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.

How would Marc Tardif have fared in the 1976 Canada Cup?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-30-2013, 03:10 PM
  #26
double5son10
Registered User
 
double5son10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
I said that about Lafleur, not because he was a total "dog" like Frank Mahovlich was against the Soviets in 1972 and 1974. It was just you expected more. He was never awful like Mahovlich was - but he was never great like Phil Esposito, Bobby Hull, Ralph Backstrom, etc were against the Soviets. He was okay and at times very good. But for someone of his stature - didn't we expect a performance like Wayne Gretzky gave in Game 2 of the 1987 Canada Cup, or Backstrom in Game 7 of the 1974 Summit, or Esposito through most of the 72 Summit, as well as future games against the Soviets?

As for Dryden - well he got pasted by the Soviets in 1969, (he gave up 9 goals playing for the Nats against the Soviets) and the first 2 games of the 72 Summit. He was a fumbling, bumbling mess. He was very good in Game 6 , and well in Game 8 I guess we can say Canada survived him. (Remember Phil Esposito saved a 6th goal from going in during the 2nd period.) He was horrible in the 1975 New Years Game - my god he stunk! He played okay splitting a game against a weak Spartak team in 1977-78. He did play well in Game 1 of the Challenge Cup and had a weak game in Game 2.

So in 9 games versus the Soviets he was horrible in 4 of them (1969, Games 1, 4 of 72 and 1975 New Years Eve), below average in one (Game 2 of Challenge Cup), okay in 2 (Game 8 of 72 and Spartak),and played well in 2 (Game 6 of 72 and Game 1 of Challenge Cup.) Now is that a stellar record of a goalie who raised his game to a higher level? Two good games out of 9?

To be fair Ken Dryden didn't tend to have great success against team who had great lateral speed - who could really get him going "back and forth." The early 70's Rangers and the Sabres of the mid 70's had success against him and of course the Soviets.

Craig Wallace
I've written this elsewhere, but I've always had a hard time seeing how Dryden was "horrible" in game 4 of the Summit or New Year's '75. Maybe it's the former goalie in me, but being scored on by world-class players off of prime scoring chances isn't being a "fumbling, stumbling mess."

Game 4's goals are two power play deflections, both the result of Goldsworthy being an idiot; a two on one after Stapleton coughs it up at the opposite blue-line; a one-timer off a cross-ice pass while his teammates are running around in the defensive zone (or in Esposito's case had completely abandoned it); and the final goal Dryden makes the initial save, but Shadrin, who's left completely uncovered in front, knocks in the rebound. Blaming the goalie for the whole team in front of him for sucking royally is simply looking for a scapegoat.

New Year's isn't quite the same beast, as the Canadiens outplayed CSKA for most of the game, but none of the Russian goals are bad goals. Mikhailov is allowed to skate in too deep on the first goal and has a full view of the net and roofs his shot over Dryden's glove; the 2nd Kharlamov is sprung off a nifty pass by Petrov and is in all alone on Dryden; the third is a two on one after Awrey is caught up ice. People judge Dryden vs. Tretiak's performance in that one and look at the shot differential, but all three goals are excellent scoring opportunities, cashed in by some of the best players in the world. It's not like Dryden is allowing unscreened slow rollers from the blueline, or giving up juicy rebounds for gimme goals, or kicking the puck into his own net.

As for the rest of your game's analysis, well if you're gonna say that Team Canada survived him in game 8 you might also point out that Dryden had to survive them (and the officiating) early on, as three of the five goals are on power plays, including a 5 on 3. Shadrin's goal is also a total fluke that bounces off the screen behind the goal from Yakushev's shot straight out in front and onto the Shadrin's stick. Again I don't see how any of the five are "horrible" goals.

