A minority of posters claim he should be in the HHOF. The thing is, you love that type of player and what he brought to the table, the only thing is I am afraid there are many similar to Carboneau in the mold of being a good defensive player who helped his team win a lot too. Tikannen is his closest competitor followed by Lehtinen and to a lesser extent Madden. To open the HHOF to him might open a can of worms. Gainey just might be the only defensive forward capable of getting in on that merit alone.
As for where he ranks.............I say among defensive forwards pretty high. Gainey might just be the best but Carboneau is probably his red headed cousin if that makes any sense.
It's funny that he made a name for being elite defensively, good offensively, with 3 defensive trophies and 3 cups. If you flipped the defense/offense scale, that person would unquestionably get in. Oh, the double standard.
It's funny that he made a name for being elite defensively, good offensively, with 3 defensive trophies and 3 cups. If you flipped the defense/offense scale, that person would unquestionably get in. Oh, the double standard.
It's easier to be good defensively than good offensively.
It's easier to be good defensively than good offensively.
Well, yes and no. Carbonneau was a really, really intelligent player, and such a thing cannot be taught. One can learn to be a decent defensive player, but you need some natural gifts in order to become a great one.
It's funny that he made a name for being elite defensively, good offensively, with 3 defensive trophies and 3 cups. If you flipped the defense/offense scale, that person would unquestionably get in. Oh, the double standard.
Not necessarily. A Selke winner is never better than a Hart/Art Ross winner. John Madden wasn't equal to Jagr in 2000, right?
Put me in that "minority" of posters that think he should be in the HOF. Yes, perhaps it's easier to play defense than offense, but to really excel at the role to where a player is a multiple Selke winner and generally recognized as the best defensive forward of his era, is part of the case for him being in the Hall. One of the best centers on faceoffs, an outstanding shot blocker, and a tremendous penalty-killer due to excellent skating, anticipation and smarts.
The other part of the argument for induction, and this is where he separates himself from someone such as Craig Ramsey, is his playoff record--his 231 playoff games played is 7th All-Time, winning three Cups and appearing in two more Finals. And it's not as if he was some workmanlike third-liner on those teams, he often was given, particularly in Montreal, his teams tough minutes. Carbonneau going to Jacques Demers and asking to be put head to head against Gretzky after Wayne had destroyed the Habs in game 1 of the '93 Finals is well known. In the final four games of that series Gretzky is held by Carbonneau to a goal and two assists, a point less than his total in game 1. And this is after Gretzky had had a dominating performance against Selke winner Doug Gilmour in the Conf. Finals. In the two finals appearances in Dallas he's still averaging 17 minutes a game in the playoffs at ages 38 and 39, and is being sent out head to head against Peter Forsberg in consecutive Conf. Finals.
I don't see how rewarding a player that's top ten in playoff games played, top 50 in reg. season games played, has multiple trophies, multiple Cup rings, was effective right up to the end of his career and is regarded as the best defensive forward of his era would "open a can of worms". I'd say that's already been done by the Hall voters w/ Dick Duff, among others. Carbonneau has more awards than Madden, more rings than Lehtinen, and more longevity as an effective player than Tikkanen. Carbonneau belongs in the Hall.
The biggest difference with Carbo compared to most others named is that he was a fast, right handed center, one hell of a face-off man and shot blocker.
He was no slouch offensively either.
All together, he was actually a pretty rare package.
Carbonneau was the best defensive forward post-Gainey. Better than Otto, Tikkanen, Lehtinen, etc. He was one of the most intelligent players of his era.
He was a fantastic defensive forward with really high hockey IQ and as a Habs fan I would love to see him get in the Hall, but I just can't see it happening.
I know I'm in the minority here, but having seen Gainey for most of his career, and Carbonneau for all of it, I personally think Carbonneau was the better hockey player. There are also solid arguments for Craig Ramsey as well for players in that role. I just think Carbonneau's role as a defensive center was much more demanding than Gainey's or other elite defensive wingers.
As Gainey said himself, he got a hell of alot of mileage from that quote from the Russian coach.
Last edited by Psycho Papa Joe: 04-13-2012 at 11:51 AM.
I know I'm in the minority here, but having seen Gainey for most of his career, and Carbonneau for all of it, I personally think Carbonneau was the better hockey player. There are also solid arguments for Craig Ramsey as well for players in that role. I just think Carbonneau's role as a defensive center was much more demanding than Gainey's or other elite defensive forwards.
As Gainey said himself, he got a hell of alot of mileage from that quote from the Russian coach.
