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
Notices

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

Round 2, Vote 3 (HOH Top Defensemen)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-22-2011, 08:14 PM
  #101
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by plusandminus View Post
I'm looking at scoring stats for Cleghorn, using my own database with data from 1917 (originally from hockeydb). I know scoring isn't everything.

I have not memorized everything written here as it is new to me.

What is so special about Cleghorn offensively? He only have one scoring title (everything I say here is defencemen only), and in total one goal scoring title and one assist title. A contemporary Harry Cameron seem far more dominating with 4 scoring wins in 5 years, which might have become more if he hadn't left for WCHL.
Cameron seem, according to hockeyreference, to have been defenceman only, and he is age wise just one year younger than Cleghorn.
After Cameron left NHL, an aging Cleghorn only managed to finish 5, 3, 8, 16, 21 or so in the scoring.

George Boucher also seemed to score more than Cleghorn, winning scoring title twice and finishing top 3 six consecutive seasons (compared to Cleghorns five in six seasons).

King Clancy outscored Cleghorn from age 20 (Cleghorn was then 33). Clancy won three scoring titles, including one where he led in both goals and assists.

"Offensive threat whenever he was on the ice" or what I read here quoted about Cleghorn. But he wasn't even the defenceman scoring most points?

Am I missing something? Was Cleghorn outstanding before age 27 and before NHL came to be?

Cleghorn, however his first name is pronounced, - apart from sounding to be the most vicious and brutal player ever - looks like nothing very special. (Probably far below guys Salming, Suchy, Svedberg).

(I looked at Dit Clapper too, and he don't look very special either. Probably at least five or so Europeans not rankable yet who should deserve to be better. So far only two Europeans in the top 21(!) of the big list. I'm sure if there would be a more even representation of participators, there might be at least twice as many already.)
I'll try to find the stats, but my impression is that Cleghorn = Boucher = Cameron offensively as the top 3 offensive defensemen of the era. Cleghorn brought the most (of the 3) away from the puck, however. I think Clancy was better than all 3 offensively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Wish to make a point. Earl Seibert earned 10 consecutive AST selections, mainly 2nd team. However he was traded from the Rangers to the Hawks after his first team AST selection in 1935 and earned the remaining nine on a team that rarely finished with a winning record, only twice during his stay.

Ten consecutive AST selections is increadible especially on a weak team where the player has very little support from teammates,coaches, management and ownership.
Absolutely. I think Seibert is definitely a top 20 defenseman. But I don't think he's a top 15 defenseman like Clancy is.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2011, 08:31 PM
  #102
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
1965 playoff Stan Mikita spent way too much time in the penalty box - two GWGs were scored by the opposition while he was in the penalty box. Not where you want your #1 center to be. Within two seasons he was a Lady Byng winner.

Aaron Rome's hit on Nathan Horton. Game 3 of the finals accomplished what? Certainly did not help the Canucks win. Rather it rallied the Bruins. So much for intimidation or sending a message.
The Bruins didn't win because of Rome's 5 mins in the box and he is hardly top 600 of all time nevermind 60.

As for Mikita the coincidence of the exception proves the rule doesn't it?

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2011, 09:02 PM
  #103
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,774
vCash: 500
Clancy / Seibert

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'll try to find the stats, but my impression is that Cleghorn = Boucher = Cameron offensively as the top 3 offensive defensemen of the era. Cleghorn brought the most (of the 3) away from the puck, however. I think Clancy was better than all 3 offensively.



Absolutely. I think Seibert is definitely a top 20 defenseman. But I don't think he's a top 15 defenseman like Clancy is.
Two comments.

Far from convinced that pre forward pass and post forward pass/pre red line / post red line defensemen are being properly compared across eras or between eras to begin with. Basic issue is that there seems to be some carry over by the voters especially when it comes to AST selections and awards. Not sure how to address the situation. Main concern is the perception of offense when comparing the two players.

