tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
You know, it's never occurred to me to ask whether hockey had on-the-fly substitutions during that era.
That style of play became obsolete when Odie Cleghorn (apocryphally, at least) pioneered the idea of wholesale substitutions in the form of line changes. From what I have seen, it took a little while before 2nd/3rd liners were no longer listed as spares.
Prior to the advent of "rolling" lines, hockey teams consisted of 6 starters and a list of spares. Your starters played the whole game unless injured or exhausted. A good spare at each position was helpful. The dynamics were very similar to modern basketball.
That style of play became obsolete when Odie Cleghorn (apocryphally, at least) pioneered the idea of wholesale substitutions in the form of line changes. From what I have seen, it took a little while before 2nd/3rd liners were no longer listed as spares.
I've read accounts of both Cleghorn and Lester Patrick "inventing" the idea of a second line. Haven't really looked into it enough to figure it out.
Not sure that I've read about Cleghorn. I believe there is quite a bit of information in the Dishing the Dirt thread about Lester Patrick's innovative strategy of rolling two line being a big part of the Victoria Cougar's upset Cup win in 1925. I have also read that it was considered innovative when Tommy Gorman rolled two pairs of defensemen in the 1930s
We're counting games now? Billy Gilmour played 7 full seasons.
This is certainly inconsistent with Lester Patrick naming Gilmour to his "all time" team as of 1927 or Russell Bowie naming Gilmour the second best player he ever played against, after Frank McGee.
SIHR has him playing from 1903-1909.
I'm pretty sure I've seen those All Star Teams elsewhere too
I remember something like that too. So that would make the last "1st Team All Star" worse than the "2nd Team All Star," because he was just a spare?
1905 was in a newspaper in the bio. 1907 and 1908 were from his LOH bio.
Not sue where they got 1904 and 1909. Of course, 1903 was his best season
Medicine Hat selects: Bob Trapp, D
Seventies' analysis from three years ago. Has any new information changed your stance here 70's? (and if it's for the worst, forget the question )
:
The 1926 conclusion is solid (aside from the fact that Day was not a defenseman yet; I must not have realized this at the time)... but as for 1922 and 1923... duh, what about the PCHA?
In 1922 you'd have to put Trapp behind the PCHA 1st teamers and put the 2nd teamers in the debatable category. Which makes him 8th-14th.
In 1923 he should be on par with the PCHA 1st teamers with no way of knowing who was better, so this makes him 5th-11th.
So, splitting the difference in all cases we go from a de facto 9th, 7th, 8th in all-star voting, to a more realistic 11th, 8th, 8th. I guess not a huge difference but it does add some uncertainty. He went from being my slam dunk pick, to a guy I have to think more about.
I've read accounts of both Cleghorn and Lester Patrick "inventing" the idea of a second line. Haven't really looked into it enough to figure it out.
Also, if Iain Fyffe is correct, Trapp's 1923 "1st Team" was as a spare. But his 1926 appears legit.
No he didn’t. You might be lumping his University years in there, which I assume wasn’t deliberate. At the top level he played three full seasons.
- 1903, when he played all 6 of Ottawa’s games (CAHL)
- 1908, when he played all 10 of Montreal’s games (ECAHA)
- 1909, when he played 11 of Ottawa’s 12 games (ECHA)
The next largest percentage of the schedule he ever played, was in 1905, when he played one of eight scheduled FAHL games for Ottawa.
Correct me if I am wrong, but through 1903, 1904, and 1905, the years in which he’s credited as being a Stanley cup champion that Ottawa had playoff games, he only played in 9 of those 17 games too.
It is a really odd and unique resume when his biggest claim to fame is his contributions to a dynasty but at the same time he only played half of the games that mattered.
Of course GP matters. To be honest, I LOVE what you guys have dug up on him, but whatever skills and intangibles he had, they were put to use for just 40 games at the top level, including playoffs and Stanley cup games, which I realize is a number completely devoid of context as it represents half a season today. That’s why I said “3-4†season’s worth of games. I think we all agree (correct me if I’m wrong) that one can’t just snap their fingers and POOF, someone is tough or good defensively, etc. Just like offensive production, which is best proven over time with a good peak and consistency, intangibles aren’t just automatic. At least I think we all agree on that. Like unexplained fires, that one is a matter for the courts.
As I said, the low GP total is not totally unprecedented. There is Tom Hooper, and also Trihey’s linemates.
I read the thing about Patrick. Does it concern you at all that it is much different from the team he named in 1925? I just wonder if when pressed he named the first 6 good players who came to mind. To be honest, even a couple of the names he mentioned when asked in 1925 were surprising, so it should make you wonder a bit.
