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
07-28-2013, 12:59 AM
  #126
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Real issue is whether Guy Carbonneau is HHOF worthy not whether he is superior to a flavour of the month scoring center.

You missed the the Carbonneau / Bozak analogy. Neither played in game 7 of the Leafs / Bruins series in 2013. Leaf center with the most minutes was Mikhail Grabovski, an offensive center with little defense.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/boxs...305130BOS.html

Your Carbonneau / Bergeron comparison is interesting. Did you fact check your claim before submitting it? Rather important to do so.

You are stuck with the claim that Bergeron is a #1 center and your assertion that Carbonneau is mainly a #3 center. To date Patrice Bergeron has played 579 regular season games with a 0.75PPG result:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...bergepa01.html

Guy Carbonneau in his first 622 NHL regular season generated app. 0.67PPG:
http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...carbogu01.html

As a first line center Patrice Bergeron sees more PP time plus at ES and on the PP he plays with better offensive players.Evidenced by Bergeron's PP numbers to date 46G and 90A = 136 PTS. Slighly more than 33 1/3% of Bergeron's offense comes from the PP. Conversely at roughly the same point of his career Carbonneau had 6G and 14A = 20PTS on the PP or less than 5% of Carbonneau offensive numbers were the result of PP opportunities..

So now the key question which center Guy Carbonneau or Patrice Bergeron produced more offense at ES? Answer is rather obvious = Guy Carbonneau.

Your characterization of Guy Carbonneau as a third line defensive center with no offensive skills is simply wrong. He had better ES offensive skills than Patrice Bergeron while surrounded with lesser offensive talent and confined to greater defensive responsibilities.

Guy Carbonneau is a definite HHOFer while Patrice Bergeron is a possibility. Hopefully his defense and ES offense improves to Guy Carbonneau levels.
Are you seriously trying to compare guy scoring in the 80's to Patrice in the 00's?

skipping over the ES argument Bergerons adjusted seasons are

71,71,71,61,56 now here are Carbs in his first 622 games
46,46,45,44,43

Can you see the differences here?

Also Patrice is more likely to get some HHOF consideration than Guy ever is IMO and rightly so.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 01:11 AM
  #127
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Rod Langway showed definite offensive skills with the Canadiens - 5 PP goals and 12 PTS one season:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...langwro01.html

Similar to Scott Stevens in NJ starting with the 1994-95 season. Stevens' role changed as did the Devils success.

Their is an presumption that a team or a coach has to play a player in certain roles for the player to be considered capable of specific attributes. Prime example being Henri Richard. Great defensive center yet he hardly ever played on the PK. Zero SH goals in the last 12 seasons of his career.Previously the stat was not tracked. Not how the Canadiens played defense in SH situations. Yet this in no way detracts from Richard as a defensive player. Just optimized his TOI in key ES situations.Likewise for Langway, Stevens, Carbonneau.
Langway was limited offensively, his best season or absolute peak, the one you quoted he was 30th in league scoring for a Dman in a 21 team league.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

That year he was also only 10th on his team in scoring.

It is true that both Rod and Guy are better known for their defense and not for their offense which was pretty average at best.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 01:14 AM
  #128
vadim sharifijanov
ugh
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 14,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Are you seriously trying to compare guy scoring in the 80's to Patrice in the 00's?

skipping over the ES argument Bergerons adjusted seasons are

71,71,71,61,56 now here are Carbs in his first 622 games
46,46,45,44,43

Can you see the differences here?

Also Patrice is more likely to get some HHOF consideration than Guy ever is IMO and rightly so.
i think we're all getting a little caught up in the patrice bergeron hype right now because we've just seen his peak stretch (SC, selke, SCF). i say this as someone who respects the hell out of bergeron, but unless he wins another two or three selkes or has another few monster playoffs, i don't see what separates him from, say, dave poulin. i.e., an excellent defensive center with good offensive production who is one of the key motors on a tough, defensively oriented contending team. vintage doug gilmour or fedorov, he ain't.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 02:59 AM
  #129
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
this has been discussed before, but two factors here:

1. keenan consistently went with guys he knew: crossman in '87 over any number of better guys (macinnis, stevens, wilson, reinhart, etc.); dirk graham in the defensive specialist role in '91, hawerchuk over yzerman in the same year.

