Round 2, Vote 2 (HOH Top Defensemen)

[Pear Juice]

Its not the style, its the results.

By what metric are Paul Coffey's results worse than anyone available in this round?

 

[Hardyvan123]

By what metric are Paul Coffey's results worse than anyone available in this round?

For me it's the defensive metric.

My vote is in and this round was much tougher than round 1

 

[VMBM]

Reading some posts here - if I didn't know better - I'd think that Fetisov was nothing special without the Green Unit.

- Again, why did he stood out from the rest (along with the forward Makarov)? And if you think he didn't stand out, then you probably haven't seen them much. So, the 5man unit helped him? Okay, did he help - as the obvious leader of the unit - maybe the others too, and even more so? Was his role possibly more than just 1/5 of the unit? What if he had lesser players around him and he had had to take more responsibility; would he have been unable to fill that role or, say, could he have become even more of a key player? i.e. was the 5man unit just a blessing for him, or is it possible that it hindered him from achieving even more (plus that his greatness still being doubted years later on a friggin' message board)
- when NOT playing with the Green unit, Fetisov wasn't very good or something?(and if you think that it never happened during the games - like in, say, every game - then you REALLY haven't seen them much). When as a 19/20-year old youngster he was selected the best dman at the 1978 WC, he wasn't playing with the Green unit you know (because it didn't even exist then). The competition was awful, you probably say (although Vasiliev, Lutchenko, Bubla, Machac, Waltin were pretty good, and some even better than that)
- You have seen the quotes from the NA players (I would add Darryl Sittler during the 1984 CC semi-final broadcast) calling him the best dman in the world, but I guess they (like me & hockey experts and hockey fans) have all been fooled by the sheer magic and wonder of the '5man unit'

Just because four of them played until their late 30s/early 40s proves that they - or some of them - weren't past their primes around 1989? Anyone thought that they wanted to make some money for themselves and their families before retiring? Has anyone ever thought that if Peter Stastny had come in the NHL as a 31-year old instead of 24-year old, nobody outside Europe and hardcore NA hockey fans would be talking about him now? And maybe the fact that he is a unique case; a great player from Eastern bloc who started out in the NHL when he was still young and just approaching his prime. You say that Fetisov still should have done better as a 31-year old? Fair enough. But I say that he is still a far greater player than Stastny even if he didn't have a great NHL career.

Should the comparisons between NHL players and European greats, er, cease to exist? It is nothing but a big, frustrating headache, as far as I can see. Oh yeah, I forgot, Fetisov (as well as Makarov, Krutov, Nedomansky, Hlinka, Novy...) had an 'NHL career'

Anyway, this is a great reason for me to stay the hell away from here. Been looking for that for some time now (Yes yes, buzz of drama queen, I know).

 

[Pear Juice]

For me it's the defensive metric.

My vote is in and this round was much tougher than round 1

I'm sorry, but I don't see how defense is a metric for results. Playing a strong defensive game is not a result in itself, it contributes to achieve the overall result; winning hockey games. He may have been the worst defenseman available at playing a defensive game but he is also the strongest offensive contributor of them. The net result is that he won hockey games basically anywhere he went (save for his final few years when he was clearly far from his best).

 

[plusandminus]

Reading some posts here - if I didn't know better - I'd think that Fetisov was nothing special without the Green Unit.

- Again, why did he stood out from the rest (along with the forward Makarov)? And if you think he didn't stand out, then you probably haven't seen them much. So, the 5man unit helped him? Okay, did he help - as the obvious leader of the unit - maybe the others too, and even more so? Was his role possibly more than just 1/5 of the unit? What if he had lesser players around him and he had had to take more responsibility; would he have been unable to fill that role or, say, could he have become even more of a key player? i.e. was the 5man unit just a blessing for him, or is it possible that it hindered him from achieving even more (plus that his greatness still being doubted years later on a friggin' message board)
- when NOT playing with the Green unit, Fetisov wasn't very good or something?(and if you think that it never happened during the games - like in, say, every game - then you REALLY haven't seen them much). When as a 19/20-year old youngster he was selected the best dman at the 1978 WC, he wasn't playing with the Green unit you know (because it didn't even exist then). The competition was awful, you probably say (although Vasiliev, Lutchenko, Bubla, Machac, Waltin were pretty good, and some even better than that)
- You have seen the quotes from the NA players (I would add Darryl Sittler during the 1984 CC semi-final broadcast) calling him the best dman in the world, but I guess they (like me & hockey experts and hockey fans) have all been fooled by the sheer magic and wonder of the '5man unit'

