Round 2, Vote 13 (HOH Top Wingers)

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Didn't Ramsay have the same duties?

Thank you so much! That is high praise for my consistency.

My impression is that Ramsay was the regular LW on Buffalo's two-way second line/checking line, centered by Don Luce. Gainey, on the other hand, was shifted through the lineup, used strictly in defensive situations with a variety of linemates.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm not baffled or surprised and I don't think there is a very strong argument that he should be here yet either.

seriously? I thought you did think so. Or has that position changed?

What about Marleau? How would he look here?

- I expressed my regrets over my Round 1 list. I also rarely agree with Hardyvan. Marc Tardif would be a top-5 lock this round. For about 3 or 4 seasons, he was a bit like Lafleur, but in the WHA instead, and his pre-WHA career is close (but inferior) to Lafleur.

I'm not seeing it. Tardif is an MLD talent (to use ATD-speak with a guy who understands) though, he's an elite ATD talent with enough grit to make one question why he isn't an ATD 4th line staple. But that's Dubbie Kerr/Brian Bellows material - not top-60. And not really close, either, to be honest.

Are you aware of my study that concludes AHL points are worth about 0.71 NHL points? Here it is, from AAA2013:

I recall in 2010 I did a study where I compared the career PPG of players who played a certain number of games in both the WHA and NHL, and averaged out the decline in point totals that were typically observed. It was the first time I had seen such a thing done, and it yielded a result closer to that 0.60 mark; however, I can’t find the spreadsheet and I think I only publicly released the final results as opposed to “showing my work”. Also, IIRC, it was not that scientific as it was based on career totals; I think specifically targeting the seasons directly before/after a player’s WHA stint makes more sense even if it is more difficult.

I took a long list of players to determine the appropriate factor to use. To qualify, a player had to have at least two WHA seasons if they were primarily an NHL player, and at least two NHL seasons if they were primarily a WHA player. They had to be a player typically discussed in this section (arguably ATD/MLD/AAA/AA caliber) and had to be a forward, as forwards can be judged primarily on offensive numbers, and defensemen can’t (and their offensive totals are hugely dependent on whether they got PP time in a given season or not). Players whose positional integrity was uncertain were dropped to be safe (Mark Howe, for example). If a player went “NHL-WHA-NHL” then I used their last two in the NHL, first two in the WHA, last two in the WHA, first two in the NHL. If their career started or ended with the WHA, then there is only one point of comparison instead of two, so I used their first/last two in the respective leagues. If one of the “adjacent” seasons was less than a half season I added the next one in as well, to ensure I was getting a solid sample size. The smaller of the two samples (either WHA or NHL) had to be at least 125 games; if it wasn’t, I would take the next season to make it at least that large. If that was not possible, the player was thrown out (Tom Webster, Gordie Howe). I also left out Wayne Gretzky because he is an extreme outlier in just about any model and this one is no exception.

After collecting who I could off the top of my head, I found the rest of these players by scanning the top-50 all-time leaders for career WHA GP and Pts, then looking at the year by year all-star teams and top-20 in points. Then I looked at the “skater statistics” pages on WHA, checking the oldest and youngest blocks of players for guys who were working their way up to the NHL, or taking it easy after their prime was over. I hope I got everyone. If I didn’t, please let me know.

