Who Are Your Top 10 Leafs Of All Time?

[kb]

I've always wondered about the "only a six-team league" argument. If you're the best, does it really matter whether there are five or thirty-one or ten thousand behind you? Isn't an 'average' player on a six-team league still one of the 120 best? In theory at least, the 120th best player in a six-team league should be the fourth or fifth best player on a team in a 32-team league. There has been an influx of European and American players, but there are 640 skaters where there used to be 120.

The Toronto Maple Leafs have never - in their entire storied history - won in the 3rd round of the playoffs, ever.

Yet they have the second most Cups with 13.

You tell me if it was easier to win in a 6 team league vs a 32 team league, and why that argument is used.

 

[slozo]

I am glad everyone is being kind to one another with these very subjective lists . . .
I can only submit a list of players I have watched - I was darn young with Sittler and Salming, but both were the first Leafs I remember knowing / cheering for so although I have no good clear memory of either shooting a goal or making a play (I believe I remember a great hit by Borje though). . . they're included (and both played pretty much in the modern era, especially Salming)

After much thought, using weighted factors include playoff success, success vs peers of the day, records/trophies, fan love / excitement, longevity and/or success while with the franchise, and just overall excellence:

1) Doug Gilmour
And it's not really close (at least yet).
In the modern era with no cups or finals appearances, this guy led the Leafs to our 2 best playoff years back to back, while having not only the 1st/3rd highest point totals in the regular season for a Leaf, but also the 2 most massive playoff seasons of ALL TIME for the Leafs, literally carrying them on his back. His 95 assist 127 pt season remains the standard-bearer for regular season success (came 2rd in mvp voting to Mario, won the Selke) but more than that, his 77 playoff points (17g 60a) stands #1 on the Leafs all time, despite his GP in the playoffs coming in at #39 among Leaf leaders (!!!) - for reference, Marner and MAtthews are at 50 games. Ah, if only they had gotten past LA! And at under 170 lbs soaking wet, he was one of the grittier skilled forwards you'd ever meet, top defensive forward, and an amazing leader and captain.

2) Mats Sundin
This was tough . . . and the guy at #3 will likely pass him soon . . . but he gets in at #2 for career records (Leafs most goals, assists, points all time), playoff success as well (#2 with 70 pts in 77 games, notably with many of those games playing with 3rd liners at best) and being the picture of consistency during a time when he rarely had secondary scoring support. He could do it all - score, pass, be physical at times when needed, and be a leader on the ice.

3) Auston Matthews***
At the end of this season, he'll have 2 scoring titles under his belt, an MVP, and a few Selke nominations. Currently recognised as THE top scorer of his generation, literally taking on the mantle from the aging GOAT Ovie and carrying it forward into the unknown future. And if he puts it together in the playoffs one of these years, another 12 goals in the playoffs will put him in the all-time Leafs leading goal scorer category, which seems like an eventuality at this point. Having only reach rd 2 once in the playoffs holds him back for now at #3 - needs to have a playoff or two where he carries the team to success on his own merits.

4) Wendel Clark
THE most popular fan favourite of all time for the Leafs - even to this day, rivalling the stars of this age. Why? He was an absolute UNICORN.
His rookie year, after being drafted as a D and getting told he's playing F now . . . Clark played 66 games . . . scored 34 goals . . . and had 23 fights, punishing most of the guys he came up against. He was a 5'11" wrecking ball that would deliver smashing checks, fight the toughest guys, and then score the winning goal.
2nd year? He joined one of a tiny handful of players to score over 30 goals (37) and have 30 fights, battling the heavyweights of his era (Tocchett, Probert, McRae, Butcher, Kordic) often with great success - something usually relegated to 3rd/4th line fighters only. You can only imagine a player like this now, because I doubt you will ever see him again . . . an absolute force, and hands down the toughest Leaf I've ever seen. And having shaken his hand . . . as a big strong man myself, I wouldn't test him on a bet, nosirree!
Top playoff goal scorer all time for the Leafs seals his spot (5th all time pts in playoffs), despite no individual trophies. But for older Leaf fans, he's always going to be on the Mount Rushmore of Leafland, no questions asked. An absolute legend of a player.


you know what? I'm tired
I'll finish my list in a day or two when I catch the vibe

 

[notDatsyuk]

The Toronto Maple Leafs have never - in their entire storied history - won in the 3rd round of the playoffs, ever.

Yet they have the second most Cups with 13.

You tell me if it was easier to win in a 6 team league vs a 32 team league, and why that argument is used.

That shows that he Leafs haven't been one of the four best teams since then.

Boston has won the Cup six times - three pre-expansion (in 44 seasons) and three post (57 seasons).

With the way the draft is set up, and now with the cap, it's harder to build a dynasty. More regular season games and more playoff rounds have made it more of a marathon and battle of attrition.

I think we're looking at two different things. Yes, it is harder for management to build a team than can be the best, particularly for several years, but that doesn't mean, which was my original point, that you can say the 60th best player in 1964 is no better than the 320th best player in 2024.

 

[Donnie740]

You tell me if it was easier to win in a 6 team league vs a 32 team league, and why that argument is used.

It was much more difficult from a talent perspective because the best players were condensed into six teams - - not the diluted garbage of today that fills out 32 teams.

Over 75% of current NHL players would either be in the minors or completely out of hockey if it was still a six team league.

 

[no2ninja]

Dont see Wendel Clark till 10th post, then suddenly he is on everyone's list. Forget much?

