better player: Rod Brind'amour or Doug Gilmour

[ted2019]

I'm curious on what the people think. I personally would take Brindy over Gilmour.

Click to read more...

 

[Big Phil]

BrindAmour was a good player but even at his best he never hit the level that Gilmour did. He couldn't lead a team quite the same way. Brindy never hit the scoring heights or the elite company that Gilmour did. Where was a year that Rod was anywhere near Gilmour in '93?

 

[arrbez]

Not to knock Rod, but this shouldn't really be that close. Gilmour all the way. Better offensively, arguably better defensively, better in the playoffs, received far more Hart consideration, etc. Brind'Amour does have him in the faceoff circle though.

 

[SuicideKings15]

Not a huge Gilmour fan, but this isn't even close.

Dougie every day of the week and twice on sundays.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Not a huge Gilmour fan, but this isn't even close.

Dougie every day of the week and twice on sundays.

Me neither (lifetime Habs fan), but despite the 2 to 1 in Selkes, Gilmour no doubt at all.

 

[ted2019]

BrindAmour was a good player but even at his best he never hit the level that Gilmour did. He couldn't lead a team quite the same way. Brindy never hit the scoring heights or the elite company that Gilmour did. Where was a year that Rod was anywhere near Gilmour in '93?

Brind'amour was the Captain of the canes cup run and Gilmour was never a captain for a cup winning team. That alone makes Brind'amour was the better leader.

 

[arrbez]

Brind'amour was the Captain of the canes cup run and Gilmour was never a captain for a cup winning team. That alone makes Brind'amour was the better leader.

Exactly. It's also why he's a better leader than Bobby Orr and Gordie Howe. Because he was the captain on a championship team, and they weren't.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

gilmour: at his best, the second best center in the league.

brind'amour: at his best, the second best center on his team.

no disrespect to rod, who had a fine career. but the comparison is ridiculous.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Brind'amour was the Captain of the canes cup run and Gilmour was never a captain for a cup winning team. That alone makes Brind'amour was the better leader.

We are hitting some real logic lows in the history section lately.

 

[seventieslord]

Brind'Amour is most likely better defensively, and a faceoff beast. That's it. There is absolutely no other reason to consider him better than Gilmour.

Gilmour was Top-5 in Hart voting 3 times, in seasons in which Gretzky and Lemieux won scoring titles. Brind'Amour was once 10th, and never again in the top-20.

Exactly. It's also why he's a better leader than Bobby Orr and Gordie Howe. Because he was the captain on a championship team, and they weren't.

 

[MS]

Brind'Amour is most likely better defensively, and a faceoff beast. That's it. There is absolutely no other reason to consider him better than Gilmour.

Gilmour was Top-5 in Hart voting 3 times, in seasons in which Gretzky and Lemieux won scoring titles. Brind'Amour was once 10th, and never again in the top-20.

Honestly, I don't even think Brind'Amour is better defensively.

I think Brind'Amour's defensive play is horribly over-rated. He's a guy who is gritty and a veteran and wins a ton of faceoffs. But when you actually look at the defensive numbers for goals scored when he's on the ice and quality of competition statistics, he's very average.

A guy like Sami Pahlsson absolutely destroyed Brind'Amour in those defensive categories during Brind'Amour's Selke seasons. But Pahlsson didn't score 70 points or win 60% of his faceoffs.

 

[seventieslord]

Honestly, I don't even think Brind'Amour is better defensively.

I think Brind'Amour's defensive play is horribly over-rated. He's a guy who is gritty and a veteran and wins a ton of faceoffs. But when you actually look at the defensive numbers for goals scored when he's on the ice and quality of competition statistics, he's very average.

A guy like Sami Pahlsson absolutely destroyed Brind'Amour in those defensive categories during Brind'Amour's Selke seasons. But Pahlsson didn't score 70 points or win 60% of his faceoffs.

I know Brind'Amour's GA numbers aren't that great but I always attributed that to competition quality, since his reputation is so strong and he looks good out there. What can you tell me about his quality of competition?

