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.

Guy Carbonneau HOF

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-25-2013, 10:10 PM
  #76
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
In the NFL, Super Bowl teams have won Super Bowls or previously the
NFL or AFL Championships with very pedestrian kickers.
Or to reverse that, great kickers have minimal control over their team's success.

The recently retired Jason Hanson is a wonderful example; there are not many guys you can say were ever as good at any point as he was for most of his career. Yet during much of his career the team was restarting a rebuild every two years. Insanity level=spaaaaaaaaaaace!

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 10:11 PM
  #77
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
And a strong argument can be made that their impact is actually pretty even.
So you say. Killion says otherwise. If you're going to make that argument why don't you PROVE that their impact is a wash instead of just gratuitously asserting it with nothing to back it up?

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 10:22 PM
  #78
Killion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Westcoast
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
The big 3 all got mentioned in the top 40 of the best Dmen of all time and I don't remember any Sabre even coming up for discussion.
I dont know why that might be or not be Hv. but the Sabres had some quite excellent & really almost seminal players playing for them under Imlach, into the 80's. Danny Gare, Gil Perrault, the French Connection Line, string of decent Goalies. Heck, Ive always respected these guys. Great players, team.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 10:26 PM
  #79
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
So you say. Killion says otherwise. If you're going to make that argument why don't you PROVE that their impact is a wash instead of just gratuitously asserting it with nothing to back it up?
It's not that hard really as most people here know about Craig and his scoring but for the uniformed I'll post it here.

Gainey

1160-239-262-501 ES 205-236

peaks

Goals 23, 21,20,20,19
Points 47,45,43,39,38

Ramsey

1070-252-420-672 ES 201-355

peaks

goals 28,26,26, 24,22,21,20,20
points 71,71,64,61,60,59,51,46

That's right 7 seasons with more points than Bob's best.

Even after acknowledging Bob has the defensive edge, is it really that great to make up for the edge Craig has in offense?

The gap between them is smaller than the perception IMO.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 10:31 PM
  #80
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
It's not that hard really as most people here know about Craig and his scoring but for the uniformed I'll post it here.

Gainey

1160-239-262-501 ES 205-236

peaks

Goals 23, 21,20,20,19
Points 47,45,43,39,38

Ramsey

1070-252-420-672 ES 201-355

peaks

goals 28,26,26, 24,22,21,20,20
points 71,71,64,61,60,59,51,46

That's right 7 seasons with more points than Bob's best.

Even after acknowledging Bob has the defensive edge, is it really that great to make up for the edge Craig has in offense?

The gap between them is smaller than the perception IMO.
Except.....Killion wasn't talking about points when making distinctions between the two. In fact, I'm not seeing any reference to scoring in any of his posts. So.....

Try again.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 10:52 PM
  #81
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Except.....Killion wasn't talking about points when making distinctions between the two. In fact, I'm not seeing any reference to scoring in any of his posts. So.....

Try again.
So Killion wasn't proving anything either then was he?

We are comparing how close or far part the two players were in terms of value, since when does only one side dictate the terms of reference?

If you have an opinion between these 2 guys and/or how it relates to Guy please share.

Defensive forwards tend to get over rated when they play a secondary role on a SC team, that's my point.

Craig Ramsey has a much higher peak scoring than Gainey does, if that's not Proof of his offensive edge then nothing is.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 11:01 PM
  #82
Killion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Westcoast
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
.. if that's not Proof of his offensive edge then nothing is.
Well, no Hv. Craig Ramsay may have had statistically a higher scoring peak, but he wasnt, EVER, a better performer OVERALL than Bob Gainey. No way... and I hate doing this as I like Ramsay. Why is it always necessary for you & others to insist on denigrating the reputation of one over another?

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 11:09 PM
  #83
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Well, no Hv. Craig Ramsay may have had statistically a higher scoring peak, but he wasnt, EVER, a better performer OVERALL than Bob Gainey. No way... and I hate doing this as I like Ramsay. Why is it always necessary for you & others to insist on denigrating the reputation of one over another?
I just happen to think that Ramsey gets under rated and guys on SC teams, and multiple ones specifically tend to get over rated.

It's just an opinion, I certainly don't think that you are degradating Ramsay because you think Gainey has more value.