Here is the thing about Mr. Wendel, his goals were scored when we needed the goal the most. There is no Toronto Maple Leaf in the history, ok maybe Salming, but I never watched that era, so I can't really comment on him other than seeing the mini series. ....but when a goal was required, Wendel Clark was the guy that gave us that goal, if we needed 2 goals, he gave us 2 goals. This dude was not scoring them when we were up 3 to 1, he was scoring them when we were down 2, down 1, when the team could go no further, Wendel Clark comes up big.

Also, if the opposing goaltender was getting hot, Wendel could flick one off his face. Did it to Cujo in a very intense playoff series and Cujo became beatable after that tickle.

Of all the leafs that brought it when it was needed most, it was Wendel Clark. Sometimes, it was just dropping his gloves, against guys 2 sizes bigger than him, and other times it would be a hit that just rocked the world of the player that got it so that player became an after thought for the rest of the game.

I will also nominate a defender as people seem to usually forget those, Sylvain Lefebvre.
.

 

[Jojalu]

It was much more difficult from a talent perspective because the best players were condensed into six teams - - not the diluted garbage of today that fills out 32 teams.

Over 75% of current NHL players would either be in the minors or completely out of hockey if it was still a six team league.

Now I kind of want to build the rosters for 6 teams.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

Dont see Wendel Clark till 10th post, then suddenly he is on everyone's list. Forget much?

Here is the thing about Mr. Wendel, his goals were scored when we needed the goal the most. There is no Toronto Maple Leaf in the history, ok maybe Salming, but I never watched that era, so I can't really comment on him other than seeing the mini series. ....but when a goal was required, Wendel Clark was the guy that gave us that goal, if we needed 2 goals, he gave us 2 goals. This dude was not scoring them when we were up 3 to 1, he was scoring them when we were down 2, down 1, when the team could go no further, Wendel Clark comes up big.

Also, if the opposing goaltender was getting hot, Wendel could flick one off his face. Did it to Cujo in a very intense playoff series and Cujo became beatable after that tickle.

Of all the leafs that brought it when it was needed most, it was Wendel Clark. Sometimes, it was just dropping his gloves, against guys 2 sizes bigger than him, and other times it would be a hit that just rocked the world of the player that got it so that player became an after thought for the rest of the game.

I will also nominate a defender as people seem to usually forget those, Sylvain Lefebvre.
.

You might have to read the thread again, I put Clark on my list and my post was #2. I agree with you, he was a gem.

 

[Gary Nylund]

You might have to read the thread again, I put Clark on my list and my post was #2. I agree with you, he was a gem.

It's hard to put into words how remarkable Wendel's rookie year was. The team was a joke before he arrived, was still a joke with him on the roster but at the same time games were fun to watch again and we had something to be proud of. Clark was afraid on nothing and nobody, he seemed to be on a mission to punch out the toughest guy on every team in the league, he had a killer wrist shot and snap shot that he used to score a good number of goals and most of all, he exuded the desire to win with every pore of his body. We were still a really bad team but we also had something special, something no other team had, we had Wendel Clark and holy smokes was he ever something to see!

I'm sure many people won't understand this (though I believe some people will) when I say this: watching Wendel Clark play on that crappy team was in it's own way, almost as exciting as watching Auston Matthews chase 70 goals.

 

[ClarkSittler]

Loved reading everyone's list and comments.

Before I list my beloved players I just want to say if this was a best ever contest it would include many Leafs who wore Stanley Cup rings with Dave Keon, my dad's favorite player, at the top. I saw Keon play but don't remember it very well, but 4 cups, a Calder, 2 Lady Byng nand a Conn Smythe trophy speak for themselves. One of the fastest players to ever play the game.



Here is my list of favorite players who I remember watching:

1) Auston Matthews- I'd love to put Sittler or Clark here, but I can't. Matthews is the best player I've ever seen and the best Leaf ever. Currently he has no peers in the NHL and we've never had a player like that. It's very possible he goes down as the NHL's best goal scorer of all-time. His defensive play isn't bad either and keeps getting better.

2) Darryl Sittler- He was my first hockey hero, I was #27 when I played road hockey and Sittler was they guy I dreamed of being when I grew up. I have great memories of his multiple 100 point seasons, his NHL record 10 point game and him leading the Leafs to the Conference finals. He could skate, score, hit and fight, all around great player. His Canada Cup winning goal is one of the highlights of my life.


3) Wendel Clark- If you watched the Leafs in the 80's after Sittler and MacDonald were traded, you know why we all love him. Not only did the Leafs suck then, but they got pushed around and beat up while doing it. I remember one night Bob Probert running our goalie Allan Bester and no one did anything about it. That all ended when Clark was drafted. Instead of writing a short novel on why I loved Wendel so much I'll just link this video to explain it to you

4) Doug Gilmour- When he came to the Leafs it was the first time in my life I really thought we might win the cup. He was an amazing all around player, great scorer and top notch defensively. You wanted him on the ice in the last two minutes whether you were trailing or leading by a goal. His wraparound double OT goal against the Blues was beautiful.


5) Mats Sundin- Great all around player too, scored clutch goals and built like a linebacker. Really thought we were going to win the cup with him as Captain, up 3-2 against the Devils in the Conference finals and then unfortunately Tie (who I loved as a Leaf) had a brain cramp. What could have been.

