Split League Consolidated All Star Team Discussion

[jarek]

You literally missed the point in which I said I don't think we should blindly follow the votes. But I have a hard time believing that those who saw him play and termed him more valuable than either of the guys you've listed. We may as well just make our teams based on points and be done with it.

You're only justification seems to be outscored by a margin and that's it.

I have no idea why communication is so hard.

I don't think we'd be doing due diligence if we didn't investigate this in depth. I'd like to see some passages from contemporary sources talking about his impact in 1930.

I am NOT suggesting we just make our decisions based on point totals. However, I very strongly feel when something seems out of place, we need to look into it further.

 

[overpass]

Does anyone have recorded the unofficial ASTs voted on by the GMs in the 1927-1930 range? I found this post by TDMM where he lists the entire 1928 team (making our job very easy for that year) but I am pretty sure there are at least a couple full or partial years out there.

Links for two of them.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=90874683&postcount=775

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=49545955&postcount=582

 

[seventieslord]

Links for two of them.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=90874683&postcount=775

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=49545955&postcount=582

thank you.... Also, just realized I posted the wrong link to tdmm's post, it links to the picture in the OP. I'll have to find that again.

 

[seventieslord]

How does this look?

The ATD Retro All-Star Teams Project

The purpose of this project is to determine, to the best of our abilities and using all available information, three teams of unofficial All-Stars for the period beginning just before official NHL teams were named (1930), and continuing back in time through the split league era and beyond, as interest permits.

For every season starting with 1929-30, evidence will be provided in this thread for everyone's digestion and consideration. After a short period of discussion where we attempt to reach a consensus, votes are submitted publicly, via a post in this thread.

Participating members:

1. seventieslord
2. ResilientBeast
3. dreakmur
4. VanIslander
5. jarek
6. BenchBrawl
7. rmartin65
8. chaosrevolver
9.
10.

All-Stars voted on:

1930:

1st Team:

2nd Team:

3rd Team:

RB, assuming you agree, please stick this in the OP.

 

[seventieslord]

Re: Weiland and loafing to score more points: I was looking forward to discussing this. VI is correct that it's well-documented that this happened in the 1929-30 season. So was Weiland the best center in the league or not?

- He outscored any other player by 11 points and had twice as many as even the league's 15th highest scorer
- If it was so easy to do what he was doing, why didn't anyone else do it?
- If a player plays in such a way that it creates more GF but also more GA, it's arguable that his contributions were not a net positive. But the results show that Boston was the best defensive team in the league by a wide margin, with Weiland presumably on the ice more often than any other center. So was he really opening the floodgates at his own end?

on the other hand,

- Nels Stewart edged him in Hart voting, and considering he outscored his nearest teammate 55-33 (as opposed to 73-61 for Weiland), it's entirely arguable Stewart was the better player this season. (Weiland essentially beat Stewart at his own game this season though, didn't he? Stewart often loafed and camped his way to near league leading totals, and the one time Weiland played that way, he led the league).
- Frank Boucher was 2nd in the league in points with a total that was more heavily based on assists, which were not recorded as dilligently back then. He was a better defensive player tyhan Weiland, maybe not always, but certainly this season at least. (He did have a linemate just as good as him, though...)

 

[overpass]

Try this thread for more about the rule change in the 1929-3 season.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=73446107

 

[jarek]

Re: Weiland and loafing to score more points: I was looking forward to discussing this. VI is correct that it's well-documented that this happened in the 1929-30 season. So was Weiland the best center in the league or not?

- He outscored any other player by 11 points and had twice as many as even the league's 15th highest scorer
- If it was so easy to do what he was doing, why didn't anyone else do it?
- If a player plays in such a way that it creates more GF but also more GA, it's arguable that his contributions were not a net positive. But the results show that Boston was the best defensive team in the league by a wide margin, with Weiland presumably on the ice more often than any other center. So was he really opening the floodgates at his own end?

on the other hand,

- Nels Stewart edged him in Hart voting, and considering he outscored his nearest teammate 55-33 (as opposed to 73-61 for Weiland), it's entirely arguable Stewart was the better player this season. (Weiland essentially beat Stewart at his own game this season though, didn't he? Stewart often loafed and camped his way to near league leading totals, and the one time Weiland played that way, he led the league).
- Frank Boucher was 2nd in the league in points with a total that was more heavily based on assists, which were not recorded as dilligently back then. He was a better defensive player tyhan Weiland, maybe not always, but certainly this season at least. (He did have a linemate just as good as him, though...)