I just happen to think that the 2 guys are closer in value than you.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2013, 11:16 PM
  #84
vadim sharifijanov
thanks chris
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
All of those guys made All-NBA teams. Because they were considered to be among the best forwards/centres of their time.

Guy Carbonneau never made a post-season All-Star team, and not just because of Gretzky and Lemieux, but because he never had any support. Was he one of the top 5 centres in the NHL at any point in history? Because he was usually #2 or #3 on his own team.
well, structurally, the two sports are very different, in that due to the large minutes basketball starters play and the specialization of guys in a five man unit, in basketball a non-scoring role player can be a star while in hockey that's rarely the case (exceptions being, say, langway or gainey, not counting goalies of course).

but maybe another way to look at it is if the HHOF is going to induct secondary/tertiary scorers who won a lot like nieuwendyk or shutt or gillies, i think there's a reasonable argument that elite role players like carbo or claude lemieux were bigger factors in most of their big playoff runs. which is to say, when we reward team success, i'd like to see the goalposts shifted such that "glue" guys get the ancillary credit that unduly goes to second/third banana scorers.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 09:19 AM
  #85
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,273
vCash: 931
There's probably a couple of defensive stalwarts that deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I think Jere Lehtinen was a really, really good two-way player too although with the weight on the defensive side whilst a good teammate of his, Modano, had the weight on the offensive side.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 09:21 AM
  #86
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Yes Gainey was bigger and moire physical and more intimidating but your post kind a reinforces my point.

If you look at the actual defensive impact of both players, it's pretty close and Ramsey didn't have the big 3 to bail him out either or a guy in net named Ken.

5 SC and Bob is in the HHOF, Craig was probably more the player overall, when you add his offense to his defensive contributions but he still has to buy a ticket.

Too much emphasis is placed on the SC of defensive guys like Guy and Bob when it's highly likely that their support roles would be much diminished (in the eyes of HHOF and historians) had they the misfortune of being drafted by the wrong team.
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!!!!!

No matter what your style of play - sniper, playmaker, grinder, etc. - the ultimate evaluation of your contributions is whether or not you contributed to winning. With Gainey and Carbonneau the answer is a million times yes.

They shouldn't have to apologize for that when it comes to HOF consideration. Conversely, the inability of or the unwillingness to do what it took to win on the part of some of these compilers shouldn't be swept under the rug.

Carbonneau played for about a decade in Montreal for a team that won night in, night out in the regular season and was a legitimate SC contender just about every one of those years. Playing on a team like that is so much more impressive than toiling away on a sub 500 club.

Then he leaves Montreal kicks around for about a year and winds up in Dallas for some relocated rebuilding franchise that can't even make the playoffs. Surely his luck has run out. Now he's in the same boat as all these other players who weren't lucky enough to catch on with a winning franchise. What does he do? Buys into the rebuild and contributes to winning a SC on the back end of his career.

Cup wins and winning in general should count just as much as individual statistics. I won't go so far as to say a player needs an SC on his résumé as a prerequisite for consideration. I will say a player needs to have been a part of a legit cup contender at some point in his career to be taken seriously. If that's not the case then what are we doing here?

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 09:56 AM
  #87
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,273
vCash: 931
That's right Dopamine! One dude does not make a team. It does not matter if that dude is Denis Savard or Guy Carbonneau. What does matter though is that Guy would not have any Cups without Roy and Modano, just as Denis Savard probably would have some if he had had enough good premiere defensive players on his teams. As a matter of fact he has one, but he only got it by going to play with Carbo and Roy lol.
What the Hall needs to realise is that to win in hockey it takes more than a couple of stars to win, so therefore it is a but strange that Selanne and perhaps even Kariya will be in, when Carbonneau is out.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 10:44 AM
  #88
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!!!!!

No matter what your style of play - sniper, playmaker, grinder, etc. - the ultimate evaluation of your contributions is whether or not you contributed to winning. With Gainey and Carbonneau the answer is a million times yes.

They shouldn't have to apologize for that when it comes to HOF consideration. Conversely, the inability of or the unwillingness to do what it took to win on the part of some of these compilers shouldn't be swept under the rug.