Name | NHL GP | NHL Pts | WHA GP | WHA Pts | NHL PPG | WHA PPG | Diff
Tardif | 272 | 225 | 303 | 409 | 0.83 | 1.35 | 0.61
Keon | 308 | 221 | 301 | 291 | 0.72 | 0.97 | 0.74
Walton | 292 | 247 | 211 | 281 | 0.85 | 1.33 | 0.64
Dudley | 303 | 173 | 270 | 277 | 0.57 | 1.03 | 0.56
Hull | 183 | 206 | 253 | 373 | 1.13 | 1.47 | 0.76
Bernier | 223 | 145 | 273 | 368 | 0.65 | 1.35 | 0.48
Lacroix | 158 | 70 | 312 | 436 | 0.44 | 1.40 | 0.32
Ftorek | 145 | 131 | 293 | 406 | 0.90 | 1.39 | 0.65
Houle | 290 | 186 | 214 | 257 | 0.64 | 1.20 | 0.53
Stoughton | 272 | 227 | 219 | 179 | 0.83 | 0.82 | 1.02
Henderson | 212 | 159 | 279 | 235 | 0.75 | 0.84 | 0.89
Cloutier | 168 | 217 | 150 | 258 | 1.29 | 1.72 | 0.75
K.Nilsson | 160 | 222 | 158 | 214 | 1.39 | 1.35 | 1.02
Nilsson | 160 | 163 | 144 | 250 | 1.02 | 1.74 | 0.59
Hedberg | 160 | 149 | 145 | 253 | 0.93 | 1.74 | 0.53
Flett | 199 | 95 | 195 | 187 | 0.48 | 0.96 | 0.50
Rogers | 160 | 210 | 160 | 143 | 1.31 | 0.89 | 1.47
McKenzie | 142 | 146 | 179 | 190 | 1.03 | 1.06 | 0.97
Mahovlich | 149 | 173 | 148 | 171 | 1.16 | 1.16 | 1.00
Lukowich | 158 | 141 | 160 | 174 | 0.89 | 1.09 | 0.82
MacDonald | 143 | 151 | 160 | 139 | 1.06 | 0.87 | 1.22
Preston | 202 | 125 | 153 | 110 | 0.62 | 0.72 | 0.86
Nedomansky | 143 | 101 | 174 | 172 | 0.71 | 0.99 | 0.71
Ruskowski | 146 | 129 | 153 | 158 | 0.88 | 1.03 | 0.86
Bordeleau | 144 | 84 | 153 | 176 | 0.58 | 1.15 | 0.51
Williams | 198 | 131 | 139 | 89 | 0.66 | 0.64 | 1.03
Connelly | 147 | 86 | 156 | 165 | 0.59 | 1.06 | 0.55
Lawson | 156 | 39 | 156 | 194 | 0.25 | 1.24 | 0.20
MacMillan | 182 | 113 | 153 | 88 | 0.62 | 0.58 | 1.08
Ullman | 158 | 104 | 144 | 130 | 0.66 | 0.90 | 0.73
Backstrom | 155 | 110 | 148 | 122 | 0.71 | 0.82 | 0.86
Napier | 130 | 80 | 159 | 161 | 0.62 | 1.01 | 0.61
Tonelli | 150 | 100 | 145 | 119 | 0.67 | 0.82 | 0.81
MacGregor | 193 | 110 | 135 | 75 | 0.57 | 0.56 | 1.03
Joyal | 139 | 62 | 194 | 103 | 0.45 | 0.53 | 0.84
McDonald | 171 | 107 | 147 | 70 | 0.63 | 0.48 | 1.31
Hampson | 156 | 59 | 154 | 117 | 0.38 | 0.76 | 0.50
Boudrias | 149 | 106 | 140 | 70 | 0.71 | 0.50 | 1.42
Gendron | 132 | 55 | 127 | 69 | 0.42 | 0.54 | 0.77
Fonteyne | 138 | 32 | 149 | 61 | 0.23 | 0.41 | 0.57
Semenko | 125 | 32 | 142 | 36 | 0.26 | 0.25 | 1.01
Total | 7371 | 5422 | 7548 | 7776 | 0.74 | 1.03 | 0.71

It’s not particularly hard to put together something even more “scientific” than this; however, this is a great improvement on what I did before and it appears intuitively sound, fitting in with what the consensus tends to be about WHA offensive totals.

A couple of notes:

- I probably should have included all players, not just the ones who were at least AA draft caliber. I’m not interested in going back and finding them all, but to be honest I can’t quite justify why their results should not be relevant in a study of how much easier it is to score in the WHA than the NHL. These players would tend to drag that 0.71 figure down, as they are guys who were not special NHL players, hence why we’ve never selected them here.
- Another factor that would technically drag this 0.71 down is that so many of these players played at ages where we know there were likely not in their offensive primes – either quite old or quite young. And then they’re being compared to NHL seasons that were closer to, or in, their prime. If an age-adjusted analysis was possible it would surely drag the final answer down just a bit.
- If you were to “weigh” each player’s factor based on the number of games played and points (i.e. which samples are more significant) the final factor that the table would determine would be 0.76. However, these were arbitrarily selected samples to begin with so I didn’t see the point in adding that factor into it. It could be argued that even if this is valid, the two points above offset that to about the same degree.
- My conclusion as of now (and I welcome comments and criticisms) is that WHA scoring achievements are worth about 71% what NHL scoring achievements in the 1970-1982 range are.

Tardif's best VsX scores, with WHA years converted, are 89, 88, 63, 58, 58, 54, 53 (on my sheet. a couple numbers on the actual VsX sheet may be different). but that is not top-60 caliber. It definitely gives him credit for his two massive seasons - I mean, how much more than that can you possibly give him, right? - but other than that he actually didn't do a heck of a lot in terms of eliteness.

- He probably won't be first on my list, but if I'd have to name a player who MUST get in, it's probably Rick Middleton. Current gap with Goulet is perfectly reasonable, and frankly, if we could manage to not screw up on something that obvious, that'd be awesome.

Yes, absolutely. After everything I've read about him in the last couple of days, I'm leaning towards him for #1 as of now. Kovalchuk has four point finishes better than Middleton's best; however, I still think Nifty has the edge:

- His points finishes were behind Gretzky and usually two players who would not have outscored him without Gretzky
- Adams division
- successful defensive team, as opposed to the exact opposite - unsuccessful run-and-gun team (meaningful points as opposed to meaningless ones)
- did not have the benefit of double shifting on the PP like Kovalchuk did
- far, far, far better defensively
- much better in the leadership and physicality departments even though he's not world-renowned in either area
- better eye test player: Kovalchuk was dynamic and physically talented too, but he was not "best in the league one on one" level.
- much better playoff record

As for playoffs:

Don't forget that the benefit of the doubt to a player in a stingy division must be exponentially greater in the age of divisional playoffs. Basically every playoff game Middleton played was against a stingy team.