2. carbonneau, as a defensive center, was never really competing with larmer, who was a two-way winger. nor was he really competing with graham, also a winger. if carbonneau was considered for a spot on that team, it would have been brent sutter's spot-- sutter was, of course, a keenan guy from the '87 team, and a guy he loved and whom he acquired in chicago soon after the CC tournament ended.


but those are just details. i think the main thing to address is that we're not really debating how good guy carbonneau was here. i think most of us are pretty close to accurately gauging what carbonneau was (a pure defensive center who was the best of his generation at that role); whether peca or lehtinen or craig ramsay were as good as him, or whether they were close, or whether it's even a fair comparison between lehtinen and ramsay (wingers, more offense) and carbonneau is pretty small potatoes at this point in the discussion. the real crux here is our criteria for HHOF induction.

blogogmike, judging from your roenick comparison, you seem to be hinging a lot (maybe everything) on a specific definition of value that i don't think is as universal or self-evident as you think it is. if i'm starting a team, of course i'd rather have prime jeremy roenick than carbonneau. in an absolute my-roster-is-a-blank-slate sense, a center who can crack the top 30 in scoring while also providing very good but sub-selke-level defense (say, philly-era brind'amour or vinnie damphousse or prime linden) is almost certainly more valuable than the very best pure defensive center.

but what i want to suggest, and what i think C1958 is getting at, is that just ranking the top 150-odd players and saying "that's the cut off" might not be the ideal way to gauge a player's HHOF candidacy. relative to how a team works, i think winning teams need to have specialists, and i think the very best of the specialists deserve to be remembered over your jack-of-all-trades-great-at-none-type players. which is to say that i specifically disagree with your argument that you could exchange carbonneau from the '93 habs team for a lesser defensive player who put up more points (say, a second damphousse) and still get the same or better results. within the context of a championship team, or at least within the context of that championship team, having carbonneau there are your defensive horse was very important. i haven't seen any icetime figures, but i wouldn't be surprised that there were many games in that run where carbonneau, and not muller or damphousse, had the highest icetime among centers. did carbonneau "single-handedly" shut down gretzky? of course not; of course muller, odelein, keaner, and many other players played important roles. picking on that "single-handedly" line, wherever it came from, replaces the issue with a straw man. was carbonneau by far the most important non-goalie in that series from a stopping-gretzky standpoint? that's the real issue.

and the bigger issue, in my mind, is whether carbonneau's pure defensive game was replaceable. i don't think it was, anymore than you couldn't replace tikkanen for a higher scoring but less tenacious winger on those oilers teams (say, a LW version of steve larmer). and, following that logic, and thinking about a more nuanced set of criteria for the HHOF, a guy like roenick (and i was a fan of his) is dime-a-dozen; ditto damphousse, brind'amour, nieuwendyk, and countless other scoring centers with above-average-to-very good defensive games. carbonneau was a unique and special player; neely was a unique and special player; theo fleury was a unique and special player; claude lemieux, bure, gilmour, you get the point. if the HHOF is, as i think it should be, about remembering remarkable moments and figures in the game's history as opposed to just "objectively" ranking the best players of all time, carbonneau belongs.
Something I take away from this thread is that lots of people view defensive forwards as forwards who weren't good enough to be scorers so therefore found another way to catch on with a team. I don't feel this way, especially when it comes to a player of Guy Carbonneau's calibre. I think the habs had a vision for him and molded him right from the jump into a defensive specialist. At some point he had to buy in as well.

I can't blame people on these boards that feel defensive forwards are just scorers who didn't make the cut. There are probably NHL franchises that share this philosophy.

It's also noteworthy to point out that the Selke trophy doesn't resonate in a HOF argument. You can look back over this thread and naysayers rarely even take the time to counter the Selke argument. If it was a 3 time Norris winner, no further information would be required, punch the guys ticket. maybe it's a function of that view of defensive forwards as being inherently lesser players.

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 07:51 AM
  #130
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,871
vCash: 500
Criteria

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post

Then why not ask whether you'd want Carbonneau over an HHOF-worthy player? Someone like an Adam Oates who had issues making the Hall.



Why keep drawing the line with players like Bozak and Jarvis? They're not HHOF-calibre. I'd take Peter Zezel over Bozak to defend a lead. Doesn't mean we should enshrine him.



So we're judging Carbonneau by raw point totals from the 1980s. You do know by this method Dale Hawerchuk is leaps and bounds ahead of Gordie Howe.

But hey, you got me. In Guy Carbonneau's highest scoring Selke season he was the offensive equivalent of Dave Ellett. Actually Guy is slightly behind him since Ellett played fewer games, but close enough.



Not playing on the PP is a sign he wasn't that great offensively. It's not like Pat Burns ever said Doug Gilmour couldn't have a defensive role and play on the PP.

At his best, Carbonneau never was close to the team scoring leader (I believe 10 ES points back of Naslund in 89 is his best), barely cracked the top 100 in points (T93 in 1989, T99 in 1986) and I don't think he ever made the top 100 in PPG. In spite of Boston rolling lines and not giving him first line minutes, Bergeron has managed to beat Carbonneau in every one of those regards.

Furthermore, Bergeron was possibly the best player on a Cup finalist. I don't think Carbonneau was ever a Conn Smythe contender.
Raw point totals. You were posting based on raw point totals all along. You set the goalposts so do not complain when the applied results do not favour your view.