 

[MS]

I know Brind'Amour's GA numbers aren't that great but I always attributed that to competition quality, since his reputation is so strong and he looks good out there. What can you tell me about his quality of competition?

I don't have the numbers in front of me anymore but I know there was a discussion here awhile back where they were gone over pretty well.

If I recall correctly, his 5-on-5 numbers both in terms of goals against and quality of competition were very standard for a #1 center (as a Canuck fan, I seem to recall that Henrik Sedin came out ahead by the numbers). Pahlsson's numbers were absolutely ridiculous by comparison.

Additionally, he was getting credit for his PK work when Carolina's PK was terrible during one of his Selke seasons and I think the worst of any team that made the playoffs that year

He was a 'good' defensive player, no doubt, but to me the Selkes always seemed more like an effort to recognize an under-appreciated player who was having career years near the end of his career and seemed to 'fit' the Selke profile. And won lotz of faceoffs. Watching him play during those season, he never struck me as a defensive beast, just a really good two-way center.

 

[Eisen]

Brind'amour was the Captain of the canes cup run and Gilmour was never a captain for a cup winning team. That alone makes Brind'amour was the better leader.

Breath in, breath out...... And now, after there is some oxygen in your brain, please think again

 

[wendelclark17]

Killer

There really shouldn't be any debate.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Brind'amour was the Captain of the canes cup run and Gilmour was never a captain for a cup winning team. That alone makes Brind'amour was the better leader.

Are you the father of that babysitter by chance?

Edit to add: It's even possible that Brind'Amour is just as good of a leader or better. He willed Carolina to the Cup in 2006 (him not getting the Smythe was a joke), but the reason you give is simply terrible.

 

[MXD]

Actually, starting a Michel Goulet v. Mike Bossy poll wouldn't as bad as this.

 

[ted2019]

We are hitting some real logic lows in the history section lately.

Who made You the Lord all mighty ? People like to compare players, so I decided to compare these Two.

 

[mrhockey193195]

Who made You the Lord all mighty ? People like to compare players, so I decided to compare these Two.

Haven't read all the responses yet, but the only thing Brind'amour has over Gilmour is consistency later in his career: Brind'amour was still offensively productive and defensively solid past the age of 35, whereas Gilmour started bouncing around teams and was essentially a third line center.

Other than that, Gilmour was a superior player. Better offensive peak, phenominal playoff resume, etc. Gilmour was a dominant player at his best, a top 5 center in the league in the early 90s with Gretz, Mario, Messier and Yzerman. Brind'amour has never been that.

Their "defensive peaks" are pretty similar, but I might give the edge to Gilmour. Couldn't go wrong either way though.

 

[Vagrant]

I agree that Gilmore wins this one pretty easily, but the trashing of Brind'Amour on the way is a little troubling. I wish people could grasp the concept that you don't have to dismiss the performance or career of another player to reinforce your opinion regarding who is the better player.

Through the entire course of Brind'Amour's career he has been asked to play an exorbitant amount of time on ice because he has always been so defensively responsible, until the past two years, that he has drawn those assignments.

In 05-06, he was 22nd overall in terms of TOIPG and the only forward other than Brad Richards (44th), in the Top 50. He also won more draws than anybody outside the Top 25 in the league had even taken. 1,268 won that year. Joe Thornton a distant second with 922 wins. I went back until 97-98 and that number of wins was the highest that I could find. I would imagine it to be close to a league record.

Brind'Amour is one of the best faceoff men in history, has legendary strength and work ethic, and is also one of a few multiple Selke winners while also being the Captain of a Cup winning team. I also agree that he probably should have won the Smythe that year. The funny thing is that he probably would have been in consideration for the award with the 96-97 Flyers with his 13 goals and 21 points in 19 games.

I think Brind'Amour is a player that has value that extends beyond his numbers. His leadership by example, his infectious work ethic, and his steady production and dedication have made him a player that will one day garner consideration for the HHOF. He's that revered in the circles that matter.

