Quiet Robert said:
The era consideration is a valid argument. Not denying that Dino wasnt good. Kind of like Gartner or Andreychuck. They have great stats but...
- Status
The era consideration is a valid argument. Not denying that Dino wasnt good. Kind of like Gartner or Andreychuck. They have great stats but...
chooch said:
I know what you mean and what I meant to say is that this argument does play a role, but again, you can't discredit a player because of when he played. You have to look at his era and how good he was in comparison to others in his era. I agree it can play a role, but it doesn't take away from how good a player was. With this argument you can discredit anybody.
Joe Malone-Too early, no forward passing etc..
Rocket Richard- War time player, watered down competition
Orr- Played in an era with 6 new teams, half his competition sucked
Gretzky-Too many goals, not enough defence.
Hasek-Tight defences, no goal scoring.
That basically leaves the period of about 1955-1967 as the only period where you can take a forwards numbers at face value, unless there is some excuse for this period I can't think of.
Quiet Robert said:
Also it should be noted that when Bossy played in the playoffs he played a lot more games in his prime then Lafleur did. Here are both men's 6 best playoffs.
Guy Lafleur:
11 GP 12 G 7 A 19 P
13 GP 7 G 10 A 17 P
14 GP 9 G 17 A 26 P
15 GP 10 G 11 A 21 P
16 GP 10 G 13 A 23 P
3 GP 3 G 1 A 4 P
Total: 72 GP 51 G 59 A 110 P
Mike Bossy
16 GP 10 G 13 A 23 P
18 GP 17 G 18 A 35 P
19 GP 17 G 10 A 27 P
19 GP 17 G 9 A 26 P
21 GP 8 G 10 A 18 P
10 GP 5 G 6 A 11 P
Total:103 GP 74 G 66 A 140 P
Now let's see their goals, assists and points per game averages.
Guy Lafleur: 0.71, 0.83, 1.54
Mike Bossy: 0.72, 0.64, 1.36
Now here's what both men would've had if they had played in the same number of games in their primes.
Guy Lafleur: 103 GP 73 Goals, 84 assists, 157 Points
Mike Bossy: 103 GP 74 Goals, 66 assists, 140 points
Still pretty close but Lafleur actually has the lead now doesnt he? They're pretty much the same in goal scoring except Lafleur is much better in playmaking. No knock on Bossy but he was no Guy Lafleur.
And you know if the following things hadn't taken place their stats wouldnt be even close.
1- Not take care of himself, smoke 2 packs a day and go out drinking every night.
2- Accident which nearly killed him and took a toll on him both phisically and mentally.
3- A defensive minded coach in Lemaire who was rarely playing him.
4- Lack of great players around him... as in no Bryan Trottier making plays.
5- Pressure to perform at the same level and boy what a high level it was and if you dont win the cup then you're nothing.
6- Being burned out after 4 cups in a row.
If those things hadn't happened then Guy would've been much better statisticaly and wouldnt have dropped all of a sudden from a 130 point man to a 70 point one. So all in all Bossy was great but he was no Guy Lafleur.
I thought I should post that again because its basically the answer. And no I never said Lafleur was better goals scorer then Bossy but he was just as good IN HIS PRIME. I mean if those 6 things I mentioned hadn't happened which in Bossy's case didnt Lafleur would've had at least 7 to 10 50 or more goal seasons. I know I got no proof but can you explain to me how a 60 goal guy like Lafleur drops to 27 goals all of a sudden? And they were so close in goal scoring even with the problems Lafleur had and in playmaking and pressure play and clutch/playoff play Lafleur was better so in the end Lafleur was the better player. Why else would you think Bossy was ranked number 20 by the hockey news and Lafleur number 11?
You bring up some very valid points, but don't forget Bossy's career was cut short at the age of 30. And his last season was incomplete due to injury. If he had played another 2-3 years at the top of his game. (There's nothing to suggest he wouldn't he just came off one of his best seasons before his last one.) If Bossy had played a full career, he probably would have gotten 800+ goals.
