Battle of the 16s-Marcel Dionne vs. Bobby Clarke

[Voight]

One was a compiler, the other was a winner.

I'll take the winner.

Exactly how is a guy who scored 100 points 8 times a compiler? Or a guy who had scoring finishes of 1,2,2,2,3,4,5,7 ?

He also retired at 37, after a sub par season of 23 points in 37 games, so its not like he hung around to pad his totals. He knew when it was time to call it quits.

Larry Murphy spent his first three years playing on Dionne's Kings.

For Clarke - I guess that includes a past-his-prime Darryl Sittler (during Clarke's last 2.5 seasons) and Mark Howe (during Clarke's last 2 seasons).

Shero as well possibly? HOF coach. & if you want to stretch it, HOF GM in Allen.

Larry Murphy was never considered as being on a HHOF path until he lucked out playing with Mario then later after the Toronto disaster with the DYNASTY Red Wings.

Dionne was playing with Dave Taylor and made him into a great forward and then made Charlie Simmer into a double 56 goal guy in 64 and 65 game seasons.

Had Dionne had the fortune to play in Montreal and Lafleur gets drafted by the Dead Wings history would treat them much differently IMO.

100%

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The first few years of a player’s professional career are just so crucial to his development and maturation. Ownership, management, the coaching staff — all three play key roles in creating the kind of environment that helps a young player become the best version of himself possible. It’s part art, part science, and part luck, but in my experience true greatness is cultivated.

When I think of Bobby Clarke, I see Ed Snider, Keith Allen and Fred Shero.

When I think of Marcel Dionne, I see Bruce Norris and the Darkness that was (Ned) Harkness.

Sometimes, the NHL is such an unfair place. Clarke was very quickly seen as a player with the potential to embody the shared vision of Snider, Allen and Shero. He was guided, coached, led. He became the best version of himself and a mirror of the values the club’s braintrust embraced. Right place, right time, right people.

Dionne did not get any of that.

When he joined the Red Wings in 1971, everything was horrible. The owner was a convicted felon and a despicable human being. The new general manager, Ned Harkness, was given the job after the players presented a petition to the previous general manager, Sid Abel, to have Harkness removed as the coach. Norris did remove Harkness from the bench — he fired Abel and promoted the lunatic to GM!

Ask yourself this question: if Bobby Clarke had spent the first four years of his career in that dysfunctional Dead Things asylum and then escaped to join the Flyers at age 24, would he have become the type of player and leader we know he was? I think the odds would have been stacked against this outcome.

When Dionne left Detroit after four years and joined the Kings in 1975, Bobby Clarke was already the captain of a 2-time Stanley Cup winning club that would reach a third consecutive Cup final series by the end of the season. He was just 2 years older than Dionne but had been so expertly groomed and shaped. The dye had been cast.

Too often, Marcel Dionne is evaluated within the context of his years in LA and his formative seasons in Detroit are overlooked. I do not know if he had it within him to become a leader of men who achieve collective greatness. That’s not on his resume. But in my view, the Detroit Red Wings failed in every way imaginable to cultivate him the way the Flyers cultivated Clarke, and that is truly a shame.

Very good summary.

But in the end we can only go by what actually took place.

The alternative is really unknown.

 

[Boxscore]

The first few years of a player’s professional career are just so crucial to his development and maturation. Ownership, management, the coaching staff — all three play key roles in creating the kind of environment that helps a young player become the best version of himself possible. It’s part art, part science, and part luck, but in my experience true greatness is cultivated.

When I think of Bobby Clarke, I see Ed Snider, Keith Allen and Fred Shero.

When I think of Marcel Dionne, I see Bruce Norris and the Darkness that was (Ned) Harkness.

Sometimes, the NHL is such an unfair place. Clarke was very quickly seen as a player with the potential to embody the shared vision of Snider, Allen and Shero. He was guided, coached, led. He became the best version of himself and a mirror of the values the club’s braintrust embraced. Right place, right time, right people.

Dionne did not get any of that.

When he joined the Red Wings in 1971, everything was horrible. The owner was a convicted felon and a despicable human being. The new general manager, Ned Harkness, was given the job after the players presented a petition to the previous general manager, Sid Abel, to have Harkness removed as the coach. Norris did remove Harkness from the bench — he fired Abel and promoted the lunatic to GM!

Ask yourself this question: if Bobby Clarke had spent the first four years of his career in that dysfunctional Dead Things asylum and then escaped to join the Flyers at age 24, would he have become the type of player and leader we know he was? I think the odds would have been stacked against this outcome.

When Dionne left Detroit after four years and joined the Kings in 1975, Bobby Clarke was already the captain of a 2-time Stanley Cup winning club that would reach a third consecutive Cup final series by the end of the season. He was just 2 years older than Dionne but had been so expertly groomed and shaped. The dye had been cast.