Just because four of them played until their late 30s/early 40s proves that they - or some of them - weren't past their primes around 1989? Anyone thought that they wanted to make some money for themselves and their families before retiring? Has anyone ever thought that if Peter Stastny had come in the NHL as a 31-year old instead of 24-year old, nobody outside Europe and hardcore NA hockey fans would be talking about him now? And maybe the fact that he is a unique case; a great player from Eastern bloc who started out in the NHL when he was still young and just approaching his prime. You say that Fetisov still should have done better as a 31-year old? Fair enough. But I say that he is still a far greater player than Stastny even if he didn't have a great NHL career.

Should the comparisons between NHL players and European greats, er, cease to exist? It is nothing but a big, frustrating headache, as far as I can see. Oh yeah, I forgot, Fetisov (as well as Makarov, Krutov, Nedomansky, Hlinka, Novy...) had an 'NHL career'

I agree with parts of what you write, and think you raise some important points that I get the impression is being constantly overlooked and needs to be reminded of. While some participants seem to respect hockey outside of North America, my impression is that for many Canadians hockey simply is hockey in North America. When a European player decides to stop play in the NHL and move back home, he "retires", even if he'll continue to play at a very high level but in another environment.
Nice comparison with Peter Stastny. (It may not be perfect but yet thought awakening.)

When the IIHF chose its All Star Team of the century, it consisted of Tretiak, Fetisov, Salming, Makarov, Kharlamov, and (the only North American) Gretzky. It does seem a bit too "European". Yet "The panel comprised 56 ice hockey experts from 16 countries representing a balance between North American and European countries, and included people who have worked in the game for an extended period and whose opinions are universally respected. One of the 56 votes represented the collective opinion of the staff of The Hockey News.", according to http://www.iihf.com/100-years/100-years-of-ice-hockey/home/centennial-all-star-team.html
Maybe it is as "European" to a North American as the North American rankings are to Europeans.

So far, this project do seem fairly fair in regard to Europeans. Among post 1968, Lidstrom finished 3rd in this project's ranking, and Fetisov seem to finish around 5th. Let's hope Salming will get recognized in the next group (he was very good att both ends of the ice, and was likely a top 2 European NHL defenceman of the whole 20th century as well as being great internationally). Regarding Kelly, it would have been interesting to see Suchy in the same environment as him.

 

[Pear Juice]

Reading some posts here - if I didn't know better - I'd think that Fetisov was nothing special without the Green Unit.

- Again, why did he stood out from the rest (along with the forward Makarov)? And if you think he didn't stand out, then you probably haven't seen them much. So, the 5man unit helped him? Okay, did he help - as the obvious leader of the unit - maybe the others too, and even more so? Was his role possibly more than just 1/5 of the unit? What if he had lesser players around him and he had had to take more responsibility; would he have been unable to fill that role or, say, could he have become even more of a key player? i.e. was the 5man unit just a blessing for him, or is it possible that it hindered him from achieving even more (plus that his greatness still being doubted years later on a friggin' message board)
- when NOT playing with the Green unit, Fetisov wasn't very good or something?(and if you think that it never happened during the games - like in, say, every game - then you REALLY haven't seen them much). When as a 19/20-year old youngster he was selected the best dman at the 1978 WC, he wasn't playing with the Green unit you know (because it didn't even exist then). The competition was awful, you probably say (although Vasiliev, Lutchenko, Bubla, Machac, Waltin were pretty good, and some even better than that)
- You have seen the quotes from the NA players (I would add Darryl Sittler during the 1984 CC semi-final broadcast) calling him the best dman in the world, but I guess they (like me & hockey experts and hockey fans) have all been fooled by the sheer magic and wonder of the '5man unit'

Just because four of them played until their late 30s/early 40s proves that they - or some of them - weren't past their primes around 1989? Anyone thought that they wanted to make some money for themselves and their families before retiring? Has anyone ever thought that if Peter Stastny had come in the NHL as a 31-year old instead of 24-year old, nobody outside Europe and hardcore NA hockey fans would be talking about him now? And maybe the fact that he is a unique case; a great player from Eastern bloc who started out in the NHL when he was still young and just approaching his prime. You say that Fetisov still should have done better as a 31-year old? Fair enough. But I say that he is still a far greater player than Stastny even if he didn't have a great NHL career.