Agree with VBMB that Dryden outperforms Tretiak in game 2 of the Challenge Cup. He's not great, but he isnt awful either, but the team in front of him stops skating after the first period and the game's only close because of some big saves by Dryden and because Tretiak is that bad.
I can't comment on the games with the Nats, as I didn't see them, beyond pointing out that Father Bauer himself said that Nats team was very inexperienced and were outclassed by a good Soviet team. The game against Spartak was a one sided affair and Dryden got to sit before it was over.
In the 8 games that Dryden played against the Soviets as a pro he was 4-3-1, with only game 1 of the Summit Series a truly poor performance, and he was of course not the lone Canadian to be wretchingly bad that day. A breakdown of Tretiak's performance head to head might reveal more sterling performances, certainly New Year's, but also some just plain bad goals surrendered, such as Henderson's winner in game 6.

I'd agree that a big goalie often has difficulty moving side to side and the Soviet game was predicated on lateral puck movement. But then most goalies have difficulties from good puck movement by championship calibre teams. Dryden struggled at times, but at no time did he ever, even in game 1 in '72, look as bad as Cheevers in the Challenge Cup final, or Liut in '81. Even Grant Fuhr, as big as he is remembered against the Soviets, gave up 27 goals in six games against between Rendezvous '87 and the '87 Canada Cup.

I guess you could say the Rangers and Sabres had success against Dryden since they each did beat him in a playoff round in the 70s too. So what. Those two series have no bearing on his play against the Soviets and little impact on his legacy in the NHL. He was a winner, even against the Russians, and outside of a single game as a pro in International play, his first, he was never "horrible." It's a myth

double5son10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 05:43 PM
  #27
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by double5son10 View Post
I guess you could say the Rangers and Sabres had success against Dryden since they each did beat him in a playoff round in the 70s too. So what. Those two series have no bearing on his play against the Soviets and little impact on his legacy in the NHL. He was a winner, even against the Russians, and outside of a single game as a pro in International play, his first, he was never "horrible." It's a myth
I'll chime in here. I wouldn't say "horrible" as he came back in 1972 with a good game in Game 6 and settled in nicely after the wild start in Game 8. He won, which we have to remember is the most important and I wouldn't say the Canadians won in SPITE of him either, because to watch the second half of Game 8 he stood on his head making some critical saves that could have easily made Paul Henderson non-existant to this day.

However he played poor in Game 1 and 4. Allowing 3 goals on 13 shots in the 1975 New Year's Game wasn't good either. Rogie Vachon managed to shut down the Russians in 1976 rather well. Dryden was a little mediocre in the 1979 Challenge Cup as well. So in the sample size we have, for a goalie as great as he was there certainly could have been better performances against the Russians. I think a lot of it had to do with the fact that Dryden had trouble laterally from their crisp passing. He wasn't strong post to post. Maybe they picked up on that, who knows. But it worked, and Tony Esposito didn't seem to have that same problem.

As for Fuhr, he played in a wild series in 1987 and a true goaltending clinic can be seen in Game 2 of the series, especially in overtime. If anyone wants to know why Fuhr had the reputation of "never allowing the winning goal" then you watch this game. There were sure goals he robbed from the Soviets that I couldn't imagine any other goalie at that time doing. We can thank Fuhr for the memories of Gretzky and Lemieux, because without his heroics they end on a sour note.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 08:39 PM
  #28
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
I think that in the fall of '76, Lafleur was at least very close to being the best forward in the world and Clarke was past his peak a bit. Clarke's numbers weren't great in the tournament (were they ever internationally?), but in the key games like the must-not-lose round robin game vs. USSR and the 2nd final, I think he was actually one of the better players.
Then again, Lafleur - instead of Sittler - could have been 'the hero' of the 2nd final. He scored in the OT, but the goal was disallowed.

