HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

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

Round 2, Vote 5 (HOH Top Centers)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-02-2013, 05:21 PM
  #176
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,355
vCash: 500
I'm not sure how all that fits with the fact that Beliveau had a ton of PP points and Richard had very few.

Also, as for Kennedy... wow! If you told me he had points on 32% of the Leafs playoff goals and asked me what percentage of their game winners he had a part in, I'd have guessed about 50. Have you read the laundry list of important goals he was a part of? Clutch play was supposed to be his forte. Maybe it was, but it doesn't show up in game winning points (which are not the only important points scored, of course...)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2013, 05:49 PM
  #177
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 12,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Peak, yes. Prime, maybe, if you consider prime to be <4 seasons. But career, hell no. I'm certainly far more of a career than peak guy, and any faults Forsberg has in career regard (due to his injuries), Crosby has tenfold. Unlike Crosby, Forsberg actually has a case to be up for vote now.
I'm more of a peak & prime guy.

At this point, my top two are Crosby & Forsberg. Dionne & Richard & Schmidt, to me, are still in the running.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2013, 08:39 PM
  #178
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm not sure how all that fits with the fact that Beliveau had a ton of PP points and Richard had very few.

Also, as for Kennedy... wow! If you told me he had points on 32% of the Leafs playoff goals and asked me what percentage of their game winners he had a part in, I'd have guessed about 50. Have you read the laundry list of important goals he was a part of? Clutch play was supposed to be his forte. Maybe it was, but it doesn't show up in game winning points (which are not the only important points scored, of course...)
Kennedy had a 4 point game in a 5-4 win during the 50-51 season, and the only goal he wasn't in on was the winner.

Kennedy had Toronto's first goal 11 times, and assisted on 14 others. So he was in on 25 of a possible 67 playoff games (TO was shutout 11 times) or 37.3%.

For comparison GWG points for Rocket Richard in the Finals are 8 goals and 3 assists. Montreal played 68 (41-27) Finals games over Richard's career with 190 GF. Unlike Kennedy, Richard did miss some games though. (4-3 with 20 GF in 1955 when he was suspended.) Richard was 34-11-45 in the Finals.

Without the 51-52 or 56-57 seasons, I have Kennedy at 31-44-75 on GWG and 17-21-38 on GTG in the regular season. He was 0-9-9 and 5-4-9 from his 10-42-52 in his Hart season of 1954-55.

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2013, 10:43 PM
  #179
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,235
vCash: 500
Shift and Roster Management

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm not sure how all that fits with the fact that Beliveau had a ton of PP points and Richard had very few.

Also, as for Kennedy... wow! If you told me he had points on 32% of the Leafs playoff goals and asked me what percentage of their game winners he had a part in, I'd have guessed about 50. Have you read the laundry list of important goals he was a part of? Clutch play was supposed to be his forte. Maybe it was, but it doesn't show up in game winning points (which are not the only important points scored, of course...)
Goes to shift and roster management. Part of the why of a four center rotation along with the fact that during a part the O6, 70 game season the Canadiens and Leafs regularly played 3 games in 4 nights and 4 in 5:

1959-60 Canadiens:

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi

1959-60 Maple Leafs:

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi

Excellent contribution pappyline.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2013, 11:04 PM
  #180
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Goes to shift and roster management. Part of the why of a four center rotation along with the fact that during a part the O6, 70 game season the Canadiens and Leafs regularly played 3 games in 4 nights and 4 in 5:

1959-60 Canadiens:

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi

1959-60 Maple Leafs:

http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/hspgames.cgi

Excellent contribution pappyline.
sorry, I'm not quite sure where this is supposed to be going. Beliveau's heart problem proves he didn't play as much on the PP as we may think? It's probably the opposite. PP time is much easier on the body than ES time, and it would make way more sense to ride a supremely talented player with a heart condition on the PP while giving someone else more ES time.

As for Richard, so is the assertion that he actually played more PP time than we think? Because if so, he was a terrible PP player. Even mediocre players can pick up a good number of points by accident playing on a good PP.

