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.

HOH Top 70 Players of All Time (2009)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-31-2010, 06:13 AM
  #326
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
Enhances

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Top guys per decade is fun, but I'm not sure how much room their is for serious historical study on it, as IMO it badly shortchanges guys like Sakic whose peak spanned 2 decades.

I like the rank by position. Top 100 coaches might be pushing it, but Top 50 could be doable.



I would be okay with this. Ideally more than one person would see the voting, but it would be nice to have one primary guy to be the main guy. Maybe you could collect the results add up the votes and then forward them on to someone like 70s to doublecheck and post?
If anything spanning two eras or decades would enhance a player's prestige by bringing aspects like longevity, the ability to perform or dominate under possibly different rules and circumstances, etc. to the forefront.Prime example would be Ray Bourque - pre and "Dead Puck" era, pre and "European Influence", etc.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-15-2010, 03:08 PM
  #327
Hockeytown999
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 127
vCash: 500
i may join in on the next round of this

Hockeytown999 is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 03:14 AM
  #328
Wickedness*
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ANUS
Posts: 418
vCash: 500
What About Dan Bain??????????

Wickedness* is offline  
Old
08-24-2010, 10:43 AM
  #329
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickedness View Post
What About Dan Bain??????????
I don't think Dan Bain's dominance, career value and level of competition come close to warranting a top-100 spot.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-25-2010, 01:11 AM
  #330
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickedness View Post
What About Dan Bain??????????
how many other guys had to look Bain up?

Pretty hard to judge all but the absolute best players from that time period.

Level of competition and general lack of detailed information keeps him out with so many other good players being in the mix ahead of him.

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
08-25-2010, 02:09 AM
  #331
FissionFire
Registered User
 
FissionFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
As much as I've been wanting to get this going again the time commitment it takes is just too much for me right now. I've been working full-time all summer and studying for the ACS Biochemistry Exam, which I need to pass to graduate. I start my final semester in 2 weeks and my class schedule has my days starting at 8am and ending anywhere from 6pm to 10pm, and then I have my research work in the lab and my regular job. Toss in the fact that I'm spending lots of time applying to grad schools and sending out resumes looking for a job and quite honestly I just don't have the time to get back involved in this project right now. If someone wants to take over and try to fill out the final 30 spots I'd be grateful.

As for future editions of the list, it was always planned to be a non-annual event since on a year-to-year basis very little movement is likely. Right now I'm planning on starting this project back up and expanding upon some of the concepts I have been considering for it after I get settled into my post-undergraduate life. That said the next update I'm tentatively scheduling for 2012, with expanded content and hopefully it's own website devoted to the project.

Good luck everyone! I'll see you all soon for the 2012 list, it'll come up sooner than you think!

FissionFire is offline  
Old
08-25-2010, 07:06 PM
  #332
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
As much as I've been wanting to get this going again the time commitment it takes is just too much for me right now. I've been working full-time all summer and studying for the ACS Biochemistry Exam, which I need to pass to graduate. I start my final semester in 2 weeks and my class schedule has my days starting at 8am and ending anywhere from 6pm to 10pm, and then I have my research work in the lab and my regular job. Toss in the fact that I'm spending lots of time applying to grad schools and sending out resumes looking for a job and quite honestly I just don't have the time to get back involved in this project right now. If someone wants to take over and try to fill out the final 30 spots I'd be grateful.

As for future editions of the list, it was always planned to be a non-annual event since on a year-to-year basis very little movement is likely. Right now I'm planning on starting this project back up and expanding upon some of the concepts I have been considering for it after I get settled into my post-undergraduate life. That said the next update I'm tentatively scheduling for 2012, with expanded content and hopefully it's own website devoted to the project.

Good luck everyone! I'll see you all soon for the 2012 list, it'll come up sooner than you think!
Please send me your files - I'll take it over from here. TDMM and I will work together and determine how to proceed.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-25-2010, 07:16 PM
  #333
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,465
vCash: 500
It's interesting to note that Makarov and Kharlamov were chosen as the wingers alongside Gretzky on the IIHF all centennial team. Perhaps those two should be alot closer on all time lists?

ushvinder is offline  
Old
08-25-2010, 09:44 PM
  #334
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I don't think Dan Bain's dominance, career value and level of competition come close to warranting a top-100 spot.
I disagree that Bain doesn't warrant consideration for a top 100 spot. I think he just missed my list of 120 last time we submitted those. Obviously a very tough player to judge though, as are all of the pre-NHA players. Judging who was the best out of Bain, Bowie, McGee, and Trihey (and probably another name I'm missing) might be a good starting point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
how many other guys had to look Bain up?