In this specific instance King Clancy was mainly a pre forward pass defenseman while Earl Seibert along with Art Coulter were the first two true post forward pass / pre red line defensemen.With the Leafs Clancy had a 52G / 78A ratio. Seibert's career ratio was 89G / 187A indicating greater playmaking or passing skills.

Second point pertains to the actual gap 15 vs 16 or 11 vs 20. Especially in the context of the 1930s Leafs being the most mediatized team of the decade while the Hawks were the least mediatized team. If there is a gap I doubt that it will be big either way.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2011, 10:00 PM
  #104
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Two comments.

Far from convinced that pre forward pass and post forward pass/pre red line / post red line defensemen are being properly compared across eras or between eras to begin with. Basic issue is that there seems to be some carry over by the voters especially when it comes to AST selections and awards. Not sure how to address the situation. Main concern is the perception of offense when comparing the two players.

In this specific instance King Clancy was mainly a pre forward pass defenseman while Earl Seibert along with Art Coulter were the first two true post forward pass / pre red line defensemen.With the Leafs Clancy had a 52G / 78A ratio. Seibert's career ratio was 89G / 187A indicating greater playmaking or passing skills.

Second point pertains to the actual gap 15 vs 16 or 11 vs 20. Especially in the context of the 1930s Leafs being the most mediatized team of the decade while the Hawks were the least mediatized team. If there is a gap I doubt that it will be big either way.
I'll also add that the Leafs had alot more assists per goal in the early 30's than other teams, something I'm going to research for Apps which makes Clancy's lower goal-assist ration even more surprising.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2011, 10:23 PM
  #105
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,778
vCash: 500
Here are some all-time teams taken from newspaper articles. These often reflect the experiences of the person who named them, but can help give an idea of which players were most highly regarded from eras that we haven't seen.

Names of defencemen are bolded.

Bill Cook in 1935

Busher Jackson - Frank Frederickson - Charlie Conacher
Ching Johnson - Eddie Shore
George Hainsworth

Red Dutton in 1938

Aurel Joliat - Dick Irvin - Bill Cook
Busher Jackson - Howie Morenz - Charlie Conacher
Paul Thompson - Frank Boucher - Dit Clapper

Eddie Gerard - Sprague Cleghorn
Herb Gardiner - Eddie Shore


Tiny Thompson

Duke Keats in 1942

Gordie Roberts/George Hay - Dick Irvin - Bill Cook
Joe Simpson, Sprague Cleghorn, Eddie Shore
Happy Holmes

Shorty Green in 1944

Aurel Joliat - Frank Nighbor - Bill Cook
Sprague Cleghorn - Eddie Gerard
Georges Vezina

Cyclone Taylor in 1956 (picking his pre-1944 team)

Howie Morenz - Syl Apps - Bill Cook
Eddie Gerard - Eddie Shore
Tiny Thompson

Foster Hewitt in 1961

Ted Lindsay - Howie Morenz - Maurice Richard
Eddie Gerard - Eddie Shore
Georges Vezina

Jack Adams in 1966

Maurice Richard - Milt Schmidt - Gordie Howe
Jack Stewart - Eddie Shore
Terry Sawchuk

Charles L. Coleman (historian, Trail of the Stanley Cup)

1893-1926 all-star team

Russell Bowie - Joe Malone - Frank Nighbor
Sprague Cleghorn - Ernie Johnson
Clint Benedict

Other nominees for defence: Harry Cameron, Eddie Gerard

These selections may be biased toward Eddie Gerard, as I came across some while researching Gerard in particular.

I didn't find any that named Clancy or Seibert, even when searching for their names.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2011, 11:01 PM
  #106
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by plusandminus View Post
Since his name likely will be written here now and then, how is "Sprague Cleghorn" being pronounced?

Sprayg? Spragg?? Spraggé???
Clegghorn? Cleeghorn??
I always thought it was Sprayg, going by the old Jays 3rd baseman Ed Sprague.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
King Clancy was better offensively than Cleghorn. I think he was probably the second best offensive defenseman to ever play (after Shore) until Kelly came around. I'll post more on that later.