Carbonneau played for about a decade in Montreal for a team that won night in, night out in the regular season and was a legitimate SC contender just about every one of those years. Playing on a team like that is so much more impressive than toiling away on a sub 500 club.

Then he leaves Montreal kicks around for about a year and winds up in Dallas for some relocated rebuilding franchise that can't even make the playoffs. Surely his luck has run out. Now he's in the same boat as all these other players who weren't lucky enough to catch on with a winning franchise. What does he do? Buys into the rebuild and contributes to winning a SC on the back end of his career.

Cup wins and winning in general should count just as much as individual statistics. I won't go so far as to say a player needs an SC on his résumé as a prerequisite for consideration. I will say a player needs to have been a part of a legit cup contender at some point in his career to be taken seriously. If that's not the case then what are we doing here?
Maybe in golf or tennis. Not in team sports.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 11:54 AM
  #89
vadim sharifijanov
thanks chris
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
Then he leaves Montreal kicks around for about a year and winds up in Dallas for some relocated rebuilding franchise that can't even make the playoffs. Surely his luck has run out. Now he's in the same boat as all these other players who weren't lucky enough to catch on with a winning franchise. What does he do? Buys into the rebuild and contributes to winning a SC on the back end of his career.

Cup wins and winning in general should count just as much as individual statistics. I won't go so far as to say a player needs an SC on his résumé as a prerequisite for consideration. I will say a player needs to have been a part of a legit cup contender at some point in his career to be taken seriously. If that's not the case then what are we doing here?
i think, as you point out, that dallas is the unacknowledged part of his legacy here. similar to the effect ludwig had on the development of hatcher and matvichuk, it's important to consider the influence of carbonneau on lehtinen (a rookie the year they got carbo) and modano's mid-career transformation. not saying carbonneau helped those guys along singlehandedly-- hitchcock was the coach, gainey was the GM-- but it seems pretty rich in my opinion to suggest that carbonneau was "lucky" to be on the very good teams he was on, as if he didn't play a big part in making the talented guys around him as good as they were.

on the other hand, a guy like nieuwendyk for example was more sort of just along for the ride. not saying nieuwendyk's leadership didn't make a difference, or that he never taught young guys how to win faceoffs or tip shots or deal with pressure, but he never was really a pillar of a drawn-out team-building process in the carbonneau-in-dallas sense even though they arrived in dallas within months of each other.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 01:45 PM
  #90
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
You introduced the irrelevant football analogies. I just illustrated that they were so.

As for the NBA/NHL cross sport comparison. Again you raised it. Realistically 5 out of 12 NBA roster spots start and have a reasonable chance at a roster spot. NHL 18 of a teams roster has an AST chance. Adjust to the number of NHL/NBA teams any season and the NBA ASTs have little competition.

The "collective approach" has bee present since the start of hockey. Last change advantage to the home team only magnifies the fact. So I do not see the eureka moment of EXACTLY!!.

Fact of the matter is that the center is the defensive catalyst setting the tone,dictating the pace, the spacing,the possession from faceoffs - a Carbonneau strength. Also Carbonneau was a RHS, critical when defending Gretzky a LHS on a team with LHS centers since the different looks and timing cause adjustments on alternate offensive shifts. In basketball handedness does not matter on defense. Does for offense - shooting from the baseline favours the outside hand.

Three Selke trophies and multiple high finishes clearly illustrate how good Gut Carbooneau was, how much better than the collective.
People wondered if Carbonneau would make another HOF. I don't think that would be the case. He's a depth player. A nice-to-have, but not need-to-have guy.

Saying 5/12 guys have a shot in the NBA as opposed to 18 in the NHL is misleading. Manu Ginobili can be a sixth man and all-star, but I don't know of any 4th liners who have made it near an all-star team. If you're a top six forward, you have a chance at winning votes and Carbonneau wasn't anywhere near being one of the best centres of his era.

"EXACTLY!" is a reaction people who say Carbonneau "single-handedly" shut people down who produced about as many points as you'd expect. Does being one difference-maker of many qualify you for the HHOF?

Carbonneau was a great defensive forward, but is there really separation between him and Ramsay? And is Carbonneau more valuable than a merely good defensive guy who could also score, like Jeremy Roenick?

