Joe Pelletier said:The first key to Doug's success was he was a flawless defender. Doug was so superb in one on one defensive battles that he would routinely steal the puck off the attacker as though he were picking cherries. He would rarely be beaten, and his teammates knew it.
Kevin Shea said:Harvey controlled the game like Orr did, but where Orr controlled it by carrying the puck, by acting as a forward, Harvey would slow the pace down, then pick it up. He could control the game and was the epitome of the brilliant general on the blueline.
Legends of Hockey: One on One/Pinnacle said:Dick Irvin very quickly discovered Harvey's greatest skill – the ability to control the temp of a game. Methodically, Doug carried the puck, at his own speed, surveying the ice landscape before he committed to any play. At first, it drove his coach and teammates to distraction, until they learned that there was method to Harvey's madness – the other team couldn't score if Doug controlled the puck.
Hockey's Golden Era said:Doug Harvey was the first defenseman in NHL history who ''quarterbacked'' his team. Playing from the blueline, Harvey would orchestrate the Canadiens’ style of ''fire wagon hockey'' with his ability to frame accurate passes. Not only was his passing a sight to behold but he could control game as he pleased.
Hockey's Glory Days said:Doug Harvey was the best defenseman in hockey during his heydays, and he ranks among the greatest of all time. He could check, block shots, rush the puck, stickhandle, and pass, but what made him truly unique was the way he could combine his skills to control the pace of the game.
Putting a Roof on Winter said:Harvey was the Habs’ general, directing play, controlling pace, passing with uncanny accuracy, and busting the head of anyone who got in the way of him or his teammates.
Joe Pelletier said:Even more impressive was Doug's ability with the puck. He would rarely simply dump the puck out of the zone. He would be able to gain control of the puck and never give it up. At first he would drive fans and coaches crazy, as he wandered in front of the net with fore-checkers zooming in, but more often than not he would remain calm, and in an unhurried fashion spot a streaking forward with a pinpoint pass. Because of t his uncanny ability Montreal's superstar forwards could afford stay high and loosen up on their backchecking duties.
...
Unlike a Bobby Orr or Paul Coffey, Doug wouldn't rush the puck out of his own zone. His thinking was the puck can move faster than any player on the ice, so why not utilize that as a tactic? He had this unique ability to draw in a forechecker which would then open up more ice for his teammates. [...] Harvey would plant a perfect pass to one of his forwards, creating an odd-man rush. In doing so, Harvey controlled the game perhaps better than any player in history. More often than not he would rag the puck to slow the game down, but he also knew exactly when to catch the other team by surprise with a perfectly placed pass into an open lane.
Doug Harvey is perhaps the greatest all-around defenseman of all time. He was not as offensively gifted as Bobby Orr but controlled in much the same degree if only a contrasting style. He was not as hard hitting as Eddie Shore, but he was known as one of the most physical yet clean defenders of his time.
Canadiens official website said:His masterful stickhandling allowed him to control the puck for as long as he wished. It was often to the dismay of fans, coaches and opponents, who watched helplessly as the defenseman took chances that others dared not take, rarely being caught out of position or making a costly mistake.
Canadiens Captains by Michael Ulmer said:When, inevitably, Harvey got hold of the puck, opponents feared his passing touch and peeled back. The Canadiens' forwards, secure in the knowledge that Harvey would be beaten very rarely, were afforded the luxury of hanging higher in the defensive zone or even lurking in neutral ice. Harvey's natural skills bought him more room and, unimpeded by forecheckers (Harvey would quickly lose anyone who challenged him), he was free to bring the puck up ice. "He was like a big glider moving with the puck," remembered television analyst Howie Meeker, a veteran of the Harvey era. "He controlled the play so well, his forwards could cheat."