 

[overpass]

I agree that Gilmore wins this one pretty easily, but the trashing of Brind'Amour on the way is a little troubling. I wish people could grasp the concept that you don't have to dismiss the performance or career of another player to reinforce your opinion regarding who is the better player.

Through the entire course of Brind'Amour's career he has been asked to play an exorbitant amount of time on ice because he has always been so defensively responsible, until the past two years, that he has drawn those assignments.

In 05-06, he was 22nd overall in terms of TOIPG and the only forward other than Brad Richards (44th), in the Top 50. He also won more draws than anybody outside the Top 25 in the league had even taken. 1,268 won that year. Joe Thornton a distant second with 922 wins. I went back until 97-98 and that number of wins was the highest that I could find. I would imagine it to be close to a league record.

Brind'Amour is one of the best faceoff men in history, has legendary strength and work ethic, and is also one of a few multiple Selke winners while also being the Captain of a Cup winning team. I also agree that he probably should have won the Smythe that year. The funny thing is that he probably would have been in consideration for the award with the 96-97 Flyers with his 13 goals and 21 points in 19 games.

I think Brind'Amour is a player that has value that extends beyond his numbers. His leadership by example, his infectious work ethic, and his steady production and dedication have made him a player that will one day garner consideration for the HHOF. He's that revered in the circles that matter.

For a player that was supposedly a top defensive forward, Rod Brind'Amour got surprisingly little support in Selke voting for most of his career. Before the lockout, Brind'Amour received Selke votes in only one season - 2000-01, when he finished between Magnus Arvedson and Ziggy Palffy.

In contrast, Doug Gilmour received Selke votes in ten different seasons over a thirteen year span from 1984-85 to 1996-97.

 

[canucks4ever]

For a player that was supposedly a top defensive forward, Rod Brind'Amour got surprisingly little support in Selke voting for most of his career. Before the lockout, Brind'Amour received Selke votes in only one season - 2000-01, when he finished between Magnus Arvedson and Ziggy Palffy.

In contrast, Doug Gilmour received Selke votes in ten different seasons over a thirteen year span from 1984-85 to 1996-97.

Well Joe sakic never got selke votes until 2000, was he a one dimensional player throughout the 90's.

 

[Vagrant]

For a player that was supposedly a top defensive forward, Rod Brind'Amour got surprisingly little support in Selke voting for most of his career. Before the lockout, Brind'Amour received Selke votes in only one season - 2000-01, when he finished between Magnus Arvedson and Ziggy Palffy.

In contrast, Doug Gilmour received Selke votes in ten different seasons over a thirteen year span from 1984-85 to 1996-97.

I cannot say why Brind'Amour didn't get as much attention for his defensive play until after the lockout. I do not have a vote, obviously, and do not take part in the process. I can say that the advent of the trap created more dedicated checking lines right around the end of the timeline you posted where Gilmore was drawing a lot of votes. The run on players like Lehtinen, Madden, Peca, Draper, etc. made a lot of really responsible two way players on the outside looking in there for a while.

I do somewhat agree that the Selke trophy has evolved into somewhat of a physical manifestation of the "best intangibles" award, but that does not diminish the value of the trophy in my estimation.

There really is no quantifiable way to measure defensive play short of obscure stats and new age mechanics that would confuse most of the voters and as we all know, there is no way that one could watch all thirty teams enough to gauge with any kind of accuracy who was the best without it becoming too abstract and subjective. Therefore, it becomes an award that is predicated on popularity that Brind'Amour simply did not have prior to the incredible run that he took Carolina on in 05-06. I suppose it's up for debate whether the recognition came as a result of the success or the success was unnoticed prior to the recognition, but at the end of the day he has his name on that award twice.

Brind'Amour, perhaps unfairly, has played a large portion of his career in the shadow of a star center. Lindros with the Flyers and Francis with the Hurricanes. He was really unable to establish his dominance prior to that due to the presence of a generational talent in Lindros and one of the greatest to ever play in Francis. Once that veil was lifted and he inherited a team of his own, which had a run of tremendous success, the collective recognition that Brind'Amour had always been that good really snapped into focus.