Should the comparisons between NHL players and European greats, er, cease to exist? It is nothing but a big, frustrating headache, as far as I can see. Oh yeah, I forgot, Fetisov (as well as Makarov, Krutov, Nedomansky, Hlinka, Novy...) had an 'NHL career'

Anyway, this is a great reason for me to stay the hell away from here. Been looking for that for some time now (Yes yes, buzz of drama queen, I know).

What matters to me is that Fetisov was the captain, leader, and overall best player on the most dominant hockey team I have ever seen. Playing together as line mates for a very long time elevated all the players of the CSKA Moscow team to very great heights, that's undeniable. The chemistry they showed on the ice was sensational. But I don't see why that should in any way be accounted for as negative. That's punishing a player for achieving team results, which to me seems completely contradictory to the whole purpose of the game itself.

It would be one thing if Fetisov was a marginal or even merely a very good player on these teams, but he was (at least I would argue so) the most important player for the Soviet team throughout the entire 1980s. His team and his line was absolutely world class for ten years. I simply cannot fathom how that could be a problem.

 

[VanIslander]

I was convinced until recently that Fetisov was better than Lidstrom. I certainly think Fetisov is top-10 all time. I have watched hockey since the seventies and only Bourque and one other (not in top-10 discussions, will refer to the guy later) has ever impressed me the way Fetisov did. Makarov may have been the most hyped star, but team USSR was clearly Fetisov's team, just like the Oilers' was obvious to anyone who watched them to be Messier's team more than Gretz's.

From Lawrence Martin's "The Red Machine"(1990):

Fetisov was not the Bobby Orr of Soviet hockey, as some seekers of superlatives sought to label him. In his prime, however, he was better than Denis Potvin, Larry Robinson, Brad Park and all the rest. Gretzky called him the hardest defenseman to beat that he ever played against.

He.. developed into a rock-solid physical mass, with tree-trunk legs. He possessed exceptional mobility and an uncanny sense of when to make the telling penetration from the blueline. To sit in the stands in Moscow was to be mystified by this. Fetisov would leave his point position for no apparent reason and dash into the melee in front of the goal. As if pre-ordained, the puck would speed to him among all the other bodies. Fetisov would shoot or pass off instantly and be back at the point.

As captain of both Central Army and the national team, Fetisov looked the part. He was the ice commander, the Doctor Cool of Soviet hockey. His very physical presence defined leadership.

 

[Dreakmur]

I was convinced until recently that Fetisov was better than Lidstrom. I certainly think Fetisov is top-10 all time. I have watched hockey since the seventies and only Bourque and one other (not in top-10 discussions, will refer to the guy later) has ever impressed me the way Fetisov did. Makarov may have been the most hyped star, but team USSR was clearly Fetisov's team, just like the Oilers' was obvious to anyone who watched them to be Messier's team more than Gretz's.

From Lawrence Martin's "The Red Machine"(1990):

He possessed exceptional mobility and instinctively knew when to pinch in from the blueline to create a scoring chance in the offensive zone. As a defenceman in the 1980s he had few rivals, not just at home but worldwide.

His talent, size, and hockey intelligence was undeniable.

He was well respected by his teammates for his strength of character both as a player and as a person, and he served as captain of both the National Team and of the Central Army squad.

He possessed exceptional mobility and instincts, both offensively and defensively. He was always in perfect position defensively, though never shied from taking offensive chances. He was also a hard hitting and mean spirited defender, setting him apart from most international players of his day. The 6'1", 215 pound blue liner was among the biggest and best-conditioned hockey players in the world. He loved physical contact, setting him apart from others and earned the grudging admiration of even the bitterest rivals.