- the Adams division became the stingy 5-team Adams we know in 1981-82. taking out 1987-88 when Middleton was fading, he scored 55 points in 40 games - a bit behind Pederson's unreal numbers over that time, but his 1.38 per game was easily 2nd best on the team over that time, well ahead of Bourque (0.90) and the next-best Boston forward with at least 20 games (McNab, 0.85)

- Best per-game scorers with at least 20 GP over this time on the other Adams teams? Naslund, Smith, Lemieux (1.00, 0.83, 0.78), Perreault, Foligno, Ruff (1.16, 0.64, 0.59), Stastny, Goulet, Stastny (1.20, 0.92, 0.76), and Hartford had just 16 games but two guys with 1.00 PPG in that period. So needless to say, scoring in the Adams playoffs was HARD. and Middleton was the 2nd best scorer in the division over that time. Even his 22 points in the 'other' 23 games besides the outlier would make him the 2nd best scorer on any other team.

Agreed.

I know top ten finishes in his era were not what they are now, but he has a lot more of them than the other candidates. Assists (9), Goals (6), Points (7).

it was before the merger. Look at top-5s and compare to other players' top-10s. It's not fair if you look at his top-10s.

Gainey was on my list, but not in the top 60. Still, I went with the hype.

I think if voting again I would have had Craig Ramsay instead of Gainey.

Gainey's career numbers:

1160-239-262-501 +196

Ramsay's numbers:

1070-252-420-672 +328

Same era, on a better team, Gainey doesn't measure up to Ramsay.

Was Gainey better defensively? Sure, but not by a lot. Not enough to ignore those numbers.

I would put Ramsay ahead again, certainly as an overall player and perhaps even strictly defensively. Just because the Habs were a dynasty, it doesn't have to mean they had the best of everything - the best goalie, best defenseman, best forward, best defensive forward... the best defensive forward could have been on another team; he doesn't have to have been a Hab.

anyway, I don't bring this topic up because doing so means I have to clear my schedule for the next week.

Still don't want a guy with a -116 on the top 60 list. Is there anyone close to that level of failure on any of our lists? Kovalchuk played on a bad Atlanta team, sure, but Hossa managed a couple good seasons (+17, +18) while Kovy was there. His only season with a plus rating was the year he was traded. But the next season in NJ, he put up a team leading -26 on what had been a very good Devils team the year before.

OK, fair enough, but speaking of your consistency:

You said in the past goals are the most important thing. Kovalchuk brings them in droves. I think it was in regards to Babe Dye in particular when you made note of your affinity for goal scorers. However, Babe Dye was every bit as flawed and one-dimensional as Kovalchuk. A modern Babe Dye would have had 400+ goals and a career -100 too. But you didn't seem to care about that when it was dye up for voting. Why are the deficiencies so important now that they outweigh all the goals for Kovalchuk?

Left Wing All-Star voting (Martin, Shutt, Gainey)

All-Star voting in every season one of these three players received votes. I'm using a cutoff of at least 4 voting points here (which means at least 1 1st place vote or at least 2 other votes on a 5-3-1 ballot)

1972
LEFT WING: (378/378) Bobby Hull 158; Vic Hadfield 145; Frank Mahovlich 64; Rick Martin 10

1973
LEFT WING: (432/432) Frank Mahovlich 188, Dennis Hull 93, John Bucyk 85, J.P. Parise 33, Rick Martin 29

1974
LEFT WING: (432/432) Rick Martin 198, Wayne Cashman 77, Lowell MacDonald 59, Frank Mahovlich 38, Dennis Hull 24, Johnny Bucyk 16, Ross Lonsberry 14,

1975
LEFT WING: (498/486) Rick Martin 243; Steve Vickers 85; Danny Grant 83; Bill Barber 46; Johnny Bucyk 12; Don Lever 7; Yvon Lambert 6; Lowell MacDonald 6;

Martin dominated LW voting in 1974 and 1975, but man, that's some all-time awful competition. SOMEONE has to get the 1st team. Not that Bill Barber and Steve Shutt would be the best competition ever but even they weren't factors yet in 1974 and 1975.

1976
LEFT WING: (486/486) Bill Barber 232, Rick Martin 122, Chuck Lefley 46, Steve Shutt 35, Johnny Bucyk 27, Errol Thompson 11, Clarke Gillies 4, Steve Vickers 3, Curt Bennett 3, Yvon Lambert 1, Wayne Cashman 1, Don Maloney 1

This was Barber's spike year as a scorer and he got rewarded. I honestly never hear of Chuck Lefley before.

1977
LEFT WING: (486/486) Steve Shutt 270 (54-0-0); Rick Martin 107; Eric Vail 38; Tom Williams 27; Clark Gillies 26; Bill Barber 5; Craig Ramsay 4;

Shutt looks to have received every 1st place vote. Martin is the best of an ininspiring rest.

1978
LEFT WING: (486/486) Clark Gillies 192; Steve Shutt 186; Bill Barber 59; Craig Ramsay 16; Pat Hickey 10; Bob Gainey 9; Bob MacMillan 6; Rick Martin 6;

1979
LEFT WING: Clark Gillies, NYI 232; Bill Barber, Phi 61; Steve Shutt, Mtl 40; Bob Gainey, Mtl 31; Brian Sutter, St.L 28; Rick Middleton, Bos 16; Pat Hickey, NYR 10; Craig Ramsay, Buf 8; Rod Sedlbauer, Van 7; Bob MacMillan, Atl 6; Eric Vail, Atl 6; Richard Martin, Buf 4;

1980
LEFT WING: (567/567) Charlie Simmer 280; Steve Shutt 86; Steve Payne 46; Bob Gainey 44; Bill Barber 43; Kent Nilsson 23; Al MacAdam 19; Rick Martin 10; Craig Ramsay 4; Brian Propp 4;