Trying to redefine the chess pieces - knights should also have bishop moves, does not credit the discussion. You introduce Mats Naslund a teammate of Carbonneau's. Okay I'll play your redefinition game one time. The two were teammates under four different coaches - Bob Berry, Jacques Lemaire, Jean Perron, Pat Burns. Naslund and Carbonneau were hardly ever linemates. Your reasoning seems to be that to satisfy the criteria of an abstraction today, the coaches, more than a generation ago, should have altered the TOI of each players' line so that Carbonneau would have more PP time while Naslund would have more PK and ES time.

Naslund's numbers:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...nasluma01.html

PP, 68G + 143A = 211PTS or 33% of his total points. SH = 2G + 1A = 3PTS. PP comparable to Patrice Bergeron is rather striking. Mats Naslund was very solid defensively.

Is there any net benefit to the Canadiens as a team during the Naslund/Carbonneau era to change the emphasis of their TOI especially when you consider the ripple or falling dominoes effect of doing so? There is no possible net benefit, just match-up problems post PP or PK.

Regardless of how you play the numbers or comparables game, introducing defensemen etc. Guy Carbonneau definitely merits HHOF induction.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 07-28-2013 at 08:11 AM.
Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 08:06 AM
  #131
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,871
vCash: 500
Comparables

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Langway was limited offensively, his best season or absolute peak, the one you quoted he was 30th in league scoring for a Dman in a 21 team league.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

That year he was also only 10th on his team in scoring.

It is true that both Rod and Guy are better known for their defense and not for their offense which was pretty average at best.
Rod Langway played on the PP with the Canadiens when Guy Lapointe was injured.

In Washington as Scott Stevens matured and Larry Murphy arrived the team needs changed to one where Rod Langway was best suited to lead the defensive focus.

No need for the team or coaches to define players responsibilities in terms of a possible abstration 25-30 seasons down the road.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 11:01 AM
  #132
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 187
vCash: 500
Its inconsistent to have a HOF where Bob Gainey is in and Guy Carbonneau is out. People in this thread have argued against Carbonneau reasoning that a player like Gainey was far better than him or Craig Ramsay was almost as good as him.

Offensive players aren't saddled with the same burden. Its accepted that there's many great offensive players and that they should all be appreciated. Wayne Gretzky was the greatest playmaker of all-time but that doesn't diminish the achievements of a playmaker one step down in the stratosphere such as Adam Oates.

Voting in Bob Gainey was something akin to setting a legal precedent. If the voters don't consider Guy Carbonneau for HOF based on his merits as a defensive forward, they are passively declaring they made a mistake inducting Gainey.

Hv and BofM, I know you guys don't think Carbonneau warrants induction but how do you guys feel about Gainey being in the hall?

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 11:50 AM
  #133
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 11,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
Its inconsistent to have a HOF where Bob Gainey is in and Guy Carbonneau is out. People in this thread have argued against Carbonneau reasoning that a player like Gainey was far better than him or Craig Ramsay was almost as good as him.

Offensive players aren't saddled with the same burden. Its accepted that there's many great offensive players and that they should all be appreciated. Wayne Gretzky was the greatest playmaker of all-time but that doesn't diminish the achievements of a playmaker one step down in the stratosphere such as Adam Oates.

Voting in Bob Gainey was something akin to setting a legal precedent. If the voters don't consider Guy Carbonneau for HOF based on his merits as a defensive forward, they are passively declaring they made a mistake inducting Gainey.

Hv and BofM, I know you guys don't think Carbonneau warrants induction but how do you guys feel about Gainey being in the hall?

Probably was a mistake.

But Gainey is still the only 4 time winner of the Selke and most likey the only pure defensive forward to win a Conn Smythe.

If Carbonneau were to get in that would really be a mistake as that would open the flood gates.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 12:07 PM
  #134
Killion
Registered User
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 30,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Probably was a mistake.

But Gainey is still the only 4 time winner of the Selke and most likey the only pure defensive forward to win a Conn Smythe.

If Carbonneau were to get in that would really be a mistake as that would open the flood gates.
.... ya, brilliant defensive forwards are a dime a dozen. Who cares? Big mistake right there.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 01:27 PM
  #135
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Raw point totals. You were posting based on raw point totals all along. You set the goalposts so do not complain when the applied results do not favour your view.

Trying to redefine the chess pieces - knights should also have bishop moves, does not credit the discussion. You introduce Mats Naslund a teammate of Carbonneau's. Okay I'll play your redefinition game one time. The two were teammates under four different coaches - Bob Berry, Jacques Lemaire, Jean Perron, Pat Burns. Naslund and Carbonneau were hardly ever linemates. Your reasoning seems to be that to satisfy the criteria of an abstraction today, the coaches, more than a generation ago, should have altered the TOI of each players' line so that Carbonneau would have more PP time while Naslund would have more PK and ES time.