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 04:41 PM
  #91
Ishdul
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Lithuania
Posts: 3,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Litework View Post
Art Monk:

-won 3 Super bowls
- 2 time all-pro
- First player to catch 100 passes in a season
- Was at one time the all-time leader in receptions
- 1980s All-Decade team

Seriously? Monk was given a 4 minute standing ovation when he was inducted.

Im not seeing the comparison to Gartner.
Monk was a one time All-Pro and 3 time Pro Bowler. In receiving yards he had finishes of 3rd, 4th and 10th, and was never otherwise in the top 10. That's not an especially impressive record. And he was on one of the dominant teams of his era so he got lucky in that respect.

He was also second team All-80s, which is quite a bit different than being on the first team, and the NFL is even dumber to go by All-Decades team due to the shortness of even the top player's careers. Monk would be an obvious beneficiary of going by that, since he played his age 23 to age 33 seasons in the 80's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
maybe the closest basketball analogy to carbonneau is dennis rodman. a pure defensive player (i.e., not a two-way guy) and probably the best pure defensive guy of his generation, entered the league and developed under a legendary defensive environment, DPOY awards, key contributor to two different championship teams, HHOFer.

of course, basketball has counting stats for rodman (rebounds) that hockey didn't yet have for carbonneau (blocked shots, faceoffs, takeaways).

also, i'm curious to see what becomes of mutombo's and ben wallace's HHOF cases as time passes. but like rodman, carbo has the winning pedigree along with the awards.
Rebounds is an incredibly important part of offense too, and Rodman is probably the best rebounder of all time. I would also say that part of the issue with defensive forwards is that they are seen as having less defensive value than the top defensemen, and are certainly seen as having less defensive value than goalies. Wallace, Rodman and Mutombo would have been considered the best defensive players in all of the NBA, whereas I don't think people would have taken Charbonneau's defense ahead of Chelios, let alone Roy.

Dennis Johnson made the Hall of Fame because people wanted a representative from the '79 Sonics who won the Championship and he was seen, probably erroneously, as the best candidate and then he won 2 more championships as a role player and also had a 1st team and 2nd team All-NBA (which were both questionable picks as well). And it took him forever to make it on the extremely lenient Basketball Hall of Fame. He is generally agreed to be a terrible induction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
As for the NBA/NHL cross sport comparison. Again you raised it. Realistically 5 out of 12 NBA roster spots start and have a reasonable chance at a roster spot. NHL 18 of a teams roster has an AST chance. Adjust to the number of NHL/NBA teams any season and the NBA ASTs have little competition.
This does not work at all. There have been players who have made the All-NBA team as bench players, and very similar to how we always say that the number of teams in the NHL doesn't really affect who would be the absolute best players, the number of "slots" isn't a very important number because it doesn't correct itself to the talent pool and so the best players in the world inevitably end up as starters. It's also worth noting that those All-NBA spots are monopolized by a smaller group of players. Shaq has 14 All-NBA appearances, Duncan has 14, Kobe has 15, Nowitzki has 12, Garnett and Payton have 9, LeBron already has 9, Nash (who was considered a very late bloomer) and McGrady (who was considered washed up after he hit 28) both have 7, as does Howard who just turned 27. It's exceedingly rare that anyone who isn't a sure fire Hall of Famer gets to be 1st Team All-NBA, whereas that doesn't apply to hockey. That has a lot more to do with the nature of basketball than some vague concept of competition.

Ishdul is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 05:27 PM
  #92
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Bill James has the "was he ever the best player on his team question that we can modify it to "was he ever one of the 3 or 5 best players on his team and if so for how long?

It's pretty hard to argue that any player that is HHOF worthy and an all time great wasn't at least for some time a top 3 or top 5 player on his team.

Even then the role should be a long and productive one as primary players should be in the HHOF not secondary ones.

Just looking at the SC teams he played for, he has an argument for being the 5ish best guy on that 86 Habs SC team but definitely not for the other 2 SC teams where his contribution is borderline top 10 on those 2 teams at best.

At this starting point it's had to conclude that Guy is going to make up ground for a HHOF career.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 06:12 PM
  #93
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Bill James has the "was he ever the best player on his team question that we can modify it to "was he ever one of the 3 or 5 best players on his team and if so for how long?