1981
LEFT WING: (567/567) Charlie Simmer 284; Bill Barber 168; Steve Shutt 38; Bob Bourne 23; Anton Stastny 15; Brian Sutter 9; Clark Gillies 9; Jacques Richard 5; Darryl Sutter 4;

1982
LEFT WING: (567/567, 63-63-63) Mark Messier 189 (25-19-7); John Tonelli 87 (9-10-12); Bill Barber 74 (11-5-4); Morris Lukowich 44 (4-6-6); Clark Gillies 43 (5-4-6); Al Secord 38 (3-4-11); Glenn Anderson 37 (5-3-3); Brian Propp 14 (0-3-5); Ryan Walter 13 (1-2-2); Michel Goulet 9 (0-3-0); Bob Gainey 6 (0-1-3); Brian Sutter 4 (0-1-1);

1982 was the last year Barber and Gainey received All-Star votes, though Gainey would get Selke votes for a few more years.

Wow.... talk about context.

Seriously, if a few knee injuries took Martin out for 20-25 games in four seasons, we're actually talking about:

- Wayne cashman and Steve Vickers the 1st team all-stars
- Chuck Lefley and Eric Vail the 2nd team all-stars (!!!)

certainly a fully integrated NHL with Tardif, Kharlamov and Yakushev would have changed things. Martin may not have had a single all-star team in those circumstances.

the world had a pretty solid group of LWs those years - it's just that half of them were not in the NHL!

 

[seventieslord]

My impression is that Ramsay was the regular LW on Buffalo's two-way second line/checking line, centered by Don Luce. Gainey, on the other hand, was shifted through the lineup, used strictly in defensive situations with a variety of linemates.

Does someone have access to the data showing who Gainey collaborated on points with the most by season? it would shed some light on who his most frequent linemates, if any, were.

I think he was more bound to Jarvis, and then carbonneau, than you think.

I could be wrong - I mean, the lack of points scored with the other lines he was shuffled through could be partially explained by saying "he was used in defensive situations, so why would there be evidence of it in the scoring?" but then, his role was always defensive, and he still scored about a half a point a game so the data is there to help us better understand - we should take a look.

 

[MXD]

70ies, interesting work. I have some comments on it, but I'll reply in private due to the somewhat off topic nature of the said reply.

 

[tarheelhockey]

70ies, interesting work. I have some comments on it, but I'll reply in private due to the somewhat off topic nature of the said reply.

Thanks for taking that to PM.

Alternately, we could take it to the "wingers who didn't make it" thread. Discussion of guys like Tardif needs to go there, per the rule the OP.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

seriously? I thought you did think so. Or has that position changed?

OK, fair enough, but speaking of your consistency:

You said in the past goals are the most important thing. Kovalchuk brings them in droves. I think it was in regards to Babe Dye in particular when you made note of your affinity for goal scorers. However, Babe Dye was every bit as flawed and one-dimensional as Kovalchuk. A modern Babe Dye would have had 400+ goals and a career -100 too. But you didn't seem to care about that when it was dye up for voting. Why are the deficiencies so important now that they outweigh all the goals for Kovalchuk?



Wow.... talk about context.

Seriously, if a few knee injuries took Martin out for 20-25 games in four seasons, we're actually talking about:

- Wayne cashman and Steve Vickers the 1st team all-stars
- Chuck Lefley and Eric Vail the 2nd team all-stars (!!!)

certainly a fully integrated NHL with Tardif, Kharlamov and Yakushev would have changed things. Martin may not have had a single all-star team in those circumstances.

the world had a pretty solid group of LWs those years - it's just that half of them were not in the NHL!

Indeed, I've always loved the goal scorers.

Babe Dye was the premier goal scorer of his era. Kovalchuk was not.

But the biggest difference may be that I didn't get to see Dye play, or even how the game was played back then. To say categorically that Dye would be a -100 player today is a stretch. Hell, Frank Nighbor might be too. But I did see Kovy and even as a goal-scorer lover I wouldn't want Kovy on my team. Simple as that.

As for Rick Martin, he did have a couple back-to-back 52 goal seasons when he was only 22-23 years old, at the time the youngest player to do so.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Indeed, I've always loved the goal scorers.

Babe Dye was the premier goal scorer of his era. Kovalchuk was not.

Um except that he was until his injury.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

and even so with his last injury affected season

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

Might be why he dropped, perceptions are fine but at least give him actual credit where credit is due eh?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Um except that he was until his injury.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

and even so with his last injury affected season

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=goals

Might be why he dropped, perceptions are fine but at least give him actual credit where credit is due eh?

Think I'm going to say with certainty that Ovechkin is the premier goal scorer of Kovalchuk's era.

 

[ted2019]

Does someone have access to the data showing who Gainey collaborated on points with the most by season? it would shed some light on who his most frequent linemates, if any, were.

I think he was more bound to Jarvis, and then carbonneau, than you think.

I could be wrong - I mean, the lack of points scored with the other lines he was shuffled through could be partially explained by saying "he was used in defensive situations, so why would there be evidence of it in the scoring?" but then, his role was always defensive, and he still scored about a half a point a game so the data is there to help us better understand - we should take a look.