Naslund's numbers:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...nasluma01.html

PP, 68G + 143A = 211PTS or 33% of his total points. SH = 2G + 1A = 3PTS. PP comparable to Patrice Bergeron is rather striking. Mats Naslund was very solid defensively.

Is there any net benefit to the Canadiens as a team during the Naslund/Carbonneau era to change the emphasis of their TOI especially when you consider the ripple or falling dominoes effect of doing so? There is no possible net benefit, just match-up problems post PP or PK.

Regardless of how you play the numbers or comparables game, introducing defensemen etc. Guy Carbonneau definitely merits HHOF induction.
I don't think I ever said "Guy Carbonneau never scored 60 points therefore he's not a HHOFer", but if you want to think Bergeron is a lesser offensive player than Carbonneau, go for it. I'm reasonably sure that I argued that compared to other HHOFers and Selke winners his offensive contribution was weak. In the context of the 1980s, peaking at 56 points is middling.

I don't think I said Carbo should take more PP time and Naslund more PK time. Just more PP time for Carbo. See, plenty of good players have played on both PP and PK, when their skills merited that allocation of ice time and Carbo wasn't playing right at the line of some minute quota. He was never averaging 20 minutes a game, as many players do when their ice time is more valuable than a clear-cut non-HHOFer like Bobby Smith.

As for goal posts, I've never explicitly set them, but can you answer these questions:

Was he ever considered one of the best overall players in the game?
Was he ever considered one of the best overall players at his position?
Was he ever considered the best player on his team and if so, for how long?
Is he AS valuable as HHOF centres from his era who struggled to get in (Oates, Gilmour, etc.)?
Was he MORE valuable than centres who have not gotten in (Turgeon, Roenick, Lindros, Goring, Brind'Amour)?

If he's supposed to get in as a defensive forward (which I'm not a fan of anyways...):
Is he the equivalent of Bob Gainey, the only other modern forward induction who was selected for defense?
Is he better than Selke winners like Craig Ramsay or Jere Lehtinen or Dave Poulin? If so, is it by a large enough margin that these guys wouldn't all be HHOF contenders as a result?
Is he clearly more worthy of induction than similar calibre defensive players from other eras like Claude Provost or Marty Pavelich or Nick Metz?

And if it makes you feel better, we can toss in: Is he better than Tyler Bozak?

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 02:04 PM
  #136
Pat Paeplow
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
I don't think I ever said "Guy Carbonneau never scored 60 points therefore he's not a HHOFer", but if you want to think Bergeron is a lesser offensive player than Carbonneau, go for it. I'm reasonably sure that I argued that compared to other HHOFers and Selke winners his offensive contribution was weak. In the context of the 1980s, peaking at 56 points is middling.

I don't think I said Carbo should take more PP time and Naslund more PK time. Just more PP time for Carbo. See, plenty of good players have played on both PP and PK, when their skills merited that allocation of ice time and Carbo wasn't playing right at the line of some minute quota. He was never averaging 20 minutes a game, as many players do when their ice time is more valuable than a clear-cut non-HHOFer like Bobby Smith.

As for goal posts, I've never explicitly set them, but can you answer these questions:

Was he ever considered one of the best overall players in the game?
Was he ever considered one of the best overall players at his position?
Was he ever considered the best player on his team and if so, for how long?
Is he AS valuable as HHOF centres from his era who struggled to get in (Oates, Gilmour, etc.)?
Was he MORE valuable than centres who have not gotten in (Turgeon, Roenick, Lindros, Goring, Brind'Amour)?

If he's supposed to get in as a defensive forward (which I'm not a fan of anyways...):
Is he the equivalent of Bob Gainey, the only other modern forward induction who was selected for defense?
Is he better than Selke winners like Craig Ramsay or Jere Lehtinen or Dave Poulin? If so, is it by a large enough margin that these guys wouldn't all be HHOF contenders as a result?
Is he clearly more worthy of induction than similar calibre defensive players from other eras like Claude Provost or Marty Pavelich or Nick Metz?

And if it makes you feel better, we can toss in: Is he better than Tyler Bozak?
In regard to your last paragraph, I am probably firmly in the minority but I don't go in with the assumption that he has to separate from these players. My underlying argument is that all excellent defensive forwards should recieve consideration, not just Carbonneau. However, I recognize this is a non-starter for most people and would ruin the HOF in their opinion.

Lehtinen is special to me because he is essentially a descendant of Gainey. The approach was passed down from Gainey to Carbo to Jere. However, I don't think any of the players you mention have the longevity for serious HOF consideration. 1000 reg season games really seems to be the benchmark for HOF calibre longevity with a very few distinct exceptions(Bure, Neely).

Ramsay is the only player that exceeds 1000 and the bulk of his career came about 5 years before I was old enough to watch hockey critically. therefore, I've been playing catch-up in educating myself about him. You, in arguing against Carbonneau, have actually piqued my interest in this guy and maybe he deserves a second look.

