Bobby Hull: Two-Way Player?

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
This is absolutely hilarious. What you really looking for is proof that Bobby Hull was poor defensively and are not really interested in proof the other way. So far both dark shadows and I provided video proof of hull's defensive play. I also gave you a quote from red Hay that states the Hull line was used to check the Howe line.

However, none of this matches your unsupported opinion, does it.

I'm looking for people like you to actually back your opinion with evidence. I've got evidence that he was poor defensively. I know, I know...you don't like any of the 3 different sources. If those sources are so bad, surely there are many sources who claim the opposite, right? Right??

You and Dark Shadows have provided some videos that show both that Hull could make good defensive plays as well as make poor ones. Both of his good back-checks were from when he was playing the point on the powerplay. First of all, thre is a much different mentality when you know you're playing the position of defense. I've played both forward and defense, and I've coached for a long time, and I can tell you that players definately come back a lot harder when they're on the point/defense. Furthermore, both of his back-ckecks were after he caused the break-aways, and, once again, I can tell you that players come back a lot harder then they know they are making up for their own mistake. You videos show that, under the right set of circumstances, Hull can back-check. The defense zone video does show that he can anticipate a pass, but it also shows that he roams around and cheats offensively. Overall, it's not a very strong piece of evidence.... though it is something I suppose.

Hay's quote doesn't actually say they did a good job of matching up, just that their coach wanted them to do so. Hay's response actually tells a good bit about the line's mentality - we don't need to check them, they need to check us!

You still have not found me that Punch Imlach quote that you said you saw....
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
that is ridiculous. that was a standard defensive play that every coach would support.

Every coach would support their left winger floating though the slot, coming over onto the right winger's side, leaving both the high slot and middle point wide open, and cheating for an offensive chance?
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
Neither do the numbers (for the years available) above.

Mikita and Hull had very similar TGA and even almost the same PGA.
Which is very odd considering their reputations.

Hull and Mikita both played in different situations. Mikita was often matched against opposing top lines, where oppsing teams matched their checkers against Hull. Based on that, their TGA shouldn't be close - really, Miktia should have at least doule, and probably tripple.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,516
3,352
Hull and Mikita both played in different situations. Mikita was often matched against opposing top lines, where oppsing teams matched their checkers against Hull. Based on that, their TGA shouldn't be close - really, Miktia should have at least doule, and probably tripple.

I know that is the regurgitated party line and I'm not doubting Mikita was a very good two-way player, his reputation as such is well known.. but according to who was he matched so diligently against the top lines?

At first glance those numbers suggest to me that Chicago basically had a 1 and 1a option in their two front lines headlined by Mikita and Hull.

Like I said in the thread already I saw it from Hulls mouth that he loved competing against Howe head to head.

Another poster said Hull often went up against the big guns.

And yes I agree their TGA shouldn't be close if what you are claiming is in fact true. But their TGA and PGA are close for the years the data is available.

So something is amiss and not leaning in the way you'd like.

What the truth is.. I don't know I wasn't born yet to watch enough of their games and tell you what actually happened.
 
Last edited:

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
I know that is the regurgitated party line and I'm not doubting Mikita was a very good two-way player, his reputation as such is well known.. but according to who was he matched so diligently against the top lines?

According to Bobby Hull for one.

I've actually been lucky enough to talk to Bobby Hull a few times. Last time I talked to him, I owned Glenn Hall, so I was looking for some insight into their play-off issued. I asked him why he thought the Blackhawks only won one Cup. His response was pretty clear - Billy Reay was a moron. He gave a few examples of why, but one applies here. He said that Mikita was almost always used to match up against top lines, which was fine against everyone except Montreal. Mikita couldn't handle Beliveau's size, and Reay never changed his plan. He just went back to that match-up over and over, and it always bit Chicago in the ass.
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
According to Bobby Hull for one.