Saw both from the strat of their career including junior. Carbonneau was a complete hockey player. High scoring junior who quarterbacked the Chicoutimi PP from the right point. Lead checker on their PK. Averages a goal a game in his last season, 180+ pts in a 72 game season. One of the few juniors from the high scoring late 1970`s who had a sense of defensive play:
Bob Gainey was one of the few who could physically defend Bobby Orr. Strength was his skating, discipline and endurance. Offensively so-so. Soccer nets would not have made a significant difference in his numbers.
Carbo was an excellent and rare player. As has been said a smart, fast rh center who was better than average offensively. Would not mind if he made the hall. I like Lehtinen better offensively but very few defensive forward compare to Carboneau. I also like him better than Gainey and probably Craig Ramsey.
Carbo certainly had more offensive gifts, but Gainey was a punishing body checker in his prime. As stated, he could skate exceptionally.
Its really too bad Carbo never got to play against an elite centerman during Montreal's cup runs in 86 and 93. If they still win those cups and Carbo plays against Gretzky in 86 and Lemieux in 93 and stifles their offensive game, he might have been revered as much as Roy. But that is a big if. In 86, I can't see the Habs beating Edmonton, but I can see them beating Pittsburgh in 93.
Well, yes and no. Carbonneau was a really, really intelligent player, and such a thing cannot be taught. One can learn to be a decent defensive player, but you need some natural gifts in order to become a great one.
I think your idea on natural gifts is more so for being a defensive player though.
We see today how many players are very good defensively because their coaches and the game demands it.
No one can teach hands and I highly doubt you can teach eye-hand co ordination.
It's pretty dangerous to put great defensive players in the Hall, unless they were high-end offensive players too.
Obviously it's a different situation with a supreme two-way threat like Datsyuk or Fedorov. But putting a guy who was primarily a defensive threat in the Hall opens up a whole can of worms.
The basic problem is that while these guys (Carbonneau, Lehtinen, etc) were the best at their role, they weren't really among the very best hockey players in the world. You would never compare Guy Carbonneau's best season to Joe Sakic's best season, despite Carbonneau being a better defensive player than Sakic was as an offensive player (relatively speaking). A guy who can carry an offense is just way more valuable.
I think your idea on natural gifts is more so for being a defensive player though.
We see today how many players are very good defensively because their coaches and the game demands it.
No one can teach hands and I highly doubt you can teach eye-hand co ordination.
okay, but is the hall of fame really to memorialize skills, or is it to memorialize what players did with that skill? al iafrate did things on the ice that adam foote couldn't dream of doing. but which one was the more impactful player? (not saying adam foote belongs in the hall, but he's much much closer than iafrate obviously.)
and also, you can't teach hands like pavel datsyuk has. but you can teach shooting. look at a guy who was drafted with "hands of stone" like ryan kesler. he scored 40 goals last year and tied for fourth in the league because he worked on his shot.
ultimately, hockey skills obviously aren't distributed equally among players, but with good coaching and hard work, less naturally skilled players can raise their game to near-elite levels. carbonneau had an intuitive understanding of the game you flat out can't teach. but you can get to, say, 75% of carbonneau's level of defensive ability by learning patterns, playing the odds, etc. but then as my kesler example shows, the same can be said of offense. kesler's not marian gaborik, but his best goal scoring season is almost indistinguishable from gaborik's best, both numbers-wise and ranking-wise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez
It's pretty dangerous to put great defensive players in the Hall, unless they were high-end offensive players too.
Obviously it's a different situation with a supreme two-way threat like Datsyuk or Fedorov. But putting a guy who was primarily a defensive threat in the Hall opens up a whole can of worms.
The basic problem is that while these guys (Carbonneau, Lehtinen, etc) were the best at their role, they weren't really among the very best hockey players in the world. You would never compare Guy Carbonneau's best season to Joe Sakic's best season, despite Carbonneau being a better defensive player than Sakic was as an offensive player (relatively speaking). A guy who can carry an offense is just way more valuable.
you're right that a selke shouldn't have the same weight as a hart. but i don't think anyone is suggesting that carbonneau should be on the same level as sakic. it seems pretty reasonable, in my opinion, to suggest that carbonneau might be on the same level as a bottom-rung hall of famer like gartner though, if not higher. almost the same career length, carbonneau's consistent defensive excellence matches gartner's consistent offensive very good-ness, and i don't think it's a stretch to say that carbonneau was usually more valuable to his teams than gartner was, and obviously carbonneau's teams accomplished a hell of a lot more.
peak vs. peak, i think you could say the same about carbonneau vs. nieuwendyk. in my opinion, carbo's absolute peak was the '93 playoffs. nieuwendyk's shining moment was his conn smythe run. is it really that much of a stretch to say that carbonneau winning a cup by shutting down the greatest offensive player of all time in the final round of one of the great offensive playoff runs of all time is on the same level as nieuwendyk and all those goals he scored? could any other center in the league have shut down gretzky like that over an entire series? that year's two-way selke winner and future hall of famer doug gilmour couldn't, not for the full series anyway.
