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.

Jean Beliveau vs. Bobby Hull

View Poll Results: Jean Beliveau or Bobby Hull?
Hull 54 40.30%
Beliveau 80 59.70%
Voters: 134. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-09-2013, 07:18 PM
  #76
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Nor do I think it was Bobby Hull's fault Esposito did not score more in Chicago. Chicago used him all wrong.
Indeed, and to this day rather bitter towards certainly Boston & to a lesser extent Chicago. Not happy with either when asked during the Hawks-Bruins Stanley Cup Finals. "Both teams traded me, didnt want me, couldnt give a **** which one wins" or words to that affect. Particularly bitter with Boston as he'd signed for a lot less money than he'd been offered by the WHA to make the jump to stick with and hopefully retire as a Bruin.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2013, 07:25 PM
  #77
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Everyone loves '98/99 for Jagr because it's "untainted" by Lemieux's presence/impact. Well I don't care about that. 60 goal scoring (or pace) Jagr with someone else around who could more than keep up skill-wise was one of the most dangerous things to be seen on 1990s NHL ice surfaces. Heck, his production in the '00/01 regular season is almost more impressive when you compare how low playoff scoring ended up. Both he and Lemieux were <PPG, but absolutely torched the regular season. I think it took more work to drag that team to the Conference Final than it took lose to Toronto in '99, but this is all a long time ago for my memory at this point, lol.
So you think Jagr's 2001 season was his best? I consider it to be 4th or 5th best for him personally. Not that it wasn't a great season, but I'll always take 1999 followed by 1996. He was with Lemieux in 1996 but anyone could see he was a product of himself as much as anything. He and Lemieux were well above the rest of the field that year. But 1999 was a 127 point season in a lower scoring league while carrying a weaker team. I'll always go with 1999 here. He was unstoppable.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2013, 07:57 PM
  #78
Crosbyfan
Registered User
 
Crosbyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Indeed, and to this day rather bitter towards certainly Boston & to a lesser extent Chicago. Not happy with either when asked during the Hawks-Bruins Stanley Cup Finals. "Both teams traded me, didnt want me, couldnt give a **** which one wins" or words to that affect. Particularly bitter with Boston as he'd signed for a lot less money than he'd been offered by the WHA to make the jump to stick with and hopefully retire as a Bruin.
Which is a shame considering he is known as a Bruin, one of their best, from their "glory years", and the fans of Boston had nothing to do with that.

Crosbyfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2013, 08:18 PM
  #79
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosbyfan View Post
Which is a shame considering he is known as a Bruin, one of their best, from their "glory years", and the fans of Boston had nothing to do with that.
Yes when I read that was taken aback a bit. Some Bruins fans disturbed, suggesting the club "de-retire" his number if he wasnt willing to bury the hatchet.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2013, 08:19 PM
  #80
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
So you think Jagr's 2001 season was his best?
I'm not sure how the words "almost more impressive" got converted to "best".

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2013, 08:22 PM
  #81
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,307
vCash: 500
Please steer the conversation back towards Jean Beliveau and Bobby Hull. Thanks!

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-09-2013, 08:46 PM
  #82
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
Yeah, I also view him as basically the prototype for top line center.

Like, I'm sure if you asked a GM to give a vague description of what they want their first line center to be (other than cheeky responses like "Wayne Gretzky"), most would want him to be a big, rangy, intelligent two-way guy who could skate, pass and shoot.
This is what steers me towards Beliveau too despite Hull having a slightly better regular season offensive resume on paper.