I got these from the Strat-O-Matic game. Don't know on how accurate these really are.
73-74: Yvon Lambert & Chuck Lefley
74-75: Glen Sather & Doug Risebrough
75-76: Doug Jarvis & Jimmy Roberts
76-77: Doug Jarvis & Mario Trembley
77-78: Rejean Houle & Doug Jarvis
78-79: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
79-80: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
80-81: Guy Lafleur & Pierre Larouche
81-82: Doug Jarvis & Mark Hunter
82-83: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
83-84: Guy Carboneau & Chris Nilan
84-85: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
85-86: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
86-87: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
87-88: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
88-89: Guy Carbonneau & Mike Keane

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

I got these from the Strat-O-Matic game. Don't know on how accurate these really are.
73-74: Yvon Lambert & Chuck Lefley
74-75: Glen Sather & Doug Risebrough
75-76: Doug Jarvis & Jimmy Roberts
76-77: Doug Jarvis & Mario Trembley
77-78: Rejean Houle & Doug Jarvis
78-79: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
79-80: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
80-81: Guy Lafleur & Pierre Larouche
81-82: Doug Jarvis & Mark Hunter
82-83: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
83-84: Guy Carboneau & Chris Nilan
84-85: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
85-86: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
86-87: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
87-88: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
88-89: Guy Carbonneau & Mike Keane

I haven't researched the other seasons but from what I can gather the 76-77 Habs had Trembley on the Risebrough-Houle line and Roberts on the Jarvis-Gainey line.

 

[ted2019]

Wow, 3 days in between posts. It has to be a record for one of these projects.

 

[MXD]

Wow, 3 days in between posts. It has to be a record for one of these projects.

That is why we have a Holiday break.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Not....

I got these from the Strat-O-Matic game. Don't know on how accurate these really are.
73-74: Yvon Lambert & Chuck Lefley
74-75: Glen Sather & Doug Risebrough
75-76: Doug Jarvis & Jimmy Roberts
76-77: Doug Jarvis & Mario Trembley
77-78: Rejean Houle & Doug Jarvis
78-79: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
79-80: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
80-81: Guy Lafleur & Pierre Larouche
81-82: Doug Jarvis & Mark Hunter
82-83: Doug Jarvis & Mark Napier
83-84: Guy Carboneau & Chris Nilan
84-85: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
85-86: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
86-87: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
87-88: Guy Carbonneau & Chris Nilan
88-89: Guy Carbonneau & Mike Keane

Not accurate at all, especially early career.

Basically from the HSP.

1973-74 broke in slowly Richard and P. Mahovlich at center, sa bit Dave Gardner. RW, mainly Larose and Jim Roberts.

1974-75 started with Richard and Guy Lafleur into November until Richard was hurt:
http://www.flyershistory.com/cgi-bin/poboxscore.cgi?H19740069

then basically with Roberts and a center rotation

Then when Jarvis arrived in 1975-76, with Jarvis and Roberts on RW, followed by Houle.
Until Jarvis was traded.

Then with Carbonneau,mainly Nilan.

Key point is that Gainey would get extra shifted replacing a LW - Shutt when size and physicality was needed, Lambert - when speed was needed, to fill defensive needs.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

In the early 1930s, there was a series of articles printed for the Montreal Gazette called "Turning Back Hockey," each of which profiled a different historical player. Here's a link to a list of them that were found: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=52719129&postcount=297

Here's a direct link to the Gazette article on Broadbent: http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...,3511934&dq=turning+back+hockey's+pages&hl=en

It calls him a "money player" and lists the big goals he scored during his 1 Allan Cup and 4 Stanley Cup wins.

It also contains the following passages on his ability without the puck:

"He was one of the best wing players the game has ever seen for he knew how to cover his check like few men who have held down the job of patrolling the right boards."

"Broadbent was a leech in covering his check and Forum fans can still recall the familiar sight of Punch, riding up and down the right flank, almost bodily supported by some unhappy opponent, vainly attempting to shake him. Punch had probably the most useful set of elbows ever seen in the N.H.L."

He was basically a one-year wonder as a top scorer, but he seems to have been well-known for his defensive ability and clutch scoring.

 

[Hardyvan123]

In the early 1930s, there was a series of articles printed for the Montreal Gazette called "Turning Back Hockey," each of which profiled a different historical player. Here's a link to a list of them that were found: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=52719129&postcount=297

Here's a direct link to the Gazette article on Broadbent: http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...,3511934&dq=turning+back+hockey's+pages&hl=en

It calls him a "money player" and lists the big goals he scored during his 1 Allan Cup and 4 Stanley Cup wins.

It also contains the following passages on his ability without the puck:

"He was one of the best wing players the game has ever seen for he knew how to cover his check like few men who have held down the job of patrolling the right boards."

"Broadbent was a leech in covering his check and Forum fans can still recall the familiar sight of Punch, riding up and down the right flank, almost bodily supported by some unhappy opponent, vainly attempting to shake him. Punch had probably the most useful set of elbows ever seen in the N.H.L."

He was basically a one-year wonder as a top scorer, but he seems to have been well-known for his defensive ability and clutch scoring.

Interesting stuff but Broadbent is hard pressed to make my top 10 list this round because aside from his 1 year outlier seasons he has exactly an 8,10th in goals and a 10th in points in a 4 team NHL with divided NHL talent in other NA leagues.