I've actually been lucky enough to talk to Bobby Hull a few times. Last time I talked to him, I owned Glenn Hall, so I was looking for some insight into their play-off issued. I asked him why he thought the Blackhawks only won one Cup. His response was pretty clear - Billy Reay was a moron. He gave a few examples of why, but one applies here. He said that Mikita was almost always used to match up against top lines, which was fine against everyone except Montreal. Mikita couldn't handle Beliveau's size, and Reay never changed his plan. He just went back to that match-up over and over, and it always bit Chicago in the ass.
First time I have ever seen that comment from Bobby. Do you have a source? I doubt he said exactly that. For certain in the 62 game with the leafs that I have, It was Fleming/Horvath/Nesterenko against Big M/Kelly/Nevin for the whole game. Never saw a third line get so much ice. In the 65 Wings game that I have it was the Hull line against the Howe line.

BTW, DarkShadows has access to these games on his HOH sticky. I suggested to you before that you should watch them. I will suggest it again. You actually might learn something.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,516
3,352
According to Bobby Hull for one.

I've actually been lucky enough to talk to Bobby Hull a few times. Last time I talked to him, I owned Glenn Hall, so I was looking for some insight into their play-off issued. I asked him why he thought the Blackhawks only won one Cup. His response was pretty clear - Billy Reay was a moron. He gave a few examples of why, but one applies here. He said that Mikita was almost always used to match up against top lines, which was fine against everyone except Montreal. Mikita couldn't handle Beliveau's size, and Reay never changed his plan. He just went back to that match-up over and over, and it always bit Chicago in the ass.

So Hull thought he could have? Cause one of the knocks about the Hawks was their lack of depth.. who else would have?
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Once again, that top clip shows two sides, and I'm sure you didn't see the bad.

Yes, Bobby Hull back-checked on that play. Yes, it was a great defensive play. The break-away, however, was caused by Hull, who made a poor decision that lead to the break-away.

The second clip, he was playing the point, so it's not like he skated past others to be the first one back. Also, that break-away was aslo partially caused by Hull.

To be fair, I don't think a guy like Jagr would put that much effort into the back-check.
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
I'm looking for people like you to actually back your opinion with evidence. I've got evidence that he was poor defensively. I know, I know...you don't like any of the 3 different sources. If those sources are so bad, surely there are many sources who claim the opposite, right? Right??

You and Dark Shadows have provided some videos that show both that Hull could make good defensive plays as well as make poor ones. Both of his good back-checks were from when he was playing the point on the powerplay. First of all, thre is a much different mentality when you know you're playing the position of defense. I've played both forward and defense, and I've coached for a long time, and I can tell you that players definately come back a lot harder when they're on the point/defense. Furthermore, both of his back-ckecks were after he caused the break-aways, and, once again, I can tell you that players come back a lot harder then they know they are making up for their own mistake. You videos show that, under the right set of circumstances, Hull can back-check. The defense zone video does show that he can anticipate a pass, but it also shows that he roams around and cheats offensively. Overall, it's not a very strong piece of evidence.... though it is something I suppose.

Hay's quote doesn't actually say they did a good job of matching up, just that their coach wanted them to do so. Hay's response actually tells a good bit about the line's mentality - we don't need to check them, they need to check us!

You still have not found me that Punch Imlach quote that you said you saw....

Somehow, I don't think it is possible to supply enough evidence to change your opinion but at least I am supplying evidence where you have supplied squat. I do know you have a Stan Fischler quote out there. Why don't you post that and then the rest of us can have a good laugh.

The Punch Imlach quote is on a DVD I own. I will take a look at it tomorrow and provide his exact words. They are quite flattering to Hull & we all know Punch didn't value one-dimensional players.

Not sure why you felt the need to bring this discussion over from the ATD forum but it looks like you are not getting much support.
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
So Hull thought he could have? Cause one of the knocks about the Hawks was their lack of depth.. who else would have?
Actually Red Hay would have been a good choice. He was a big centre and actually was quite good defensively. After Espo replaced him on the Hull line, Hay moved to the third line in a defensive role.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
First time I have ever seen that comment from Bobby. Do you have a source? I doubt he said exactly that. For certain in the 62 game with the leafs that I have, It was Fleming/Horvath/Nesterenko against Big M/Kelly/Nevin for the whole game. Never saw a third line get so much ice. In the 65 Wings game that I have it was the Hull line against the Howe line.

If you read my comment, it was based on a conversation that I had with Mr Hull at a hockey trounament. My source is him. You're right that he didn't say exactly that, but those are some specific points that I remember from what he said.

1962 was before Billy Reay came to Chicago.