For the people drafting a player to start a team, I'd definitely pick Beliveau aside from the idea that Hull's electrifying style would fill more seats. Beliveau meshed with so many different players and would elevate lesser players. Hull would still score, but I don't think he'd make a lesser player seem better the way Beliveau would.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
Beliveau made his teammates better. Hull didn’t. This is far fetched. IMO it is the opposite. You could argue that Beliveau’s teammates made him better. It had to help him to step into the NHL as a mature player and immediately be teamed up with star players like Geoffrion, Moore, Olmstead etc. Meanwhile, Hull was playing on a lines with the likes of Murray Balfour, Red Hay, Chico Maki, Anders Hedberg, Ulf Nilsson. All of whom had the best years of their careers playing on a line with Hull. I would also argue that Hull made Espo a better player. Espo had a difficult time making the Hawks and was floundering until they put him on the Hull line in his first full season. Guess what, Espo finished top 10 in scoring.
What about guys like Gilles Tremblay, Marcel Bonin, John Ferguson, or Bobby Rousseau?


Last edited by Rob Scuderi: 09-09-2013 at 08:51 PM.
Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 09:33 AM
  #83
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
Beliveau.

Reasons: Both have great resumes, but Beliveau's a huge center, which I'm partial toward when the other guy's (I guess at the time) an average-sized wing.
So size is your deciding factor?

Dennis Bonvie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 12:14 PM
  #84
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,843
vCash: 593
So Billybudd earlier is of the opinion that Beliveau was stronger than Bobby Hull? That he dominated the game physically more than Hull? I find that hard to believe.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 12:31 PM
  #85
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
So Billybudd earlier is of the opinion that Beliveau was stronger than Bobby Hull? That he dominated the game physically more than Hull? I find that hard to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
So size is your deciding factor?
Where did these extrapolations come from? Sounds like centre is the defining factor, and that the bigger and more "widely/universally" skilled the better they'd hold up in any era, contributing to his "all-time value".

I don't think anyone who has seen/heard of hay-bailing Hulls on the farm thinks Beliveau could beat him in any actual feat of strength.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 01:14 PM
  #86
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
I'm not sure how the words "almost more impressive" got converted to "best".
Alright, fair enough.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 04:24 PM
  #87
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Where did these extrapolations come from? Sounds like centre is the defining factor, and that the bigger and more "widely/universally" skilled the better they'd hold up in any era, contributing to his "all-time value".

I don't think anyone who has seen/heard of hay-bailing Hulls on the farm thinks Beliveau could beat him in any actual feat of strength.
That's verbatim what I was getting at. Thanks.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 04:48 PM
  #88
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,843
vCash: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
That's verbatim what I was getting at. Thanks.
But was still his physical size important here?

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 04:54 PM
  #89
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,157
vCash: 500
I will repeat my post #36 since few seem to have read it.


Right on. In my opinion, revisionism without any substance is becoming the norm in this forum.

I have Hull as the 5th best player with Beliveau, Shore, Harvey, Richard being in a grouping a step or 2 below. Using the eye test and the goal scoring criterion, Hull is way ahead. In some of the other aspects of their game, Beliveau is closer and there may be arguments to rank Beliveau slightly ahead but I donít see it.

Here are some of the arguments that have been made in favor of Beliveau in this thread.

Cup Counting. Meaningless. Cups are won by teams not individuals. Playoff performance is what matters. Playoff PPG for Hull & Beliveau is virtually identical. Also it usually ignored that Hull won a few WHA cups.

Beliveau made his teammates better. Hull didnít. This is far fetched. IMO it is the opposite. You could argue that Beliveauís teammates made him better. It had to help him to step into the NHL as a mature player and immediately be teamed up with star players like Geoffrion, Moore, Olmstead etc. Meanwhile, Hull was playing on a lines with the likes of Murray Balfour, Red Hay, Chico Maki, Anders Hedberg, Ulf Nilsson. All of whom had the best years of their careers playing on a line with Hull. I would also argue that Hull made Espo a better player. Espo had a difficult time making the Hawks and was floundering until they put him on the Hull line in his first full season. Guess what, Espo finished top 10 in scoring.

