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

Why is LeClair underrated?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2013, 06:59 AM
  #1
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,011
vCash: 500
Why is LeClair underrated?

Given recent threads about american players, LeClair is rarely cracking TOP 10, altough his accomplishments are often bigger than his country-mates, i.e. Roenick.

He has the numbers, he was though, had a great prime being arguably the best in his position, more or less carrying the team on his shoulders, played a lot of playoff hockey, very good international record...

Points: 4,5,9,9
Goals: 3,3,5,5,7,10

I don't want this thread to be ruined by talking about his HOF chance, I want to learn why he is not even mentioned among TOP 10 american players or forwards.

begbeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 07:26 AM
  #2
skip2mybordeleau
We're not that bad!
 
skip2mybordeleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,475
vCash: 5000
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbeee View Post
Given recent threads about american players, LeClair is rarely cracking TOP 10, altough his accomplishments are often bigger than his country-mates, i.e. Roenick.

He has the numbers, he was though, had a great prime being arguably the best in his position, more or less carrying the team on his shoulders, played a lot of playoff hockey, very good international record...

Points: 4,5,9,9
Goals: 3,3,5,5,7,10

I don't want this thread to be ruined by talking about his HOF chance, I want to learn why he is not even mentioned among TOP 10 american players or forwards.
Lindros was "carrying" the team, Leclair was just lightening the load.

He was clearly the 2nd best player on his line, he was essentially a 50 point player when he was traded from Montreal to philly, coincidentally you could argue that he was just entering his prime but as soon as Lindros got moved Leclair went right back to being a 50 point player, had he not have played with Lindros i doubt we would have seen anything higher than a 75 point season from him.

If we're waiting on Lindros to get into the Hall then i think we are going to be waiting a long time for Leclair to get in.

skip2mybordeleau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 08:00 AM
  #3
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by skip2mybordeleau View Post
Lindros was "carrying" the team, Leclair was just lightening the load.

He was clearly the 2nd best player on his line, he was essentially a 50 point player when he was traded from Montreal to philly, coincidentally you could argue that he was just entering his prime but as soon as Lindros got moved Leclair went right back to being a 50 point player, had he not have played with Lindros i doubt we would have seen anything higher than a 75 point season from him.

If we're waiting on Lindros to get into the Hall then i think we are going to be waiting a long time for Leclair to get in.
It has been shown repeatedly around here that once Leclair got going, though, he was capable of putting up the numbers without Lindros too.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 08:06 AM
  #4
tommyjoh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 13
vCash: 500
As allready mentioned, Lindros carried the team and it might seem like his success was a product of playing with him. But that's not all I think. During two of LeClair finest seasons (96-97, 97-98) Lindros was injured a lot and it was LeClair who carried the team. It would be interesting to see what his numbers was like without Lindros those two years.

But no matter what, for five years in the mid-90's LeClair was one of the best players in the NHL. Probably better than guys like Roenick and Tkachuk, but his success didn't last as long as theirs.

By the way, this is my first post. I've been reading on here for a while, but never registered. I've been following the NHL since 1995. I'm Looking forward to many great discussions.

tommyjoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 08:08 AM
  #5
Crosbylsmalkin
Registered User
 
Crosbylsmalkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
It has been shown repeatedly around here that once Leclair got going, though, he was capable of putting up the numbers without Lindros too.
but if you look his seasons with Lindros vs his career other seasons it sure looks that Lindros inflated his stats quite a bit. sure he could've put up good numbers without Lindros but not 50 goal or even 40 goal seasons and then his numbers wouldn't be even near Roenick's numbers for example.

Crosbylsmalkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 09:19 AM
  #6
Pat Paeplow
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
It says something that Bobby Clarke targeted him specifically to play with Lindros. He didn't just wind up on that line by accident. His jump in production is also skewed because he was deployed as a third-liner in Montreal while seeing hardly any power-play time.

Don Cherry put it best when he said " John LeClair didn't Lear no to play hockey on the bus to Philadelphia".

__________________
Follow me on Twitter: @PPaeplow
Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 09:38 AM
  #7
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Paeplow View Post
It says something that Bobby Clarke targeted him specifically to play with Lindros. He didn't just wind up on that line by accident. His jump in production is also skewed because he was deployed as a third-liner in Montreal while seeing hardly any power-play time.

Don Cherry put it best when he said " John LeClair didn't Lear no to play hockey on the bus to Philadelphia".
Leclair was a big part of 1993 Cup on Montreal. He was huge in 1997 World Cup and 2002 Olympics for USA.

I think he is short of the HHOF, but great performances in some best on bests and the high peak for many years in Philly and the big 400 goals make him a very important American in terms of hockey history. He is a top tier HHOFer if there was a US hockey hall of fame. (Is there one?)