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 02:21 PM
  #137
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
i think we're all getting a little caught up in the patrice bergeron hype right now because we've just seen his peak stretch (SC, selke, SCF). i say this as someone who respects the hell out of bergeron, but unless he wins another two or three selkes or has another few monster playoffs, i don't see what separates him from, say, dave poulin. i.e., an excellent defensive center with good offensive production who is one of the key motors on a tough, defensively oriented contending team. vintage doug gilmour or fedorov, he ain't.
this is true but only a couple of more deep runs and the legend and myth of the injuries in 13 will grow to "he almost died " proportions.

Just watch.

That being said his tracking is more HHOF worthy than guy at the same point and he isn't a lock for the Hall either.

A better bet IMO yes but not even close to a maybe yet.


Last edited by Hardyvan123: 07-28-2013 at 04:38 PM.
Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 02:30 PM
  #138
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Rod Langway played on the PP with the Canadiens when Guy Lapointe was injured.

In Washington as Scott Stevens matured and Larry Murphy arrived the team needs changed to one where Rod Langway was best suited to lead the defensive focus.

No need for the team or coaches to define players responsibilities in terms of a possible abstration 25-30 seasons down the road.
Rod Langway was always a defense first guy and limited offensively, that never changed.

He was serviceable PP guy but then again if one looks at the PP guys in the early 80's it wasn't the best player pool of all time for Dmen who were PP guys either.

Either way Guy wasn't going to make his mark as a elite or even very good scoring forward, it was his defense that earned him his paycheque.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 02:35 PM
  #139
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
Its inconsistent to have a HOF where Bob Gainey is in and Guy Carbonneau is out. People in this thread have argued against Carbonneau reasoning that a player like Gainey was far better than him or Craig Ramsay was almost as good as him.

Offensive players aren't saddled with the same burden. Its accepted that there's many great offensive players and that they should all be appreciated. Wayne Gretzky was the greatest playmaker of all-time but that doesn't diminish the achievements of a playmaker one step down in the stratosphere such as Adam Oates.

Voting in Bob Gainey was something akin to setting a legal precedent. If the voters don't consider Guy Carbonneau for HOF based on his merits as a defensive forward, they are passively declaring they made a mistake inducting Gainey.

Hv and BofM, I know you guys don't think Carbonneau warrants induction but how do you guys feel about Gainey being in the hall?
You bring up a good point about Gainey and the door it opens.

I'm not sure if he would be in my personal HHOF but his resume is more impressive than Guy's and the Russians thought he was the best player in the world, which I don't agree with BTW but it did add to his legacy with teh HHOF voters.

In a crunch no I wouldn't have Gainey in the HHOF, precisely for the door it opens like you suggested.

He was always a complementary player ans without those SC and being on those teams he wouldn't be in the Hall.

Great scoring forwards make the Hall despite their teams limitations as their greatness is more rare.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 02:51 PM
  #140
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,337
vCash: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
He was always a complementary player ans without those SC and being on those teams he wouldn't be in the Hall.

Great scoring forwards make the Hall despite their teams limitations as their greatness is more rare.
You could also say that those scoring forwards that never won the cup did not do so becouse they had no Bob Gainey's on their team.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 03:40 PM
  #141
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,871
vCash: 500
Best Defensive Center or Forward

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
I don't think I ever said "Guy Carbonneau never scored 60 points therefore he's not a HHOFer", but if you want to think Bergeron is a lesser offensive player than Carbonneau, go for it. I'm reasonably sure that I argued that compared to other HHOFers and Selke winners his offensive contribution was weak. In the context of the 1980s, peaking at 56 points is middling.

I don't think I said Carbo should take more PP time and Naslund more PK time. Just more PP time for Carbo. See, plenty of good players have played on both PP and PK, when their skills merited that allocation of ice time and Carbo wasn't playing right at the line of some minute quota. He was never averaging 20 minutes a game, as many players do when their ice time is more valuable than a clear-cut non-HHOFer like Bobby Smith.

As for goal posts, I've never explicitly set them, but can you answer these questions:

Was he ever considered one of the best overall players in the game?
Was he ever considered one of the best overall players at his position?
Was he ever considered the best player on his team and if so, for how long?
Is he AS valuable as HHOF centres from his era who struggled to get in (Oates, Gilmour, etc.)?
Was he MORE valuable than centres who have not gotten in (Turgeon, Roenick, Lindros, Goring, Brind'Amour)?

If he's supposed to get in as a defensive forward (which I'm not a fan of anyways...):
Is he the equivalent of Bob Gainey, the only other modern forward induction who was selected for defense?
Is he better than Selke winners like Craig Ramsay or Jere Lehtinen or Dave Poulin? If so, is it by a large enough margin that these guys wouldn't all be HHOF contenders as a result?
Is he clearly more worthy of induction than similar calibre defensive players from other eras like Claude Provost or Marty Pavelich or Nick Metz?