Playmaking. Pretty close, IMO. It is a question of focus. Hull focused on goal scoring which makes sense since he was the best goal scorer that ever laced them up. Beliveau focused more on assists which also makes sense when you have someone like Geoffrion on your wing. An interesting comparison is to look at the 15 years they played in the NHl at the same time. In 7 of those years Beliveau came out on top in assists. Seven times, Hull had the most assists. The other year they tied. I know there are extenuating circumstances here--difference in age, injuries, Hull coming in as a teenager etc. However, the point is, Beliveau is usually considered the better playmaker but he certainly didnít blow Hull away in this area. I will let Beliveau have the last word here. This is from his autoboigraphy. ďHaving started his career as a centre, he (Hull) was an excellent playmaker, apt to put a beautiful pass on a linemates stick at the very moment when an opposition winger and 2 defensemen converged on him.Ē

Checking. Both were decent checkers but I would give the edge to Hull. Hull killed penalties regularly in his prime. I donít remember Beliveau ever doing so which allowed him to focus more on offense. Montreal was a deeper team so they didnít need to depend on their superstars to kill penalties. Both were physical players but Hull gave more punishing bodychecks. In the 76 Canada cup, Hull took Salmingís game away by dishing out punishing but clean bodychecks. Also, Hull was regularly matched up against Howe in the playoffs.

Here is a clip from the 76 Canada cup that illustrates Hull's all round play. Hull back checks and knocks the player off the puck. He then leads the rush back up ice and lays a perfect pass on Perreault's stick who scores. Note that Hull was 37 at the time which gives every indication that he still would have been one of the best in the NHL at that age.

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

Last edited by pappyline; 05-07-2012 at 09:07 A

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:05 PM
  #90
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,864
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Where did these extrapolations come from? Sounds like centre is the defining factor, and that the bigger and more "widely/universally" skilled the better they'd hold up in any era, contributing to his "all-time value".

I don't think anyone who has seen/heard of hay-bailing Hulls on the farm thinks Beliveau could beat him in any actual feat of strength.
Here is the post I responded to verbatim:

"Beliveau.

Reasons: Both have great resumes, but Beliveau's a huge center, which I'm partial toward when the other guy's (I guess at the time) an average-sized wing."

No mention of skill set.

Huge center > average-sized wing?

Dennis Bonvie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:06 PM
  #91
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
But was still his physical size important here?
At the centre position? For "universal" insertion into any era? Obviously.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Huge center > average-sized wing?
If everything else is arguably close ("talent", or whatever), or even not necessarily part of the issue, then yeah, why not? I think everyone is fully willing to admit that there's an amount of talent that you don't give up for the sake of a bit of size, but we're talking about all-time greats kind of specifically here, so again: why not?


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 09-10-2013 at 05:11 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:12 PM
  #92
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,843
vCash: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
At the centre position? For "universal" insertion into any era? Obviously.