Overall, IMO Lafleur wasn't bad against the Russians or anything like that, but I don't think he was great either. Perreault was simply better, and I believe the Russians thought so too. The sample size is obviously not huge.
I cant believe people are talking about Lafleur & Clarke as being the best forwards on that 76 team. It was easily 37 year old Bobby Hull. The stats show it and he was great in every aspect of the game. Physically took Salming out of the Sweden game and was brilliant both offensively & defensively. Next best was Perreault who replaced Espo on the Hull line. Can't believe how little credit Hull gets for his performance.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2013, 10:28 PM
  #29
BadgerBruce
Registered User
 
BadgerBruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
100% agree, Papyline. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I very recently watched the games on dvd, and Hull blew me away. The way he came back into his own end, crossed his feet and generated tremendous speed behind the puck made me feel as though I was watching a star player sent back in time from today. Beautiful to watch. Lapointe and Savard consistently undershot him with their passes, but both Robinson and Potvin adjusted to Hull's speed coming out of the zone and fired bullets on the tape. And yes, I remember him finishing his check on Salming in the first period against Sweden and just pasting him into the end boards, and I remember Salming getting rid of the puck in his own end very quickly for the rest of the game. I don't recall this ever happening to Salming before.

When Perrault was moved into Esposito's spot on the line with Hull, there were breathtaking moments of greatness off the rush. Perreault had the speed Esposito did not, and his superb stickhandling through the neutral zone and ability to play an overlap/underlap game with Hull was fantastic. My God, Dionne on the right side was almost invisible except on the deep cycle, and he was hardly an old nag in any other horse race. He could barely keep up.

To me, it isn't even close. Hull and Perreault were the most dynamic forwards on that 76 team by a mile.

BadgerBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:31 AM
  #30
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
I cant believe people are talking about Lafleur & Clarke as being the best forwards on that 76 team. It was easily 37 year old Bobby Hull. The stats show it and he was great in every aspect of the game. Physically took Salming out of the Sweden game and was brilliant both offensively & defensively. Next best was Perreault who replaced Espo on the Hull line. Can't believe how little credit Hull gets for his performance.
Who has done that? I just said - responding to Big Phil - that IMO Clarke was very good in two key games of the tournament (CAN vs. USSR and the 2nd final; scoring/assisting key goals), and that Clarke was never a big stats guy anyway. Other than that, his main contribution probably was that he was the captain/leader. And I certainly haven't indicated that Lafleur was among the best forwards in the '76 CC; rather that he was a disappointment, since he arguably was the best forward in the world at the time (you may disagree).

To me the best forward in the tournament was Gilbert Perreault, end of story, and then it's Hull and the rest.

Edit:
As far as Hull should be getting more credit goes, well, that's fair enough.


Last edited by VMBM: 08-31-2013 at 03:17 AM.
VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 08:51 AM
  #31
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
Who has done that? I just said - responding to Big Phil - that IMO Clarke was very good in two key games of the tournament (CAN vs. USSR and the 2nd final; scoring/assisting key goals), and that Clarke was never a big stats guy anyway. Other than that, his main contribution probably was that he was the captain/leader. And I certainly haven't indicated that Lafleur was among the best forwards in the '76 CC; rather that he was a disappointment, since he arguably was the best forward in the world at the time (you may disagree).

To me the best forward in the tournament was Gilbert Perreault, end of story, and then it's Hull and the rest.

Edit:
As far as Hull should be getting more credit goes, well, that's fair enough.
I agree with this. I'll say Perreault is the best forward during that tournament. Followed by Hull. Just my own eye witness account after watching all the games. Perreault looked like he was having fun out there. But this is the first time I've ever heard anyone complain that Hull never gets credit for his play in this tourny. He certainly did play well.

After Perreault and Hull, probably Sittler stood out the most. But with that team it was hard to stand out. They rolled 4 lines rather well, the best scorer had 9 points and it was Orr/Potvin. It wasn't as if someone was getting all the minutes on that team. I think it is fair to say that Clarke and Lafleur have played better than in the 1976 Canada Cup, but neither played poor either, just good enough.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 06:43 PM
  #32
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgerBruce View Post
100% agree, Papyline. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I very recently watched the games on dvd, and Hull blew me away. The way he came back into his own end, crossed his feet and generated tremendous speed behind the puck made me feel as though I was watching a star player sent back in time from today. Beautiful to watch. Lapointe and Savard consistently undershot him with their passes, but both Robinson and Potvin adjusted to Hull's speed coming out of the zone and fired bullets on the tape. And yes, I remember him finishing his check on Salming in the first period against Sweden and just pasting him into the end boards, and I remember Salming getting rid of the puck in his own end very quickly for the rest of the game. I don't recall this ever happening to Salming before.

