a plus 32 on that team and not into his two statistically freakish years yet). You know the more you look at it Nassy had a pretty good year in 03, but then again it's apples and oranges......

Quote:
Look, I pick Orr in 1975 as well. But It doesn't take anything away from Clarke that he was leading first place teams who went on to win the Cup. That tied into it. Someone may have posted this already but here is where they finished in scoring:

Clarke - 2, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 10
Forsberg - 1, 2, 4, 5, 10

Give Clarke the edge on this one. Throw in the defensive superiority as well. Not to mention something that hasn't been said a lot and that's intangibles. Clarke was a better leader, would take your head off to win and was given more space because of that.
Okay we all know that Clarke was healthy and that Foppa wasn't but the counterpoint here is that Foppa is [B]8th of all freaking time in PPG scoring[/B and he isn't some fluke product of the 80's either, 94-06 is a pretty hard NHL to score points in.

Quote:
I think with Forsberg it is the romanticizing and "what if" theories with him. Once you start an argument with what a player "may" have done when healthy then it's game over.

I mentioned 1980 because it was a great run by the Flyers. There was no Bernie Parent anymore but for that Cup run you'd have to say it was Clarke's team (Barber did his part as well). Colorado never won the Cup with Forsberg playing the staring role at forward and that hurts him a bit with the playoff ranking.
I think there is also a lot of romanticiicng with Clarke going on as well and he never had to play in anywhere close to a fully integrated league.

And why might this be relevant, well a guy like Nedomansky outscores Clarke in 79 and 80 despite being 34 and 35 to Clarke's 29 and 30.

It's not a crazy "what if scenario" to imagine if the NHL was indeed fully integrated and all of the era's best players were in the NHL at the time on how different the landscape might look.

The bottom line is that IMO when looking at the totality of all 3 players careers and everything they did and the context in when they did it there is very little separating Clarke, Gilmour, and Foppa.

Throw in Feds as well.

Larinov will be an interesting case for the top 60 centers of all time project though as he is a very interesting case.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 12:52 AM
  #145
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
my original point was forsberg scored more career playoff points because clarke played fewer rounds due to era, even though his teams had more deep runs.
That's fine but it's pretty hard to argue that Clarke stacks up better against his peers for his playoff resume than Forsberg does right?

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 06:02 AM
  #146
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,138
vCash: 500
Peter Forsberg

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Foppa also lost 1 and 1/2 seasons due to lockouts so the difference is much less and all of it is due to injuries.
Maybe, but up thread you gave Peter Forsberg the benefit of his Swedish games, 1 1/2 seasons of these results were generated during the lockouts. Looks like you are trying to give your boy a double benefit he is not entitled to. Giving credit for Swedish games while complaining that he missed NHL games. Which is it?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...forsbpe01.html

Further more in 1994-95, playing for Modo before the NHL resumed was a benefit since various NHL players had little choice but to remain idle during the first lockout.

By the time of the 2004-05 lockout Peter Forsberg had broken down - groin and hip injuries. The narrative at the time was that he was going to take time off even if there was an NHL season. In fact he had signed to play for Modo BEFORE the lockout was announced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_F...5.E2.80.932004

That Peter Forsberg suffered two more injuries during the 2004-05 season playing in Sweden is evidence of his lack of physical readiness to play in the NHL.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 06:15 AM
  #147
21
Peter The Great
 
21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Thread is "Gilmour compared to Clarke"

How come Forsberg is involved in this discussion, it feels almost provoking??? ;-)

Forsberg was probably one of the top three most skilled, gritty and complete players ever, in the world. Clarke was not but still a great player and leader, a legend of his own.

**** the stats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYsLM06hRuI


Last edited by 21: 08-21-2013 at 06:21 AM. Reason: upset
21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 08:26 AM
  #148
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Maybe, but up thread you gave Peter Forsberg the benefit of his Swedish games, 1 1/2 seasons of these results were generated during the lockouts. Looks like you are ]trying to give your boy a double benefit he is not entitled to. Giving credit for Swedish games while complaining that he missed NHL games. Which is it?
He isn't "my boy", no dog in the race here just thoughts and observations, if anything Clarke would be "my boy" as he was my favorite player growing up and 16 was my 1st jersey.

The 1 and 1/2 missed NHL seasons was in direct response to total NHL points and the "he did nothing of note after the age of 30" post.

There is no double counting going on, but when looking at direct NHL counting stats to not consider the lockouts and missed games from them is misleading IMO.

Furthermore, most of his play in Sweden is before 20 and after 30, so it's still at a high level, much like other Non NHLers when they get considered right?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...forsbpe01.html

Quote:
Further more in 1994-95, playing for Modo before the NHL resumed was a benefit since various NHL players had little choice but to remain idle during the first lockout.
Jagr also played in Europe in 95, I have never heard the argument that he had an unfair advantage over Lindros in that Art Ross tie.

Quote:
By the time of the 2004-05 lockout Peter Forsberg had broken down - groin and hip injuries. The narrative at the time was that he was going to take time off even if there was an NHL season. In fact he had signed to play for Modo BEFORE the lockout was announced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_F...5.E2.80.932004

That Peter Forsberg suffered two more injuries during the 2004-05 season playing in Sweden is evidence of his lack of physical readiness to play in the NHL.
wait a 2nd further up post you suggest that peter had an advantage playing in Sweden during the 95 lockout, now his 2 injuries playing in Sweden in the 05 lockout indicate a lack of readiness? Maybe if he is in the NHL and there is no lockout he doesn't get injured, although this is unlikely.

He played in 39 games and 60 games in the season before and after the lockout in the NHL, it's reasonable to assume that he would have played some games in the NHL if there had been no lockout right?


Last edited by Hardyvan123: 08-21-2013 at 08:39 AM.
Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 08:29 AM
  #149
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 21 View Post
Thread is "Gilmour compared to Clarke"

How come Forsberg is involved in this discussion, it feels almost provoking??? ;-)

Forsberg was probably one of the top three most skilled, gritty and complete players ever, in the world. Clarke was not but still a great player and leader, a legend of his own.

**** the stats.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYsLM06hRuI
Yes thread is Clarke and Gilmour, along with Forsberg all 3 are known as great 2 way centers, as opposed to only elite offensive ones like Esposito for instance.

Maybe it's just me but I'm in top 60 centers mode already.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2013, 09:55 AM
  #150
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 15,138
vCash: 500
Aggressive Forecheck

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFX0dVXNDXw&t=2m56s

Rushes are better highlights, but there's two right here around the 3 minute mark and oddly enough neither involves Jari Kurri who Gretzky used to forecheck with all the time.
Operative word was an aggressive forecheck which involves contact behind the goal line. Playing the body behind the goal line to separate the puck from the player so that the checker or a teammate can create a scoring chance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbDgvSR2ePI

Canadiens1958 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 12:39 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.