Pretty hard to judge all but the absolute best players from that time period.

Level of competition and general lack of detailed information keeps him out with so many other good players being in the mix ahead of him.
How many were better than Bain though? He has a case as being the best player in the world in the latter half of the 1890s. He was the star of the Winnipeg Victorias, one of the first Stanley Cup winners. How often is the best player on the best team not one of the best players in the game? Especially in an era where it seemed a team's fortune could greatly depend on the ability of one star player (similar to the present day NBA).

_______

Still onboard with finishing this project. I'll help out in whatever capacity I can, seventies.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Old
08-25-2010, 10:58 PM
  #335
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
It's interesting to note that Makarov and Kharlamov were chosen as the wingers alongside Gretzky on the IIHF all centennial team. Perhaps those two should be alot closer on all time lists?
They definitely should be closer together. IMO, Makarov, Fetisov, and Tretiak were all basically equals and should probably be ranked about where Fetisov is now.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 12:02 AM
  #336
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
As much as I've been wanting to get this going again the time commitment it takes is just too much for me right now. I've been working full-time all summer and studying for the ACS Biochemistry Exam, which I need to pass to graduate. I start my final semester in 2 weeks and my class schedule has my days starting at 8am and ending anywhere from 6pm to 10pm, and then I have my research work in the lab and my regular job. Toss in the fact that I'm spending lots of time applying to grad schools and sending out resumes looking for a job and quite honestly I just don't have the time to get back involved in this project right now. If someone wants to take over and try to fill out the final 30 spots I'd be grateful.
No worries FF - the only reason I didn't manage this project myself is because I'm also too busy to give this project the time/effort it deserves.

I don't have enough time to take over the project though I will (probably) find time to continue as a participant if we want to finish the last thirty spots.

Once school is over life gets better, but even busier (believe it or not)!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
Good luck everyone! I'll see you all soon for the 2012 list, it'll come up sooner than you think!
We should also consider other "HOH projects" -- I like the top 100 list but I suspect that, aside from Crosby and Ovechkin, there will be relatively little change in another two years. A long-term project with a different focus (any ideas, anybody?) may be more interesting and a better use of everyone's time.

Hockey Outsider is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 06:13 AM
  #337
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
Ideas

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post

We should also consider other "HOH projects" -- I like the top 100 list but I suspect that, aside from Crosby and Ovechkin, there will be relatively little change in another two years. A long-term project with a different focus (any ideas, anybody?) may be more interesting and a better use of everyone's time.
Limit any such list to players who have retired from the game for at least three seasons since on going performance changes the nature of the debate.

The bias of conforming to previous lists in any shape or form, has to go. Otherwise there will not be any significant movement. A series of lists by eras leading to a master list would be the optimum. This would reflect how hockey evolved.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 11:08 AM
  #338
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Limit any such list to players who have retired from the game for at least three seasons since on going performance changes the nature of the debate.

The bias of conforming to previous lists in any shape or form, has to go. Otherwise there will not be any significant movement. A series of lists by eras leading to a master list would be the optimum. This would reflect how hockey evolved.
- why is it so hard to accept that many players who are not yet retired have already proven themselves better than many players who have retired?

- We could separate by era first and then combine into a master list, but what makes you think the end result would be largely different?

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 12:28 PM
  #339
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
The Issues

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- why is it so hard to accept that many players who are not yet retired have already proven themselves better than many players who have retired?

- We could separate by era first and then combine into a master list, but what makes you think the end result would be largely different?
Retired/not retired players. You completely miss the point. Take non-retired players and ask the following questions.

1.) Do you wish to constantly be facing Eric Lindros type scenarios where at his peak there were people rating him as easily top 10 / 50 / 100 and today this is far from the case? Obviously a significantly premature conclusion where something that you allege as proven has been disproven. Hardly a sign of credibility.