When Perrault was moved into Esposito's spot on the line with Hull, there were breathtaking moments of greatness off the rush. Perreault had the speed Esposito did not, and his superb stickhandling through the neutral zone and ability to play an overlap/underlap game with Hull was fantastic. My God, Dionne on the right side was almost invisible except on the deep cycle, and he was hardly an old nag in any other horse race. He could barely keep up.

To me, it isn't even close. Hull and Perreault were the most dynamic forwards on that 76 team by a mile.
Thank you for the comments BadgerBruce. Good to hear that someone who just watched it recently verifies my memory of watching it live. Yes, the Hull/Perreault combination was magical.

Here is a youtube clip which shows a nice Perreault goal. Hull backchecks and knocks the opposing player off the puck. Hull then speeds up ice and takes a pass from the D. Makes a perfect pass to Perreault who scores on a great shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euEwsx_eVZ0

I agree with you that Hull & Perreault were the most dynamic forwards on the team. Would give a slight edge to Hull because of his physical and defensive play.Remember the guy was the oldest player in the tournament at 37.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 08:27 PM
  #33
cam042686
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by double5son10 View Post
I've written this elsewhere, but I've always had a hard time seeing how Dryden was "horrible" in game 4 of the Summit or New Year's '75. Maybe it's the former goalie in me, but being scored on by world-class players off of prime scoring chances isn't being a "fumbling, stumbling mess."

Game 4's goals are two power play deflections, both the result of Goldsworthy being an idiot; a two on one after Stapleton coughs it up at the opposite blue-line; a one-timer off a cross-ice pass while his teammates are running around in the defensive zone (or in Esposito's case had completely abandoned it); and the final goal Dryden makes the initial save, but Shadrin, who's left completely uncovered in front, knocks in the rebound. Blaming the goalie for the whole team in front of him for sucking royally is simply looking for a scapegoat.

New Year's isn't quite the same beast, as the Canadiens outplayed CSKA for most of the game, but none of the Russian goals are bad goals. Mikhailov is allowed to skate in too deep on the first goal and has a full view of the net and roofs his shot over Dryden's glove; the 2nd Kharlamov is sprung off a nifty pass by Petrov and is in all alone on Dryden; the third is a two on one after Awrey is caught up ice. People judge Dryden vs. Tretiak's performance in that one and look at the shot differential, but all three goals are excellent scoring opportunities, cashed in by some of the best players in the world. It's not like Dryden is allowing unscreened slow rollers from the blueline, or giving up juicy rebounds for gimme goals, or kicking the puck into his own net.

As for the rest of your game's analysis, well if you're gonna say that Team Canada survived him in game 8 you might also point out that Dryden had to survive them (and the officiating) early on, as three of the five goals are on power plays, including a 5 on 3. Shadrin's goal is also a total fluke that bounces off the screen behind the goal from Yakushev's shot straight out in front and onto the Shadrin's stick. Again I don't see how any of the five are "horrible" goals.

Agree with VBMB that Dryden outperforms Tretiak in game 2 of the Challenge Cup. He's not great, but he isnt awful either, but the team in front of him stops skating after the first period and the game's only close because of some big saves by Dryden and because Tretiak is that bad.
I can't comment on the games with the Nats, as I didn't see them, beyond pointing out that Father Bauer himself said that Nats team was very inexperienced and were outclassed by a good Soviet team. The game against Spartak was a one sided affair and Dryden got to sit before it was over.
In the 8 games that Dryden played against the Soviets as a pro he was 4-3-1, with only game 1 of the Summit Series a truly poor performance, and he was of course not the lone Canadian to be wretchingly bad that day. A breakdown of Tretiak's performance head to head might reveal more sterling performances, certainly New Year's, but also some just plain bad goals surrendered, such as Henderson's winner in game 6.