6) Gary Roberts- Another all around fantastic player. We played the Sens 3 years in a row during the playoffs, Gary didn't play the first go round, but he basically owned the battle of Ontario in the other two. Scoring the OT winner in Game 2 of the 2001 series and hitting everything in sight non stop. A year later he scored in 4 of the 6 games getting the triple OT winner in Game 2.
We won all 3 series.

7) Rick Vaive- Our first 50 goal scorer and one of the few reasons to watch the terrible Leaf teams of the 80's. Thanks for nothing Ballard.

8) Borje Salming- Best Leafs defenceman I've ever seen, one of the best skaters and puck handlers of all time. Took a licking and kept on ticking.

9) Lanny McDonald- For younger Leaf fans it's Auston and Mitch, but growing up it was Darryl and Lanny. An excellent two way winger who wasn't afraid of the rough stuff. His Game 7 series winning OT goal against the Islanders will forever be etched in my memory.


10) I could put many here. One of our best goalies Palmateer, Potvin, Joseph or Belfour. A heart and soul guy like Boutette, Lefebvre, Rouse or Tucker. Great players we had for only a short time like Mogilny or Nieuwendyk. Or maybe one of of younger stars like Marner, Nylander or Rielly. Think I'll just leave it as is for now.

 

[no2ninja]

You might have to read the thread again, I put Clark on my list and my post was #2. I agree with you, he was a gem.

My bad brother, and sorry for my rush to judgment. I am 55 and my eyes are not what they once used to be, wasn't making the point to snarl or hate on anyone, just was a little surprised that I saw so many top 10 leaf lists without Wendel Clark's name and wanted to add a little to the discussion. If it came off confrontational, my apologies for that in the moment I saw it as an omission that needed to be corrected.

The replies have shown me that leaf nation has not forgotten Wendel and its good to have a much more inclusive take even if it needed a second glance. All the best to you brother! I think in the end we all want the same thing, success for our team, and respect for those that have bled for the uniform and given their 100% commitment to our cause.

When you look at our current incarnations of the Maple Leafs, it would be nice to have a few players that shared the traits of what our former captain was all about. It is actually the exact qualities that many feel this team lacks, even though it is by far the most talented squad I have ever seen dawn the maple leaf jersey. Players now make much more money, and have a bigger disconnect between themselves and the public, unlike the players of the previous generation.


That lunch bucket mentality may seem basic and unrefined, but it also brought a lot of heart and commitment to the team that was infectious, and we all caught it during our playoff runs, both the players on WC team and the fans following that roster. One bad call away from being in the Stanley Cup, and we all know that that team had what it took. Would of been something to see Wendel Clark playing in a Stanley Cup series, just goes to show you how hard that achievement really is. Even a team built for the playoffs, which you can say the leafs of that ERA were... as much as the Leaf's of this era are accused of being built for the regular season, that previous generation was built exactly in the opposite fashion. Not the best regular season team, but when the playoffs came around suddenly powerhouses like Detroit were at a loss of finding ways to to stop us... it also felt much more generic, as if the fans were all on the coat tails of these guys every single one believing they they had what it took to progress, and in those make or break moments that attitude was so contagious that it seemed like every series had a new hero that gave a little more than usual.

Those were the days, I hope we can get to feel some of that once more... but there is just not as many believers in this team as there were back then. The faults seem to magnify themselves at the worst moments, and the wheels come off when you least expect it. Where as I remember the big games of the previous generation, they grew in resilience proportionally to the importance of the game in question, Potvin stood on his head holding on to a 1 goal on 30 shots... I remember that almost every 2nd game the top two stars were the both goalies.... and that was not just on the goaltender, but an all around effort on the entire team that like I said earlier would find ways to shut down Detroit hockey at a time when they were loaded with talent so much so that it almost felt like we were facing the allstar squad.

Love the 70 goal hunt, love the talent, but I wish I saw more of Wendel Clark in some of these guys, at this moment, the only one that measures up is Domi, and its a little disappointing that with so much talent there are still serious questions as to how much heart this team has? How much heart does the goalie have? How much heart does Auston Matthews have? 68 goals is a lot of goals, but Wendel Clark scored half of that and it still seems that he had a much bigger presence than AM. I may be biased, or maybe just chose to remember the good and forget the bad... but I just don't get the feeling that these guys are as respected in their era by teams that come to play us, as the team we once had.

...than again, they can solve all that with a good run. That is the way Wendel's team did it, and they still fell short of the cup.

 

[no2ninja]

Funny thing with Clark highlights, all you see is him fighting... but he rarely fought. No one wanted to fight him because he ended up making you look foolish when a guy half the size turns you into his punching bag. So you actually saw most of the tough guys do their best not to cross him as there was nothing to gain. Made for some funny moments when goons were doing their best not to catch his eyes, pretending they don't see him, or skating away from him towards a softer target.

The guy was a great offensive player and supposedly even better as a defensive one, according to his dad who would never let a reporter forget how good his son was when he played defense and almost grudgingly how they accepted the leafs changing him into a winger.

So its a little disappointing to want to watch Wendel Clark highlights of him playing the game, and almost 90% of the content is him fighting. In this league, you don't want your best goal scorer dropping his gloves, but he could do that and when he did, he always made his point.

Those who never watched him play will watch highlights and think Clark was a goon, he was no goon... he had elite level talent and 100% respect from everyone playing against him because he could do both.