Leetch was definitely better defensively than Coffey, at least in his prime. I don't think it was particularly close either.
100% agree on both.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plusandminus View Post
I'm looking at scoring stats for Cleghorn, using my own database with data from 1917 (originally from hockeydb). I know scoring isn't everything.

I have not memorized everything written here as it is new to me.

What is so special about Cleghorn offensively? He only have one scoring title (everything I say here is defencemen only), and in total one goal scoring title and one assist title. A contemporary Harry Cameron seem far more dominating with 4 scoring wins in 5 years, which might have become more if he hadn't left for WCHL.
Cameron seem, according to hockeyreference, to have been defenceman only, and he is age wise just one year younger than Cleghorn.
After Cameron left NHL, an aging Cleghorn only managed to finish 5, 3, 8, 16, 21 or so in the scoring.

George Boucher also seemed to score more than Cleghorn, winning scoring title twice and finishing top 3 six consecutive seasons (compared to Cleghorns five in six seasons).

King Clancy outscored Cleghorn from age 20 (Cleghorn was then 33). Clancy won three scoring titles, including one where he led in both goals and assists.

"Offensive threat whenever he was on the ice" or what I read here quoted about Cleghorn. But he wasn't even the defenceman scoring most points?

Am I missing something? Was Cleghorn outstanding before age 27 and before NHL came to be?

Cleghorn, however his first name is pronounced, - apart from sounding to be the most vicious and brutal player ever - looks like nothing very special. (Probably far below guys Salming, Suchy, Svedberg).

(I looked at Dit Clapper too, and he don't look very special either. Probably at least five or so Europeans not rankable yet who should deserve to be better. So far only two Europeans in the top 21(!) of the big list. I'm sure if there would be a more even representation of participators, there might be at least twice as many already.)
- yes, Cleghorn was outstanding prior to the start of the NHL. Also, a lot of those years you're thinking of, featured a player or two who you may think was a defenseman but actually wasn't.

- The fact that Cleghorn was a Hart runner-up twice at the ages of 33 and 35 should tell you all you need to know about his overall value as a player, which is obviously much more important than whatever you think about his offensive value.

- Cameron doesn't have anything close to the defensive/physical game that Cleghorn had. He also played his way out of a couple of cities.

- Georges Boucher played a lot of forward in those years, so much that it's hard to say when, if ever, he had a "scoring title" as a defenseman.

- Clancy was great, yes, but he was a forward/utility player for a couple years in Ottawa prior to becoming a full time defenseman.

- Cleghorn bio: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=2...7&postcount=49

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Once a team figures out they can win without you, its just a matter of time and Pronger was traded to Philly when an attractive deal came along.
what nonsense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Horton is fairly underrated offensively.

He was very strong defensively for sure but was good offensively as well. The totals from those days by defensemen just don't look as good to us these days.
absolutely.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 01:41 AM
  #107
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Interesting stuff. Where were you in Round 2, Vote 1?
it is another reason to wonder whether harvey should rank above bourque.

Quote:
I didn't realize how big the affect of Americans was, but probably should have. Seems like the cause of the "best competition ever" that Bourque faced is the golden age of American defensemen (Langway and Howe followed by Chelios and Leetch. Housley if you want to count him). Without those guys, his competition would be much closer to historical norms.
also mike ramsey, gary suter, reed larson, derian hatcher, kevin hatcher

not really competitors for norris, though

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Good point. Those are NHL stats only. That's why Shore is much closer on a "per game" level than on a total level - he was in the WHL until 1926-27.
shore also had higher points per game (.44) than clancy (.39) from '27-'29.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Wish to make a point. Earl Seibert earned 10 consecutive AST selections, mainly 2nd team. However he was traded from the Rangers to the Hawks after his first team AST selection in 1935 and earned the remaining nine on a team that rarely finished with a winning record, only twice during his stay.

Ten consecutive AST selections is incredible especially on a weak team where the player has very little support from teammates,coaches, management and ownership.
very good point. chicago was generally a weak team and may have been close to collapsing at various points.

chicago had many american players, and i have wondered if it was a way to try to attract more fans.