When it was announced that he would not be allowed to play with the National Team during the upcoming World Championships, his teammates rose in solidarity to have him reinstated by stating that if Fetisov would not be allowed to play then they would not play either. He was soon reinstated and the players wasted no time in electing him as their captain.

He was always a tough competitor because he had great size, he had great vision of the ice and he always made solid plays. Very, very seldom did you ever see him make a bad play and he was a guy that was a lot like Denis Potvin in that he could kind of do it all.

He's a phenomenal player. He reads and anticipates so well. He's big and strong like Rod Langway, but he moves into the play like a Ray Bourque.

He’ll help an awflul lot. Not only with his ability, but with his leadership. He can make an entire team a notch better.

… Viacheslav Fetisov, the Soviet Union’s premier defenseman and generally regarded by hockey people everywhere as the world’s best defenseman.

They lost their dynamo and policeman. He was a player with lots of muscle, a guy who could play 35 minutes a game.

The Soviets without Tretiak and Fetisov are like New York Islanders playing without Billy Smith and Denis Potvin.

You look at that (Viachislav Fetisov), and if you weren’t behind 5-1, you would want to stand up a cheer. Or maybe cry in envy.

Yesterday, a tremendous young Russian defenseman named Vyachesav Fetisov waited patiently for Gretzky to finish his bluff, then blithely skated off with the puck. Fetisov was a tower of strength all day, a fact that stunned us Canadians who had been contemptuous until now of Russian defensemen (“Can never learn to get it out of their own endâ€).

Viacheslav Fetisov, 24, is the star of the Soviet defense and the team captain for the tour. He stands 6-1 and 198, and is sometimes called “the Bobby Orr of Europeâ€. Edmonton’s Wayne Gretzky says Fetisov is the best defensemen he has ever played against.

As usual, they were like a red machine, with every perpetually moving part working in unison. But a couple of those gears stood out in particular Thursday: defenseman Viacheslav Fetisov and goaltender Vladislav Tretiak.

If you can look past the red of his uniform, Fetisov may be the closest thing you’ll ever see to Bobby Orr. In one particular sequence, he was skating so fast with the puck – backwards – that none of the Flyers could catch him.

He (Wayne Gretzky) said that Fetisov was excellent both offensively and defensively.

Defenseman Viacheslav Fetisov – considered by many the best defenseman in the world – broke his leg…

Although both teams are coming off shutouts, the Soviets hold a strong defensive edge with the pairing of Viacheslav Fetisov and Alexsei Kasatonov, not so arguably the best defensive pairing ever to play the game. And, despite what you read about Wayne Gretzky, many people outside Alberta consider Fetisov to be the hands-down best all-around player in the world. Some even compare him to Bobby Orr.

Vyacheslav Fetisov, the giant Soviet defenseman who is regarded as the best in the world at that position, isn’t in the latest Canada Cup lineup. He’s suffering from an ankle injury…

Even the Soviet defensemen are rabbit-quick. Viacheslav Fetisov and Alexai Kasatonov complete what is generally regarded as the first team I the Soviet lineup.

The 27-year-old defenseman was generally regarded as the best hockey player in the world last year… normally a hard-hitting but clean player…

The Soviet Union All-Stars, led by the smooth passing of Vyacheslav Fetisov and the cool goaltending of Vladislav Tretiak, defeated the Philadelphia Flyers…

The Soviets, mixing pinpoint passing and solid defense led by Vyachelav Feitsov…

Defenseman Vyacheslav Fetisov, a 24-year-old Communist Bobby Orr…

For every clean, hard check, like the one Fetisov threw to send Mario Lemieux head-first into the boards…

Soviet League Accomplishments:
11 x Soviet League Champion (1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989)

11 x European Cup (1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989)


2 x MVP (1982, 1986)

9 x All-Star (1978, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988)

MVP Voting – 1st(1982), 1st(1986), 2nd(1985), 2nd(1988), 3rd(1978), 3rd(1984), 3rd(1989), 4th(1983), 5th(1987)


Soviet League Scoring:
Points – 4th(1984), 7th(1987), 8th(1986)

Points among Defensemen – 1st(1978), 1st(1979), 1st(1980), 1st(1981), 1st(1982), 1st(1984), 1st(1986), 1st(1987), 1st(1988), 2nd(1983), 2nd(1985), 5th(1989)