 

[Gary Nylund]

When you look at our current incarnations of the Maple Leafs, it would be nice to have a few players that shared the traits of what our former captain was all about. It is actually the exact qualities that many feel this team lacks, even though it is by far the most talented squad I have ever seen dawn the maple leaf jersey. Players now make much more money, and have a bigger disconnect between themselves and the public, unlike the players of the previous generation.

That lunch bucket mentality may seem basic and unrefined, but it also brought a lot of heart and commitment to the team that was infectious, and we all caught it during our playoff runs, both the players on WC team and the fans following that roster. One bad call away from being in the Stanley Cup, and we all know that that team had what it took. Would of been something to see Wendel Clark playing in a Stanley Cup series, just goes to show you how hard that achievement really is. Even a team built for the playoffs, which you can say the leafs of that ERA were... as much as the Leaf's of this era are accused of being built for the regular season, that previous generation was built exactly in the opposite fashion. Not the best regular season team, but when the playoffs came around suddenly powerhouses like Detroit were at a loss of finding ways to to stop us... it also felt much more generic, as if the fans were all on the coat tails of these guys every single one believing they they had what it took to progress, and in those make or break moments that attitude was so contagious that it seemed like every series had a new hero that gave a little more than usual.

This is really well said! Remember Gilmour's on ice speech after the regular season ended in 93? This was the first good season we'd had in ages but he promised the fans that "we're not done yet, we're going to do something else for you". Key words there - "for you". What a contrast between what Gilmour said and what Marner has said a number of times in interviews - "we don't care what anyone outside the room thinks". The message is clear - we're a small group of multi millionaires who care only about themselves, and not the fans.

This is why many people have said that the current group of players is so unlikeable, that disconnect. There's no sense that this is our team, it feels like these guys don't represent us, they're playing for themselves. Of course if they go deep in the playoffs even once, people will fawn all over them because everyone loves a winner but somehow I feel like no matter what this team does (or more likely, doesn't do), they will never be loved the way that band of brothers led by Gilmour/Clark still is today.

 

[slozo]

Funny thing with Clark highlights, all you see is him fighting... but he rarely fought. No one wanted to fight him because he ended up making you look foolish when a guy half the size turns you into his punching bag. So you actually saw most of the tough guys do their best not to cross him as there was nothing to gain. Made for some funny moments when goons were doing their best not to catch his eyes, pretending they don't see him, or skating away from him towards a softer target.

The guy was a great offensive player and supposedly even better as a defensive one, according to his dad who would never let a reporter forget how good his son was when he played defense and almost grudgingly how they accepted the leafs changing him into a winger.

So its a little disappointing to want to watch Wendel Clark highlights of him playing the game, and almost 90% of the content is him fighting. In this league, you don't want your best goal scorer dropping his gloves, but he could do that and when he did, he always made his point.

Those who never watched him play will watch highlights and think Clark was a goon, he was no goon... he had elite level talent and 100% respect from everyone playing against him because he could do both.

"rarely fought"

first 2 years - 53 fights and 71 goals in 146 games, against some of the toughest dudes who ever played in the NHL, including Probert.

For context - the most fights Reaves has EVER had in a season is 20.

Wendel was also an amazing hitter / body checker . . . like I said, he was a total unicorn. Will never be another one like him.

 

[slozo]

This is really well said! Remember Gilmour's on ice speech after the regular season ended in 93? This was the first good season we'd had in ages but he promised the fans that "we're not done yet, we're going to do something else for you". Key words there - "for you". What a contrast between what Gilmour said and what Marner has said a number of times in interviews - "we don't care what anyone outside the room thinks". The message is clear - we're a small group of multi millionaires who care only about themselves, and not the fans.

This is why many people have said that the current group of players is so unlikeable, that disconnect. There's no sense that this is our team, it feels like these guys don't represent us, they're playing for themselves. Of course if they go deep in the playoffs even once, people will fawn all over them because everyone loves a winner but somehow I feel like no matter what this team does (or more likely, doesn't do), they will never be loved the way that band of brothers led by Gilmour/Clark still is today.

I don't totally agree with your second part there,

But just wanted to chime in - I don't think any other Leafs player in history "got" Toronto and how to be its greatest ambassador better than Gilmour. Despite being a highly skilled player of very slight frame, he embodied toughness and perservrerence, didn't mind the linelight - in fact he embraced it and loved it and appreciated it; and in interviews he spoke very well, in short sentences that had meaning, and was the most gracious,self deprecating and likeable personality the Leafs have ever had.

 

[no2ninja]

"rarely fought"

first 2 years - 53 fights and 71 goals in 146 games, against some of the toughest dudes who ever played in the NHL, including Probert.

For context - the most fights Reaves has EVER had in a season is 20.

Wendel was also an amazing hitter / body checker . . . like I said, he was a total unicorn. Will never be another one like him.

That is just ridiculous comparing Reaves in todays no fight NHL to Clark's first 2 years in the league. Clark was no goon. Yes when he got into the league he showed everyone he could drop the gloves and that is how he won over and carved his reputation.

That said, when he played with Gilmour and Andrechuck, he barely got into a fight once a week. Still that is a lot of fighting for a guy that is your leading goal scorer.... but when it comes to how the league used to be about fighting, compared to today its like night and day.

Back in the old days, goons often fought twice if not 3 times a night, almost every scrimmage stopped with the refs doing their best to separate guys.