2.) A Top 100 list of active players would see Brodeur, Crosby, Lidstrom, Ovechkin, closely grouped perhaps Top 5. Furthermore such a list would be at the whim of each shutout, hat trick or hilite reel goal? Would the ordering and proximity be reflected in an HOH 100 list. Extremely doubtful. The placement of active players would eventually vary especially if an aging Lidstrom or Brodeur win individual or team awards. This opens the age argument for retired players. If Lidstrom jumped x places because he did this at age 4y+ then so and so's(retired player) contributions at age 4y+ get magnified where previously they were not.

3.) With a retired / non- retired distinction based on when a player is HHOF eligible you would have a smooth transition without any of the doubt potential that exists presently.

Separating by era. That the list would be largely the same or significantly different is totally irrelevant. What matters is that the resulting master list would be much easier to justify since it would reflect the evolution of hockey from the start as opposed to the perception that it was imposed working backwards from the present.
Different or the same is not the issue. The issue is greater credibility which comes with greater justifiability.

Recently the Dan Bain issue was raised and you brushed it off as if the issue had been settled. Not so fast. A discussion and the resulting list of 1893- 1910 players, give or take, would provide very clear and precise answers with a resulting appreciation.

The PCHA and its players would be looked at and a greater understanding would emerge. Perhaps then posters would not be so dismissive of a Jack Walker.

The NHL era would also benefit. A breakdown into sub eras would better show how certain players performed during distinct eras that featured different rule, styles, conditions, etc.Crossing eras would show which players sustained performance and adapted.

An international list would provide greater understanding of the relative skills of international players in games between nations as opposed vs the NHL only approach presently in place.

The choice in both instances comes down to greater credibility with justifiability.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 01:12 PM
  #340
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Retired/not retired players. You completely miss the point. Take non-retired players and ask the following questions.

1.) Do you wish to constantly be facing Eric Lindros type scenarios where at his peak there were people rating him as easily top 10 / 50 / 100 and today this is far from the case? Obviously a significantly premature conclusion where something that you allege as proven has been disproven. Hardly a sign of credibility.
Nobody rated him as top-10, ever. One of the top-10 talents or physical packages, perhaps. Potential to be top-10, sure. But yes, there were those who had him in the later stages of the top-100 (see the THN list where he was 54th). This was a mistake. If you ignore Lindros' 1993 season where he was great but not yet elite, and call 1994 through 1998 his first five seasons, he had not put together as impressive a resume as Crosby and Ovechkin currently have.

Not to mention that him placing somewhere more reasonable, like around 80th could be somewhat justified circa 1998 considering the THN list was an NHL-only list and numerous active players have also exceeded his greatness since, and he did nothing to improve his standing post-1998, meaning that even if he truly was 80th all-time (in NHL history) back then, he'd be out of the top-100 (of all-time) now (which is where the HOH list says he stands)

So if your argument is "don't be so fast to put Crosby and Ovechkin into the top-100, because look at what happened to Lindros", I think it's a bad argument that ignores all the factors that led to him being placed where he was circa 1998 and why he's no longer a top-100 player.

Quote:
2.) A Top 100 list of active players would see Brodeur, Crosby, Lidstrom, Ovechkin, closely grouped perhaps Top 5. Furthermore such a list would be at the whim of each shutout, hat trick or hilite reel goal? Would the ordering and proximity be reflected in an HOH 100 list. Extremely doubtful. The placement of active players would eventually vary especially if an aging Lidstrom or Brodeur win individual or team awards. This opens the age argument for retired players. If Lidstrom jumped x places because he did this at age 4y+ then so and so's(retired player) contributions at age 4y+ get magnified where previously they were not.
That's laughable. "OMG what a nice goal by Ovechkin last night, OK, he moves up to #1!!!"

Quote:
Separating by era. That the list would be largely the same or significantly different is totally irrelevant. What matters is that the resulting master list would be much easier to justify since it would reflect the evolution of hockey from the start as opposed to the perception that it was imposed working backwards from the present.
Different or the same is not the issue. The issue is greater credibility which comes with greater justifiability.

Recently the Dan Bain issue was raised and you brushed it off as if the issue had been settled. Not so fast. A discussion and the resulting list of 1893- 1910 players, give or take, would provide very clear and precise answers with a resulting appreciation.
No one is brushing off Dan Bain. But he came from a generation that predated even guys like Tommy Phillips and Marty Walsh. Who did he dominate? How many top level games did he get into? How extensive is the information supporting his greatness? Even if we made a "pre-1905" generation and decided to rate Bain 3rd in that generation, that is far from a ringing endorsement of his top-100 worthiness.