Carbo certainly had more offensive gifts, but Gainey was a punishing body checker in his prime. As stated, he could skate exceptionally.
Its really too bad Carbo never got to play against an elite centerman during Montreal's cup runs in 86 and 93. If they still win those cups and Carbo plays against Gretzky in 86 and Lemieux in 93 and stifles their offensive game, he might have been revered as much as Roy. But that is a big if. In 86, I can't see the Habs beating Edmonton, but I can see them beating Pittsburgh in 93.
?
Gretzky's 40 points in 24 games in 93 is not an elite offensive center for Carbo to be judged by?
In game 1, Montreal iced Kirk Muller against Gretz line, and Gretzky scored a goal and 3 assists.
Carbo stepped up to Demers and asked to be matched against Gretz all the time. Gretzky then scored a goal and 2 assists in the remaining 4 games against Carbo
Last edited by Dark Shadows: 04-13-2012 at 10:41 PM.
Saw both from the strat of their career including junior. Carbonneau was a complete hockey player. High scoring junior who quarterbacked the Chicoutimi PP from the right point. Lead checker on their PK. Averages a goal a game in his last season, 180+ pts in a 72 game season. One of the few juniors from the high scoring late 1970`s who had a sense of defensive play:
Bob Gainey was one of the few who could physically defend Bobby Orr. Strength was his skating, discipline and endurance. Offensively so-so. Soccer nets would not have made a significant difference in his numbers.
So true.
I love Gainey but he sure can get over rated at times, if he had played for the Leafs and not those stacked Hab teams does anyone really consider him a HHOF guy?
Craig Ramsay brought more value overall to the table than Gainey but played on a non SC team and gets undervalued because of it IMO.
Carbonneau was a very smart player and a great defensive one but talk about the Hall is overkill IMO.
okay, but is the hall of fame really to memorialize skills, or is it to memorialize what players did with that skill? al iafrate did things on the ice that adam foote couldn't dream of doing. but which one was the more impactful player? (not saying adam foote belongs in the hall, but he's much much closer than iafrate obviously.)
I like Foote alot as well and when I was talking about skills I wasn't taking about practice skills but actually how they translated onto the ice.
Quote:
and also, you can't teach hands like pavel datsyuk has. but you can teach shooting. look at a guy who was drafted with "hands of stone" like ryan kesler. he scored 40 goals last year and tied for fourth in the league because he worked on his shot.
I'd bet quite a bit that Kesler's scoring exploits last year were an aberration, as was indicated last year by 35 of his 41 goals against non playoff teams. He just hasn't shown that he is going to learn to be a better goal scorer at this point of his career. 25 goals is his level give or take a bit.
Quote:
ultimately, hockey skills obviously aren't distributed equally among players, but with good coaching and hard work, less naturally skilled players can raise their game to near-elite levels. carbonneau had an intuitive understanding of the game you flat out can't teach. but you can get to, say, 75% of carbonneau's level of defensive ability by learning patterns, playing the odds, etc. but then as my kesler example shows, the same can be said of offense. kesler's not marian gaborik, but his best goal scoring season is almost indistinguishable from gaborik's best, both numbers-wise and ranking-wise.
Kesler is in now way the same type of goal scorer over his career period and golatending today and the defensive systems does make the gap in talent offensively less apparent than in the past as well.
Quote:
you're right that a selke shouldn't have the same weight as a hart. but i don't think anyone is suggesting that carbonneau should be on the same level as sakic. it seems pretty reasonable, in my opinion, to suggest that carbonneau might be on the same level as a bottom-rung hall of famer like gartner though, if not higher. almost the same career length, carbonneau's consistent defensive excellence matches gartner's consistent offensive very good-ness, and i don't think it's a stretch to say that carbonneau was usually more valuable to his teams than gartner was, and obviously carbonneau's teams accomplished a hell of a lot more.
I think that alot of his value is tied up here by the fact that he played on great teams more than just his individual skillset both on offense and defense. If Gartner plays on some stacked teams, say like Glenn Anderson, I think that much of the Gartner bashing that goes on here would evaporate.
It's extremely difficult but we should make some attempt to separate the individual player and the team accomplishments.