And if it makes you feel better, we can toss in: Is he better than Tyler Bozak?
Guy Carbonneau was demonstratably better at ES than Patrice Bergeron is. TOI data is reliable since 1998-99. Any prior numbers are reasonable estimates but other data is fixed historically. Prior to 1990 Guy Carbonneau finished top three on the Canadiens in ES scoring four times, leading in 1984-85, 2nd in 1986-87, 3rd in 1985-86 and 1988-89. Impressive on a team with SC capabilities.

Definitely brought more hockey value to the Canadiens, later Dallas than any of the bolded did to their teams as career regulars or short term players. Definitely better than Poulin, Ramsey and Lehtinen. Longer career with leadership qualities that they did not possess.

As for the oldtimers listed, remove the elite defensive center they played with and ask the question. Claude Provost was recognized as an elite defensive right winger once he started playing with Henri Richard. In the 1959 playoffs Henri Richard in limited Bobby Hull playing center. 1971 and 1973 after Provost retired limited Bobby Hull with Rejean Houle playing RW. The only really good playoff that Bobby Hull had against the Canadiens was 1962 when Henri Richard was hurt and did not play. With other centers Provost was not as effective defensively.

Track the defensive skills of the centers that Pavelich and Metz played with and you see why they are not in.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 04:47 PM
  #142
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
You could also say that those scoring forwards that never won the cup did not do so becouse they had no Bob Gainey's on their team.
For a couple of guys sure but for how many?

even if one were to make a scale and equate scoring as equal for defense for forwards (which wouldn't be entirely fair either IMO as the forwards main job is to score) and then create a scale of possible points from 1-100 for both, would Gainey gather enough "points" to be a HHOF guy? Not sure as guys like Ramsay would gather more "offensive points" and still rate very high on defensive ones.

It's subjective (who gets into the HHOF and who doesn't) but the salary scale for forwards gives us an indication, and a pretty strong one too, in the value of forwards, offensive elite guys always make more than defensive elite ones due to scarcity and perceived value by NHL GM's and management.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 04:55 PM
  #143
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Guy Carbonneau was demonstratably better at ES than Patrice Bergeron is. TOI data is reliable since 1998-99. Any prior numbers are reasonable estimates but other data is fixed historically. Prior to 1990 Guy Carbonneau finished top three on the Canadiens in ES scoring four times, leading in 1984-85, 2nd in 1986-87, 3rd in 1985-86 and 1988-89. Impressive on a team with SC capabilities.

Definitely brought more hockey value to the Canadiens, later Dallas than any of the bolded did to their teams as career regulars or short term players. Definitely better than Poulin, Ramsey and Lehtinen. Longer career with leadership qualities that they did not possess.

As for the oldtimers listed, remove the elite defensive center they played with and ask the question. Claude Provost was recognized as an elite defensive right winger once he started playing with Henri Richard. In the 1959 playoffs Henri Richard in limited Bobby Hull playing center. 1971 and 1973 after Provost retired limited Bobby Hull with Rejean Houle playing RW. The only really good playoff that Bobby Hull had against the Canadiens was 1962 when Henri Richard was hurt and did not play. With other centers Provost was not as effective defensively.

Track the defensive skills of the centers that Pavelich and Metz played with and you see why they are not in.
You did that without adjusting for the differences in scoring for the era. It looks a lot like your claim won't pass muster when you do so.

Either way even if Guy has an edge in ES scoring it would be minimal and the HHOF people probably only look at total stats not breakdowns like ES versus PP. The fact that Bergeron is good enough to play more on the PK would help his case more one would think.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 06:01 PM
  #144
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Guy Carbonneau was demonstratably better at ES than Patrice Bergeron is. TOI data is reliable since 1998-99. Any prior numbers are reasonable estimates but other data is fixed historically. Prior to 1990 Guy Carbonneau finished top three on the Canadiens in ES scoring four times, leading in 1984-85, 2nd in 1986-87, 3rd in 1985-86 and 1988-89. Impressive on a team with SC capabilities.

Definitely brought more hockey value to the Canadiens, later Dallas than any of the bolded did to their teams as career regulars or short term players. Definitely better than Poulin, Ramsey and Lehtinen. Longer career with leadership qualities that they did not possess.

As for the oldtimers listed, remove the elite defensive center they played with and ask the question. Claude Provost was recognized as an elite defensive right winger once he started playing with Henri Richard. In the 1959 playoffs Henri Richard in limited Bobby Hull playing center. 1971 and 1973 after Provost retired limited Bobby Hull with Rejean Houle playing RW. The only really good playoff that Bobby Hull had against the Canadiens was 1962 when Henri Richard was hurt and did not play. With other centers Provost was not as effective defensively.

Track the defensive skills of the centers that Pavelich and Metz played with and you see why they are not in.
Patrice Bergeron has led a contender in ES points in both the playoffs and regular season. When they won the Cup he was 2 ES points behind the leader with 2 fewer games played. When you're up 4-1 in a Game 7, it doesn't matter if you have Bergeron or Carbonneau. If you're down 4-1, you surely shouldn't choose Carbonneau.