I think I had him on my original list but now thinking that was a mistake.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Appearances on Players/Coaches Polls

We have coach's polls from 1958, 1965, 1971, 1974, 1976, 1979, 1984, 1993, Jan 1994, May 1994
We have player's polls from 1981, 1990

(We also have player's selected All-Stars in certain years that I will mention when applicable).

All info in this thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=680440

Bert Olmstead

1958 - "Best Defensive Forward, Checker" - 2nd

Rick Martin

1971- none

1974- "Best Shot" - Tied 1st
1974 - "Hardest Shot" - 4th
1974 - "Most Dangerous Near Goal" - 2nd

1976- "Best Shot" - 1st
1976 - "Hardest Shot" - 2nd
1976 - "Most Dangerous Near Goal" - 1st

1979, 1981 - none

Bill Barber

1974, 1976, 1979, 1981, 1984 - none

(Barber was known as a good player without the puck, but was not getting votes as one of the best in the league at any point).

Lanny McDonald

1974- none

1976 - none

1979 - "Best Shot" - 3rd
1979 - "Hardest Shot" - 1st

1981 - "Best wrist-shot" - 1st

1984 - none

Bob Gainey

1974 - none

1976 - "Best Checker" - 3rd

1979 - "Best Bodychecker" - 3rd
1979 - "Best Defensive Forward" - 1st
1979 - "Best Penalty Killer" - 1st
1979 - "Best Skater" - 3rd

1981 - "Best Backchecker" - 1st
1981 - "Best Defensive Forward" - 1st
1981 - "Best Forechecker" - 3rd

1984 - "Best Defensive Forward" - 3rd

Rick Middleton

1976 - none

1979 - none

1981 - none

1984 - "Best Defensive Forward" - 4th
1984 - "Best Penalty Killer" - 2nd
1984 - "Best Skater" - 3rd
1984 - "Best Stickhandler" - 2nd
1984 - "Most Dangerous Near Goal" - 3rd
1984 - "Most Natural Ability" - 4th
1984 - "Smartest Player" - 5th

Interesting that he goes from not getting mentioned at all over multiple polls to getting mentioned in a lot of categories in 1984.

Cam Neely

1984 - none

1990 - none

1993 - none

Jan 1994 - "Toughest Player" - 1st

May 1994 - "Best Shot" - Tied 3rd
May 1994 - "Best Power Forward" - 1st

It's not a coach's or player's poll, but the 88-89 THN Yearbook listed Neely as both one of the best hitters and top cornermen in the game.

Alexander Mogilny

1990 - none

1993 - "Best Pure Scorer" - Tied 2nd

Jan 1994 - "Best Stickhandler" - Tied 2nd
Jan 1994 - "Best Pure Scorer" - Tied 3rd

May 1994 - "Fastest Skater" - Tied 3rd

Keep in mind that these are going to be heavily influenced by his career year in 1992-93.

__________

Tkachuk's prime isn't really covered by these polls, though he did get a single vote for "best bodychecker"

Naslund and Kovalchuk are too recent for these polls, and Broadbent and Noble are too early.

 

[sr edler]

I'm guessing Kovalchuk is pretty much a lock for top-2 in this vote? Or is someone thinking on putting Neely and/or Mogilny ahead of him?

Yes, I am. Both.

 

[tarheelhockey]

So in this round we have 5 post-expansion candidates who all had a large amount of career overlap: Barber, Gainey, Martin, McDonald, and Middleton. These 5 make up almost a third of the slate, and could potentially make up half of one's final ballot, so a huge part of this vote hinges on how we rank them against each other. Here's my attempt to make sense of them:

Regarding the four big scorers (ie, not Gainey) -- it's incredible how close they are when you really break down the numbers. We can say about ALL FOUR of them that they:

- Led their team in goals at least 4 times but no more than 6
- Led their team in points at least 1 time but no more than 4
- Top-3 on the team in goals at least 7 times but no more than 8
- Top-3 on their team in assists at least once
- Top-3 on their team in points at least 5 times but no more than 8
- Top-10 in leaguewide goals at least 2 times but no more than 4
- Top-10 in leaguewide points at least 1 time but no more than 2
- Top-4 in winger AS voting at least 3 times but no more than 5
- Top-3 in winger AS voting at least 2 times but no more than 4

And to make things even more fun, those "more than"s are pretty evenly scattered across the different players in different areas of strength.

So, needless to say, I'm drawing razor-thin distinctions between them and I'm conscious that the gaps are so small that a bit of additional context could really change them.

1. Rick Martin - Martin's offensive peak was the highest in the group, and his high-end individual achievements (top AS finishes, top leaguewide scoring finishes) are the most impressive. An easy knock on him is that his scoring is inflated by playing on the French Connection line, but his team scoring finishes actually look better than you might think intuitively. For example, in his rookie season Martin finished in a tie with Perreault for the team scoring lead in fewer GP and a lot -- a LOT -- more goals to his credit. In 1974, when Perreault missed about a third of the season to a broken leg, the Martin-Perreault-Robert trio ended up with PPG of 1.10 - 0.93 - 0.86 respectively, and Martin a mile ahead of his teammates in raw points. The following season Martin and Perreault again ended up with almost exactly the same scoring rate, except Martin had significantly more goals. It wasn't till '76 that Perreault began to really establish a gap between them, due to his rising assist rate. During this time, Martin continued to gain AS awards -- against peak competitors, yes, but also by large gaps. Even as late as 1979, Martin was leading the Sabres in goal scoring, so there's reason to believe he would have been a contributor beyond his 1980 knee injury and premature retirement.