1965 you could be right. I'm just telling you what Hul told me. Perhaps this was simply before Reay began to use Mikita in the match-up role.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,131
Regina, SK
I have some games saved from my PVR to my PC and here is what I found for matchups at even strength when skimming the game:

1962-04-15 TOR CHI:

Kelly v Horvath
Keon v Hay (Hull)
Keon v Hay
Keon v Hay
Kelly v Horvath (Mikita)
Mikita v Pulford
Pulford v Horvath

- Mikita was playing RW for much of the game but also took some faceoffs too. Horvath started the 2nd period at ES against Kelly & Mahovlich.

This game was in Toronto though, so I don't know how much of this has to do with Chicago getting the matchups they want. Also, Toronto didn't really have a "top line" - the line to stop was the one Mahovlich was on, but other than that, they had five semi-threats in Duff, Armstrong, Litzenberger, Keon & Kelly. This game is probably a poor example. I'll see what the next game shows...
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
Somehow, I don't think it is possible to supply enough evidence to change your opinion but at least I am supplying evidence where you have supplied squat. I do know you have a Stan Fischler quote out there. Why don't you post that and then the rest of us can have a good laugh.

Why don't you try supplying some evidence, and we'll go from there?

There have been 3 different sources provided. One is Stan Fischler. You can slam him all you want, but that still leaves 2 that you keep trying to ignore.

Stan Fischler - "Unlike Hull, Howe was the complete hockey player - a defensive bulark as well as an offensive ace, an ambidextrous shooter, and a spiritual team leader."

Ebbie Goodfellow - "They say that Bobby Hull might someday beat Howe's scoring records, but Bobby is pretty much an offensive player; he'll never be able to do the things Howe could."

I'll look for the 3rd source in the draft thread. It's a newspaper article that was written when Bobby Hull was about to come back from an injury. The author said that the team was doing well without him. The defensive system that they played was working, but when Hull returned, he could/would/might screw it all up.

The Punch Imlach quote is on a DVD I own. I will take a look at it tomorrow and provide his exact words. They are quite flattering to Hull & we all know Punch didn't value one-dimensional players.

As I've said a few times, I'd love to see the quote.

Not sure why you felt the need to bring this discussion over from the ATD forum but it looks like you are not getting much support.

I was going to continue it in the thread, but figured it was better to do it outside the draft thread.

I am trying to form an educated opinion about Bobby Hull. I'm not looking for support. I'm looking for evidence.

Whether you agree or not, I've done a lot of research here. Based on what I've found, Hull was less than average defensively. You don't agree. That's fine. I don't care about your opinion. I do care about the evidence you found that lead you to form that opninion. Who knows, once we both have all the same evidence, we might share a similar opinion. As of right now, however, it is very clear that we are either using very difference pieces of evidence, or we are getting a different opnion from the same evidence.
 
Last edited:

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
I'm not looking for support. I'm looking for evidence.

You have been given lots of evidence but choose to ignore it.

Your quotes aren't up to much. Don't know a lot about Goodfellow but he was coaching Chicago when Howe was putting up monster seasons. Not sure he saw much of hull's career as his coaching career was over in 1952.

Fischler of course has a lot of weird opinions so forget that.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
You have been given lots of evidence but choose to ignore it.

What's your evidence?

1. A quote from Borje Salming that basically said, "he body-checked me a few times".

2. A quote from Punch Imlach..... oh wait, you haven't provided that yet.

3. A quote from Hull's linemate that said, "our coach asked me if we wanted to check Gordie Howe, but I said you should ask Howe if he wants to check us."

4. A couple videos that do show some good defensive plays, but they also show bad ones.

Did I miss anything?
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
What's your evidence?

1. A quote from Borje Salming that basically said, "he body-checked me a few times".

2. A quote from Punch Imlach..... oh wait, you haven't provided that yet.

3. A quote from Hull's linemate that said, "our coach asked me if we wanted to check Gordie Howe, but I said you should ask Howe if he wants to check us."

4. A couple videos that do show some good defensive plays, but they also show bad ones.

Did I miss anything?

1. here is the complete quote:

in the 76 Canada cup Canada/sweden game, the Canadian strategy was to control Salming. 37 year old Hull took it to heart. Here is a quote from Salming "Canada played fair but their tactic was to neutralize me and Anders Hedberg, which they managed to do. Bodies were flying all the time. Bobby Hull hit me really hard a couple of times in the first few minutes, I softened up quite a bit after that, but the hits were all fair."