Carbonneau played with some great defensive players, in some great defensive systems. (And no, Carbo didn't make them great by himself, as shown by the lack of defensive improvement his first year on new teams.) While the absence of Henri Richard may have affected Claude Provost, the absence of Guy Carbonneau wasn't felt by Jere Lehtinen when he retired. There was also no improvement seen in Bob Gainey's play when he arrived in the league.

After leaving Montreal he was exclusively a defensive player who produced replacement level offensive numbers. He was very good in his defensive role, but 5 years of being a Kris Draper equivalent shouldn't really give you that big of a boost for the HHOF. The Dallas defense didn't decline when he was replaced with Kirk Muller. It wasn't that hard to replace him.

Carbonneau's being portrayed as a mythical defensive forward who could neutralize any opposing centre. Like Killion claiming that he could "neuter" (which is a verb, not an adjective) Gretzky and Lemieux. The facts clearly illustrate that's simply not the case. People are reading too much into Carbonneau's actual influence on the outcome of games.

1993 is also supposed to be a feather in his cap, but opposing centres seemed to pose a problem for Montreal:
Joe Sakic 3-3-6, 6 games
Pat Lafontaine 1-4-5, 3 games
Pierre Turgeon 2-3-5, 3 games
Wayne Gretzky, 2-5-7, 5 games
Total 8-15-23, 17 games

Just imagine what those lines would look like if their goaltender didn't bail them out with one of the all-time great goaltending performances in playoff history, and if the opponents were healthier. Because as is, those guys produced roughly at the levels expected of them for 1993, in spite of a peaking Patrick Roy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dopamine Fiend View Post
It's also noteworthy to point out that the Selke trophy doesn't resonate in a HOF argument. You can look back over this thread and naysayers rarely even take the time to counter the Selke argument. If it was a 3 time Norris winner, no further information would be required, punch the guys ticket. maybe it's a function of that view of defensive forwards as being inherently lesser players.
Norris means you're the best at your position, and closely correlates to post-season AS votes. Selke doesn't mean best forward, which is why Carbonneau got 0 votes for AS teams. Gainey and Ramsay on the other hand did pick up votes, even if they didn't actually make the 1st team or 2nd team.

As for Gainey in the HHOF, I don't mind him in there. It's more for his reputation than any measurable impact that he made it to the HHOF, but a few 4th place finishes in post-season AS votes and a Conn Smythe are things Carbo can't compete with. In fact, even though Selke voting appears to be the entire reason this thread exists, Gainey's record is clearly superior in spite of losing a potential 5th Selke because the award didn't exist yet. And the fact that he's already in means that we don't need a token defensive forward until someone surpasses Bob Gainey.

Bob Gainey's in there largely because he was fortunate enough to play on the Montreal Canadiens, but since Carbo never wins a Selke and this thead doesn't exist had Carbonneau played for the Maple Leafs, he can't complain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
i think we're all getting a little caught up in the patrice bergeron hype right now because we've just seen his peak stretch (SC, selke, SCF). i say this as someone who respects the hell out of bergeron, but unless he wins another two or three selkes or has another few monster playoffs, i don't see what separates him from, say, dave poulin. i.e., an excellent defensive center with good offensive production who is one of the key motors on a tough, defensively oriented contending team. vintage doug gilmour or fedorov, he ain't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
That being said his tracking is more HHOF worthy than guy at the same point and he isn't a lock for the Hall either.

A better bet IMO yes but not even close to a maybe yet.
That's the thing. Carbo can't make a convincing case that he's clearly ahead of Bergeron (through this point in their careers). The line for the HHOF is not Patrice Bergeron. Carbonneau would immediately become the weakest of all Selke winners who are in the HHOF.

There's a reason why none of the pro-Carbo posts are mentioning Doug Gilmour as a comparable, a clearly superior player who had to wait to get in.

blogofmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 06:20 PM
  #145
habsfanatics*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Well said.
Seriously? I'm still not sure what was said

Guy was one of my favourite habs players, but I have to side with hardy/blogofmike on this one. There is simply no way should he get in and he won't.

habsfanatics* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 07:49 PM
  #146
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 13,871
vCash: 500
Facts and Interpretations

Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
Patrice Bergeron has led a contender in ES points in both the playoffs and regular season. When they won the Cup he was 2 ES points behind the leader with 2 fewer games played. When you're up 4-1 in a Game 7, it doesn't matter if you have Bergeron or Carbonneau. If you're down 4-1, you surely shouldn't choose Carbonneau.

Carbonneau played with some great defensive players, in some great defensive systems. (And no, Carbo didn't make them great by himself, as shown by the lack of defensive improvement his first year on new teams.) While the absence of Henri Richard may have affected Claude Provost, the absence of Guy Carbonneau wasn't felt by Jere Lehtinen when he retired. There was also no improvement seen in Bob Gainey's play when he arrived in the league.