BM67 has posted AS voting for most of seibert's career. seibert was sometimes AS at RD and sometimes at LD.
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=145895&page=5

'35: 1st ?
'36: 2nd RD
'37: 2nd RD
'38: 2nd LD
'39: 2nd RD
'40: 2nd LD
'41: 2nd RD
'42: 1st RD
'43: 1st RD
'44: 1st ?


in '34 seibert was not an AS, but had basically the same AS votes as shore (who was suspended):
Quote:
DEFENSE:
FIRST TEAM: RIGHT D: King Clancy, Tor 17; Eddie Shore, Bos 8; Earl Seibert, NYR 6; Lionel Conacher, Chi 3; Hap Day, Tor 1

LEFT D: Lionel Conacher, Chi 17; Ching Johnson, NYR 7; King Clancy, Tor 4; Earl Seibert, NYR 4; Eddie Shore, Bos 2; Hap Day, Tor 1

ALTERNATE TEAM: RIGHT D: Earl Seibert, NYR 7; Eddie Shore, Bos 6; King Clancy, Tor 6; Ching Johnson, NYR 5; Lionel Conacher, Chi 3; Red Dutton, NYA 2; Red Horner, Tor 2; Sylvio Mantha, Mtl 2; Al Shields, Ott 1; Ebbie Goodfellow, Det 1

LEFT D: Ching Johnson, NYR 15; Lionel Conacher, Chi 7; Eddie Shore, Bos 2; Hap Day, Tor 2; Red Horner, Tor 2; King Clancy, Tor 2; Red Dutton, NYA 1; Earl Seibert, NYR 1; Ebbie Goodfellow, Det 1; Sylvio Mantha, Mtl 1; Gerry Carson, Mtl 1

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 04:57 AM
  #108
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Once a team figures out they can win without you, its just a matter of time and Pronger was traded to Philly when an attractive deal came along.
You don't actually believe that was the reason Pronger got traded?

unknown33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 09:39 AM
  #109
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,774
vCash: 500
Trades

Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
You don't actually believe that was the reason Pronger got traded?
Once a team decides that a player is no longer an untouchable then it is a matter of time before an advantageous trade is made. If a team can do the same or better without a player then it is just a question of waiting for the best offer/situation.

Example Paul Coffey - Bowman won the 1992 SC after trading him in Pittsburgh. When the opportunity came to get Shanahan to Detroit guess who was moved in the package - Coffey an attractive piece but one that Bowman knew he could win without.

Example Pete Mahovlich. Bowman saw that the Lafleur line was just as efficient offensively with Jacques Lemaire and more efficient defensively than with Pete Mahovlich. Mahovlich gets traded - roll the dice deal for Pierre Larouche.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 09:47 AM
  #110
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,774
vCash: 500
Counterexample

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
The Bruins didn't win because of Rome's 5 mins in the box and he is hardly top 600 of all time nevermind 60.

As for Mikita the coincidence of the exception proves the rule doesn't it?
Note - you specifically asked for any so providing one counterexample - Mikita, satisfies your criteria.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 09:51 AM
  #111
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,774
vCash: 500
Sprague Cleghorn

As far back as I can remember into the fifties, Sprague was pronounced in hockey and media circles just like the surname Sprague - Ed Sprague the BB player being the best example.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 09:56 AM
  #112
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
i
shore also had higher points per game (.44) than clancy (.39) from '27-'29.
Thanks. I corrected the post. Seems Clancy was the 2nd best offensive defenseman in the world (to Shore) both before and after the forward pass, and was arguably better defensively than Shore during this time (though Shore didn't seem to hit his defensive peak until after Clancy was on the decline, so it's not an easy comparison).

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:13 AM
  #113
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
King Clancy's contribution towards team success

Reckoning posted this previously:

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning View Post
There is one interesting statistic that may help show the worth of King Clancy: Ottawa's record the year before and the year after they sold him to Toronto.