Goals among Defensemen – 1st(1979), 1st(1984), 1st(1986), 1st(1987), 1st(1988), 2nd(1978), 2nd(1981), 2nd(1985), 3rd(1980), 3rd(1982), 3rd(1983), 4th(1989)



International Accomplishments:
2 x Olympic Gold Medalist (1984, 1988)

Olympic Bronze Medalist (1980)

7 x World Championship Gold Medalist (1978, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1986, 1989, 1990)

World Championship Silver Medalist (1987)

2 x World Championship Bronze Medalist (1985, 1991)

Canada Cup (1981)



Hockey Hall of Fame (2001)

IIHF Hall of Fame (2005)



IIHF Centennial All-Star

5 x IIHF Best Defenseman (1978, 1982, 1985, 1986, 1989)

9 x IIHF All-Star (1978, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1990, 1991)

Canada Cup All-Star (1987)

2 x Isvesta Cup Best Defenseman (1984, 1988)

Golden Hockey Stick voting - 1st(1984), 1st(1988), 1st(1989), 3rd(1985), 4th(1986), 5th(1987), 10th(1983)



International Scoring:
Olympics
Points – 2nd(1988), 4th(1984)
Points among Defensemen – 1st(1980) 1st(1984), 1st(1988)

World Championships
Points – 2nd(1985), 4th(1986), 5th(1987), 5th(1990), 6th(1983)
Points among Defensemen – 1st(1985), 1st(1986), 1st(1987), 2nd(1983), 2nd(1990)

Canada Cup
Points – 7th(1987), 8th(1981)
Points among Defensemen – 2nd(1987), 2nd(1981)

Euro Cup
Points – 2nd(1986), 2nd(1987), 5th(1981), 6th(1985)
Points among Defensemen – 1st(1981), 1st(1985), 1st(1986), 1st(1987)

NHL Accomplishments:
2 x Stanley Cup Champion (1997, 1998)
2 x NHL All-Star (1997, 1998)

 

[overpass]

Good to see a push for Fetisov. I haven't posted much on him but have him in my top 3 for this round.

Hope it's not coming too late to affect the voting.

 

[jkrx]

If Fetisov and Potvin isn't the top on this list then this whole ranking project might as well shut down.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If Fetisov and Potvin isn't the top on this list then this whole ranking project might as well shut down.

Feel free to submit a list for our next project, so you can turn your strong opinion into a vote.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Good to see a push for Fetisov. I haven't posted much on him but have him in my top 3 for this round.

Hope it's not coming too late to affect the voting.

Anyone who already submitted a vote can change their vote, so long as it's before the deadline. I don't necessarily expect it to happen, but it's always an option.

Just please indicate somewhere in the PM that it is a corrected or updated vote, so I don't get confused.

 

[Dreakmur]

If Fetisov and Potvin isn't the top on this list then this whole ranking project might as well shut down.

I'd bet money that Potvin ends up in 6th. I'd bet just as much that Fetisov won't be 7th.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

19/23 votes are in, which is fantastic turnout.

Planning to close voting at 6PM sharp (EST).

Edit: Got 20/23

 

[MXD]

If Fetisov and Potvin isn't the top on this list then this whole ranking project might as well shut down.

I think a case can be made for as much as 5 guys (with the exception of Potvin that you mentionned -- so 6, all in all) ahead of Fetisov in this round.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

By what metric are Paul Coffey's results worse than anyone available in this round?

Not sure about what metric.

My only point was that it wasn't his style of play that was bothersome, rather his weak defensive play, period.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how defense is a metric for results. Playing a strong defensive game is not a result in itself, it contributes to achieve the overall result; winning hockey games. He may have been the worst defenseman available at playing a defensive game but he is also the strongest offensive contributor of them. The net result is that he won hockey games basically anywhere he went (save for his final few years when he was clearly far from his best).

He didn't win any games. Teams win games. And the teams he played on instantly won more games as soon as he was gone.

 

[unknown33]

Teams win games. And the teams he played on instantly won more games as soon as he was gone.

That doubt that's correct tbh.

DRW won the Cup, yes but I don't think any of EDM, PIT, DRW win % increased after he left.