The fact that Richard's PP point totals are low demonstrate that he simply didn't play on the PP very much. It's the only explanation that makes any sense. And the opposite is true for Beliveau.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2013, 11:48 PM
  #181
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,235
vCash: 500
Four Center Rotation III

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
sorry, I'm not quite sure where this is supposed to be going. Beliveau's heart problem proves he didn't play as much on the PP as we may think? It's probably the opposite. PP time is much easier on the body than ES time, and it would make way more sense to ride a supremely talented player with a heart condition on the PP while giving someone else more ES time.

As for Richard, so is the assertion that he actually played more PP time than we think? Because if so, he was a terrible PP player. Even mediocre players can pick up a good number of points by accident playing on a good PP.

The fact that Richard's PP point totals are low demonstrate that he simply didn't play on the PP very much. It's the only explanation that makes any sense. And the opposite is true for Beliveau.
The issue is rather straightforward, the Canadiens from the 1955-56 season onward employed a four center rotation. Focus on the aspect and not the limited Beliveau / Richard aspect.

1955-56 roster:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1956.html

featured four centers - Beliveau, Henri Richard, Mosdell and Leclair plus Don Marshall who could play center.

When 60 minutes of regulation playing time is split four ways instead of three, there is an impact on each centers TOI. Previously this was illustrated in the case of Stan Mikita when the Hawks went to four centers from a three center rotation. You even supported the evidence by referring to the ETOI data you had.

Specific to the Canadiens, playing Marshall on the PK with faceoff responsibilities cut the taxing PK responsibilities for the other four centers but it also reduced the amount of center time available for the remaining four centers.

This allowed the team to use the other four centers in optimal situations at the coaches discretion. How they were used is another issue but the impact of playing reduced time impacted their statistics across the board, lowering the results for all centers.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 05:10 AM
  #182
ChiTownPhilly
Registered User
 
ChiTownPhilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: S Jersey near Philly
Country: United States
Posts: 366
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ChiTownPhilly
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
I'm more of a peak & prime guy.

At this point, my top two are Crosby & Forsberg. Dionne & Richard & Schmidt, to me, are still in the running.
At this point, my biggest investment in this round is in Schmidt (big surprise, huh?). I don't know if I'd have Kennedy 2, 3 or 4... but I'm pretty sure I'd take him in a upper grouping of four. My inclination is to say we've nerfed Dionne long enough- but I'm not wedded to the position. Really, I think if we take any center past, say- six on our list-- and transplant him into Dionne's situation, would any Cups materialize? I don't think so.

I don't have a dog-in-the-fight on Forsberg/Fedorov. My mind is pretty open on this. I certainly don't think it's a no-brainer. Might come down to what one values- the case for one over the other. However, when looking at Forsberg, such an outsized number of his points come from assists that we should remind ourselves that goals are more important than assists. How much more? Maybe someone in the "By the Numbers" sub-forum has attempted a reckoning. A similar consideration for this should be relevant to how we view Crosby.

In Forsberg's defense, he has an obvious advantage in International Play-- and this is a big deal in his homeland, where he is to this day his nation's most beloved player. Question is, how big a deal should it be to us? [It's worth mentioning, no doubt. Past that- not so sure...]

ChiTownPhilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 08:13 AM
  #183
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
As for Richard, so is the assertion that he actually played more PP time than we think? Because if so, he was a terrible PP player. Even mediocre players can pick up a good number of points by accident playing on a good PP.

The fact that Richard's PP point totals are low demonstrate that he simply didn't play on the PP very much. It's the only explanation that makes any sense. And the opposite is true for Beliveau.
Either that or he just wasn't very effective on the PP.

Even in the seasons where Beliveau missed time, Richard didn't fare much better at all on the PP.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 08:26 AM
  #184
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPhilly View Post
At this point, my biggest investment in this round is in Schmidt (big surprise, huh?). I don't know if I'd have Kennedy 2, 3 or 4... but I'm pretty sure I'd take him in a upper grouping of four. My inclination is to say we've nerfed Dionne long enough- but I'm not wedded to the position. Really, I think if we take any center past, say- six on our list-- and transplant him into Dionne's situation, would any Cups materialize? I don't think so.


Well Wayne never won a cup after Edmonton, I doubt any of the centers here win a SC with Marcel's teams.

