Round 2, Vote 11 (HOH Top Defensemen)

[Andros]

Just show proof that Ragulin was injured. Something that you have avoided all along.

You don't think that the burden of proof falls on you when making the case that a player of Ragulin's caliber misses a game because he was benched, when the reason is undocumented?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Documented

You don't think that the burden of proof falls on you when making the case that a player of Ragulin's caliber misses a game because he was benched, when the reason is undocumented?

The out of the blue claim after almost 40 years was that Alexander Ragulin was injured.

In his reminising about the 1972 Summit Series Ragulin make NO MENTION of an injury - linked previously.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Just show proof that Ragulin was injured. Something that you have avoided all along.

I never said Ragulin was injured. Stop misrepresenting my position!

What I actually said (you can check post 235 or post 243) was "I'm not sure if he was bench[ed] or was injured". I haven't found evidence to support either possibility. If anybody knows why Ragulin did not play in game 8, please share.

As for proof of poor skating we have plenty of proof of players who were moved from center, pre NHL to defence because they were not adequate skaters. Ragulin was not even at this level in terms of skating.

You also have evidence that elite skaters were put on defence - Orr because that would increase the player`s ice time and benefit all three lines. This is not Ragulin`s case

I do not understand how your tangents are relevant to this discussion. If you want to talk about players being switched from centre to defense in junior hockey, make another thread.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Post 147

Attempting to add response from my phone so apologize for typos and my inability to quote specific posts (wish I could do so), but this is better than nothing

Some have argued that Ragulin is not worthy of the top sixty because he covered Phil Esposito during the Summit Series, and Espo played some of the best hockey of his career. However, Ragulin missed games 3 and 8, and Esposito performed significantly better in those games.

(On phone so I can't double check these numbers, but fairly sure they are correct, someone please correct me if they're not)

Esposito in summit series: 8 games, 13 points

Esposito in games where Ragulin did not play: 2 games, 6 points

Esposito in games where Ragulin played: 6 games, 7 points

Thus, it appears that Ragulin significantly slowed Esposito. Watch the games and you'll see that "Sasha" used his strength and size to contain Espo. Keep in mind that Esposito was scoring roughly 1.5-2.0 points per game during this stage of his career in the NHL. He completely lit up the Soviets in the two games where Ragulin was injured. Yet in the six games where Ragulin shadowed him, Esposito was held to just 7 points in 6 games, remarkable given that Esposito was performed at a level perhaps matched by only 4 other forwards in history.

I'm well aware that we're dealing with small sample sizes here. At the very least I want to make sure that Ragulin doesn't get blamed for Esposito playing the best hockey of his career when 6 of his 13 points came in the two games Ragulin missed (and the Soviets had no way to contain him). But I'll take it one step farther - I'm confident saying, based on the numbers and footage from the series, that Ragulin did in fact have the size, strength and intelligence to slow down Esposito. Not sure if anybody could shut him down completely, but Ragulin was trusted to slow him down and in the games he played, Esposito was clearly less impactful, both statistically and throughout those six games. Ragulin did his "uneviable" and very difficult task well and gave the Soviets a chance to win.

Not sure if this will change anybody's mind, but I don't want the "Esposito dominated the summit series" argument used against ragulin

Issue is with post #147 where you specifically state in the bolded that Ragulin was injured. Provide proof. Thank you.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Post 147 II

I never said Ragulin was injured. Stop misrepresenting my position!

What I actually said (you can check post 235 or post 243) was "I'm not sure if he was bench[ed] or was injured". I haven't found evidence to support either possibility. If anybody knows why Ragulin did not play in game 8, please share.



I do not understand how your tangents are relevant to this discussion. If you want to talk about players being switched from centre to defense in junior hockey, make another thread.

See post #147. You clearly stated that Ragulin was injured.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

You've got to be joking!

I initially thought Ragulin was injured (post 147) then, upon reviewing the available evidence (i.e. no evidence that he was benched, or injured), I changed my mind and said that I wasn't sure which of those two possibilities was correct (post 235 or post 243). Not sure why you're focusing on a previously-held position, instead of what I currently believe?

I could have gone back and edited post 147 after I wrote post 235, but I thought that would have been dishonest. It's better to leave things as they are, so that the progression of the argument is documented, for everybody to read.

In other words: I no longer agree with my own comment in post 147, and have said so in writing, on two subsequent occasions, so not sure why you're focusing on it.

My current position is that we have no evidence that Ragulin was injured or benched (or if something else happened - maybe he was arrested for robbing a bank and was therefore unavailable to play). If somebody can provide insight on why Ragulin didn't play in game 8, please share, I'm curious and hope somebody here can resolve this mystery.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You don't think that the burden of proof falls on you when making the case that a player of Ragulin's caliber misses a game because he was benched, when the reason is undocumented?

You seem to have made a very good point here.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Mystery solved!

In order to find out what really happened, I watched the first few minutes of Game 8. I have this on the "Canada's Team of the Century" quadruple DVD set, published by Universal in 2002, so anybody can check this if they're so inclined. Here is the exact commentary (starting at about 9:52 into the opening ceremony segment of game eight):

"For the Soviets, they've only made one change, they've dropped number five, uh, Ragulin, the big defenseman, who's supposed to have a sore leg".

There you go. Ragulin was taken out of the Soviet lineup before game eight due to a leg injury. He was not benched by his coach. Unless somebody has contradictory evidence, this matter is closed.