What of the other high goal scoring players this season? Morenz had 40, Stewart had 39, Kilrea had 36..

If you look at both the preceding season and the season after, in 1929, the highest scoring player had 32 points. The next season, the highest scoring player had 51.

There is reason to believe that every team was doing this. Certainly Morenz would be a prime candidate for it, with his speed and stickhandling ability. That Weiland was singled out for it may very well be more a factor of him being the best at it. He led the league in scoring by a fairly significant margin. If everyone else was doing this, and there's certainly reason to believe they were, why should Weiland be the only one punished for it?

All that can be said is that Weiland probably had the most help out of all the players this season.

 

[overpass]

Reposting a post of mine from the thread I linked above about the 1929-30 season.

***********************

This isn't exact, but this article gives NHL scoring leaders as of December 24, 1929 - one week after the rules were changed. Here are the numbers for all players named in the article. (GP listed are their teams' games played.)

1. Frank Boucher - 14 GP, 9 goals, 15 assists, 24 points
2. Cooney Weiland - 14 GP, 11 goals, 12 assists, 23 points
3. Bill Cook - 14 GP, 22 points
4. Dutch Gainor - 14 GP, 22 points
5. Hec Kilrea - 14 GP, 14 G, 7 A, 21 points
6. Nels Stewart - 15 GP, 17 G, 4 A, 21 points
7. Aurel Joliat - 16 GP, 20 points
8. King Clancy - 14 GP, 19 points

Doing the math, over the rest of the season these players scored:

1. Cooney Weiland - 30 GP, 32 G, 18 A, 50 points
2. Frank Boucher - 28 GP, 17 G, 21 A, 38 points
3. Bill Cook - 30 GP, 37 points
4. Hec Kilrea - 30 GP, 22 G, 15 A, 37 points
5. Nels Stewart - 29 GP, 22 G, 12 A, 34 points
6. Dutch Gainor - 28 GP, 27 points
7. King Clancy - 30 GP, 21 points
8. Aurel Joliat - 26 GP, 11 points

All players who weren't listed here finished with 50 or fewer points on the season, with the exception of Dit Clapper who scored 61.

When you look at the scoring list from the last two-thirds of the season, played entirely with the offside rule in place, Weiland separated himself from the rest of the league in scoring during this time. It appears that the games played without the offside rule had very little to do with Weiland's scoring in this season.

Boucher was leading in scoring right up until the end of February. As of February 18 he had 58 points and Weiland had 52. Source.

But over the rest of the season Weiland scored 21 points in 9 team games and Boucher scored 4 points in 10 team games. Weiland passed him during the game of Feb 25 when Boston beat Pittsburgh 7-0 and Weiland scored four goals and one assist to reach 61 points to Boucher's 59. Source.

Boucher missed the last two games of the season with a broken shoulder blade, and Weiland scored three goals against the weakend Rangers in the final game of the season to put a stamp on his record-setting season. Source.

***************************

Unless I'm missing something, history has misrepresented the role of the no-offside rule in Weiland's scoring title. The rule was only in place for the first 12-15 games or so, and Weiland was in a group of players within two or three points of the scoring lead at that point. Weiland opened up his scoring lead after the offside rule was put in place.

WIth regards to Weiland's voting results, Frank Boucher was leading in scoring for most of the season and Weiland only took the scoring lead in late February. When you consider that awards ballots were submitted in late February to early March at the time, it's very possible that Weiland was not the league leader in scoring when some ballots were submitted.

 

[seventieslord]

I think that seals it for me. Vi would probably find it hard to disagree.

 

[jarek]

Great find, overpass!

 

[BenchBrawl]

I still would like more perspective on Nels Stewart.The single thing that puts him over Boucher is the Hart.Boucher played with Cook but he was the one getting the Hart votes (and not a negligible amount neither).

Annoying that there is so few quotes from 29-30 for Stewart, Boucher and Weiland in their available bios.The only one I found was about Stewart, and it merely said that he won the Hart.