 

[nik jr]

That doubt that's correct tbh.

DRW won the Cup, yes but I don't think any of EDM, PIT, DRW win % increased after he left.

penguins' points % increased in '92 and '93 after trading coffey, but lemieux missed most of '91 and jagr was becoming a star.

oilers' and DRW's points % declined, but all 3 won the cup.

 

[double5son10]

I'm coming late to the dance as a poster, but after reading the whole of the thread there's a point about Larry Robinson I'd like to make, since nobody else has mentioned it. A couple of months before the 1987-88 season was to start Robinson broke his leg playing his other passion, polo. He missed the 1st quarter of the season that year and for the rest of his career played in pain from that injury. The injury definitely affected his skating ability, very observable by the drop in his scoring #s in his final full season in Montreal and his years w/ the Kings. He was still a good player, just not the offensive force he had been, and it certainly skews his #s over the last part of his career. I've seen mention of Fetisov being affected by the car crash, just thought I'd point out that Robinson's last five years occurred after having a horse fall on him.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Not sure about what metric.

My only point was that it wasn't his style of play that was bothersome, rather his weak defensive play, period.

Interestingly, for Coffey being so "weak", he and Bourque have very similar career differentials in goals for and against.

Actually, many of the best all around modern defensemen seem to be in the 800-1000 goal differential for their careers. (Potvin is around 800 and Lidstrom and Robinson are both around 900 for example - Bobby Orr was able to rack up the same 900ish differential in his short career).

Raymond Bourque:

1612GP
On Ice for 3257 Total GF
On Ice for 2144 Total Goals Against

For a difference of 1113 in his career.


Paul Coffey:

1409GP
On Ice for 3095 Total GF
On Ice for 2018 Total GA

For a difference of 1077 in his shorter career (including a pretty bad dropoff his last 5 years).


Now, Bourque was used much more on the penalty kill and does have 300 more powerplay goals against so yes of course he is better defensively.. but he also played 200 more games, and was on the ice for more powerplay goals in his career than Coffey too.

Just making the point that for all the supposed shortcomings, Coffey was definitely a game changing player in a very positive sense. He just needed a team that could take advantage of him moreso than the other top defensemen who were more well rounded between their offense and defense. He wouldn't have done very well playing for the dead puck era Devils, I imagine. They really put the reins on Niedermayer too.

 

[seventieslord]

Prior to today, I had never seen an argument that attempted to use total goals for and against over a career and claim to be in any way meaningful.

This also doesn't consider:

- That these totals get badly skewed by special teams
- That one player had a longer career
- That one player averaged significantly more ice time in his career
- That one player spent most of his career on a team that was defense-first and the other spent his best year on a team that, to call it offense-first would be the understatement of the year
- That one player was used almost exclusively against the opposition's best and the other would only see those players as necessary
- What baseline results would have looked like (i.e. how many GF/GA would an average player have in the same situations surrounded by the players they were)

 

[BraveCanadian]

Prior to today, I had never seen an argument that attempted to use total goals for and against over a career and claim to be in any way meaningful.

This also doesn't consider:

- That these totals get badly skewed by special teams
- That one player had a longer career
- That one player averaged significantly more ice time in his career
- That one player spent most of his career on a team that was defense-first and the other spent his best year on a team that, to call it offense-first would be the understatement of the year
- That one player was used almost exclusively against the opposition's best and the other would only see those players as necessary
- What baseline results would have looked like (i.e. how many GF/GA would an average player have in the same situations surrounded by the players they were)

Obviously it isn't a very scientific look at anything I just found it odd that so many of the top defensemen in the modern era had posted differentials over their careers that were so similar no matter their style of play. Especially when we say some were defense first ala Lidstrom and some were offense first like Coffey. Also kind of interesting is that Stevens offense dried up so much and he was so focused on defense/PK in the later half of his career that he is a top dman who was more close to even in his career.

For sure Coffey was more offensive and Bourque/Lidstrom etc. more well rounded, no one would try to dispute that.

Also I don't see how you can make the claim that Bourque was playing this massive icetime and being exclusively matched up against the oppositions best at the same time. Playing all the time means facing the good opposition and the bad opposition even if the coach was making sure he was out there as much as he could against the best.