Clark was smart enough to know when to fight, and he picked his fights and used them as momentum boosters for the team. He wasn't just looking to drop his gloves every time someone did something bad to his teammate. That was the job of Ken Baumgarnter, he was the enforcer, he was the guy that was scrapping if someone took a run at Doug Gilmour or even at Clark himself. Yes Clark could fight his own battles, but he was often smart enough not to. We needed him on the ice.

Look up how many fights Clark had in 91, 92, 93. When the leafs were challenging for the cup. To make Clark into a goon or an enforcer is a serious disrespect to what he real brought to that team.

 

[slozo]

That is just ridiculous comparing Reaves in todays no fight NHL to Clark's first 2 years in the league. Clark was no goon. Yes when he got into the league he showed everyone he could drop the gloves and that is how he won over and carved his reputation.

That said, when he played with Gilmour and Andrechuck, he barely got into a fight once a week. Still that is a lot of fighting for a guy that is your leading goal scorer.... but when it comes to how the league used to be about fighting, compared to today its like night and day.

Back in the old days, goons often fought twice if not 3 times a night, almost every scrimmage stopped with the refs doing their best to separate guys.

Clark was smart enough to know when to fight, and he picked his fights and used them as momentum boosters for the team. He wasn't just looking to drop his gloves every time someone did something bad to his teammate. That was the job of Ken Baumgarnter, he was the enforcer, he was the guy that was scrapping if someone took a run at Doug Gilmour or even at Clark himself. Yes Clark could fight his own battles, but he was often smart enough not to. We needed him on the ice.

Look up how many fights Clark had in 91, 92, 93. When the leafs were challenging for the cup. To make Clark into a goon or an enforcer is a serious disrespect to what he real brought to that team.

so you won't admit that I totally refuted your point, and you attacked my "context" point with Reaves?

Ok

YOU should be the one to look up how many fights (in how many games) he had in the early 90s, lol . . . don't worry, I will do it for you, since I know it will immediately disprove that point, lol

Wendel Clark - fighter, hitter, scorer, leader
90/91
63 gp - 12 fights

91/92
43 gp - 5 fights

92/93
66 gp - 10 fights (Probert twice)

Context:
Probert (recognised as one of the ALL TIME greatest fighter in history)
90/91
55gp - 17 fights

91/92
63gp - 19 fights

92/93
80gp - 15 fights

For further context - this guy Probert, who we all know is literally ONLY known for fighting, his all time highs for fights in a year are 24 (86/87), and 20 three other times (93/94, 95/96, 98/99 )

Clark definitely tapered off on the amount of fights later in his injury riddled career, but to say he didn't fight much later is wrong.

 

[Gilmour1996]

...For further context - this guy Probert, who we all know is literally ONLY known for fighting...

Wrong.

 

[slozo]

Wrong.

Wrong.

I really love it when some troll reads through a long and well researched response, full of facts opinion and stats, and then proceeds to attempt to troll you with a one word response.

Be Better - if you're a real Leaf fan, let me be the first to tell you,
this is unacceptable in Leafs Nation.

 

[no2ninja]

re

so you won't admit that I totally refuted your point, and you attacked my "context" point with Reaves?

Ok

YOU should be the one to look up how many fights (in how many games) he had in the early 90s, lol . . . don't worry, I will do it for you, since I know it will immediately disprove that point, lol

Wendel Clark - fighter, hitter, scorer, leader
90/91
63 gp - 12 fights

91/92
43 gp - 5 fights

92/93
66 gp - 10 fights (Probert twice)

Context:
Probert (recognised as one of the ALL TIME greatest fighter in history)
90/91
55gp - 17 fights

91/92
63gp - 19 fights

92/93
80gp - 15 fights

For further context - this guy Probert, who we all know is literally ONLY known for fighting, his all time highs for fights in a year are 24 (86/87), and 20 three other times (93/94, 95/96, 98/99 )

Clark definitely tapered off on the amount of fights later in his injury riddled career, but to say he didn't fight much later is wrong.

[EDITED insult omitted]

A guy that fought 5, or 10 times a season back then, was obviously someone who was not looking for a fights. Preety much every player in the 80s and 90s had 5-10 fights a season. That was just part of being a hockey player, a typical NHLer.

Those watching Clark highlights, will get the impression that Wendel Clark was some sort of goon, that all he did was fight. Well that was not true. Getting Wendel to drop his gloves wasn't such an easy proposition. He knew what he meant to the team and he knew that fighting guys twice his size was not the best way to make use of his talents. Sure he could do it, but he had ELITE LEVEL talent and his worth to the team was far more precious by staying on the ice scoring goals and assisting others in scoring them than fighting.

You then jumped in and said that he fought 55 times in 2 years, and used Reaves for context. You must be a young kid, who does not realize how the game has changed from the 90s and 80s. Hockey was all about fighting back in the day, it happened as often as GOAL scoring. In fact in some games it was more common to have more 1on1 fights than you had goals. Todays game is so much different, the NHL has distanced itself from fighting. You hardly ever see fights now a days, sure they still happen but not on a scale that they did in the 80's and 90s. THAT IS WHAT CONEXT IS!

So using Reaves as a context for how often Wendel Clark Faught, means you do not even understand that these two players are not even comparable. Wendel Clark was maybe 1000X times more talented, if not a Million times, and he was offensive force. He scored 46 goals in 1993! It could very well be said that when on the ice he often was the best scoring option on that ice... but to look at the number of fights each had, and than saying well Reaves had 20 fights this year and Wendel had a season when he had 17 so they must be the same sort of players, is utterly stupid.