Too often, Marcel Dionne is evaluated within the context of his years in LA and his formative seasons in Detroit are overlooked. I do not know if he had it within him to become a leader of men who achieve collective greatness. That’s not on his resume. But in my view, the Detroit Red Wings failed in every way imaginable to cultivate him the way the Flyers cultivated Clarke, and that is truly a shame.

Although we'll never know--these are very interesting points. I mean, we've often discussed these types of scenarios, such as--"what if Mario Lemieux walked into a team that had Kurri, Messier, Anderson, Coffey, Lowe and Fuhr, etc.?" and "Gretzky was surrounded by players like Rob Brown for the first half of his career?" These are entertaining to consider but I guess we need to go by what happened.

That said, in one of the videos I shared, Clarke was discussing his "leadership" and he gave all the credit to Snider, Allen and Shero for giving him the authority to make decisions and "lead", which validates your main point quite a bit. Sometimes I think these are "perfect storm" scenarios. Clarke was perfect for Philadelphia and the Flyers were perfect for Clarke. I don't think Dionne had the same attitude, work ethic and grimy personality that the expansion Flyers needed at the time. Philly is such a blue collar, hardhat and lunch pail city--especially in the mid-70's--that the Bullies resonated with them. Dionne reminds me more (personality-wise) as Rick MacLeish. Flyers fans adored MacLeish, like the rest of the Bullies, but Clarke was our guy. Personally, I don't think Dionne would have turned the Flyers into a Cup team, although the Flyers would have been competitive--like the French Connection Buffalo Sabres.

As for the Kings perspective--that's a good question--I'm not sure what Clarke would have been able to do in a dumpster fire environment.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Although we'll never know--these are very interesting points. I mean, we've often discussed these types of scenarios, such as--"what if Mario Lemieux walked into a team that had Kurri, Messier, Anderson, Coffey, Lowe and Fuhr, etc.?" and "Gretzky was surrounded by players like Rob Brown for the first half of his career?" These are entertaining to consider but I guess we need to go by what happened.

That said, in one of the videos I shared, Clarke was discussing his "leadership" and he gave all the credit to Snider, Allen and Shero for giving him the authority to make decisions and "lead", which validates your main point quite a bit. Sometimes I think these are "perfect storm" scenarios. Clarke was perfect for Philadelphia and the Flyers were perfect for Clarke. I don't think Dionne had the same attitude, work ethic and grimy personality that the expansion Flyers needed at the time. Philly is such a blue collar, hardhat and lunch pail city--especially in the mid-70's--that the Bullies resonated with them. Dionne reminds me more (personality-wise) as Rick MacLeish. Flyers fans adored MacLeish, like the rest of the Bullies, but Clarke was our guy. Personally, I don't think Dionne would have turned the Flyers into a Cup team, although the Flyers would have been competitive--like the French Connection Buffalo Sabres.

As for the Kings perspective--that's a good question--I'm not sure what Clarke would have been able to do in a dumpster fire environment.

The Clarke-led Flyers were very much a built from scratch outfit, so there was no existing team ethos (good or bad), no baggage. Keith Allen and Fred Shero, fully supported by ownership, is just one helluva hockey architectural firm.

The same can be said about the Potvin-led Islanders just a few years later. Torrey and Arbour got to build that club from the ground up, no history to live up to or work within (or around).

This is way off topic, but when Dionne joined the Wings out of the powerhouse St. Catharines junior club in 1971, Gordie Howe had just retired. Coincidentally, Montreal drafted Guy Lafleur just one spot ahead of Dionne that same year, and Jean Beliveau had just retired.

We know that Beliveau worked with Lafleur, mentored him, and played a significant role in Guy’s slow and steady transition from a junior scoring sensation to an iconic Hab. Bowman, too, was crucial here in teaching Lafleur how to play without the puck and to improve his defensive game and overall situational awareness.

The Red Wings made retired Gordie Howe the vice-president of Sweet F.A. and buried him in a tiny office in the basement of the Olympia. He was not even permitted to view practices, let alone actively mentor youngsters. Perhaps Howe could have been to Dionne what Beliveau was to Lafleur, but we are talking about the Harkness darkness period in Red Wings’ history, and the Big Guy was getting the mushroom treatment.

Anyway, some clubs (and even lone individuals) are just better than others when it comes to expertly guiding extraordinarily talented youngsters along what is often a non-linear development path. Glen Sather, for instance, has a superb track record in this regard.

This doesn’t change the obvious truth several posters have pointed out — we can only deal with what actually happened, not what ifs.

Still, if people are going to compare Clarke’s otherworldly leadership to Dionne’s rather suspect leadership, recognizing their diametrically opposed environmental venues is useful. How heavily one chooses to weigh these environmental differences is an open question.

 

[Boxscore]

The Clarke-led Flyers were very much a built from scratch outfit, so there was no existing team ethos (good or bad), no baggage. Keith Allen and Fred Shero, fully supported by ownership, is just one helluva hockey architectural firm.

The same can be said about the Potvin-led Islanders just a few years later. Torrey and Arbour got to build that club from the ground up, no history to live up to or work within (or around).