All together, Martin's combination of team-significance and league-significance puts him very narrowly ahead of this pack.

2. Bill Barber - Things that Barber have over Martin: a slightly more rounded game, the good fortune to play in Philly instead of Buffalo, and a hell of a 1976. Otherwise, Barber's profile is just a slight step down from Martin's. For example, Barber's scoring finishes tend to be a little farther behind his linemates; his AS record tends toward the top-3 range instead of the top-2. For a guy whose legacy was cemented largely by winning Cups, I don't think we see a lot of elevation in his playoff profile (if anything it was just the opposite in '74). I'd probably still have favored him over Martin if he had a bit more longevity, but as it turned out he had the same catastrophic knee issue. So you end up with a guy who did just a little less (as an individual) in just a little more time.

3. Rick Middleton - I could probably devils-advocate myself on this one, because it was REALLY close between him and Barber. Ultimately the difference between them was that Barber's best seasons were a bit more relevant at the leaguewide level than Middleton's best seasons. Middleton certainly drove his team more, but that's in the context of leading a mediocre group rather than an excellent group. Barber's AS finishes and scoring finishes are just a little better -- a very little. Middleton's slow start cost him the chance to make up ground with longevity, so he goes in behind Barber.

4. Lanny McDonald - His career was oddly fractured by injury and trades... otherwise he might have come out on top in this ranking. Though his scoring profile stands in there with the rest of these guys, McDonald simply put in fewer high-end seasons (maybe 3, compared to 4 or 5) and that's costly in a ranking this close. He certainly wins the longevity competition, but it was more in the "just hanging in there" sense of longevity rather than the "ageless wonder" sense. He wouldn't be in this conversation without his spike 1983 season, but then you look closely and there are little red flags... Kent Nilsson outscoring him... Kent Nilsson having a better playoff... the fact that it wasn't a spike year for Kent Nilsson... and the fact that we're even thinking about him maybe being carried by Kent Nilsson instead of Clarke or Perreault is a problem. So no shame in being 4th in this group, but that's where Lanny goes for me.

5. Bob Gainey - Basically, you either buy into Gainey as a top-60 winger or you don't. Personally I don't think he belongs here. IMO, he derives much of his 'mythology' from the narrative about the Selke being invented for him; but Selke standards have been highly irregular over time, so we don't really have a good way to compare Gainey's record to, say, the literal 'best defensive forward' of the current era. We certainly don't have anything like that for the 70 years before Gainey. And under the more modern, liberal interpretation of what it means to be a Selke-quality winger, there have certainly been many defensive specialists who brought more offense to the table than Gainey. It all just feels a bit like talking about Langway's Norrises, in the sense that you really have to contextualize them in order to hold them up against the rest of history. Lacking a clear-cut awards argument or a clear-cut statistical argument, IMO there's just not a good way to argue Gainey as being superior to wingers who played a responsible defensive game while being about 4 times better offensively, so he is going to be my 5th guy here.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

So in this round we have 5 post-expansion candidates who all had a large amount of career overlap: Barber, Gainey, Martin, McDonald, and Middleton. These 5 make up almost a third of the slate, and could potentially make up half of one's final ballot, so a huge part of this vote hinges on how we rank them against each other. Here's my attempt to make sense of them:

Regarding the four big scorers (ie, not Gainey) -- it's incredible how close they are when you really break down the numbers. We can say about ALL FOUR of them that they:

- Led their team in goals at least 4 times but no more than 6
- Led their team in points at least 1 time but no more than 4
- Top-3 on the team in goals at least 7 times but no more than 8
- Top-3 on their team in assists at least once
- Top-3 on their team in points at least 5 times but no more than 8
- Top-10 in leaguewide goals at least 2 times but no more than 4
- Top-10 in leaguewide points at least 1 time but no more than 2
- Top-4 in winger AS voting at least 3 times but no more than 5
- Top-3 in winger AS voting at least 2 times but no more than 4

And to make things even more fun, those "more than"s are pretty evenly scattered across the different players in different areas of strength.

So, needless to say, I'm drawing razor-thin distinctions between them and I'm conscious that the gaps are so small that a bit of additional context could really change them.

1. Rick Martin - Martin's offensive peak was the highest in the group, and his high-end individual achievements (top AS finishes, top leaguewide scoring finishes) are the most impressive. An easy knock on him is that his scoring is inflated by playing on the French Connection line, but his team scoring finishes actually look better than you might think intuitively. For example, in his rookie season Martin finished in a tie with Perreault for the team scoring lead in fewer GP and a lot -- a LOT -- more goals to his credit. In 1974, when Perreault missed about a third of the season to a broken leg, the Martin-Perreault-Robert trio ended up with PPG of 1.10 - 0.93 - 0.86 respectively, and Martin a mile ahead of his teammates in raw points. The following season Martin and Perreault again ended up with almost exactly the same scoring rate, except Martin had significantly more goals. It wasn't till '76 that Perreault began to really establish a gap between them, due to his rising assist rate. During this time, Martin continued to gain AS awards -- against peak competitors, yes, but also by large gaps. Even as late as 1979, Martin was leading the Sabres in goal scoring, so there's reason to believe he would have been a contributor beyond his 1980 knee injury and premature retirement.