If everything else is arguably close ("talent", or whatever), then yeah, why not?
Yeah but we are comparing two specific players here. Fact is that Hull was more prominent in all important physical aspects in the game. Otherwise it's like saying Peter Popovic had anything on Scott Stevens physically, although there it might actually be that Popovic in fact might have for example benched more. He did not show that on the ice though and Bobby Hull has the physical edge over Beliveau no matter how tall the latter where. Hull was stronger, faster and more nasty.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:17 PM
  #93
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Bobby Hull has the physical edge over Beliveu no matter how tall the latter where.
Sure, in this example. Have you bothered to think about it more generally, or is this just something specific that you're choosing to really, really nitpick on for some reason? It seems like such a common opinion around the boards that I'm not understanding why the generality of the idea is being attacked so much, even if it doesn't begin or end the comparison of these two guys. Pretty sure it wasn't the beginning or end of the poster's reasoning, either, but it's possible he misjudged or was unaware of just how much of a brick poop house Hull actually was.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:23 PM
  #94
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,843
vCash: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Sure, in this example. Have you bothered to think about it more generally, or is this just something specific that you're choosing to really, really nitpick on for some reason? It seems like such a common opinion around the boards that I'm not understanding why the generality of the idea is being attacked so much, even if it doesn't begin or end the comparison of these two guys. Pretty sure it wasn't the beginning or end of the poster's reasoning, either, but it's possible he misjudged or was unaware of just how much of a brick poop house Hull actually was.
Eric Lindros was a guy that not only had the height but also immense strenght and knew how to use it. He's an outlier though, but lets just say that i would take 5'11" 180lbs Ken Linseman before Beliveau purely physically speaking. Jean was the better skater overall there though.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:25 PM
  #95
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Eric Lindros was a guy that not only had the height but also immense strenght and knew how to use it. He's an outlier though, but lets just say that i would take 5'11" 180lbs before Beliveau physically speaking. Jean was the better skater overall there though.
Consider the net result of combining that size with that skating and hockey I.Q. - like Fedorov (similar size to Beliveau, if not "big" for his time), for another currently being discussed example.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:31 PM
  #96
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,843
vCash: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Consider the net result of combining that size with that skating and hockey I.Q. - like Fedorov (similar size to Beliveau, if not "big" for his time), for another currently being discussed example.
Forget Fedorov, insert Lindros who comparatively speaking was as big during his days as Beliveau was during his.
What i'm trying to say is that while size often leads to a player being physically important it is not always the case. Hull would have his way with Beliveau.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 05:52 PM
  #97
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Forget Fedorov, insert Lindros who comparatively speaking was as big during his days as Beliveau was during his.
What i'm trying to say is that while size often leads to a player being physically important it is not always the case. Hull would have his way with Beliveau.
Divide in skating and hockey I.Q. is too vast to consider, but I know what you're suggesting when you say that maybe someone 6'4"+ would make a better analogue.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2013, 10:32 PM
  #98
Hawkman
Moderator
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,274
vCash: 500
In both The Top 70 and The Top 100 here (I miss reading FissionFire's posts) Hull was ranked #5 all time ahead of Beliveau which is consistent with the history books. Opinions change with the weather.

__________________

_______________________________
Chicago Bears, Blackhawks, Bulls, Cubs

Yzerman has 3 Rings and a Conn Smythe. OV has never been to a Conference Final.
Hawkman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2013, 12:12 AM
  #99
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Yeah but we are comparing two specific players here. Fact is that Hull was more prominent in all important physical aspects in the game. Otherwise it's like saying Peter Popovic had anything on Scott Stevens physically, although there it might actually be that Popovic in fact might have for example benched more. He did not show that on the ice though and Bobby Hull has the physical edge over Beliveau no matter how tall the latter where. Hull was stronger, faster and more nasty.
Career point per game

Beliveau 1.08
Hull 1.10

Stevens .56
Popovic .15

Not that Stevens was particularly known for his offense, but this is the quickest way I could think of to demonstrate that my preference for large players over smaller ones (and there are more advantages to to size than strength, which, I should not, I never mentioned) and centers over wings pertains only to two players of similar talent and effectiveness in their roles, which Stevens and Popovic in no way constitute.

I said I'd take Beliveau over Hull, not Crabb over St Louis, so I'll thank you to stop pretending I'm implying something other than I obviously am.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2013, 12:16 AM
  #100
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Sure, in this example. Have you bothered to think about it more generally, or is this just something specific that you're choosing to really, really nitpick on for some reason? It seems like such a common opinion around the boards that I'm not understanding why the generality of the idea is being attacked so much, even if it doesn't begin or end the comparison of these two guys. Pretty sure it wasn't the beginning or end of the poster's reasoning, either, but it's possible he misjudged or was unaware of just how much of a brick poop house Hull actually was.
I'll thank you again for trying to be a voice of reason.

There are a lot of reasons, all other things being equal, that I'd take a large player over a small one. Strength can be one of them, but not always and not one that I mentioned in this case.

billybudd 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 06:53 PM.

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.