Marty Pavelich said:'And of course Harvey, we always thought that without Harvey on that team we could beat Montreal because he really was controlling the puck back on that blueline. He'd pick it up and take his time, get it out, move it out, get the guy in the open and throw it to him and away they'd go. To me, he was one of the greatest defenceman to ever play
Howie Meeker said:All I know is that the son of a gun came out of nowhere to become the biggest thorn in the side of the Leafs in our glory days. He was an early Bobby Orr, except he did it at semi-slow motion. You always knew what was coming - you could see it happening - but you couldn't do anything about it
Toe Blake said:Doug played defense in a rocking chair
Stan Fischler said:Defenseman Doug Harvey was so laconic, so calmly sure of himself, that he executed plays of extreme complexity with consummate ease. Lacking the Flamboyance of Eddie Shore or other Hall of Fame defensemen, Harvey was slow to receive the recognition he deserved. "Often, Harvey's cool was mistaken for disinterest," said author John Greenfield. "Actually it was the result of an always calculating concentration."
Toe Blake said:No player put my heart in my mouth as often as Doug. But I learned to swallow in silence. His style was casual, but it worked. He made few mistakes, and, ninety-nine percent of the time correctly anticipated the play or pass.
What's the purpose of that Top Defensemen project again ...?
The short version: Harvey dominates his competition to a greater extent than Lidstom or Bourque. Harvey easily surpassed Red Kelly, one of the most dominant defensemen ever - dominating him to a greater degree than Bourque ever dominated Chelios or Leetch. Then for almost a decade, Harvey easily won the Norris ever season except the one he was injured (when he finished 4th).
Origin of NHL players when Harvey was 31 in 1955:
Canada 155 players
USA 2 players
Wales 1 player
Origin of NHL players when Bourque was 31 in 1991:
Canada 533
Czech. 23
Finland 12
Sweden 17
USA 130
USSR 15
Origin on NHL players when Lidstrom was 31 in 2001:
Canada 530
Czech. 107
Finland 33
Sweden 47
USA 148
USSR 91
I have often wondered this. Why do most rank Bourque behind him yet over Lidstrom? The same arguments for placing Borque over Lidstrom should then apply to Harvey, since Lidstrom and Harvey are basically mirror images of each other, although Lidstrom seems to have a slight edge on him in accolades and longevity.
imo nostalgia seems to being playing a large roll in ranking defensmen.
I believe that Lidstrom has a better chance at leapfrogging Harvey.
I have often wondered this. Why do most rank Bourque behind him yet over Lidstrom? The same arguments for placing Borque over Lidstrom should then apply to Harvey, since Lidstrom and Harvey are basically mirror images of each other, although Lidstrom seems to have a slight edge on him in accolades and longevity.
imo nostalgia seems to being playing a large roll in ranking defensmen.
If anything Bourque is more similar to Harvey than Lidstrom is to Harvey. Bourque could skate and push the pace but from about his fifth year he was all about controlling the game. Lidstrom plays a quiet style as well but does not try to control the game in all three zones. Actually I think Larry Murphy is the best comparison for Harvey. No I am not saying Murphy is close or worthy in terms of results but perhaps is the most similar to Harvey in style.
This is just a crunched-down version of the lists above, with the major hockey powers represented. It doesn't matter much if there was 1 guy from Scotland and 1 guy from Jamaica, does it?
Why? He can't even get past Bourque who is behind Harvey for the majority of voters.
That's fine but you might upset the Swiss, German, Norweigen and Polish hockey players out there.
If anything Bourque is more similar to Harvey than Lidstrom is to Harvey. Bourque could skate and push the pace but from about his fifth year he was all about controlling the game. Lidstrom plays a quiet style as well but does not try to control the game in all three zones. Actually I think Larry Murphy is the best comparison for Harvey. No I am not saying Murphy is close or worthy in terms of results but perhaps is the most similar to Harvey in style.
The argument for Harvey is that he flat out peaked higher for an extended period of time.
This thread will confuse Rhiessan and Tarheel as they cant use the team strength argument against Lidström anymore.
Thats the #1 argument for ranking Bourque ahead of Lidstrom. (not so much higher but longer). This argument applies even more so to Bourque over Harvey. At overall peak Harvy and Lidstrom are about dead even and both ahead of Bourque.