I don't have a dog-in-the-fight on Forsberg/Fedorov. My mind is pretty open on this. I certainly don't think it's a no-brainer. Might come down to what one values- the case for one over the other. However, when looking at Forsberg, such an outsized number of his points come from assists that we should remind ourselves that goals are more important than assists. How much more? Maybe someone in the "By the Numbers" sub-forum has attempted a reckoning. A similar consideration for this should be relevant to how we view Crosby.[/QUOTE]

Foppa was considered one of the best, ie. in the mix for best player in the world for a period of close to 10 years, just like Sid, if that's not enough to place him in the top 4 in this round, what the hell actually will be? It's not like Sid and Forsberg have lousy playoff records or were perhaps propped up by other players either.

Quote:
In Forsberg's defense, he has an obvious advantage in International Play-- and this is a big deal in his homeland, where he is to this day his nation's most beloved player. Question is, how big a deal should it be to us? [It's worth mentioning, no doubt. Past that- not so sure...]
If people aren't factoring in Foppa's NHL readiness during his time in the Swedish league and his missed time due to the lockout then it's just really unfair and way too NHL centric IMO.

As to my above reference to Sid and Foppa and their "best player in the world standing" this round, I think we should leave historians preconceptions and ATD ones as well at the door and seriously ask ourselves, if being in the mix for best player in the world over a period of 10 years can't make it over guys like Schmidt and Henri, then perhaps our metrics aren't really very good here.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 08:33 AM
  #185
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
The issue is rather straightforward, the Canadiens from the 1955-56 season onward employed a four center rotation. Focus on the aspect and not the limited Beliveau / Richard aspect.

1955-56 roster:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1956.html

featured four centers - Beliveau, Henri Richard, Mosdell and Leclair plus Don Marshall who could play center.

When 60 minutes of regulation playing time is split four ways instead of three, there is an impact on each centers TOI. Previously this was illustrated in the case of Stan Mikita when the Hawks went to four centers from a three center rotation. You even supported the evidence by referring to the ETOI data you had.

Specific to the Canadiens, playing Marshall on the PK with faceoff responsibilities cut the taxing PK responsibilities for the other four centers but it also reduced the amount of center time available for the remaining four centers.

This allowed the team to use the other four centers in optimal situations at the coaches discretion. How they were used is another issue but the impact of playing reduced time impacted their statistics across the board, lowering the results for all centers.
Every team had the same roster size and limits right?

I'm not understanding exactly what the point is here with Henri and how his situation isn't really all that different to Feds?

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 08:49 AM
  #186
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Foppa was considered one of the best, ie. in the mix for best player in the world for a period of close to 10 years, just like Sid, if that's not enough to place him in the top 4 in this round, what the hell actually will be? It's not like Sid and Forsberg have lousy playoff records or were perhaps propped up by other players either.

As to my above reference to Sid and Foppa and their "best player in the world standing" this round, I think we should leave historians preconceptions and ATD ones as well at the door and seriously ask ourselves, if being in the mix for best player in the world over a period of 10 years can't make it over guys like Schmidt and Henri, then perhaps our metrics aren't really very good here.
Crosby hasn't played for 10 years even though people have regarded him as the best player for most of his career.

People already discussed Schmidt's claim to being the best player in the world for a brief time. Richard got heavy praise as well without being better than Beliveau or Howe. Would Crosby or Forsberg been able to make that claim even though they clearly have better peak value than Richard?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Montreal Gazette (Dink Carroll) - 4/25/1960
When you hear arguments as to who is the best player in the league, you never hear Horvath's name mentioned. The names you hear most often are Jean Beliveau and Gordie Howe. If one of the debaters is defense-minded, you may hear Doug Harvey mentioned. We heard one hockey savant declare: "Pound for pound, the best hockey player in the league today is Henri Richard."

This is another way of saying that if he was as big and heavy as Jean Beliveau, he would be a better hockey player. But he isn't as big as Beliveau, and that's where Jean has the advantage.

But Little Rocket is great in his own way and is highly regarded by the coaches of rival clubs. After Alfie Pike had been back in the league a month as coach of the Rangers, he remarked: "What we need is centres. If I had my choice, I'd take Beliveau first and the Little Rocket next."

Gordie Howe expressed surprise at the Little Rocket's strength. 'I don't know where he gets it all," he said. "He's like a little bull."