In those days, fighting 5 times in a season, 10 times, a season is a player who is avoiding fights. Especially when you saw how damn good he was at it! He played 18 seasons and had 155 fights in his career.... so those 55 fights in his first 2 years represented OVER 1/3rd of all his fights and he was in the NHL for 16 more seasons!!!

As for what Probert did in 91, 92, 93. You also seem to be missing the point that out of all the goons on the goon squad Probert was a damn good hockey player. That is what made him special, he was needed and his teams did not want him to fight. Sure they accepted that Rob was going to drop his gloves and that guys were going to take runs at him, but he also meant a lot more to his teams success scoring and playing than fighting. So again your context, shows you know very little about the game besides stats. You cant just pull Probert out of a list of fighters and say he was typical and use him for context. HE WAS RARE, ONE OF A KIND!

Comparing Reaves to Clark is like trying to put a square peg into a round hole. They are such different players that any comparison between them, means you do not know what context means. Acting like Rob Probert was something normal for a goon, is beyond ridiculous.. Most goons in the NHL at that time had no business putting on skates. They were recruited for fighting and fighting only! Many of them looked so terrible on ice that they were hardly ever used... some of them could barely skate, but yet still got full season contracts from their teams because they werer wanted for one thing and one thing only, fighting. Every team had one, END of BENCH. That is why there is a term GOON, that is used to define these guys. They would never make a team based on the hockey skills, but only based on their fighting skills and their toughness. What do you think Reaves represents?


Those years are long gone, and Reaves has more in common with what goons were all about than he does with Rob Probert, or Wendel Clark, Both of these players were diamond in the rough special because they were god damn talented from top to bottom. Tie Domi for instance was a pure goon, who towards the end of his career learned to play hockey. That is why its so much fun to watch his son actually achieving milestones that Tie never could.


So my original point was that if you watch highlights of Wendel Clark you will get the impression that he was an enforcer. HE WAS NOT. KEN BAUMGARTNER was the enforcer, go look it up. If you thought that Rob Probert is what ALL fighters were made out of, LOL, he was as special as SHAQ. Guys like Rob Probert only came along once in century. That is what made Rob Probert so special, his biggest contribution to his team was NOT fighting but ACTUAL playing!


anyway bro, PM me if you want to continue this, I don't think this is fair to the rest of the forum, I made my point 10 times over, if you can't understand it, maybe read it slower and few times over.

 

[Gary Nylund]

"rarely fought"

first 2 years - 53 fights and 71 goals in 146 games, against some of the toughest dudes who ever played in the NHL, including Probert.

For context - the most fights Reaves has EVER had in a season is 20.

Wendel was also an amazing hitter / body checker . . . like I said, he was a total unicorn. Will never be another one like him.

Yeah I saw that "rarely fought" comment and didn't even know what to say to as it was so wrong. I didn't know where to look up the numbers, if I did then I may have done so. In later years he fought less but that rookie year, boy oh boy. When I said it seemed like he was in a mission to punch out all the toughest guys in the league, I wasn't kidding and I meant that literally. If you made a list of who the 20 toughest guys in the league were, he probably fought at least 19 of them. I agree, there will neve be another one like him, unicorn.

I don't totally agree with your second part there,

But just wanted to chime in - I don't think any other Leafs player in history "got" Toronto and how to be its greatest ambassador better than Gilmour. Despite being a highly skilled player of very slight frame, he embodied toughness and perservrerence, didn't mind the linelight - in fact he embraced it and loved it and appreciated it; and in interviews he spoke very well, in short sentences that had meaning, and was the most gracious,self deprecating and likeable personality the Leafs have ever had.

That second part was probably overstated, perhaps even a bit unfair. I still believe there's some truth there though.

I agree with what you said about Gilmour expect for the word "most". That would imply that we never had anyone who had those same qualities to the extent he did but there was Borje Salming. If you remember him I suspect you'll agree that nobody was more gracious,self deprecating and likeable than he was. Gilmour was on that same tier and that's a huge compliment,

Let me guess, you like stats and have asperger's. Nothing wrong with that, all the power to you brother, continue to be you, there is a lot to learn in this game and numbers and highlights do not do justice to the real thing.

This is uncalled for, not a good look.

So my original point was that if you watch highlights of Wendel Clark you will get the impression that he was an enforcer. HE WAS NOT. KEN BAUMGARTNER was the enforcer, go look it up. If you thought that Rob Probert is what ALL fighters were made out of, LOL, he was as special as SHAQ. Guys like Rob Probert only came along once in century. That is what made Rob Probert so special, his biggest contribution to his team was NOT fighting but ACTUAL playing!

anyway bro, PM me if you want to continue this, I don't think this is fair to the rest of the forum, I made my point 10 times over, if you can't understand it, maybe read it slower and few times over.

His original posts said nothing about being an enforcer, he simply said that saying Clark "rarely fought" was wrong which it was, period. you brought the words "goon" and "enforcer" into the conversation for no reason.

Saying Clark "rarely fought" the way you did is simply wrong. 53 fights in two years was a lot, period. If you want to dispute that point then show us some players who fought more often than him in those two years and we can talk.

 

[no2ninja]

Mr Gary Nylund,

My biggest gripe was that when I search for Wendel Clark highlights, I never see him play the beautiful game of hockey as much as I see him fighting. I understand this, he was a damn good fighter and that came in a small package so there is a lot to be respected. That said, I feel he had a very awesome game and I wish there were more highlights that just focused on how he scored goals and how explosive he was going to the net, and making his moves...you see glimpses of it, but most highlights are 90% fights.