From Round 1 of the HOH Top Defenseman Project:
Why Doug Harvey is the Second Best Defenseman of All-Time
Why do many of us rank Doug Harvey the second best defenseman of all-time? If you count the number of elite seasons a player had, he falls below several of the defensemen listed here. But then so does Bobby Orr.
(Much of the information presented is courtesy of EagleBelfour's bio)
I. He is often considered the best defensive defenseman of all time
-He is rated the top defensive defenseman of all-time in the book Hockey's 100 by Stan Fischler
-Rated the best defensive defenseman of the 1950s by Ultimate Hockey
-Several older posters on the HOH board have said that Harvey is the best defensive defenseman they have ever seen. (I'd find specific quotes, but the search function is broken. I know Dark Shadows is one of them, though).
II. By all accounts, he is second only to Bobby Orr in his ability to control the pace of a hockey game in all three zones. (And some believe he was Orr's equal in this)
III. Was Harvey (like Lidstrom) slow to be recognized due to his style of play?
Who's Who in Hockey
Bourque, while one of my favorite players, just is not at Harvey's level. Harvey's peak was ridiculous. He was THE best defensive defenseman and Penalty killer ever to lace up the skates and was also the second best offensively at the same time(Red Kelly taking a slight lead there).
You want to compare their competition for the Norris trophy? Bourque's field was larger, while Harvey's had Red Kelly(Who was better than any of Bourque's top competition), followed by Gadsby, a guy who rightfully ranks ahead of many of Bourque's top competition. Gadsby is ahead of Macinnis, Leetch, Stevens, Langway, Howe, etc, while Kelly at his best was equal to or better than Potvin, Robinson, Chelios or Coffey. Had the Norris existed in 52-53, Harvey would have an 8th to add to his collection.
Harvey's competition was very stiff. Trying to imply he had easy competition is wrong.
Harvey was, in my opinion, the most important player on that Habs dynasty while he was there. He was certainly their best playoff performer. Bourque was no playoff slouch himself, but compared to Harvey? He just doesn't compare. Few players do.
Hockey Outsider did a graph regarding how much the Habs scoring went up or down during their cup winning years, and I was no surprise that Harvey's numbers jumped through the roof in those years.
Offensive Production: regular season PPG vs playoffs PPG on the 11 Stanley Cup winning teams
Minimum 250 RS games and 40 PO games
Player|RegSeason|Playoffs|%Change
Doug Harvey | 0.56 | 0.82 | 46.4
J.C. Tremblay | 0.52 | 0.75 | 44.2
Bernie Geoffrion | 1.11 | 1.39 | 25.2
Dickie Moore | 1.03 | 1.16 | 12.6
Maurice Richard | 0.94 | 1.05 | 11.7
Yvan Cournoyer | 0.88 | 0.94 | 6.8
Jacques Lemaire | 0.86 | 0.91 | 5.8
Jacques Laperriere | 0.41 | 0.43 | 4.9
Jean Beliveau | 1.16 | 1.19 | 2.6
Terry Harper | 0.19 | 0.18 | -5.3
Ralph Backstrom | 0.6 | 0.54 | -10
Henri Richard | 0.83 | 0.74 | -10.8
Ted Harris | 0.28 | 0.24 | -14.3
Claude Provost | 0.62 | 0.51 | -17.7
John Ferguson | 0.56 | 0.46 | -17.9
Bobby Rousseau | 0.91 | 0.64 | -29.7
Tom Johnson | 0.35 | 0.24 | -31.4
Don Marshall | 0.4 | 0.27 | -32.5
Jean-Guy Talbot | 0.27 | 0.18 | -33.3
Claude Larose | 0.44 | 0.25 | -43.2
Bob Turner | 0.18 | 0.09 | -50
Bourque's longevity edge vs the Peak edge and playoff edge Harvey possesses does not close the gap in my opinion.
Excellent summary. Since I hold Bourque over Lidstrom, Ill add my past comments regarding Harvey vs Bourque as to why I take Harvey over him
Had the Norris existed in 52-53, Harvey would have an 8th to add to his collection.