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 09:41 AM
  #8
feffan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Malmö
Country: Sweden
Posts: 741
vCash: 500
In the Dazé-thread I just placed him in the same territory as Mats Sundin, but a winger. I think it´s a fare comparsion. LeClair with more all star teams, but on a "easier" position and with a better team to feed off. And Sundin of course with a greater longetivity. Add that both where good international players, even if Sundins resumé also there is quite a bit longer. LeClair with 2 all star teams in 3 big tournaments played is impressive (2 olympics and 1 World Cup...).

And even if LeClair accomplished more, I think Roenick (as Sundin in the end...) was the better player at their peaks. But I´m a big Roenick fan. Career wise: LeClair, Peak: Roenick. They are close for sure.

And the obvious answer is already said. Even if proven wrong many times he´s seen as a product of Lindros. And his stats where inflated by The Big Guy, even if LeClair could play on his own. The third Legion-member, Renberg, gets the same treatment. A hell of player before his about 100 injuries. At times seen as number 2 on the line. Now talked only about as the third legion of doom and one of the crappy wingers Sundin had as a Maple Leafs.

feffan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 09:57 AM
  #9
Crosbylsmalkin
Registered User
 
Crosbylsmalkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by feffan View Post
In the Dazé-thread I just placed him in the same territory as Mats Sundin, but a winger. I think it´s a fare comparsion. LeClair with more all star teams, but on a "easier" position and with a better team to feed off. And Sundin of course with a greater longetivity. Add that both where good international players, even if Sundins resumé also there is quite a bit longer. LeClair with 2 all star teams in 3 big tournaments played is impressive (2 olympics and 1 World Cup...).

And even if LeClair accomplished more, I think Roenick (as Sundin in the end...) was the better player at their peaks. But I´m a big Roenick fan. Career wise: LeClair, Peak: Roenick. They are close for sure.

And the obvious answer is already said. Even if proven wrong many times he´s seen as a product of Lindros. And his stats where inflated by The Big Guy, even if LeClair could play on his own. The third Legion-member, Renberg, gets the same treatment. A hell of player before his about 100 injuries. At times seen as number 2 on the line. Now talked only about as the third legion of doom and one of the crappy wingers Sundin had as a Maple Leafs.
there is just no way LeClair is ahead of Roenick career vice. Or is there? please explain.

Crosbylsmalkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 10:08 AM
  #10
Pat Paeplow
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
I've heard that in the 1989 WJC, Team USA rolled out a first line of LeClair-Modano-Roenick. I've never gotten reputable confirmation but, if true, that's a surprisingly dynamic line given where USA hockey was at back then.

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 10:12 AM
  #11
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Paeplow View Post
I've heard that in the 1989 WJC, Team USA rolled out a first line of LeClair-Modano-Roenick. I've never gotten reputable confirmation but, if true, that's a surprisingly dynamic line given where USA hockey was at back then.
Not really, since they for some reason or another managed to produce all those talents for the 1996 World Cup, a golden generation. Nowadays they have a much higher percentage of NHL-players, but it could be said that the star quality is not quite as high. The depth even at the Olympic level is better now though.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 10:23 AM
  #12
JaymzB
Registered User
 
JaymzB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 2,555
vCash: 500
It's because of bitter Habs fans like me!

Not only did he explode when he left Montreal, he also proceeded to torch them for the rest of his career!

JaymzB is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 11:23 AM
  #13
Pat Paeplow
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens Rule View Post
Leclair was a big part of 1993 Cup on Montreal. He was huge in 1997 World Cup and 2002 Olympics for USA.

I think he is short of the HHOF, but great performances in some best on bests and the high peak for many years in Philly and the big 400 goals make him a very important American in terms of hockey history. He is a top tier HHOFer if there was a US hockey hall of fame. (Is there one?)
At first glance, I don't think LeClair quite makes the HOF cut either but then there's the curious case of Cam Neely. His numbers weren't quite at Neely's level but they're close enough to get him in the conversation.

It will be interesting to see if Lindros wiggles into the Hall. That would probably bolster LeClair's case even further.

Pat Paeplow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 11:44 AM
  #14
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,011
vCash: 500
We all know he has an outside chance, borderline/fringe HOFer, but again. Is he that bad that he doesnt make a TOP 10 of USA players/forwards?

EDIT: I brought the comparision to Roenick, but Tkachuk may be the better one. Despite all that bad rap Tkachuk is getting, he is always mentioned in TOP 10 american players/forwards and Leclair is not. I don't get it. Yet, has he anything, but his retrospective Richard T. on Leclair?

begbeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 12:22 PM
  #15
ted1971
History Of Hockey
 
ted1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: south jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 1,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat Paeplow View Post
At first glance, I don't think LeClair quite makes the HOF cut either but then there's the curious case of Cam Neely. His numbers weren't quite at Neely's level but they're close enough to get him in the conversation.