In a way, it's to be regretted that playoff performances have no effect on the voting for All-Star berths. That's when the pressure is on and you measure and athlete by the way he performs under pressure. If that were the case, there isn't a doubt that Jacques Plante would have made the First All-Star team and the Little Rocket the Second.

"Plante and Henri Richard were our best players in the playoffs," said Coach Toe Blake. "Sometimes Henri doesn't like to check and when that happens we're in trouble. But he was digging all the way in the playoffs."

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 09:06 AM
  #187
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Scuderi View Post
Crosby hasn't played for 10 years even though people have regarded him as the best player for most of his career.

People already discussed Schmidt's claim to being the best player in the world for a brief time. Richard got heavy praise as well without being better than Beliveau or Howe. Would Crosby or Forsberg been able to make that claim even though they clearly have better peak value than Richard?
For Sid it's close to 10 years, as with Foppa, both of their Hart voting records, even with it's faults are better and much better in a Canadian to Canadian apples to apples comp as well.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 09:36 AM
  #188
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,631
vCash: 500
Here is a comparison of players to the guy who finished 1st, 2nd and 3rd on their team in points in the playoffs each season over their career.

PlayerCPO Pts#1 PO PtsRatio #1#2 PO PtsRatio #2#3 PO PtsRatio #3
Max Bentley455581.8243104.6536125.00
Sidney Crosby10511293.7597108.2575140.00
Marcel Dionne455384.914795.7441109.76
Sergei Fedorov17620884.62173101.73152115.79
Peter Forsberg17121380.28169101.18145117.93
Ted Kennedy607085.7156107.1447127.66
Joe Malone223956.4120110.0014157.14
Henri Richard12924552.6520961.7218270.88
Richard 56-7110918857.9815868.9914177.30
Milt Schmidt497664.476081.675687.50

Malone's career includes two NHA/SC playoffs without assists being recorded.

It is harder to look good with a longer career and more successful team. Richard is also hurt by the scoring and GP explosion after expansion, so I've shown him up to the year Beliveau retired in 71 to help show how much this dragged his numbers down. See Maurice below to see how much success impacts on a legendary playoff scorer.

Here are a few other players to compare

PlayerCPO Pts#1 PO PtsRatio #1#2 PO PtsRatio #2#3 PO PtsRatio #3
Glenn Anderson21440652.7130869.4826979.55
Jean Beliveau17622080.0018794.12167105.39
Yvan Cournoyer12718967.2016975.1514289.44
Ron Francis14324259.0919872.2217979.89
Wayne Gretzky40240599.26303132.67270148.89
Mark Messier29541071.9531892.77279105.73
Messier AGT13815887.34134102.99110125.45
Brian Propp14820671.8417982.6814999.33
Maurice Richard12618867.0215282.8912997.67
Steve Yzerman18525373.1221386.8518898.40

AGT: After Gretzky Trade

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 09:46 AM
  #189
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,235
vCash: 500
Roster Size

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Every team had the same roster size and limits right?

I'm not understanding exactly what the point is here with Henri and how his situation isn't really all that different to Feds?
Every team uses the limits differently and not all teams favour multi-position players. A player who can play more than one position effectively is worth an extra roster spot for each position. Point is that when such a player plays the extra position he reduces the available ice time for the regulars. If looking at offensive production the amount of ice time becomes a factor.

By the nineties - Fedorov's time, game rosters were larger, plus spares were around. All teams rotated 4 lines with 4 centers getting playing time. Also the CBA eliminated the 3 games in 4 days and 4 games in 5 days scheduling.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 09:48 AM
  #190
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Is it just me or does anyone have Teeder in their top 4?

Other guys have better peak/primes and several have better careers as well.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 09:52 AM
  #191
Hardyvan123
[email protected]
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Every team uses the limits differently and not all teams favour multi-position players. A player who can play more than one position effectively is worth an extra roster spot for each position. Point is that when such a player plays the extra position he reduces the available ice time for the regulars. If looking at offensive production the amount of ice time becomes a factor.

By the nineties - Fedorov's time, game rosters were larger, plus spares were around. All teams rotated 4 lines with 4 centers getting playing time. Also the CBA eliminated the 3 games in 4 days and 4 games in 5 days scheduling.
Travel in the 6 team league was limited to one time zone as well, the "special case" of Henri isn't being made very well here.