 

[jarek]

I still would like more perspective on Nels Stewart.The single thing that puts him over Boucher is the Hart.Boucher played with Cook but he was the one getting the Hart votes (and not a negligible amount neither).

Annoying that there is so few quotes from 29-30 for Stewart, Boucher and Weiland in their available bios.The only one I found was about Stewart, and it merely said that he won the Hart.

Stewart's Hart win probably has to do with him nearly doubling the next best player on his team in scoring. Unless he was unusually amazing at the defensive game or something this year..

 

[BenchBrawl]

Stewart's Hart win probably has to do with him nearly doubling the next best player on his team in scoring. Unless he was unusually amazing at the defensive game or something this year..

That's fine, but then do we have to do like the Hart voters and punish Boucher because he played with Cook, even though Boucher received the Hart votes? The ''most-valuable'' factor shouldn't apply as much with AST selections as it does for the Hart.

I'm leaning

1.Weiland
2.Boucher
3.Stewart

 

[jarek]

That's fine, but then do we have to do like the Hart voters and punish Boucher because he played with Cook, even though Boucher received the Hart votes?

I'm leaning

1.Weiland
2.Boucher
3.Stewart

Well like I said earlier, the Hart back then probably was awarded to the guy judged most valuable to his team. It wasn't the best player award like we often see today. There is certainly a strong case for Stewart being more important to his team than anybody else, at least based on scoring.

That being said, I may be leaning more towards your way of thinking here. Stewart was great this year but unless he brought a lot more to the table than scoring, he was not likely the best center.

 

[BenchBrawl]

BTW I thought this project was strictly about defensemen, not sure why lol.

 

[jarek]

BTW I thought this project was strictly about defensemen, not sure why lol.

Nope, it's *much* more interesting.

The battle at RW is interesting. Clapper and Cook surely have to be 1-2 in some order. Who is 3rd?

For LW it's even harder. Kilrea is the obvious winner for me there, and then it could go any way depending on what we find.

Reposting a post of mine from the thread I linked above about the 1929-30 season.

***********************

This isn't exact, but this article gives NHL scoring leaders as of December 24, 1929 - one week after the rules were changed. Here are the numbers for all players named in the article. (GP listed are their teams' games played.)

1. Frank Boucher - 14 GP, 9 goals, 15 assists, 24 points
2. Cooney Weiland - 14 GP, 11 goals, 12 assists, 23 points
3. Bill Cook - 14 GP, 22 points
4. Dutch Gainor - 14 GP, 22 points
5. Hec Kilrea - 14 GP, 14 G, 7 A, 21 points
6. Nels Stewart - 15 GP, 17 G, 4 A, 21 points
7. Aurel Joliat - 16 GP, 20 points
8. King Clancy - 14 GP, 19 points

Doing the math, over the rest of the season these players scored:

1. Cooney Weiland - 30 GP, 32 G, 18 A, 50 points
2. Frank Boucher - 28 GP, 17 G, 21 A, 38 points
3. Bill Cook - 30 GP, 37 points
4. Hec Kilrea - 30 GP, 22 G, 15 A, 37 points
5. Nels Stewart - 29 GP, 22 G, 12 A, 34 points
6. Dutch Gainor - 28 GP, 27 points
7. King Clancy - 30 GP, 21 points
8. Aurel Joliat - 26 GP, 11 points

All players who weren't listed here finished with 50 or fewer points on the season, with the exception of Dit Clapper who scored 61.

When you look at the scoring list from the last two-thirds of the season, played entirely with the offside rule in place, Weiland separated himself from the rest of the league in scoring during this time. It appears that the games played without the offside rule had very little to do with Weiland's scoring in this season.

Boucher was leading in scoring right up until the end of February. As of February 18 he had 58 points and Weiland had 52. Source.

But over the rest of the season Weiland scored 21 points in 9 team games and Boucher scored 4 points in 10 team games. Weiland passed him during the game of Feb 25 when Boston beat Pittsburgh 7-0 and Weiland scored four goals and one assist to reach 61 points to Boucher's 59. Source.

Boucher missed the last two games of the season with a broken shoulder blade, and Weiland scored three goals against the weakend Rangers in the final game of the season to put a stamp on his record-setting season. Source.