It's pretty hard to argue that any player that is HHOF worthy and an all time great wasn't at least for some time a top 3 or top 5 player on his team.

Even then the role should be a long and productive one as primary players should be in the HHOF not secondary ones.

Just looking at the SC teams he played for, he has an argument for being the 5ish best guy on that 86 Habs SC team but definitely not for the other 2 SC teams where his contribution is borderline top 10 on those 2 teams at best.

At this starting point it's had to conclude that Guy is going to make up ground for a HHOF career.
1993 was before I really started paying attention to non-local hockey, but I have seen people say that they thought Guy was the 2nd most important member of that Cup-winning team.

Edit: I guess it's pretty hard to argue him over Damphousse, though.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 07-26-2013 at 06:20 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 06:21 PM
  #94
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,773
vCash: 500
Trees and Forests

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
People wondered if Carbonneau would make another HOF. I don't think that would be the case. He's a depth player. A nice-to-have, but not need-to-have guy.

Saying 5/12 guys have a shot in the NBA as opposed to 18 in the NHL is misleading. Manu Ginobili can be a sixth man and all-star, but I don't know of any 4th liners who have made it near an all-star team. If you're a top six forward, you have a chance at winning votes and Carbonneau wasn't anywhere near being one of the best centres of his era.

"EXACTLY!" is a reaction people who say Carbonneau "single-handedly" shut people down who produced about as many points as you'd expect. Does being one difference-maker of many qualify you for the HHOF?

Carbonneau was a great defensive forward, but is there really separation between him and Ramsay? And is Carbonneau more valuable than a merely good defensive guy who could also score, like Jeremy Roenick?

Canadiens traded a prime Doug Jarvis coming off his only 20 goal season but kept Guy Carbonneau as their defensive center of the future. Carbonneau was a need to have as opposed to a nice to have center.

Your NBA comparable is slowly falling apart. Your 10-12 NBA player is blow-out filler, give a foul player who do not move into the top five, AST, HOF category.Conversely the bottom 15-18 NHL players may progress to first line, AST, HHOF level status - some historic, examples would be Martin St.Louis, entering the NHL in Calgary, Doug Gilmour in St.Louis, Yvan Cournoyer with Montreal amongst others.

The distinction between offense and defense is controlled in the NBA, 24 second segments where one team is on defense, the other team on offense. Further fragmented at the half court line. Nor is changing players on the go permitted in the NBA. In the NHL offense and defense is not clearly defined while changing on the fly is a valued tactic that puts great emphasis on the center's ability to manage the shift.

Carbonneau was a center while Ramsay was a winger. Look at Ramsay's performance after Don Luce left Buffalo.look at Carbonneau's performance after Gainey retire. Ramsay dropped, Carbonneau sustained even though Gainey to Luce is gold to iron.

Is Carbonneau more valuable than Roenick?. Most definitely. The value distinction is not scoring centric. A team knew what they were getting elite defense from Carbonneau. Carbonneau was a player who would easily integrate a team, recognizing his role and adapt to the skills of his teammates. A team would think they were getting elite scoring from Roenick but would be disappointed.Teams had to adapt to Roenick's skills, compensating for his weaknesses, living with his personna until it wore thin.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 06:23 PM
  #95
Killion
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Westcoast
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,766
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
1993 was before I really started paying attention to non-local hockey, but I have seen people say that they thought Guy was the 2nd most important member of that Cup-winning team.
He was the one who suggested to Demers that he ask the Ref to measure Marty McSorleys stick, resulting in a penalty, the turning point in the game... one other thing to consider about Carbo: holds the all time Habs record for shorthanded goals at 27. Considering who's played for that franchise over its entire history, a not insignificant achievement.


Last edited by Killion: 07-26-2013 at 10:37 PM.
Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 09:18 PM
  #96
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Bill James has the "was he ever the best player on his team question that we can modify it to "was he ever one of the 3 or 5 best players on his team and if so for how long?

It's pretty hard to argue that any player that is HHOF worthy and an all time great wasn't at least for some time a top 3 or top 5 player on his team.

Even then the role should be a long and productive one as primary players should be in the HHOF not secondary ones.