Like I said before Henri looks to be in the Francis/Keon type of player grouping and his SC might have him too high here, somethign to ponder.

BM67's list and comparisson didn't help him very much either.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 11:49 AM
  #192
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
I would like to see icetime numbers for Henri Richard and the other top scorers of the era. I strongly suspect that Pocket was getting more ES icetime (to balance out the lacking PP time) than the players against whom he is being compared, and that this has skewed the (raw) ES points calculation in his favor.

I am trying to recall Richard's regular linemates. I know he spent a lot of time skating with guys like Claude Provost, Dave Balon, Bobby Rousseau, etc. but didn't he also skate pretty often with other hall of famers like Dickie Moore? Schmidt's Kraut linemates were obviously good, but I seriously doubt they'd be as well remembered if not for having skated with Schmidt.
The Canadiens "super-team" where all 6 of their top 6 forwards were inducted into the HHOF was actually only together for THREE seasons - 1955-56, Henri Richard's rookie season until 1957-58 when Bert Olmstead was traded away: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...olmstbe01.html

I believe (but am not 100% certain) that after Olmstead was traded away, Dickie Moore was moved from the Richards line to the Beliveau line.

Maurice Richard did play with Henri until he retired following the 1959-60 season: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...richama01.html. However, Maurice was a shell of himself the last 2-3 years of his career (his last season as a top 10 scorer was in 1956-57, Henri's sophmore season), and he is quoted as saying that the only reason he didn't retire earlier was that he was enjoying playing with his younger brother. Likewise, other sources indicate that Maurice was struggling with weight problems the last few years of his career and that he actually (believe it or not) reinvented himself as a more defensive forward as his offense finally started to leave him.

As for Dickie Moore himself, regardless as to whether he was moved to the Beliveau line, his last season in Montreal was 1962-63: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...mooredi01.html. The overpass chart I reposted in post 149 showing Henri very close to Hull and Mikita in even strength scoring goes from 1961-62 to 1966-67.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
You may be on to something here. Richard may have been getting first line centre minutes and probably a lot more pp time than is thought.
If Richard was the Canadiens' first line center at even strength over Beliveau, isn't that a positive for him?

Look, I think there are some what-ifs going on with Henri Richard - if I actually believed he was almost Mikita's equal offensively, I would rank him over Mikita due to Henri's elite all-round game, but I didn't do that.

What if he was on a team where he was given the offensive opportunities of every other center discussed and a normal amount of powerplay time? Best-case scenario, he's as good as Mikita, but we shouldn't rank players on best-case scenarios. I think it's more likely than not that he would have been as good as Clarke or maybe Trottier, but still, those guys were definitely that good, and "definite" is better than "probably." That said, I think the appropriate place for Henri Richard is a single tier down from Clarke or Trottier, basically in the same tier as Yzerman.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 11:58 AM
  #193
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Is it just me or does anyone have Teeder in their top 4?

Other guys have better peak/primes and several have better careers as well.
If I were voting today, Henri would be #1, Crosby/Forsberg 2/3, and Schmidt/Kennedy 4/5.

I had Kennedy lower than this on my round 1 list, but his overall case is worthy now I think. On my round 1 list, I had Bentley over Kennedy, but am probably going to flip them.

Kennedy and Bentley were so far ahead of everyone else in playoff scoring in the late 40s, it's ridiculous. And even if Bentley was even better than Kennedy from a points perspective, he was basically an offense-only player, while Kennedy did everything else at a high level.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 12:12 PM
  #194
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,235
vCash: 500
Dickie Moore

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The Canadiens "super-team" where all 6 of their top 6 forwards were inducted into the HHOF was actually only together for THREE seasons - 1955-56, Henri Richard's rookie season until 1957-58 when Bert Olmstead was traded away: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...olmstbe01.html

I believe (but am not 100% certain) that after Olmstead was traded away, Dickie Moore was moved from the Richards line to the Beliveau line.

Maurice Richard did play with Henri until he retired following the 1959-60 season: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...richama01.html. However, Maurice was a shell of himself the last 2-3 years of his career (his last season as a top 10 scorer was in 1956-57, Henri's sophmore season), and he is quoted as saying that the only reason he didn't retire earlier was that he was enjoying playing with his younger brother. Likewise, other sources indicate that Maurice was struggling with weight problems the last few years of his career and that he actually (believe it or not) reinvented himself as a more defensive forward as his offense finally started to leave him.