***************************

Unless I'm missing something, history has misrepresented the role of the no-offside rule in Weiland's scoring title. The rule was only in place for the first 12-15 games or so, and Weiland was in a group of players within two or three points of the scoring lead at that point. Weiland opened up his scoring lead after the offside rule was put in place.

WIth regards to Weiland's voting results, Frank Boucher was leading in scoring for most of the season and Weiland only took the scoring lead in late February. When you consider that awards ballots were submitted in late February to early March at the time, it's very possible that Weiland was not the league leader in scoring when some ballots were submitted.

Now that I look at this again, I am absolutely bewildered that Clapper wasn't a top-8 scorer through 12-15 games, given how he ended up.

Something significant changed in Boston that made them a much more dangerous scoring machine.

I wonder if Clapper started on defense and then was moved to RW.

 

[seventieslord]

I still would like more perspective on Nels Stewart.The single thing that puts him over Boucher is the Hart.Boucher played with Cook but he was the one getting the Hart votes (and not a negligible amount neither).

Annoying that there is so few quotes from 29-30 for Stewart, Boucher and Weiland in their available bios.The only one I found was about Stewart, and it merely said that he won the Hart.

I should clarify that when I said that sealed it for me, I meant I wouldn't hold the loafing/camping thing against Weiland, not that he's a lock for 1st team.

BTW I thought this project was strictly about defensemen, not sure why lol.

Well the defensemen are who I'm most interested in for sure. But if we're gonna do this, we should do a complete job.

I wonder if Clapper started on defense and then was moved to RW.

I've never heard anything about Clapper switching during a season.

 

[overpass]

When interpreting voting results from the divisional era of the 20s and 30s, consider the division in which players played.

If you go to the newspaper archives and read the weekly updates on the league scoring leaders, the leaders are often reported separately by division. It's probable that rankings within the division were more meaningful at to the voters of the time than they have been to the history enthusiasts on these boards.

Scoring leaders Boucher and Weiland were both in the American division, where Boston ran away with first place. Nels Stewart was one of the scoring leaders all season in a tight Canadian division race.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Nels Stewart

Below is a quote talking about how Hooley Smith won ''Most Valuable Player'' in the Maroons home games (in 29-30 this time).

It may be surprising to some local hockey fans to know that Hooley Smith was adjudged the most useful player to the Montreal Maroons in the club's home games this season.Nels Stewart, Flat Walsh and Jimmy Ward were tied for second place in the voting.


Hooley took down a valuable trophy as a result of the voting.It will be interesting to see how many votes he receives for the Hart Trophy, awarded along the same lines, but open to all players in the NHL.My guess is that Stewart will double the score on him.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...g=5684,2367595&dq=montreal+maroons+1929&hl=en

-----

Some blog I found talking about Stewart's line:

In 1929-30, Stewart was teamed with Siebert and Hooley Smith to form the dreaded S Line. This formidable trio fused talent and physical play at a level rarely seen in NHL history. Stewart responded to this new assignment with a personal-best 39 goals in only 44 games. Stewart scored 134 times in just 5 seasons with the "S" line. He was presented with his second Hart Trophy and his reputation as one of the most effective pivots in league history was solidified. He starred for the Maroons for seven seasons in all.

http://hockeygods.com/images/9691-Nels_Stewart___Montreal_Maroons___1930

-----

This is a quote about Stewart I found in Hooley Smith's bio, but it is from 1928.

Who in hockey has not heard of Hooley Smith, daring, dauntless and doughty, fearing no man, and accordingly to report few women, as John Bassett said at the banquet to the Senators last spring when they were acclaimed world's champions.

Smith, the daring chance-taker who makes more hazardous plays than any man in hockey, has twice been injured in recent games, and is playing with a fibre jockey cap to prevent head injuries. He has given xxxxxx the hockey attribute he has been seeking for years, a strong poke-check, and around his check and ability to stop headlong rushes by opponents, Maroons are building a mighty machine again...

Smith, of course, isn't the whole machine, though a strong cog. Any team that had Nels Stewart would think it well endowed in a scoring way. Stewart, rugged and rangy, whose vicious drive is the nemesis of many a goal tend, is now at left wing playing well. With Smith and xxxxxxx, he helps to work in a close-knit combination, and is particularly powerful in his body-checking propensities.