I'd agree that a big goalie often has difficulty moving side to side and the Soviet game was predicated on lateral puck movement. But then most goalies have difficulties from good puck movement by championship calibre teams. Dryden struggled at times, but at no time did he ever, even in game 1 in '72, look as bad as Cheevers in the Challenge Cup final, or Liut in '81. Even Grant Fuhr, as big as he is remembered against the Soviets, gave up 27 goals in six games against between Rendezvous '87 and the '87 Canada Cup.

I guess you could say the Rangers and Sabres had success against Dryden since they each did beat him in a playoff round in the 70s too. So what. Those two series have no bearing on his play against the Soviets and little impact on his legacy in the NHL. He was a winner, even against the Russians, and outside of a single game as a pro in International play, his first, he was never "horrible." It's a myth
I will respectfully disagree. In both Games 4 and the 1975 New Years Eve game, even when he made saves he looked shaky. He dropped pucks out of his glove, struggled with rebounds, etc. Even he has admitted that! He wasn't very good in these games.

Craig Wallace

cam042686 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 09:38 PM
  #34
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by double5son10 View Post
Blaming the goalie for the whole team in front of him for sucking royally is simply looking for a scapegoat... He was a winner, even against the Russians, and outside of a single game as a pro in International play, his first, he was never "horrible." It's a myth.
The only myth here is the perpetuation of Dryden being something beyond infallible doubleson. He stunk against the Soviets. Couldnt, wouldnt adapt. I had a real hard time watching it as I admired Dryden based on his 71 performance against the Hawks. Could not understand "what happened"? How could so much brilliance just evaporate, disappear? So then I started taking his game apart. Special project. Clearly at that time, circa 71 he had it all: best glove, best positioning on shots: excellent on the scramble in deep. Yet, he lost it against the USSR, and in spectacular fashion. It was like a different person in the crease. He battled, fought himself, and as did he, so did Team Canada from the crease out. I watched Game One & Four, all of it. He stunk. Plain n' simple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
I will respectfully disagree. In both Games 4 and the 1975 New Years Eve game, even when he made saves he looked shaky. He dropped pucks out of his glove, struggled with rebounds, etc. Even he has admitted that! He wasn't very good in these games.

Craig Wallace
Correct. His confidence had been shattered in dealing with the Soviets early. He played like a Jr.B Goalie at 2pm when his alarm clock doesnt even go off until 8pm. I had zero confidence in that "guy" after game one. Ya, spectacular NHL career. All time great. But "All Time Best Greatest"? You kiddin me? Dissect his style, how he sits on the crease, lateral movement, skating & puckhandling skills, rebound control, total package. Built for North America. That just wasnt good enough in my book. He was far too "predictable". Over-thought himself while thinking too much (goaltending in 95% mental) and I believe to some no small extent caused wide spread breakdown & loss of confidence amongst Team Canada. Like a virus.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 12:49 AM
  #35
double5son10
Registered User
 
double5son10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
The only myth here is the perpetuation of Dryden being something beyond infallible doubleson. He stunk against the Soviets. Couldnt, wouldnt adapt. I had a real hard time watching it as I admired Dryden based on his 71 performance against the Hawks. Could not understand "what happened"? How could so much brilliance just evaporate, disappear? So then I started taking his game apart. Special project. Clearly at that time, circa 71 he had it all: best glove, best positioning on shots: excellent on the scramble in deep. Yet, he lost it against the USSR, and in spectacular fashion. It was like a different person in the crease. He battled, fought himself, and as did he, so did Team Canada from the crease out. I watched Game One & Four, all of it. He stunk. Plain n' simple.