I think without the 05-06 season, Brind'Amour ends his career in the Hall of Very Good. For the recognition he received for that season and the way it carried over into the next with consecutive Selke awards and a Stanley Cup with a Smythe worthy performance, it elevated him into that higher tier of defensive stalwarts with scoring prowess.

 

[MS]

I agree that Gilmore wins this one pretty easily, but the trashing of Brind'Amour on the way is a little troubling. I wish people could grasp the concept that you don't have to dismiss the performance or career of another player to reinforce your opinion regarding who is the better player.

Through the entire course of Brind'Amour's career he has been asked to play an exorbitant amount of time on ice because he has always been so defensively responsible, until the past two years, that he has drawn those assignments.

In 05-06, he was 22nd overall in terms of TOIPG and the only forward other than Brad Richards (44th), in the Top 50. He also won more draws than anybody outside the Top 25 in the league had even taken. 1,268 won that year. Joe Thornton a distant second with 922 wins. I went back until 97-98 and that number of wins was the highest that I could find. I would imagine it to be close to a league record.

Brind'Amour is one of the best faceoff men in history, has legendary strength and work ethic, and is also one of a few multiple Selke winners while also being the Captain of a Cup winning team. I also agree that he probably should have won the Smythe that year. The funny thing is that he probably would have been in consideration for the award with the 96-97 Flyers with his 13 goals and 21 points in 19 games.

I think Brind'Amour is a player that has value that extends beyond his numbers. His leadership by example, his infectious work ethic, and his steady production and dedication have made him a player that will one day garner consideration for the HHOF. He's that revered in the circles that matter.

Faceoffs are a nice stat, but in and of themselves they mean nothing. Yannick Perreault is the best faceoff man of the past 15 years or so, but he's still a crap defensive player.

However, I do agree that they're one of the big reasons he won the award.

I don't disagree about much you're saying about Brind'Amour.

He does have a terrific work ethic.
He was an outstanding two-way center.
He was/is an excellent leader.
He logged ridiculous minutes in all situations for that Carolina team.
He may have a shot at the HHOF.

But that doesn't mean he should have won the Selke in 2006 or 2007. When you look at the numbers, the impact he had defensively just ... wasn't that huge, or out-of-line with what you see from a lot of other #1 centers around the league.

Hell, in 2005-06 Brind'Amour's ES GA/min was almost identical to Marc Savard's, and Savard was playing on a non-playoff Atlanta team that rotated through about 6 goalies while Brind'Amour was on the Stanley Cup Champions.

There was simply nothing extraordinary about the results that Brind'Amour got during those seasons. But he won lots of faceoffs, played a lot of minutes, was gritty, and was 'overdue for recognition' so he got the award.

The best defensive forward in the NHL from 2005-2007 was Sami Pahlsson.

 

[seventieslord]

Haven't read all the responses yet, but the only thing Brind'amour has over Gilmour is consistency later in his career: Brind'amour was still offensively productive and defensively solid past the age of 35, whereas Gilmour started bouncing around teams and was essentially a third line center.

Other than that, Gilmour was a superior player. Better offensive peak, phenominal playoff resume, etc. Gilmour was a dominant player at his best, a top 5 center in the league in the early 90s with Gretz, Mario, Messier and Yzerman. Brind'amour has never been that.

Their "defensive peaks" are pretty similar, but I might give the edge to Gilmour. Couldn't go wrong either way though.

I wouldn't say that.

Gilmour at age 33: 1.01 PPG
age 34: 0.84
35: 0.78
36: 0.99
37: 0.54
38: 0.59
39: 0.48
Total: 0.76

In the last two years, Gilmour did that with very little PP time. (on ice for 14 and 19 PPGF)

Brindamour, age 33: 0.49
age 34: DNP
35: 0.90
36: 1.05
37: 0.86
38: 0.64
39: 0.33 (so far)
Total: 0.75

03-04 was the only time Brind'Amour's PPGF went below 26 in a season.

Add to that the lower scoring era for Gilmour and he takes the "late career offense" comparison.