Just looking at the SC teams he played for, he has an argument for being the 5ish best guy on that 86 Habs SC team but definitely not for the other 2 SC teams where his contribution is borderline top 10 on those 2 teams at best.

At this starting point it's had to conclude that Guy is going to make up ground for a HHOF career.
Well, assuming the goalie is the MVP, call it top four. You can't accurately measure Carbonneau's value based on point production. That would be like evaluating Gord Downey's musicianship based on his guitar playing. A corsi rating would be perfect for this type of player but those don't exist yet so we're left with good old plus/minus.

He never led any of his teams in +/- in the regular season. He was 2nd twice (84/85, 88/89). Third twice (85/86, 93/94). He was fourth once in 99/2000, his last year when the Stars lost to Jersey in the finals.

He did lead the Habs in +/- during the cup run of 85/85 as well as 94/95(short sample 7 games).

It's impossible to prove but Carbo must have played the most difficult minutes of all the forwards on those Montreal teams of the late 80s to early 90s. But whatever, he was able to make his way into this Bill James adjusted territory five times in his career based on the rudimentary analytics of the era.

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 11:09 PM
  #97
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Canadiens traded a prime Doug Jarvis coming off his only 20 goal season but kept Guy Carbonneau as their defensive center of the future. Carbonneau was a need to have as opposed to a nice to have center.
Being more valuable than Doug Jarvis doesn't equal being a Hall of Famer or All-Star.

Quote:
Your NBA comparable is slowly falling apart. Your 10-12 NBA player is blow-out filler, give a foul player who do not move into the top five, AST, HOF category.Conversely the bottom 15-18 NHL players may progress to first line, AST, HHOF level status - some historic, examples would be Martin St.Louis, entering the NHL in Calgary, Doug Gilmour in St.Louis, Yvan Cournoyer with Montreal amongst others.
You do realize you compared the 18th man on an NHL team to the 5th man on an NBA team, right?

I understand that guys are able to become first liners. It's like how Steve Nash went from a backup point guard to 2-time MVP. Doesn't mean Gilmour or Nash could make it to an AS team while they were in the fourth line or backup PG spots. They had to move up to a more prominent role.

But no matter how difficult it is to get AS votes in hockey, Ramsay and Roenick got them frequently. Carbonneau didn't. Ever. Not once. I guess competition with the likes of Tom Fergus, Perry Berezan, and random 18th man AHL call-ups was too much for him. Roenick and Ramsay have a ton of these super-rare NHL AS votes though.

Quote:
Carbonneau was a center while Ramsay was a winger. Look at Ramsay's performance after Don Luce left Buffalo.look at Carbonneau's performance after Gainey retire. Ramsay dropped, Carbonneau sustained even though Gainey to Luce is gold to iron.
Ramsay finished 2nd in Selke voting 3 times before he won once, with the win coming after Luce left and was about as valuable that year as Carbonneau was when he won his 3rd Selke. After Luce left he dropped from 59 to 51 points before being injured, and even then he kept picking up Selke votes. He no longer showed up in AS voting but that's not a disadvantage when compared to Carbonneau who never got a single vote.

Ramsay suffered from stronger Selke competition in Bob Gainey, much like people say Yzerman lost out for coming along when Gretzky and Lemieux were peaking. Ramsay lost more Selkes because he was playing while Gainey was peaking than Yzerman did Hart Trophies. (That should impress the Wings contingent on here.) That cost him the chance to win a Selke as a 71-point guy, which would probably place him above Carbonneau's peak.

Quote:
Is Carbonneau more valuable than Roenick?. Most definitely. The value distinction is not scoring centric. A team knew what they were getting elite defense from Carbonneau. Carbonneau was a player who would easily integrate a team, recognizing his role and adapt to the skills of his teammates. A team would think they were getting elite scoring from Roenick but would be disappointed.Teams had to adapt to Roenick's skills, compensating for his weaknesses, living with his personna until it wore thin.
So Carbonneau should benefit from lower expectations? Because it seems like you said we should judge Roenick against top-line centres and Carbonneau against 3rd-liners. We shouldn't be so impressed by how Carbonneau excelled in his niche that we start pretending that the 3rd liner is better than the first liner, or ascribe some mythical value to his goal prevention that doesn't seem to be supported by evidence. Gretzky's scoring stayed the same. The other Kings dropped off. (That 93 team could have used a Joe Nieuwendyk or Vincent Damphousse to be their Goring/Messier. Maybe even Jeremy Roenick...)