SeasonWLTPtsPctRank
29-302115850.5684th
30-311030424.2739th

Now Ottawa had been slowly letting the stars from their glory days leave throughout the late-20s, but they were still able to stay respectable on the ice. However after losing Clancy the team totally fell apart. For the two seasons above, they had the same coach, same goalie and pretty much the same roster. The only major difference was that Clancy was gone.
It's also helpful to look at Clancy's effect on Toronto after acquiring Clancy:

SeasonWLTPtsPctRankPlayoffs
27-281818844.5007thno
28-292118547.5345thlost Semifinals
29-301721640.4557thno
30-312213953.6023rdlost Quarterfinals
31-322318753.5523rdWon Stanley Cup
32-332418654.5633rdlost in Finals

Anecdotes suggest that Clancy was the main reason for Toronto's sudden improvement between 29-30 and 30-31:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier
Perhaps no single player had as big an effect of the Toronto Maple Leafs franchise than did Francis "King" Clancy.
...
One of Clancy's biggest admirers was Conn Smythe, the architect of the Maple Leafs. Clancy aggressively pursued the acquisition of this player more than any other, as he knew that no other player could have such an impact on his new Maple Leafs team. Smythe, a celebrated gambler, took a big chance in the minds of most when he traded away Eric Pettinger, Art Smith and $35,000 cash in exchange for Clancy in October of 1931. It was the biggest deal in hockey history at the time. The financially troubled Sens jumped at the deal as the Great Depression was in full swing, but the team was never the same on the ice.

The Leafs were vastly improved with the pugnacious yet charismatic Clancy on their blue line. Much like the Wayne Gretzky trade to Los Angeles many years later, Clancy brought excitement and success to Toronto and set the standards for excellence for decades to come. He instilled a winning attitude complete with a Stanley Cup championship - the franchise's first while known as Maple Leafs - in 1932
Note that Pelletier has his date wrong, as Clancy played all of 1930-31 in Toronto

Quote:
Originally Posted by legendsofhockey
In 1930, Clancy was the centrepiece of what became known as "the best deal in hockey" when he was acquired by the Toronto Maple Leafs. Buds' manager Conn Smythe paid the unprecedented sum of $35,000 and two players to acquire the ingredient he felt would put his club over the top as a Stanley Cup contender, a sum he acquired by winning a bet on a racehorse named Rare Jewel. Clancy repaid Smythe's faith in him by constantly bringing the Toronto crowd to its feet with bodychecks, rushes with the puck, and boundless enthusiasm

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:17 AM
  #114
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
Cleghorn vs. Clancy?

Above, I made the case as to why I think Clancy should be ranked a clear step ahead of Earl Seibert among pre-WW2 defensemen.

What about Cleghorn vs. Clancy?

I went into this round ranking Clancy higher (and therefore considering him the 2nd best defenseman who played before WW2), largely because of his tangible contribution to team success versus the fact that Cleghorn's teams appeared to be successful with or without him, and Clancy's rep as the "ultimate winner" vs. Cleghorn's rep as "the ultimiate loose cannon."

But those all-time all-star teams seem to think higher of Cleghorn than Clancy.

Thoughts?


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 11-23-2011 at 11:40 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:22 AM
  #115
VanIslander
Don't waste my time
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 23,414
vCash: 500
The Pronger I saw in St. Louis and Edmonton (and to some extent in Anaheim and Philly) was better than ANY defenseman not named Bourque in my lifetime! So, in all due respect to my eyes, with Chelios and Fetisov already ranked ahead of him, it'd be a real travesty I think to put Coffey, Stevens and MacInnis ahead of him!

I say that as a proud '7' fan, thinking Coffey my fav Oiler (but embarrassment as a Red Wing, bloody defensive-negligent opportunist!); and as a longtime Capitals fan I loved Stevens but think him a step down from Pronger.

I feel NO COMPULSION to cite stats regarding guys I've seen. Pronger is underrated big time imo, as a dominant force for multiple franchises, and Oilers fans should thank him at every turn for his role in their Stanley Cup Finals run, as he was more responsible for it than anyone, and yet he is lambasted for "off-ice" considerations in his trade. Oilers fans be damned! He gave it his all for that franchise ON THE ICE! I revere the MacInnis slapshot but Prongs is an all-time great competitor, worthy of top-15 status imo.

