Robert Stewart (Defenseman) worst NHL player in history
- Thread starter MR50goalscorer
- Start date
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that he spent nearly his entire career with the Seals/Barons franchise.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Hockeynomad
Registered User
The quality of skills has gone up in NHL even from the era of the six team league.
I know Gordie Howe once remarked there used to be a couple of player on the Red Wings that couldn't even skate backwards.
I know Gordie Howe once remarked there used to be a couple of player on the Red Wings that couldn't even skate backwards.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
A point could be made that Bill Mikkelson is the worst guy to have played at least 1 full season, however. The guy is -147 in, you guessed it, 147 games.
tommygunn
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2008
- 590
- 2
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,271
- 2,808
I agree with this also. Coaches won't play the worst player in NHL history for very long.
I'd go further and say that coaches won't play the worst players in NHL history for any significant amount of minutes. If a player posts a very large negative plus-minus, he's getting a substantial amount of ice-time. If you want to find the worst NHL players for a given career length, I'd look at lowest ice-time instead of worst plus-minus, or where ice-time is unavailable, fewest on-ice goals for and against per game. By this measure, the worst NHL players with ~500 games are Darren Langdon, Tony Twist, Stu Grimson, and Kryztsztof Oliwa, with Rob Ray as the worst 800 game player and Craig Berube as the worst 1000 game player.
Lard_Lad
Registered User
Stewart was actually a pretty solid, physical defenseman who played on some really awful teams. He was well-regarded enough that the Blues got Blair Chapman, a good second-third line winger, from the Pens in return for him.
The worst was Paul Higgins. Had no business being in the NHL, but the Ballard-era Leafs wasted a draft pick on him and needed a goon, so they let him play 25 games despite a ton of media criticism. No goals, no assists, one shot.
The worst was Paul Higgins. Had no business being in the NHL, but the Ballard-era Leafs wasted a draft pick on him and needed a goon, so they let him play 25 games despite a ton of media criticism. No goals, no assists, one shot.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
Well, there was maybe a reason why he was only an expansion Islander and an expansion Capitals...
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Gilles Lupien.
He's an agent now. Think of a backup center in the NBA that plays 5 minutes a night
and fouls out half the time. As Al Mcguire would have said, "you know, a big white stiff."
He's an agent now. Think of a backup center in the NBA that plays 5 minutes a night
and fouls out half the time. As Al Mcguire would have said, "you know, a big white stiff."
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
Normand Baron holds the distinction of being the worst Hab ever. Former Quebec body building champ (or was it boxer?). Was brought in to intimidate, but skated worse than a one legged chimp.
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
Trottier
Very Random
Stats don't mean as much with the posters on this board. To be sure, they are useful, but not in this case.
tommygunn
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2008
- 590
- 2
No matter how minor a role he played, I'd never consider a 2-time Cup winner on one of the best dynasties of all-time the worst NHL'er in history.
tommygunn
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2008
- 590
- 2
But I've noticed for a lot on here, stats are the be-all and end-all in critiquing a player.. to the point of even trying to make stats up where there are none. I sometimes wonder if there are more stats majors than actual fans of the game.
ck26
Alcoholab User
If there were a way to quantify this, I'd bet that a short-tenured goaltender is the most likely to have the "least qualified NHL'er of all time" title. In today's game, it would take 3 or 4 injuries for a team to have to reach waaaay down the ladder (ECHL or beyond) for a goaltender ... for an NHL team to need emergency ECHL skaters would require 8+ injuries / suspensions to their regulars. Barring a tragedy or some sort of mass-suspension incident, and without citing a particular instance, it seems far more likely that all your goaltenders would get hurt in a 10-14 day span (ie: before you can trade for replacements) than that all your skaters would all become unavailable.
My personal favorite is Jordan Willis, a solid minor-league goalie who played one game for my Stars back in '96 or so. I remember him being pretty decent in a 3 GA loss at Edmonton.
My personal favorite is Jordan Willis, a solid minor-league goalie who played one game for my Stars back in '96 or so. I remember him being pretty decent in a 3 GA loss at Edmonton.
Trottier
Very Random
But I've noticed for a lot on here, stats are the be-all and end-all in critiquing a player.. to the point of even trying to make stats up where there are none. I sometimes wonder if there are more stats majors than actual fans of the game.
Overall on HF, no doubt. It's insufferable, yet highly entertaining, in a farcical way. Baseball Sabremetricians/fantasy league geeks substituting numbers for an original thought.
Here, on the History of Hockey Board, however, there is relatively speaking, a much greater depth of knowledge about players both past and present, IMO.
Generally speaking, here stats are used to support opinions, not substituted for opinions. Big difference, and much more engaging.
tommygunn
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2008
- 590
- 2
Yes, I hear you.
Some of the stats comparisons people put up are fascinating and highly informative.
The thing with stats though, is realizing when to use them and when to not.
Take Henri Richard and Bob Gainey for example. A few on here say they're overrated, and provide stats to show this. Then you find a quote from Frank Selke and Scotty Bowman saying Richard and Gainey respectively were their most valuable players. IMO, those quotes alone trump any stats someone can put up that show 'they didn't produce here' or 'they finished behind this person in this category', etc. You put up a quote like that and some don't know how to react.. because it can't be quantified.
I guess it's just human nature.. people always wanting to quantify everything. Now.. back to making my Top 120 list..
Yes, I hear you.
Some of the stats comparisons people put up are fascinating and highly informative.
The thing with stats though, is realizing when to use them and when to not.
Take Henri Richard and Bob Gainey for example. A few on here say they're overrated, and provide stats to show this. Then you find a quote from Frank Selke and Scotty Bowman saying Richard and Gainey respectively were their most valuable players. IMO, those quotes alone trump any stats someone can put up that show 'they didn't produce here' or 'they finished behind this person in this category', etc. You put up a quote like that and some don't know how to react.. because it can't be quantified.
I guess it's just human nature.. people always wanting to quantify everything. Now.. back to making my Top 120 list..
By the same token, I'd say we need to be equally wary of using some quote as the be all and end all. People rave about players they were associated with all the time. And I find they especially like to praise their "unsung hero" type of players. Scotty Bowman says Bob Gainey was his most valuable player...Larry Robinson says Guy Lafleur was the most valuable on those teams...I'm sure someone has called Larry Robinson and Ken Dryden the MVP of those squads at some point in time. I find too often that people just take it as gospel when a hockey legend states "this guy was the best".
These quotes could come from Jesus himself, but knowing what I know about those teams, it'll take a lot more than that before I consider Henri Richard and Bob Gainey to be as valuable as Jean Beliveau and Guy Lafleur were.