Carbonneau also had his weaknesses. Forwards are expected to produce offense, and even among the Selke-winners he's a middling offensive player. He's nowhere near as good as a Bobby Clarke or Sergei Fedorov. Adjusting for era, a peak Selke-calibre Carbonneau is about as valuable as a peak Selke-calibre Mike Peca.

If you put Carbonneau out there for 21 minutes a game, you'd be much more disappointed than you would be with Roenick, a good two-way player who actually was one of the top 10 centres in the game in many seasons (perhaps even top 5 at his peak), and got a few Hart, Selke, and post-season AS votes along the way. You may dislike his personality, but as you explicitly said personality was irrelevant with Bobby Jones, I don't know why you'd care.

In short, a team has a much better shot at a Stanley Cup if Jeremy Roenick is their best centre than if Guy Carbonneau is their best centre.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-26-2013, 11:57 PM
  #98
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 185
vCash: 500
Roenick never won a Cup. in fact he played for a number of very good teams that underachieved. It's actually kind of remarkable to look at the list of HOF inductees. Unless you're a girl or from the Communist Bloc, if you're an HOFer, chances are you won a cup. don't wanna go through, double check and do the math but its gotta be well over 95% Cup winners.

I forgot about Carbo's Selkes though. A 3 time winner in 87/88, 88/89 and 91/92. It's weird that those Selkes wins don't directly correspond with his high watermarks for +/-. Anyway, it's safe to assume that when he was widely recognized for being the best defensive forward in the entire league, he was one of the best players on his team. One of those Selkes overlaps with a top team +/- ratings so that means he was in Bill James Adjusted territory 7 times. This wasn't with just some also-ran team either. This was mostly with the Montreal Canadiens when they were a wagon year in, year out.

I think that also explains Carbo's lack of AS games. You have to have one player from each team in those games and he was often overshadowed by Patrick Roy and Chris Chelios, Traditionally molded HOFers.

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2013, 12:42 AM
  #99
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
1993 was before I really started paying attention to non-local hockey, but I have seen people say that they thought Guy was the 2nd most important member of that Cup-winning team.

Edit: I guess it's pretty hard to argue him over Damphousse, though.
It's hard to argue him over Keane as well. In 93 it was Roy by a mile over the 2nd guy IMO.

After Roy and then Damphousse and Keane there is a cluster of players that Guy might be in the mix with including Bellows, Muller, Desjardins and heck even Paul DiPietro with his team leading 8 ES. goals.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2013, 12:53 AM
  #100
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
Roenick never won a Cup. in fact he played for a number of very good teams that underachieved. It's actually kind of remarkable to look at the list of HOF inductees. Unless you're a girl or from the Communist Bloc, if you're an HOFer, chances are you won a cup. don't wanna go through, double check and do the math but its gotta be well over 95% Cup winners.

I forgot about Carbo's Selkes though. A 3 time winner in 87/88, 88/89 and 91/92. It's weird that those Selkes wins don't directly correspond with his high watermarks for +/-. Anyway, it's safe to assume that when he was widely recognized for being the best defensive forward in the entire league, he was one of the best players on his team. One of those Selkes overlaps with a top team +/- ratings so that means he was in Bill James Adjusted territory 7 times. This wasn't with just some also-ran team either. This was mostly with the Montreal Canadiens when they were a wagon year in, year out.

I think that also explains Carbo's lack of AS games. You have to have one player from each team in those games and he was often overshadowed by Patrick Roy and Chris Chelios, Traditionally molded HOFers.
Sure but teams wins cups not players.

You have to be lucky as well, in 93 there is no SC without the Roy show and in 99 his role was minimal.

If Ray Bourque never plays with the Avs, do you think less of him?

The HHOF is supposed to be about greatness not defensive specials who happen to play on some SC teams.

Guy doesn't pass the smell test IMO.

Hardyvan123 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 09:50 PM.

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.