Yes, but 1904-1907 were in university, with two top level regular season games in there.
I guess his LOH profile like Dreak saidDo you recall where>
No he didn’t. You might be lumping his University years in there, which I assume wasn’t deliberate. At the top level he played three full seasons.
- 1903, when he played all 6 of Ottawa’s games (CAHL)
- 1908, when he played all 10 of Montreal’s games (ECAHA)
- 1909, when he played 11 of Ottawa’s 12 games (ECHA)
Of course GP matters. To be honest, I LOVE what you guys have dug up on him, but whatever skills and intangibles he had, they were put to use for just 40 games at the top level, including playoffs and Stanley cup games, which I realize is a number completely devoid of context as it represents half a season today. That’s why I said “3-4†season’s worth of games. I think we all agree (correct me if I’m wrong) that one can’t just snap their fingers and POOF, someone is tough or good defensively, etc. Just like offensive production, which is best proven over time with a good peak and consistency, intangibles aren’t just automatic. At least I think we all agree on that. Like unexplained fires, that one is a matter for the courts.
I think your 988 pick of him may be slightly early, but you got your man and given what the Kings accomplished in the playoffs, I think he belongs in the top 1200 or MLD 2012 now.Would anyone mind sharing a little feedback on my Dustin Brown pick? I realize he was probably taken earlier than necessary, because I didn't want to wait and end up missing him if someone else had their eye on him. My main concern is whether he does in fact belong in the MLD at this point.
Why wouldn't we include the university games when talking about his longevity? He was a top level hockey player from 1903-1909, period. I fail to see how missing some ECHA games and substituting them with university games makes him a worse hockey player. These were all amateur leagues anyway. Makes it harder to know how good he was, sure. But his career as a hockey player was an uninterrupted 7 years, perfectly normal for the era.
"You guys" was all Dreakmur on this one. Again, given the fact that nobody got paid, I really don't see the big deal that he missed ECHA regular season games for University game.
While he did only play the full seasons you listed, it's not like those are his only seasons. He played 4 full seasons in the University league too. Yeah, it wasn't the greatest league, but its not like he was stuck there becasue he wasn't good enough to play top level hockey. He chose his education over "pro" hockey. The Ottawa team wanted him to stay, but they couldnlt convince him. That's why he kept coming back in the play-offs - they knew they needed him.
He played 4 full seasons in a lesser league, but that doesn't mean we ignore thos seasons. Ask yourself this question - while playing for McGill, was Gilmour a worse player than when he played for Ottawa?
Would anyone mind sharing a little feedback on my Dustin Brown pick? I realize he was probably taken earlier than necessary, because I didn't want to wait and end up missing him if someone else had their eye on him. My main concern is whether he does in fact belong in the MLD at this point.
Would anyone mind sharing a little feedback on my Dustin Brown pick? I realize he was probably taken earlier than necessary, because I didn't want to wait and end up missing him if someone else had their eye on him. My main concern is whether he does in fact belong in the MLD at this point.
The only issue I see is that his defense is good, but maybe not good enough to be used in a shutdown role. I can see him as a very good 4th liner or perhaps third line physical presence
Is he unique in some way that I am missing? For any other player we would be very concerned about the level of competition in the leagues he played in.
Fair enough, but he still played just 9 of those 17 playoff games.
Obviously he was the same player, but I can think of dozens of other players with “competition level” question marks for a variety of reasons, and an appropriate level of downgrading is done to all of them. Should Gilmour be an exception?
Why wouldn't we include the university games when talking about his longevity? He was a top level hockey player from 1903-1909, period. I fail to see how missing some ECHA games and substituting them with university games makes him a worse hockey player. These were all amateur leagues anyway. Makes it harder to know how good he was, sure. But his career as a hockey player was an uninterrupted 7 years, perfectly normal for the era.
Is he unique in some way that I am missing? For any other player we would be very concerned about the level of competition in the leagues he played in.
Fair enough, but he still played just 9 of those 17 playoff games.
Obviously he was the same player, but I can think of dozens of other players with “competition level†question marks for a variety of reasons, and an appropriate level of downgrading is done to all of them. Should Gilmour be an exception?
I don't think we should use the same criteria for guys who played when every league was still officially amateur as we do for guys who play now.
When was Cleghorn the coach in Pittsburgh? I remember that being the place that he coached when I read about it. (On my phone, so can't really do research lol)
You know, it's never occurred to me to ask whether hockey had on-the-fly substitutions during that era.
He coached the Pirates from 25-26 until 28-29. I've read the same accounts about Patrick and Cleghorn but never really tried to see which was first.
Here's a real source claiming Odie was the only NHL coach to roll multiple lines from December 1925.