After leaving Montreal he was exclusively a defensive player who produced replacement level offensive numbers. He was very good in his defensive role, but 5 years of being a Kris Draper equivalent shouldn't really give you that big of a boost for the HHOF. The Dallas defense didn't decline when he was replaced with Kirk Muller. It wasn't that hard to replace him.

Carbonneau's being portrayed as a mythical defensive forward who could neutralize any opposing centre. Like Killion claiming that he could "neuter" (which is a verb, not an adjective) Gretzky and Lemieux. The facts clearly illustrate that's simply not the case. People are reading too much into Carbonneau's actual influence on the outcome of games.

1993 is also supposed to be a feather in his cap, but opposing centres seemed to pose a problem for Montreal:
Joe Sakic 3-3-6, 6 games
Pat Lafontaine 1-4-5, 3 games
Pierre Turgeon 2-3-5, 3 games
Wayne Gretzky, 2-5-7, 5 games

Total 8-15-23, 17 games

Just imagine what those lines would look like if their goaltender didn't bail them out with one of the all-time great goaltending performances in playoff history, and if the opponents were healthier. Because as is, those guys produced roughly at the levels expected of them for 1993, in spite of a peaking Patrick Roy.
Better question would be has an NHL team with Carbonneau in the line-up ever been down 4 - 1 with 10 minutes to go in a game 7. Very doubtful.

The numbers you provide for the four number one opposing do not pass the fact check test. Specifically Pierre Turgeon had 5 points in 4 games. Net result with interpretations.

Joe Sakic was reduced from a 105 PT level over 84 games to an 84 PT
level, Lafontaine from 148 to 140, more importantly reduced the Sabres playoff scoring from 4.8 GPG against Boston to 3 GPG.Turgeon, proper numbers, from 132 to 105, Gretzky like Carbonneau was coming of an injury plagued season was held to below season and playoff norms, plus most important of all was held scoreless in 2 of the 5 games.

The injuries tend to wash since Carbonneau was coming of an injury and was playing hurt. Regardless Sakic was healthy yet he had a huge drop in performance. Also Carbonneau scored two OT goals against Buffalo and the Islanders.

Patrick Roy's performance was not as great as you suggest. Welcome to fact check the statement.

BTW "neuter" is an adjective:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuter

Killion has a unique vocabulary and sense of humour. Also view Google as a friend.

Canadiens1958 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 07:49 PM
  #147
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
You bring up a good point about Gainey and the door it opens.

I'm not sure if he would be in my personal HHOF but his resume is more impressive than Guy's and the Russians thought he was the best player in the world, which I don't agree with BTW but it did add to his legacy with teh HHOF voters.

In a crunch no I wouldn't have Gainey in the HHOF, precisely for the door it opens like you suggested.

He was always a complementary player ans without those SC and being on those teams he wouldn't be in the Hall.

Great scoring forwards make the Hall despite their teams limitations as their greatness is more rare.
No, I don't think so. As I stated in a previous post in this thread, Gainey was considered to be one of the top forwards in the world during his prime. Carbonneau was never in this conversation. Gainey has earned every right to be in the HHOF.

LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 08:32 PM
  #148
Killion
Registered User
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 30,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
Like Killion claiming that he could "neuter" (which is a verb, not an adjective) Gretzky and Lemieux. The facts clearly illustrate that's simply not the case. People are reading too much into Carbonneau's actual influence on the outcome of games....There's a reason why none of the pro-Carbo posts are mentioning Doug Gilmour as a comparable, a clearly superior player who had to wait to get in.
While I agree Gilmour was a somewhat superior player, wasnt oceans apart or lapping Guy Carbonneau, who like Doug in waiting to be inducted I believe & hope one day will be... and no....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
BTW "neuter" is an adjective:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuter

Killion has a unique vocabulary and sense of humour. Also view Google as a friend.
Sage advice. And yes, sometimes the disambiguation of neuter I be. A nutter. Google's your friend.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 08:37 PM
  #149
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeBlondeDemon10 View Post
No, I don't think so. As I stated in a previous post in this thread, Gainey was considered to be one of the top forwards in the world during his prime. Carbonneau was never in this conversation. Gainey has earned every right to be in the HHOF.
How loose is your definition of top forward?

Top 20?

Pick any year and they will be easily 10 guys better, don't forget the top Czechs and Russians weren't playing in the NHL but they had some great players and definitely great forwards.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2013, 09:00 PM
  #150
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
How loose is your definition of top forward?

Top 20?

Pick any year and they will be easily 10 guys better, don't forget the top Czechs and Russians weren't playing in the NHL but they had some great players and definitely great forwards.
I'm basing this on Victor Tikhonov's quote.

LeBlondeDemon10 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 08:27 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.