All together, Martin's combination of team-significance and league-significance puts him very narrowly ahead of this pack.

2. Bill Barber - Things that Barber have over Martin: a slightly more rounded game, the good fortune to play in Philly instead of Buffalo, and a hell of a 1976. Otherwise, Barber's profile is just a slight step down from Martin's. For example, Barber's scoring finishes tend to be a little farther behind his linemates; his AS record tends toward the top-3 range instead of the top-2. For a guy whose legacy was cemented largely by winning Cups, I don't think we see a lot of elevation in his playoff profile (if anything it was just the opposite in '74). I'd probably still have favored him over Martin if he had a bit more longevity, but as it turned out he had the same catastrophic knee issue. So you end up with a guy who did just a little less (as an individual) in just a little more time.

3. Rick Middleton - I could probably devils-advocate myself on this one, because it was REALLY close between him and Barber. Ultimately the difference between them was that Barber's best seasons were a bit more relevant at the leaguewide level than Middleton's best seasons. Middleton certainly drove his team more, but that's in the context of leading a mediocre group rather than an excellent group. Barber's AS finishes and scoring finishes are just a little better -- a very little. Middleton's slow start cost him the chance to make up ground with longevity, so he goes in behind Barber.

4. Lanny McDonald - His career was oddly fractured by injury and trades... otherwise he might have come out on top in this ranking. Though his scoring profile stands in there with the rest of these guys, McDonald simply put in fewer high-end seasons (maybe 3, compared to 4 or 5) and that's costly in a ranking this close. He certainly wins the longevity competition, but it was more in the "just hanging in there" sense of longevity rather than the "ageless wonder" sense. He wouldn't be in this conversation without his spike 1983 season, but then you look closely and there are little red flags... Kent Nilsson outscoring him... Kent Nilsson having a better playoff... the fact that it wasn't a spike year for Kent Nilsson... and the fact that we're even thinking about him maybe being carried by Kent Nilsson instead of Clarke or Perreault is a problem. So no shame in being 4th in this group, but that's where Lanny goes for me.

5. Bob Gainey - Basically, you either buy into Gainey as a top-60 winger or you don't. Personally I don't think he belongs here. IMO, he derives much of his 'mythology' from the narrative about the Selke being invented for him; but Selke standards have been highly irregular over time, so we don't really have a good way to compare Gainey's record to, say, the literal 'best defensive forward' of the current era. We certainly don't have anything like that for the 70 years before Gainey. And under the more modern, liberal interpretation of what it means to be a Selke-quality winger, there have certainly been many defensive specialists who brought more offense to the table than Gainey. It all just feels a bit like talking about Langway's Norrises, in the sense that you really have to contextualize them in order to hold them up against the rest of history. Lacking a clear-cut awards argument or a clear-cut statistical argument, IMO there's just not a good way to argue Gainey as being superior to wingers who played a responsible defensive game while being about 4 times better offensively, so he is going to be my 5th guy here.

Shouldn't Middleton's defensive edge put him in front of Barber?

 

[ted2019]

Shouldn't Middleton's defensive edge put him in front of Barber?

Middleton's " edge" really isn't that much considering that Barber had 31 SHG and Middleton had 25 SHG. Barber also lead the league in 1978-79 with 6 SHG. Middleton did have 1 top 5 Selke finish and a top 9 finish, while Barber best finish was 13th.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Shouldn't Middleton's defensive edge put him in front of Barber?

Maybe it should. Was Middleton good enough defensively to bridge and then surpass the offensive gap?

 

[seventieslord]

Maybe it should. Was Middleton good enough defensively to bridge and then surpass the offensive gap?

"Offensive gap"? You've gotta be kidding, man.

Your above statement should have the names reversed. Middleton was, quite easily, the superior offensive talent. Although he was excellent defensively I don't think he surpasses barber in that regard.

 

[tarheelhockey]

^ "You've gotta be kidding" isn't very helpful.

If I got it wrong, show me.

 

[seventieslord]

^ "You've gotta be kidding" isn't very helpful.

If I got it wrong, show me.

For starters, just by the way they were described as players. The eye test. Second, the difference in the help they had from linemates isn't even close. Not that Bourque didn't help, but he wasn't a linemate, and I'm guessing if you remove him, the metrics relating to leading one's team look even more in Middleton's favor.

If one is always scoring 80 points with a 100 point linemate and the other is doing it with 60 point linemates, what does that tell you?

 

[seventieslord]

I mean, Middleton's already conclusively ahead by a metric, VsX, that is probably equally unfair to both players, and 4-odd points over 7 years isn't a small margin, either, as we've seen on those charts in this project.

Furthermore, even with Bourque considered as help (which he definitely was), Middleton's scoring record indicates he was much more of a catalyst. His "help" rating over his best 7 year period is 1.48 - that's better than guys like Goulet, Robitaille, Shanahan, Recchi, etc, from what I can remember when running those numbers for them. Barber's figure is 1.26 - which is Cournoyer territory.

Middleton scored more by a not insiginificant degree, and he did so with an amount of offensive help that was signficantly less.

"You've gotta be kidding me" is the appropriate response because the position that Barber holds an offensive edge is just that fringe. I wouldn't say that position is beneath serious discussion, but it's damn close.