This is way off topic, but when Dionne joined the Wings out of the powerhouse St. Catharines junior club in 1971, Gordie Howe had just retired. Coincidentally, Montreal drafted Guy Lafleur just one spot ahead of Dionne that same year, and Jean Beliveau had just retired.

We know that Beliveau worked with Lafleur, mentored him, and played a significant role in Guy’s slow and steady transition from a junior scoring sensation to an iconic Hab. Bowman, too, was crucial here in teaching Lafleur how to play without the puck and to improve his defensive game and overall situational awareness.

The Red Wings made retired Gordie Howe the vice-president of Sweet F.A. and buried him in a tiny office in the basement of the Olympia. He was not even permitted to view practices, let alone actively mentor youngsters. Perhaps Howe could have been to Dionne what Beliveau was to Lafleur, but we are talking about the Harkness darkness period in Red Wings’ history, and the Big Guy was getting the mushroom treatment.

Anyway, some clubs (and even lone individuals) are just better than others when it comes to expertly guiding extraordinarily talented youngsters along what is often a non-linear development path. Glen Sather, for instance, has a superb track record in this regard.

This doesn’t change the obvious truth several posters have pointed out — we can only deal with what actually happened, not what ifs.

Still, if people are going to compare Clarke’s otherworldly leadership to Dionne’s rather suspect leadership, recognizing their diametrically opposed environmental venues is useful. How heavily one chooses to weigh these environmental differences is an open question.

One could argue the biggest development in Philadelphia Flyers history was the night they were physically abused by the St. Louis, the Plager brothers, and Andre Dupont. After that game, Flyers owner Ed Snider was beside himself and penned a manifesto promising the Flyers would never be physically intimidated again. That offseason, the Flyers loaded up on nuke bombs and became the Bullies--and the arms race leader of NHL goonery. Of course, once Snider went full Rambo--Clarke was the perfect ringleader for such shenanigans. Like I said--the Flyers and Clarke were the perfect storm. Just like Lafleur was for the offensive, flamboyant Canadiens of the 70's... with his blonde mane flowing in the breeze... that was just as iconic as Clarke's toothless grin.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The Clarke-led Flyers were very much a built from scratch outfit, so there was no existing team ethos (good or bad), no baggage. Keith Allen and Fred Shero, fully supported by ownership, is just one helluva hockey architectural firm.

The same can be said about the Potvin-led Islanders just a few years later. Torrey and Arbour got to build that club from the ground up, no history to live up to or work within (or around).

This is way off topic, but when Dionne joined the Wings out of the powerhouse St. Catharines junior club in 1971, Gordie Howe had just retired. Coincidentally, Montreal drafted Guy Lafleur just one spot ahead of Dionne that same year, and Jean Beliveau had just retired.

We know that Beliveau worked with Lafleur, mentored him, and played a significant role in Guy’s slow and steady transition from a junior scoring sensation to an iconic Hab. Bowman, too, was crucial here in teaching Lafleur how to play without the puck and to improve his defensive game and overall situational awareness.

The Red Wings made retired Gordie Howe the vice-president of Sweet F.A. and buried him in a tiny office in the basement of the Olympia. He was not even permitted to view practices, let alone actively mentor youngsters. Perhaps Howe could have been to Dionne what Beliveau was to Lafleur, but we are talking about the Harkness darkness period in Red Wings’ history, and the Big Guy was getting the mushroom treatment.

Anyway, some clubs (and even lone individuals) are just better than others when it comes to expertly guiding extraordinarily talented youngsters along what is often a non-linear development path. Glen Sather, for instance, has a superb track record in this regard.

This doesn’t change the obvious truth several posters have pointed out — we can only deal with what actually happened, not what ifs.

Still, if people are going to compare Clarke’s otherworldly leadership to Dionne’s rather suspect leadership, recognizing their diametrically opposed environmental venues is useful. How heavily one chooses to weigh these environmental differences is an open question.

If we're being fair, Lafleur was helped just as much by playing with 10 other HOF'ers. He may have been the straw that stirred the drink, but that team wins Cups plural with or without him.

One could argue the biggest development in Philadelphia Flyers history was the night they were physically abused by the St. Louis, the Plager brothers, and Andre Dupont. After that game, Flyers owner Ed Snider was beside himself and penned a manifesto promising the Flyers would never be physically intimidated again. That offseason, the Flyers loaded up on nuke bombs and became the Bullies--and the arms race leader of NHL goonery. Of course, once Snider went full Rambo--Clarke was the perfect ringleader for such shenanigans. Like I said--the Flyers and Clarke were the perfect storm. Just like Lafleur was for the offensive, flamboyant Canadiens of the 70's... with his blonde mane flowing in the breeze... that was just as iconic as Clarke's toothless grin.

ultimate irony is the Bruins built that Flyers team with garbage trades and asset management.

Bruins to Flyers:

Bernie Parent (expansion draft)
Reggie Leach
Rick MacLeish