Correct. His confidence had been shattered in dealing with the Soviets early. He played like a Jr.B Goalie at 2pm when his alarm clock doesnt even go off until 8pm. I had zero confidence in that "guy" after game one. Ya, spectacular NHL career. All time great. But "All Time Best Greatest"? You kiddin me? Dissect his style, how he sits on the crease, lateral movement, skating & puckhandling skills, rebound control, total package. Built for North America. That just wasnt good enough in my book. He was far too "predictable". Over-thought himself while thinking too much (goaltending in 95% mental) and I believe to some no small extent caused wide spread breakdown & loss of confidence amongst Team Canada. Like a virus.
Nowhere did I say Ken Dryden was beyond infallible. Did I call him the "All-Time Best Greatest?" He was lousy in Game 1 of the Summit, as I stated, but to blame him for Team Canada's mental state in the series is just bloody daft. Was his game built for North America? Well, yeah, that's stating the obvious. You want to dissect something, dissect the goals he surrenders in Game 4 and on New Year's and tell me which ones were bad goals. I'm curious to hear about all the softies he was letting in.

Look he wasn't stand on his head great, I'll give you that. But the goals he let's in are quality scores. Everyone gets caught up in 3 goals on 13 shots, but each of those goals are off of primo scoring plays. Frankly I find much of the argument insulting, not to Dryden, but to the Russians. They get the Canadians running around in their own end repeatedly because of their passing, or backing in too deep because of their skating, set up high percentage shots and score some beautiful goals, but it's all because Dryden was "bad against the Russians."
I'm aware of Dryden's own criticism of his play. He wanted to be better. Good for him. He was used to dominating and against the Russians he didn't. So he demands more of himself. Again, he was a winner (Plus you're talking about maybe the most self-reflective player with a penchant for over-analysis ever).

I brought up Grant Fuhr because he did play outstanding when it was all on the line, and yet he was still getting shelled. Playing against a team of superstars, that'll happen. It's not necessarily due to lousy goaltending. Bad goaltending is Liut giving up unscreened wrist shots from the top of the circles, not Dryden failing to stop Mikhailov scoring redirections on the power play or an undefended Vikulov standing on the edge of the crease converting a cross ice feed.

Only three Canadian goalies played in Moscow in a best on best series against the USSR. Dryden is the only one of the three that didn't lose a game in Russia. With Team Canada on the brink he outplayed Tretiak and won. He should get far more credit for that than he does. I'll leave it at that.

double5son10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 01:28 AM
  #36
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
I didnt realize but Larry Robinson did not get a pts in whole series and in 81 canada cup only had 1 assist.1n 14 games only 1 assist.Now Larry is a great player but surprised by his pts total.Look at Potvin his numbers were very impressive in both series

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 10:07 AM
  #37
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by double5son10 View Post
I brought up Grant Fuhr because he did play outstanding when it was all on the line, and yet he was still getting shelled. Playing against a team of superstars, that'll happen. It's not necessarily due to lousy goaltending. Bad goaltending is Liut giving up unscreened wrist shots from the top of the circles, not Dryden failing to stop Mikhailov scoring redirections on the power play or an undefended Vikulov standing on the edge of the crease converting a cross ice feed.
I agree that Dryden didn't let in bad goals in game 4 of the Summit Series. But I'd also say that does look very shaky in the game (something the color guy also notices). At one point a soft wrister plops out of his glove, and I think it's the much-maligned Don Awrey who actually prevents the puck from going in. Dryden thanks him by patting him on the back.

VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 11:50 AM
  #38
BadgerBruce
Registered User
 
BadgerBruce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
I didnt realize but Larry Robinson did not get a pts in whole series and in 81 canada cup only had 1 assist.1n 14 games only 1 assist.Now Larry is a great player but surprised by his pts total.Look at Potvin his numbers were very impressive in both series
Keeping this discussion on 76 rather than future TC incarnations, the "Robinson case" is interesting.