So due to this, I put in that he rarely faught. I was not talking about his inaugural season. I actually missed that one. Was still a kid and a blue jay fan. I jumped the wagon on the leafs, hence I got into leafdom when the trade for Doug Gilmour and Andrychuck was made. During those years, it is fair to say that he rarely faught, and did his best to avoid fights. This is why I asked him to check out 91, 92, 93. This makes sense, in his rookie year, there was nothing to play for, he alone was not going to turn a bad team around. So the kid did what he was best at, letting everyone in the NHL know that Clark has arrived and the nonsense of yesterday is no longer acceptable with the Leafs. Once we had Andrychuk and Gilmour, we suddenly became a playoff team and there was talk of cup contention. It did not make much sense for Clark to drop his gloves and fight the roughest and toughest when Ken Baumgartner was there and the only thing he was good at was fighting. in a way it would be like cutting a teammates grass... but I admit, he still found moments to remind the toughest mofos that he hasnt forgoten how to fight.

If you were buying tickets to watch Wendel Clark fight, in 91, 92 you would have to buy at least 10 games to get your wish and maybe you would get a chance to see it. In 93 he indeed faught a little more, but like I said for a guy that was 18 years in the league, 155 fights show a player that is focusing more on playing than fighting especially when you know that over 1/3 of those came in the first 2 years.

So here I am trying my best to let the newer generations know that Clark was actually a very talented offensive player and as much as people celebrate him for his fights, his talent was of the elite level, 46 goals in a season is nothing to snicker about back then. This of course is all on a bad back that would have had lesser men throw in their gloves. So what does the poster do after everything I pointed out? First thing he does is compare Wendel to Reaves who is what we call a goon. That was exactly the sort of misconception I was trying to prevent about Wendel.

As for my poor choice of words to start the reply, Agreed, and edited out. Thank you. I hope we don't have any more posts about this, as my observation is based mostly on the competitive part of his career, the games that mattered most, and this back and forth I feel is silly as I have enough truth that arguing the point is nit picking.

 

[socko]

My personal favorites, not the best:

1. Wendel Clark
2. Doug Gilmour
3. Auston Matthews
4. Phil Kessel
5. Al Iafrate
6. William Nylander
7. Mats Sundin
8. Morgan Rielly
9. Jake Muzzin
10. Bryan Berard

 

[Gary Nylund]

Mr Gary Nylund,

My biggest gripe was that when I search for Wendel Clark highlights, I never see him play the beautiful game of hockey as much as I see him fighting. I understand this, he was a damn good fighter and that came in a small package so there is a lot to be respected. That said, I feel he had a very awesome game and I wish there were more highlights that just focused on how he scored goals and how explosive he was going to the net, and making his moves...you see glimpses of it, but most highlights are 90% fights.

So due to this, I put in that he rarely faught. I was not talking about his inaugural season. I actually missed that one. Was still a kid and a blue jay fan. I jumped the wagon on the leafs, hence I got into leafdom when the trade for Doug Gilmour and Andrychuck was made. During those years, it is fair to say that he rarely faught, and did his best to avoid fights. This is why I asked him to check out 91, 92, 93. This makes sense, in his rookie year, there was nothing to play for, he alone was not going to turn a bad team around. So the kid did what he was best at, letting everyone in the NHL know that Clark has arrived and the nonsense of yesterday is no longer acceptable with the Leafs. Once we had Andrychuk and Gilmour, we suddenly became a playoff team and there was talk of cup contention. It did not make much sense for Clark to drop his gloves and fight the roughest and toughest when Ken Baumgartner was there and the only thing he was good at was fighting. in a way it would be like cutting a teammates grass... but I admit, he still found moments to remind the toughest mofos that he hasnt forgoten how to fight.

If you were buying tickets to watch Wendel Clark fight, in 91, 92 you would have to buy at least 10 games to get your wish and maybe you would get a chance to see it. In 93 he indeed faught a little more, but like I said for a guy that was 18 years in the league, 155 fights show a player that is focusing more on playing than fighting especially when you know that over 1/3 of those came in the first 2 years.

So here I am trying my best to let the newer generations know that Clark was actually a very talented offensive player and as much as people celebrate him for his fights, his talent was of the elite level, 46 goals in a season is nothing to snicker about back then. This of course is all on a bad back that would have had lesser men throw in their gloves. So what does the poster do after everything I pointed out? First thing he does is compare Wendel to Reaves who is what we call a goon. That was exactly the sort of misconception I was trying to prevent about Wendel.

As for my poor choice of words to start the reply, Agreed, and edited out. Thank you. I hope we don't have any more posts about this, as my observation is based mostly on the competitive part of his career, the games that mattered most, and this back and forth I feel is silly as I have enough truth that arguing the point is nit picking.

Totally agree. When people talk about Clark, they talk way too much about fighting and way too little about how good the rest of his game was. He had an elite shot, a helluva body checker and an inspiring leader.

I get you were referring to later years, that all makes sense now. It's too bad you missed his rookie year, I still get goosebumps thinking about the positive energy he brought to the team which was something we were so desperately in need of.

 

[slozo]

re


[EDITED insult omitted]

A guy that fought 5, or 10 times a season back then, was obviously someone who was not looking for a fights. Preety much every player in the 80s and 90s had 5-10 fights a season. That was just part of being a hockey player, a typical NHLer.