I'll marshall evidence for Kelly's excellence, but Prongs I won't unless some of you are teenagers in need of schooling. otherwise, get past your biases! Yeah, he does cheapshots, but so did Messier! He is a competitor and a leader and a dominant player. The passion of your dislike is a function of his greatness.



Last edited by VanIslander: 11-23-2011 at 10:31 AM.
VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:31 AM
  #116
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
The Pronger I saw in St. Louis and Edmonton (and to some extent in Anaheim and Philly) was better than ANY defenseman not named Bourque in my lifetime! So, in all due respect to my eyes, with Chelios and Fetisov already ranked ahead of him, it'd be a real travesty I think to put Coffey, Stevens and MacInnis ahead of him!

I say that as a proud '7' fan, thinking Coffey my fav Oiler (but embarrassment as a Red Wing, bloody defensive-negligent opportunist!); and as a longtime Capitals fan I loved Stevens but think him a step down from Pronger.

I feel NO COMPULSION to cite stats regarding guys I've seen. Pronger is underrated big time imo, as a dominat force for multiple franchises, and Oilers fans should thank him at every turn for his role in their Stanley Cup Finals run, as he was more responsibnle for it than anyone, and yet he is lambasted for "off-ice" considerations in his trade. Oilers fans be damned! I revere the MacInnis slapshot but Prongs is an all-time great competitor, worthy of top-15 status imo.

I'll marshall evidence for Kelly's excellence, but Prongs I won't unless some of you are teenagers in need of schooling. otherwise, get past your biases! Yeah, he does cheapshots, but so did Messier! He is a competitor and a leader and a dominant player. The passion of your dislike is a function of his greatness.
The problem with Pronger has always been lack of consistency, largely due to injuries, but sometimes due to lack of discipline. Count me as one of those who thinks that if Pronger was consistently as good as he was in the 2000 regular season or the 2006, 2007, or 2010 playoffs, he'd be a top 10 defenseman of all time, and would be competing with Lidstrom for the top 5 defensemen of all time. But he wasn't consistently that good.

Was his 1999-00 regular season really substantively better than Scott Stevens' 1993-94 regular season when Stevens led the 2nd best team in the league in scoring and led the league in plus minus, losing the Norris by 1 vote to one of Ray Bourque's best seasons? Were any of Pronger's dominant playoffs better than Stevens' performances across the three Cup wins and four finals?

Edit: As for the "dominant force for multiple franchises," some would consider the fact that he could never stick with one team to be a negative, not a positive. Especially compared to Scott Stevens, who was a (the?) franchise cornerstone for one of the most successful teams of the past 20 years.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:43 AM
  #117
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The problem with Pronger has always been lack of consistency, largely due to injuries, but sometimes due to lack of discipline. Count me as one of those who thinks that if Pronger was consistently as good as he was in the 2000 regular season or the 2006, 2007, or 2010 playoffs, he'd be a top 10 defenseman of all time, and would be competing with Lidstrom for the top 5 defensemen of all time. But he wasn't consistently that good.

Was his 1999-00 regular season really substantively better than Scott Stevens' 1993-94 regular season when Stevens led the 2nd best team in the league in scoring and led the league in plus minus, losing the Norris by 1 vote to one of Ray Bourque's best seasons? Were any of Pronger's dominant playoffs better than Stevens' performances across the three Cup wins and four finals?

Edit: As for the "dominant force for multiple franchises," some would consider the fact that he could never stick with one team to be a negative, not a positive. Especially compared to Scott Stevens, who was a (the?) franchise cornerstone for one of the most successful teams of the past 20 years.
I was going to respond to VI's post, but this is pretty much exactly what I was going to say. The peak is there, but when you're talking Top 15-20 all time there has to be more consistency.