Bowman began with Orr and Potvin paired together, but split them up (other than pp and pk) by game 3. From that point on, each played almost 1/2 the game, with Lapointe, Savard and Robinson rotating in as partners. The strategy was effective; who wouldn't want one of these two outstanding d-men on the ice at all times? But Robinson seemed to draw the short straw and his ice time was less than his Habs teammates. Though Jimmy Watson and Vandnais were on the roster, I don't remember either on the ice for even a single shift. Not one. This was 5-man D-corps, and often just 4. Perhaps this would not have been the case if Brad Park had been healthy enough to participate. Who knows.

At any rate, Robinson played aggressively when he saw the ice and, IMHO, was dependable. But his opportunities were limited, clearly by design, and he was a complete non-factor offensively.

And btw, I did see the complete series on television when it took place, but recently acquired the DVD package to enjoy the series once again. Best $9.99 I've dropped in ages!

BadgerBruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 02:31 PM
  #39
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgerBruce View Post
Keeping this discussion on 76 rather than future TC incarnations, the "Robinson case" is interesting.

Bowman began with Orr and Potvin paired together, but split them up (other than pp and pk) by game 3. From that point on, each played almost 1/2 the game, with Lapointe, Savard and Robinson rotating in as partners. The strategy was effective; who wouldn't want one of these two outstanding d-men on the ice at all times? But Robinson seemed to draw the short straw and his ice time was less than his Habs teammates. Though Jimmy Watson and Vandnais were on the roster, I don't remember either on the ice for even a single shift. Not one. This was 5-man D-corps, and often just 4. Perhaps this would not have been the case if Brad Park had been healthy enough to participate. Who knows.

At any rate, Robinson played aggressively when he saw the ice and, IMHO, was dependable. But his opportunities were limited, clearly by design, and he was a complete non-factor offensively.

And btw, I did see the complete series on television when it took place, but recently acquired the DVD package to enjoy the series once again. Best $9.99 I've dropped in ages!
Probably the player the least established at this time too. We all know the experience Orr had in 1976. Lapointe and Savard were veterans by this time. Potvin only had three years experience but put up a whale of a season in 1976. Robinson was just about to break into his prime, and it happened in the 1976-'77 season. But at that time, he would have been the "worst" of the 5 defensemen.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2013, 06:14 PM
  #40
Peter9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
Thank you for the comments BadgerBruce. Good to hear that someone who just watched it recently verifies my memory of watching it live. Yes, the Hull/Perreault combination was magical.

Here is a youtube clip which shows a nice Perreault goal. Hull backchecks and knocks the opposing player off the puck. Hull then speeds up ice and takes a pass from the D. Makes a perfect pass to Perreault who scores on a great shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euEwsx_eVZ0

I agree with you that Hull & Perreault were the most dynamic forwards on the team. Would give a slight edge to Hull because of his physical and defensive play.Remember the guy was the oldest player in the tournament at 37.
I love the way Hull skated a little bit to his right toward the middle of the ice just before his backhand pass to the left, drawing the Czech defence to him and creating all the space in the world on the left for Perreault, who went in for the shot entirely unmolested.


Last edited by Peter9: 09-04-2013 at 06:21 PM.
Peter9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-26-2013, 02:37 PM
  #41
donnie pfaster
Registered User
 
donnie pfaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Country: Sweden
Posts: 19
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
Lafleur played in the 1981 World Championships and indeed, was knocked cold (and injured?) in the game versus the Netherlands, of all countries.
Yes indeed, and the guy who knocked him cold was a fellow by the name of Rick van Gog, born and raised in Ontario.

donnie pfaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-26-2013, 10:42 PM
  #42
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by donnie pfaster View Post
Yes indeed, and the guy who knocked him cold was a fellow by the name of Rick van Gog, born and raised in Ontario.
Ya apparently neither he nor Larry Robinson had slept for about 2 days, John Ferguson suggesting they play as it would be a cakewalk & help them get used to the larger ice surface. First shift he takes a blind pass from Lucien Deblois & BAM! Van Gog steps into him. Clean, legal check.

Killion is online now   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 12:26 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.