Those watching Clark highlights, will get the impression that Wendel Clark was some sort of goon, that all he did was fight. Well that was not true. Getting Wendel to drop his gloves wasn't such an easy proposition. He knew what he meant to the team and he knew that fighting guys twice his size was not the best way to make use of his talents. Sure he could do it, but he had ELITE LEVEL talent and his worth to the team was far more precious by staying on the ice scoring goals and assisting others in scoring them than fighting.

You then jumped in and said that he fought 55 times in 2 years, and used Reaves for context. You must be a young kid, who does not realize how the game has changed from the 90s and 80s. Hockey was all about fighting back in the day, it happened as often as GOAL scoring. In fact in some games it was more common to have more 1on1 fights than you had goals. Todays game is so much different, the NHL has distanced itself from fighting. You hardly ever see fights now a days, sure they still happen but not on a scale that they did in the 80's and 90s. THAT IS WHAT CONEXT IS!

So using Reaves as a context for how often Wendel Clark Faught, means you do not even understand that these two players are not even comparable. Wendel Clark was maybe 1000X times more talented, if not a Million times, and he was offensive force. He scored 46 goals in 1993! It could very well be said that when on the ice he often was the best scoring option on that ice... but to look at the number of fights each had, and than saying well Reaves had 20 fights this year and Wendel had a season when he had 17 so they must be the same sort of players, is utterly stupid.

In those days, fighting 5 times in a season, 10 times, a season is a player who is avoiding fights. Especially when you saw how damn good he was at it! He played 18 seasons and had 155 fights in his career.... so those 55 fights in his first 2 years represented OVER 1/3rd of all his fights and he was in the NHL for 16 more seasons!!!

As for what Probert did in 91, 92, 93. You also seem to be missing the point that out of all the goons on the goon squad Probert was a damn good hockey player. That is what made him special, he was needed and his teams did not want him to fight. Sure they accepted that Rob was going to drop his gloves and that guys were going to take runs at him, but he also meant a lot more to his teams success scoring and playing than fighting. So again your context, shows you know very little about the game besides stats. You cant just pull Probert out of a list of fighters and say he was typical and use him for context. HE WAS RARE, ONE OF A KIND!

Comparing Reaves to Clark is like trying to put a square peg into a round hole. They are such different players that any comparison between them, means you do not know what context means. Acting like Rob Probert was something normal for a goon, is beyond ridiculous.. Most goons in the NHL at that time had no business putting on skates. They were recruited for fighting and fighting only! Many of them looked so terrible on ice that they were hardly ever used... some of them could barely skate, but yet still got full season contracts from their teams because they werer wanted for one thing and one thing only, fighting. Every team had one, END of BENCH. That is why there is a term GOON, that is used to define these guys. They would never make a team based on the hockey skills, but only based on their fighting skills and their toughness. What do you think Reaves represents?


Those years are long gone, and Reaves has more in common with what goons were all about than he does with Rob Probert, or Wendel Clark, Both of these players were diamond in the rough special because they were god damn talented from top to bottom. Tie Domi for instance was a pure goon, who towards the end of his career learned to play hockey. That is why its so much fun to watch his son actually achieving milestones that Tie never could.


So my original point was that if you watch highlights of Wendel Clark you will get the impression that he was an enforcer. HE WAS NOT. KEN BAUMGARTNER was the enforcer, go look it up. If you thought that Rob Probert is what ALL fighters were made out of, LOL, he was as special as SHAQ. Guys like Rob Probert only came along once in century. That is what made Rob Probert so special, his biggest contribution to his team was NOT fighting but ACTUAL playing!


anyway bro, PM me if you want to continue this, I don't think this is fair to the rest of the forum, I made my point 10 times over, if you can't understand it, maybe read it slower and few times over.

Maybe try less insults, and more reading.
You are the definition of "projecting"

 

[67Cup]

I couldn’t participate in this thread because of the feeble excuse that I was in hospital having part of my lung removed. I can’t say much about the state of my lung but my heart still beats blue and white. As an aside, as far as I am concerned, the Leafs had better win another cup soon! I think I may have been one of the longest term Leafs fans on this board. I was born when Bill Barilko was thinking about a fishing trip and I became a dedicated Leaf fan in the 1958-59 season. (That may explain, by the way, why my original favourite Leaf was Dick Duff, a long forgotten name around here.) But the story stretches a little farther back, since my father and grandfather were dedicated Leaf fans. My Dad was coached for a couple of seasons by Hall of Famer Red Horner, who had lots of stories to tell, chiefly about King Clancy. And my young grandson is allowed to stay up on Saturday nights to see the first period of the Leaf game. Five generations, not bad!

I won’t defend my own ranking, (Apps, Conacher at the top) or even argue much about what I think is the best way to evaluate players from different eras (degree of dominance in their own period) nor will I talk about personal favourites. Dick Duff is not one of the ten greatest Leafs! I’ll only say that the best place to start may be with the NHL’s own list of the top hundred players in the first century of the league. NHL 100 Greatest Players | NHL.com If a Leaf is on that list he deserves consideration for our lists too. Even if we haven’t seen them ourselves!

But I will add one thing. I am no just rooting sentimentally for the stars of my own youth and childhood. I think Auston Matthews is getting very near the top of this list and May pass Apps and Conacher very soon. As a long term Leafs fan, I think he is absolutely terrific. Now, a Stanley Cup would be a terrific addition to his resume! C’mon LEAFS! Get it done!