It will be interesting to see if Lindros wiggles into the Hall. That would probably bolster LeClair's case even further.
If Cam Neely & Pavel Bure are in the HHOF, then Lindros definitely belongs there.

ted1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 12:27 PM
  #16
gudzilla
Registered User
 
gudzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 4,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ted1971 View Post
If Cam Neely & Pavel Bure are in the HHOF, then Lindros definitely belongs there.
yep, but theres always the bullcrap around the player that plays in

barrasso is a hhof goaltender if it wasnt for his ****** attitude

gudzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 01:34 PM
  #17
Ishdul
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Lithuania
Posts: 2,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida pwnthers View Post
yep, but theres always the bullcrap around the player that plays in

barrasso is a hhof goaltender if it wasnt for his ****** attitude
Barrasso might very well be in if he weren't an a-hole but the case against him is much more than that. I guess the same could be said of Lindros (in that he's not a lock) but I feel like Lindros is definitely a better candidate. I would say that Barrasso is exactly at the borderline for goalies and is therefore a ~50% while Lindros would be more like a ~90% in type.

Ishdul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 02:04 PM
  #18
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,463
vCash: 500
I am personally very partial to LeClair. One of my all-time favorite players - as a Rangers fan, no less - and I think he gets criminally underrated on HF. That being said, cracking the top 10 US born players is very difficult. The "automatics", off the top of my head, are:

Leetch
Langway
Howe
Chelios
Brimsek
Modano
LaFontaine

To me, that leaves three spots (unless I'm forgetting someone obvious...don't kill me if I did!) for Roenick, Mullen, Broten, LeClair, Richter, Barrasso, Vanbiesbrouck, Amonte, Tkachuk, Housley, Suter, Hatcher, etc.

Does LeClair make it out of that list? Potentially, but for sure I would call him a borderline top-10 US born player at best. And that's nothing to scoff at.

mrhockey193195 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 02:15 PM
  #19
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,937
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by skip2mybordeleau View Post
Lindros was "carrying" the team, Leclair was just lightening the load.

He was clearly the 2nd best player on his line, he was essentially a 50 point player when he was traded from Montreal to philly, coincidentally you could argue that he was just entering his prime but as soon as Lindros got moved Leclair went right back to being a 50 point player, had he not have played with Lindros i doubt we would have seen anything higher than a 75 point season from him.

If we're waiting on Lindros to get into the Hall then i think we are going to be waiting a long time for Leclair to get in.
Lindros is the big albatross holding john down as his production numbers outside of Phil and Eric are rather pedestrian.

Quite simply it's not that hard to make a case for 10 better Americans, although John is in the 10ish mix.

But Jeremy, despite his flaws should be considered a better player IMO, he did more at a younger age driving the bus before injuries took over.

Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 02:20 PM
  #20
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Lindros is the big albatross holding john down as his production numbers outside of Phil and Eric are rather pedestrian.

Quite simply it's not that hard to make a case for 10 better Americans, although John is in the 10ish mix.

But Jeremy, despite his flaws should be considered a better player IMO, he did more at a younger age driving the bus before injuries took over.
Forgetting career value, who do you give the edge in prime play? Roenick (1990-94) or LeClair (1995-2000)? You can argue LeClair's prime was a season longer than Roenick's, so that might play a role in deciding.

mrhockey193195 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 02:24 PM
  #21
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
When he coached him, jacques Demers was calling him the next Kevin Stevens. It was obvious the talent was there, it just took playing with lindros to bring it out. The habs just didn't utilize him properly.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 03:01 PM
  #22
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,067
vCash: 500
It was during an era when bigger men with hands could outshine regular size players with better skills.


Last edited by LeBlondeDemon10: 12-20-2013 at 05:45 PM.
LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 05:13 PM
  #23
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,543
vCash: 500
He's probably underrated because he didn't take enough penalties. Like Tkachuk & Roenick. You know there must be something wrong if a so called power forward doesn't spend at least half his career in the penalty box. You know, he could be, fear the word, soft.


Last edited by the edler: 12-20-2013 at 06:02 PM.
the edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 05:36 PM
  #24
double5son10
Registered User
 
double5son10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 336
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
When he coached him, jacques Demers was calling him the next Kevin Stevens. It was obvious the talent was there, it just took playing with lindros to bring it out. The habs just didn't utilize him properly.
Agreed. Tried turning him into a 3rd line checking center. Asinine. He shone in the '93 Finals when he was paired up with Muller and Bellows. Should have stayed that way but that whole line, along with the rest of the key players in that run, were all gone within two/three years.

double5son10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-20-2013, 05:46 PM
  #25
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,543
vCash: 500
As for Roenick, LeClair and said Roencik played on the same line in the 1989 WJC tournament, with Modano as the third link. I think Roenick probably played RW, because he's more "feisty" than Modano. That said, that line scored the most points in the whole tournament, three more points than the famous Bure–Fedorov–Mogilny line. Roenick had 16 points, Modano 15 and LeClair 10, so he played a bit in the shadows of those two already back then. That 1989 US WJC team sucked a bit defensively though and only finished at 5th place, right behind Canada at 4th.

the edler 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 06:27 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.