Both players had things happen to them which hurt their productivity. We could debate which was worse, but that's way too speculative. Personally, I just think if you look at Bossy's scoring that, overall, he was more productive than Lafleur.
Also, I somewhat disagree with the point that Bossy played more games in his prime. Both were around the same age when their teams went on the cup runs in total they played close to the same amount of games. (Guy played one more)
After the age of the 30 (when Bossy retired) Guy played 24 games and scored 3 goals. If you removed that period, he's still less productive than Bossy. And we can't speculate how Bossy would have played if he was healthy. That is to say, if you stop both player's career at the age of 30, Bossy is more productive. And even after Guy kept playing, Bossy was mroe productive.
The bottom line, to me, is that both were great players. Lafleur overall will go down as the greater one. However, Bossy is better goalscorer. He's easily a top 5, top 3, maybe top 2 goalscorer of all-time, Lafleur is not. But Lafleur is still no doubt the better player.
Both players had things happen to them which hurt their productivity. We could debate which was worse, but that's way too speculative. Personally, I just think if you look at Bossy's scoring that, overall, he was more productive than Lafleur.
Also, I somewhat disagree with the point that Bossy played more games in his prime. Both were around the same age when their teams went on the cup runs in total they played close to the same amount of games. (Guy played one more)
After the age of the 30 (when Bossy retired) Guy played 24 games and scored 3 goals. If you removed that period, he's still less productive than Bossy. And we can't speculate how Bossy would have played if he was healthy. That is to say, if you stop both player's career at the age of 30, Bossy is more productive. And even after Guy kept playing, Bossy was mroe productive.
The bottom line, to me, is that both were great players. Lafleur overall will go down as the greater one. However, Bossy is better goalscorer. He's easily a top 5, top 3, maybe top 2 goalscorer of all-time, Lafleur is not. But Lafleur is still no doubt the better player.
Quiet Robert said:
Well no Bossy and Lafleur didnt play as many games in the playoffs in their primes.. Lafleur's prime was from 74-75 to 79-80 and he played 72 playoff games during that span and Bossy's prime was somewhere bettween 1980-81 and 1984-85 and he played 103 games. That's 31 more games! Ever seen Bossy go end to end? Who was the faster skater? Who was the better stickhandler? Who had a lot more pressure to perform? Who had a freakin accident which nearly killed him during his prime? Who was the better playmaker? Who won individual trophies as the best player in the league a lot of times? Who was the one who didnt have a great playmaking center? Take a guess.. I bet it starts with a G and ends with a Y.
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
Just a reminder, Bossy was also a member of the cancer stick brigade, and Lafleur had himself to blame if I remember for his accident. If I recall correctly, he was corked at the time?? If not, i apologize Guy.
KOVALEV10 said:
It depends how define prime. I see it as the period between 27-32, which is usually when a player is most productive and at the height of all his skills. In which case's Bossy's career was cut short in the middle of his prime. You seem to be suggesting 'most productive point of his career' in which case you have a point. But usually prime is defined by age, not productivity. In which case were just arguing over semantics so we don't need to keep on going there.
As to the last part, I already told you I think Lafleur was a better overall player. I don't know why that was necessary. I've already told you I think Lafleur was a better overall player, why don't you acknowledge Bossy was a better scorer?
Quiet Robert said:
I did... Bossy was the slightly better goal scorer is what I was saying all along but I was saying it is closer then what most people think.
Quiet Robert said:Sorry about that. Then I guess we agree.
Yeah I guess..
Anyways after reading my posts I may have come through as someone who thinks Bossy sucked or something. In no way shape or form did I intend to say or mean that and I apologize if I came across that way. You know in the early 80-s Bossy actually was my favorite non hab player. Another thing I really admired is the fact that Bossy was a very clean and nice player!- Status