Quote:
The PCHA and its players would be looked at and a greater understanding would emerge. Perhaps then posters would not be so dismissive of a Jack Walker.
Who's dismissive of Jack Walker? I think his offensive numbers are poor for a HHOF forward but he was clearly one of the two best defensive forwards of the pre-merger era.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 01:50 PM
  #341
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Please send me your files - I'll take it over from here. TDMM and I will work together and determine how to proceed.
I am also willing to help out with vote counting or whatever if you guys need it. Not ready to contribute to the list yet, but I enjoy reading and learning from the debates that come out of it.

Hawkey Town 18 is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 01:57 PM
  #342
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
Usual Superficiality

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Nobody rated him as top-10, ever. One of the top-10 talents or physical packages, perhaps. Potential to be top-10, sure. But yes, there were those who had him in the later stages of the top-100 (see the THN list where he was 54th). This was a mistake. If you ignore Lindros' 1993 season where he was great but not yet elite, and call 1994 through 1998 his first five seasons, he had not put together as impressive a resume as Crosby and Ovechkin currently have.

Not to mention that him placing somewhere more reasonable, like around 80th could be somewhat justified circa 1998 considering the THN list was an NHL-only list and numerous active players have also exceeded his greatness since, and he did nothing to improve his standing post-1998, meaning that even if he truly was 80th all-time (in NHL history) back then, he'd be out of the top-100 (of all-time) now (which is where the HOH list says he stands)

So if your argument is "don't be so fast to put Crosby and Ovechkin into the top-100, because look at what happened to Lindros", I think it's a bad argument that ignores all the factors that led to him being placed where he was circa 1998 and why he's no longer a top-100 player.



That's laughable. "OMG what a nice goal by Ovechkin last night, OK, he moves up to #1!!!"



No one is brushing off Dan Bain. But he came from a generation that predated even guys like Tommy Phillips and Marty Walsh. Who did he dominate? How many top level games did he get into? How extensive is the information supporting his greatness? Even if we made a "pre-1905" generation and decided to rate Bain 3rd in that generation, that is far from a ringing endorsement of his top-100 worthiness.



Who's dismissive of Jack Walker? I think his offensive numbers are poor for a HHOF forward but he was clearly one of the two best defensive forwards of the pre-merger era.
Usual superficiality.

Lindros point is not about the specifics of where he was rated. Anyone with a bit of depth should appreciate that once a player is in then out it becomes impossible to present a balanced case after he has retired. Waiting until after he has retired before making accurate evaluations on his career path as it flowed thru an active player list would be much more accurate. Point is that the decision simply did not have to be made in 1998 and doing so proved to be of no benefit to anyone.

The questions would be answered by an appropriate by era list. It would be possible to say that the x ranked player from the specific era produced these concrete results which are fractional in terms of established criteria. A close to definitive answer is much more valuable than a dismissive answer.

Jack Walker. Suppose you can provide a detailed explanation of why he is considered one of early hockey's great innovator's. Anxiously waiting to read this.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 05:01 PM
  #343
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Jack Walker. Suppose you can provide a detailed explanation of why he is considered one of early hockey's great innovator's. Anxiously waiting to read this.
I really don't have to prove anything to you, sorry. I've participated in 7 ATDs and administrated another one. Jack Walker has been discussed in each one.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 10:41 PM
  #344
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 3,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post

The NHL era would also benefit. A breakdown into sub eras would better show how certain players performed during distinct eras that featured different rule, styles, conditions, etc.Crossing eras would show which players sustained performance and adapted.
Interesting idea.

What would your breakdown into sub eras look like?

unknown33 is offline  
Old
08-26-2010, 11:02 PM
  #345
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
Outline of Eras.

Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
Interesting idea.

What would your breakdown into sub eras look like?
Outline of eras:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t...ht=hockey+eras

Should be expanded to include international hockey. Perhaps
pre 1972. 1972 - 1990. post 1990.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-27-2010, 09:10 AM
  #346
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 3,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Like it.

But why 1990-91 thru 2003-04?

The large European player influence started in 92/93 or 93/94.
Expansion started in 92/93.
League and playoff format was changed in 93/94.

unknown33 is offline  
Old
08-27-2010, 09:25 AM
  #347
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
Details

Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
Like it.

But why 1990-91 thru 2003-04?