It's the only intangible I've read about Stewart besides his ability in front of the net.Not sure if that means anything for 29-30.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm far from satisfied with the material I have to make an educated decision, but I guess that's what we meant by ''to the best of our abilities''.

That's what I have as of now, subject to change:

1st Team:
? - Weiland - Cook(?)
Hitchmen - Clancy

2nd team:
? - Stewart - Clapper(?)
Shore - ?

3rd team:
? - Boucher - ?
? - ?

I haven't checked the wingers at all.

Notice that in light of what overpass said above, I re-switched Boucher and Stewart, as I think contextually Stewart had a better year leading his team to a 1st place in a tough and tight division while being the main man with the Maroons, while the NYR didn't do that great with both Boucher and Cook having a decent year.

 

[jarek]

I'm far from satisfied with the material I have to make an educated decision, but I guess that's what we meant by ''to the best of our abilities''.

That's what I have as of now, subject to change:

1st Team:
? - Weiland - Cook(?)
Hitchmen - Clancy

2nd team:
? - Stewart - Clapper(?)
Shore - ?

3rd team:
? - Boucher - ?
? - ?

I haven't checked the wingers at all.

Notice that in light of what overpass said above, I re-switched Boucher and Stewart, as I think contextually Stewart had a better year leading his team to a 1st place in a tough and tight division while being the main man with the Maroons, while the NYR didn't do that great with both Boucher and Cook having a decent year.

Perhaps Clapper should be ahead of Cook based on the fact that Boston did very well as a team (in fact, Boston was the best team this year.. and it was not close). Clapper seemed to be an integral part of it as Weiland's scoring explosion coincided with Clapper's.

Question, are we supposed to include post-season performance when selecting these teams? I am actually not sure if the NHL does this in real life.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Perhaps Clapper should be ahead of Cook based on the fact that Boston did very well as a team (in fact, Boston was the best team this year.. and it was not close). Clapper seemed to be an integral part of it as Weiland's scoring explosion coincided with Clapper's.

I don't know.In 29-30 Cook came back strong after two less-than-stellar seasons.This might have made the Hart voters more careful about giving votes to Cook instead of Boucher.Cook went on to have many strong years after that but this was unknown at the time.

As it looks right now, Boston had the 1st team center, a 1st and 2nd team defensemen in Hitchmen and Shore, and had 22 years old Dit Clapper at RW competing against a ''just coming back'' 33 years old Bill Cook.Cook might have been the better player here given the context.

Question, are we supposed to include post-season performance when selecting these teams? I am actually not sure if the NHL does this in real life.

I don't include it.

 

[seventieslord]

definitely no postseason included.

 

[jarek]

Question going forward: should we make a separate thread for each year? So that way we can get critical things like the eligible players list in the OP?

I don't know.In 29-30 Cook came back strong after two less-than-stellar seasons.This might have made the Hart voters more careful about giving votes to Cook instead of Boucher.Cook went on to have many strong years after that but this was unknown at the time.

As it looks right now, Boston had the 1st team center, a 1st and 2nd team defensemen in Hitchmen and Shore, and had 22 years old Dit Clapper at RW competing against a ''just coming back'' 33 years old Bill Cook.Cook might have been the better player here given the context.



I don't include it.

Should Cook's condition from previous years really play into whether or not he makes an all star team for this specific season? It looks to me like Clapper was the better player.

 

[jarek]

I don't know if this was known or not but apparently Joliat had a good shot:

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=vW8tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6846,3018448

Apparently the Bruins adjusted to the new passing rules quite early in the season. Toronto took 5 penalties in the Bruins' second game for breaking the rule while Boston only took 1.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=vW8tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6642,3025769

A game too rough for even Eddie Shore.. haha.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=w28tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6658,4278330

A scoring "orgy".. interesting.. I'm sure the word must have meant something entirely different back then.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=xW8tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6680,4657925

Well this is interesting.. "Big Nels was in on everything and back-checked like a fiend."

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=xW8tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6689,4659279

Including the above, it looks like Clapper started the season as a sub. I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=v28tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6643,3412071
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=u28tAAAAIBAJ&sjid=KowFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6710,2609992

Unfortunately there is nothing available for the month of December.