As for Dickie Moore himself, regardless as to whether he was moved to the Beliveau line, his last season in Montreal was 1962-63: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...mooredi01.html. The overpass chart I reposted in post 149 showing Henri very close to Hull and Mikita in even strength scoring goes from 1961-62 to 1966-67.



If Richard was the Canadiens' first line center at even strength over Beliveau, isn't that a positive for him?

Look, I think there are some what-ifs going on with Henri Richard - if I actually believed he was almost Mikita's equal offensively, I would rank him over Mikita due to Henri's elite all-round game, but I didn't do that.

What if he was on a team where he was given the offensive opportunities of every other center discussed and a normal amount of powerplay time? Best-case scenario, he's as good as Mikita, but we shouldn't rank players on best-case scenarios. I think it's more likely than not that he would have been as good as Clarke or maybe Trottier, but still, those guys were definitely that good, and "definite" is better than "probably." That said, I think the appropriate place for Henri Richard is a single tier down from Clarke or Trottier, basically in the same tier as Yzerman.
Bert Olmstead was not traded but left unprotected and claimed by the Leafs in the draft. Dickie Moore was the LW on Henri Richard's line from 1955-56 thru Moor`'s departure from the Canadiens, After Maurice Richard retired, Bill Hicke joined the line on RW at the start of the 1960-61 season. Replaced by Claude Provost at the start of the 1961-62 season.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 12:14 PM
  #195
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Travel in the 6 team league was limited to one time zone as well, the "special case" of Henri isn't being made very well here.

Like I said before Henri looks to be in the Francis/Keon type of player grouping and his SC might have him too high here, somethign to ponder.

BM67's list and comparisson didn't help him very much either.
I see we've already reached the part of the project where you're throwing whatever you can at the wall and hoping it sticks to rank modern players over older players. Who cares that there was only one time zone in the 6 team era? (You're wrong about that anyway - Chicago is in the Central Time Zone).

As for your Richard/Francis/Keon comparison, let's take a look at their All-Star records:

playerFirstSecondThirdTotal
Henri Richard1326
Dave Keon0224
Ron Francis0033

Henri has the second best All-Star record of any center available this round (Schmidt has the best), and that's despite the fact that he was generally overshadowed by Beliveau on his own team. (He shared the official All-Star spot with Beliveau for 3 of his 4 1st or 2nd Team All-Star berths, the only teammates in history to share official All-Star berths in the same year).


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-03-2013 at 02:09 PM. Reason: fixed Francis table
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 12:16 PM
  #196
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Bert Olmstead was not traded but left unprotected and claimed by the Leafs in the draft. Dickie Moore was the LW on Henri Richard's line from 1955-56 thru Moor`'s departure from the Canadiens, After Maurice Richard retired, Bill Hicke joined the line on RW at the start of the 1960-61 season. Replaced by Claude Provost at the start of the 1961-62 season.
Thanks for the clarification. I knew that the Canadiens thought Olmstead was basically finished as an effective player; I misremembered it as them trading him. Who took over Olmstead's spot on the Beliveau line? I was under the impression that Dickie Moore was moved there at some point, though I don't remember what year, or the source where I read it.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 12:22 PM
  #197
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Claude Provost was the same the same guy who was used to shut down Bobby Hull.In 1965 Provost was habs leading scorer and 6th in nhl.Another fact in 4 yrs habs won cup in 1960s no habs player finished hire than 3rd in scoring name was Bobby Rousseau in 1966.Why Provost is not in Hall like Gainey I will never understand

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 12:35 PM
  #198
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,475
vCash: 500
"What if" - What if Sidney Crosby Played in a League with No Europeans?

Reasoning and Methodology

I'm using the same methodology and justification for "removing Gretzky and Lemieux (and sometimes Howe)" - in no other era were there offensive players that strong, so we "remove" them from the scoring tables and awards voting as a way to equalize the competition. Trottier's and Yzerman's records don't really stand out that much on their own, but they do if you look at what their records would look like without Gretzky and Lemieux.