Quote:
peak vs. peak, i think you could say the same about carbonneau vs. nieuwendyk. in my opinion, carbo's absolute peak was the '93 playoffs. nieuwendyk's shining moment was his conn smythe run. is it really that much of a stretch to say that carbonneau winning a cup by shutting down the greatest offensive player of all time in the final round of one of the great offensive playoff runs of all time is on the same level as nieuwendyk and all those goals he scored? could any other center in the league have shut down gretzky like that over an entire series? that year's two-way selke winner and future hall of famer doug gilmour couldn't, not for the full series anyway.
Carbonneau's playoff peak never was as great as Joe Nieuwendyk's, the fact of the matter is that Patrick Roy was the most single reason the Habs won that Cup in 93. Roy was also pretty decent in 86 as well.
I like Foote alot as well and when I was talking about skills I wasn't taking about practice skills but actually how they translated onto the ice.
fair enough.
Quote:
I'd bet quite a bit that Kesler's scoring exploits last year were an aberration, as was indicated last year by 35 of his 41 goals against non playoff teams. He just hasn't shown that he is going to learn to be a better goal scorer at this point of his career. 25 goals is his level give or take a bit.
Kesler is in now way the same type of goal scorer over his career period and golatending today and the defensive systems does make the gap in talent offensively less apparent than in the past as well.
but that's exactly my point. you can make a guy with no defensive instincts a passable, even above average defensive player. due to coaching, systems, drilling high percentage plays, etc., the gap in defensive talent also looks less apparent these days.
Quote:
I think that alot of his value is tied up here by the fact that he played on great teams more than just his individual skillset both on offense and defense. If Gartner plays on some stacked teams, say like Glenn Anderson, I think that much of the Gartner bashing that goes on here would evaporate.
It's extremely difficult but we should make some attempt to separate the individual player and the team accomplishments.
well first of all, that has nothing to do with anything we were talking about.
but i'll dignify it anyway because the fact is gartner never did anything to lift his teams anywhere. a stacked NYR team felt they had to trade him (for glenn anderson, btw) to win. and then they did.
gartner goes to a stacked toronto team, again the exact same toronto team that anderson played on the year before, and can't hold anderson's jock. anderson in toronto in the '93 playoffs: 7, 11, 18. gartner in toronto in the '94 playoffs: 5, 6, 11.
let us please never say gartner could have been glenn anderson ever again.
Quote:
Carbonneau's playoff peak never was as great as Joe Nieuwendyk's, the fact of the matter is that Patrick Roy was the most single reason the Habs won that Cup in 93. Roy was also pretty decent in 86 as well.
we'll have to agree to disagree here. but again, logic is an issue. i don't see how patrick roy being awesome has anything to do with carbonneau not being as good as nieuwendyk.
I know I'm in the minority here, but having seen Gainey for most of his career, and Carbonneau for all of it, I personally think Carbonneau was the better hockey player. There are also solid arguments for Craig Ramsey as well for players in that role. I just think Carbonneau's role as a defensive center was much more demanding than Gainey's or other elite defensive wingers.
As Gainey said himself, he got a hell of alot of mileage from that quote from the Russian coach.
He may have gotten a lot of mileage out of it, but that was also around the time he won the Conn Smythe. That's telling right there. You win the Smythe when you have Lafleur, Robinson and Dryden as your teammates. I love Carboneau but the year that he had his best playoff run (I don't know, 1993? or 1986) he wasn't close to a Smythe winner.
I love Gainey but he sure can get over rated at times, if he had played for the Leafs and not those stacked Hab teams does anyone really consider him a HHOF guy?
Craig Ramsay brought more value overall to the table than Gainey but played on a non SC team and gets undervalued because of it IMO.
Carbonneau was a very smart player and a great defensive one but talk about the Hall is overkill IMO.
Craig Ramsey with Don Luce and Danny Gare brought the Sabres to the level of solid SC contenders as they were a solid,complete second line behind the French Connection. However Their defensive skills are somewhat slanted by playing half their games on the smaller ice surface of the Buffalo Auditorium. Overpass posted about this a few years ago.
Gainey with Jarvis brought the Canadiens from the level of solid SC contenders in 1974 and 1975 to SC Champions by playing shutdown defense.
With the way the HHOF is selected. I have little issue with Carboneau or even Esa Tikkanen getting voted in. Or Theo Fleury. Are they the best of the best? No, but it seems the All does not recognize only the best of the best. If I could have any of those three players for their best decade of hockey, I'd take them over Glenn Anderson or Ciccareli, or Gartner. I would if I wanted to win championships. No way Dallas wins if Carbo does not come to their team. I'll argue Tikkanen was the best Oiler regular season or playoffs in the next few years after Gretzky left. Despite a Hart from Messier or Kurri, Anderson being HHOFers.