The large European player influence started in 92/93 or 93/94.
Expansion started in 92/93.
League and playoff format was changed in 93/94.
Thank you.

1990. Makarov Calder regardless of the opinions regarding his eligibility showed that the European talent pool would help sustain the level of play that an expansion would require.Last Oilers SC = end of a 5 in 7 dynasty.Division realignment also happened in 1998.
1990-91 was a cleaner demarcation point. 2003-04 last pre Salary Cap season.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-27-2010, 10:02 PM
  #348
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Outline of eras:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t...ht=hockey+eras

Should be expanded to include international hockey. Perhaps
pre 1972. 1972 - 1990. post 1990.
Don't like this era thing at all. How do you account for players that cross eras.? Gordie howe crosses about 4 of your eras.

pappyline is offline  
Old
08-27-2010, 10:44 PM
  #349
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,511
vCash: 500
Exactly

Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
Don't like this era thing at all. How do you account for players that cross eras.? Gordie howe crosses about 4 of your eras.
Exactly. That's how you account for the importance of longevity. A player's impact in four eras becomes even more striking when clearly showed how he was measured against various sets of contemporaries.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-29-2010, 06:39 PM
  #350
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,552
vCash: 500
Hey guys. I've found a couple of good quotes about Newsy Lalonde playing well defensively during important Stanley Cup games. I figure this should factor into where you guys vote him in for the next list:

March 22nd, 1919 vs. Seattle

Quote:
Quote:
In the third game the great Canadien star Lalonde, played centre, rover and defence in an effort to master the western rules but failed to score a goal
I think the fact that Lalonde made an effort to play at any position speaks to him as not just a goal scorer, but a guy who will do whatever it takes to win.

March 30th, 1919 vs. Seattle

Quote:
Quote:
At one stage Canadiens were behind 3-0 but led by the tireless Lalonde they fought back and tied the score with four minutes to go. During the overtime Lalonde and ***** moved back on defence and proved impregnable.
I'd say this proves that Lalonde was definitely at least capable of playing well defensively, and in a pinch, he would do it. I think that should count for something.

Globe and Mail, January 8th, 1917

Quote:
Quote:
Lalonde was the most useful man on the French line
This was during a game against the Wanderers, I think just a regular season game. This line was noted after they said another important player on the team was knocked out, so I'm not exactly sure what it means - I'd like to think it has more to do with just offense, though.

Globe and Mail, January 8th, 1919, league game vs. Arenas

Quote:
Quote:
Veteran Hockeyist Plays in Sensational Style When Most Needed

... and the visitors won mainly because Newsy Lalonde played brilliant hockey throughout. The famous hockeyist was never seen to better advantage in this city and his spectacular and dangerous rushes proved the undoing of Arenas.

*** ****** and ***** did not accompany the visitors, and it was thought that the team would suffer to such a degree that a victory was hardly possible. ...

... The downfall of the locals surprised the large crowd and they were at a loss to understand how their favorites, who appeared to have the edge on the play, were unable to pull out a win. However, the explanation is not hard to find when one considers the heady work indulged in by Lalonde. This veteran of many bitterly fought contests saved himself in the early stages, and when he was most needed gave one of the most dazzling displays of his career. He secured the goal that placed the visitors on even terms with the locals by completely outguessing *******, ***** and ******* in turn. With the players battling at a heart-breaking pace to break the tie, Lalonde skated down the side, drew the defence out, and passed to *******, who was uncovered near the net. The latter tallied and the game was won and lost right there.
Globe and Mail, March 24th, 1919, Stanley Cup game against Seattle
Quote:
Quote:
Newsy Lalonde gave a great exhibition of skating and scored all four of the Canadiens' goals. Lalonde was the star of both teams. The leader of the visitors was a fiend on the defense and was impossible to stop when he gained possession of the rubber. He beat ****** and **** time and time again around the Seattle net, and his shooting was deadly accurate. Out of the score of bullet shots he sent ******' way, four got by the local net guardian.
Globe and Mail, March 31st, 1919, Stanley Cup game against Seattle
Quote:
Quote:
Lalonde Plays Sensational Game and is Main Factor in Victory

... but it was the great and only Lalonde who was responsible for the Montreal win. Urging his team on, Lalonde was not only a tower of strength on the defense, but he scored the second and tieing goals himself.

jarek is offline  
Closed Thread

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 02:42 AM.

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.