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:46 AM
  #118
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,778
vCash: 500
If Pronger was as consistently good as 2000, he'd be my #2 d-man of all time. He doesn't need to meet that high standard. Even with his consistency and injury issue I have him high in this round.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:51 AM
  #119
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
If Pronger was as consistently good as 2000, he'd be my #2 d-man of all time. He doesn't need to meet that high standard. Even with his consistency and injury issue I have him high in this round.
Eh, I don't think his 2000 was necessarily better than any of Bourque or Lidstrom's best seasons (or as I said, Scott Stevens' one career year).

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:52 AM
  #120
JaysCyYoung
Registered User
 
JaysCyYoung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: York Region
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,479
vCash: 500
I certainly would rank Pronger ahead of guys like Park, Seibert and Pilote in terms of his impact on the game in the post-season. Injuries aside he has been the dominant physical defenceman of the 1995-2010 period; a peer without equal in terms of his ability to lead teams entirely of his own volition. To me that's as significant an element as Norris Trophy consideration and All-Star Team selections at the end of the day (of which Pronger has been robbed of a couple in the past few seasons).


Last edited by JaysCyYoung: 11-23-2011 at 10:59 AM.
JaysCyYoung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:54 AM
  #121
JaysCyYoung
Registered User
 
JaysCyYoung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: York Region
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,479
vCash: 500
I think if we're being entirely honest, Bourque's 1989-90 season is the best season by a defender post-Bobby Orr and I'm not sure if many would contest that statement.

But that's getting a little off topic.

The fact of the matter is that Pronger's ability to turn around moribund or middling teams and make them Stanley Cup threats is a significant element in his favour. He's comparable to a guy like Tim Horton in terms of the physical intimidation factor and his ability to be a top-notch defensive player, but he also combined that with elite-level offence from the blue-line; even if we account for the fact that period numbers make a guy like Horton's numbers appear lesser than they are in reality, Pronger still ranks as one of the best all-around names remaining on the list. In fact, I don't see any reason why he shouldn't merit a spot with the likes of Clancy near the top of this round of voting.

JaysCyYoung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:56 AM
  #122
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaysCyYoung View Post
I certainly would rank Pronger ahead of guys like Park, Seibert and Horton in terms of his impact on the game in the post-season. Injuries aside he has been the dominant physical defenceman of the 1995-2010 period; a peer without equal in terms of his ability to lead teams entirely of his own volition. To me that's as significant an element as Norris Trophy consideration and All-Star Team selections at the end of the day (of which Pronger has been robbed of a couple in the past few seasons).

Horton is arguably the best playoff performer available here. (I consider a tossup between Horton and Stevens among the post-WW2 guys here though Pronger is close).

Edit: Thinking about it, most of the guys available this round were great in the playoffs. Coffey, Clancy, etc. Hard to pick the very best ones. Park was great too, despite not winning the Cups, though Pronger was likely better post-lockout.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 10:59 AM
  #123
JaysCyYoung
Registered User
 
JaysCyYoung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: York Region
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,479
vCash: 500
Apologies. I meant to say Pilote in that post.

I am a Leafs fan first and foremost so I definitely have the ultimate respect for Horton's value to the 1960s dynasty.

JaysCyYoung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 11:29 AM
  #124
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,574
vCash: 500
Pilote vs. Park

I would be interested in hearing a comparison of these two...If you take out Orr, both were the best defensemen in the league during their primes. Weak competition has been brought up about both, but it seems to me that Park's was weaker (obviously taking out Orr). As of now I rank Pilote higher. Is there a strong argument for Park over Pilote? How close are they?

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2011, 11:53 AM
  #125
Pear Juice
Registered User
 
Pear Juice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Gothenburg, SWE
Country: Sweden
Posts: 801
vCash: 500
Wow, for me this is by far the hardest vote so far. And harder it will most definitely get.

I would like to hear someone comment on Stevens and Horton. Both were solid rock in their own zone and among the least capable offensively among the players available. Both part of very succesful teams and very strong playoff contributors. What would you guys say separate them from each other?

Pear Juice 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 05:49 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.