By analogy, it might be worth looking at what a modern player would look like without Europeans in the NHL. Europeans only started to make an impact in the NHL in the late 70s and early 80s, and even then, it was a small impact until the Iron Curtain fell in the early 90s.

A weakness of this methodology is that it assumes the North American talent pool has remained constant, and there may be good reasons to assume that it has declined somewhat since the 1990s (discussed elsewhere on this board).

I'm using the same methodology that Hockey Outsider used in his "removing Gretzky and Lemieux" study - completely removing Europeans from the leaderboards and assuming everything else remains the same. Obviously, everything else wouldn't have remained the same, so consider this a rough guide.

Crosby no Europeans, year by year

2006: goes from 6th to 3rd in scoring. goes from 2nd to 1st in Calder voting. remains "3rd Team AS"
2007: remains 1st in scoring. remains Hart winner. remains 1st Team AS.
2008: injured, but goes from 2nd to 1st in PPG. 5th to 3rd in AS voting.
2009: 3rd to 1st in scoring. 3rd to 1st in PPG. 6th to 3rd in Hart voting (As Art Ross winner, would he win without Malkin ahead of him? Maybe, but using this methodology, he's officially 3rd). 3rd to 1st in AS voting.
2010: 2nd(T) to 1st in scoring. 4th to 1st in PPG. 3rd to 1st in Hart voting. 2nd to 1st in AS voting
2011: (injured, remains 1st in PPG).
2012: (injured).
2013: remains tied for 3rd in scoring (1st in PPG). 2nd to 1st in Hart voting. remains 1st team AS

Overall Trophy Case no Europeans

Calder Trophy (2006)
Art Ross Trophy (2007, 2009, 2010)
Hart Trophy (2007, 2010, 2013)
1st Team All Star (2007, 2009, 2010, 2013)
"3rd Team All Star" (2008)

The most common players Crosby finished behind? Ovechkin and Malkin, both Russians who absolutely would not have been allowed to play in the NHL during their primes if it were before the early 1990s. Crosby also finished behind Datsyuk in All-Star voting in 2009 and Henrik Sedin for the Art Ross, Hart, and 1st Team AS in 2010. He was behind Jagr, Ovechkin, and Alfredsson in scoring in 2006.

What about points per-game finishes?

I expected Crosby to have a vastly increased trophy case if you "removed" all Europeans. But I didn't expect this: Crosby led all North Americans in official points-per-game numbers in every individual season over a 7 year period (2007-2013), except 2012 when he actually was 1st in PPG, but didn't meet the minimum games threshold.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 12:35 PM
  #199
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,235
vCash: 500
1958-59 Beliveau's LW

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Thanks for the clarification. I knew that the Canadiens thought Olmstead was basically finished as an effective player; I misremembered it as them trading him. Who took over Olmstead's spot on the Beliveau line? I was under the impression that Dickie Moore was moved there at some point, though I don't remember what year, or the source where I read it.
Starting with the 1958-59 season, Jean Beliveau's line lacked a regular LW. Initially Ab McDonald and Marcel Bonin but did not work well, a bit of Don Marshal followed by Jean Guy Gendron acquired for André Pronovost, then Gilles Tremblay. In the sixties mainly a rotation of Dick Duff and Gilles Tremblay with a little John Ferguson or filler when injuries were a factor.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-03-2013, 01:44 PM
  #200
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 3,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Starting with the 1958-59 season, Jean Beliveau's line lacked a regular LW. Initially Ab McDonald and Marcel Bonin but did not work well, a bit of Don Marshal followed by Jean Guy Gendron acquired for André Pronovost, then Gilles Tremblay. In the sixties mainly a rotation of Dick Duff and Gilles Tremblay with a little John Ferguson or filler when injuries were a factor.
I thought Moore spent one season on Beliveau's wing because of this quote. Not that it undercuts the rotating door of LWs before and afterwards you mentioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Windsor Star - 5/2/1963
The best year of Moore's career was the 1958-59 season when he and centre Jean Beliveau, who have never since played regularly together, went on a remarkable late-season scoring splurge.

That was the year he scored 96 points-the league record-on 41 goals and 55 assists, and Beliveau wound up with 91 points. No two players on the same team had ever scored more than 90 points a season, and none have since.

Rob Scuderi 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 12:02 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.