Bobby Hull basically took Salming out of an important game. That is defensive play by anybody's definition.

2.Be patient. You will get the exact quote tomorrow although I expect you will put your own spin on it.

3. The point of The Hay comment is that they were asked to check the Howe line. The fact Hay made a cocky comment is irrelavent.

4.The fact that the videos show good defensive plays is enough. Does this not tell you the Hull was decent defensively.

Besides that, you are too young to have seen Hull play. I watched his entire career quite closely as I was a big Hawk fan at the time.

You are a bear for punishment. Not one poster here has supplied evidence that Hull was bad defensively. Several(besides me) have supplied evidence that he was a decent 2 way players.

Have you watched the games yet? This is the third time I have asked you to.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
1. here is the complete quote:

in the 76 Canada cup Canada/sweden game, the Canadian strategy was to control Salming. 37 year old Hull took it to heart. Here is a quote from Salming "Canada played fair but their tactic was to neutralize me and Anders Hedberg, which they managed to do. Bodies were flying all the time. Bobby Hull hit me really hard a couple of times in the first few minutes, I softened up quite a bit after that, but the hits were all fair."

Bobby Hull basically took Salming out of an important game. That is defensive play by anybody's definition.

If I spear Gretzky in the face, is that good defensive play? I took him out of the game right?

The quote says Hull body-checked him. That's evidence of physical play, not defensive ability.

3. The point of The Hay comment is that they were asked to check the Howe line. The fact Hay made a cocky comment is irrelavent.[/qupte]

The quote proves only one thing. Pilious asked them to do it.

Did he actually end up doing it?
Did Bobby Hull actually do a good job in that role?
Was he ever asked to perform that role again?

As a coach, I've tried hundreds of different things. That doesn't make them all good ideas.

4.The fact that the videos show good defensive plays is enough. Does this not tell you the Hull was decent defensively.

I already agreed that they did show some good defensive player. I also said they show some pretty poor defensive plays, which you refuse to see.

Those videos push me very slightly towards thinking Hull was average defensively. They aren't enough to counter the 3 written sources I have, but they do go the other way a little bit.

The biggest problem I have is that there seems to be no written evidence that he was good defensively. I've read through many Bobby Hull mini-bios, blurbs, and newspaper articles, and I've never seen him, not once, called a good back-checker, a reliable defensively, or any kind of two-way player.

With all the Bobby Hull information out there, it's not like we're digging fro scraps here. If he was as good as you think, surely, somebody, somewhere, would have written it down.....
 

Stephen

Moderator
Feb 28, 2002
77,840
51,502
Dreakmur, I don't know what the agenda is, but your search for 'evidence' is just bizarre. If you're going to provide your own hearsay evidence as to how badly a defensive player Hull was, do yourself a favour, and don't use Stan Fischler, who is just an idiocy machine.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=341080

I'd take a rumoured Punch Imlach quote, a youtube video and some plus minus stats over that junk any day. What's your other evidence, a quote suggesting team chemistry could be affected when Hull returns, and a one liner from a guy who was a Howe teammate? Just impartial observation, right?

Just horrible.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
Dreakmur, I don't know what the agenda is, but your search for 'evidence' is just bizarre. If you're going to provide your own hearsay evidence as to how badly a defensive player Hull was, do yourself a favour, and don't use Stan Fischler, who is just an idiocy machine.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=341080

I'd take a rumoured Punch Imlach quote, a youtube video and some plus minus stats over that junk any day.

My agenda is to learn about hockey players of the past. I'm trying to form a more informed opinion about Bobby Hull. Peope seem to think he was good defensively, and I'm trying to understand why.

As I said already, if he was good, somebody would have documented it.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
What's your other evidence, a quote suggesting team chemistry could be affected when Hull returns, and a one liner from a guy who was a Howe teammate? Just impartial observation, right?

Just horrible.

Stan Fischler was Howe's teammate? I know, I know, you meant Ebbie Goodfellow.... but he played no more games with Howe than Fischler did.
 

Stephen

Moderator
Feb 28, 2002
77,840
51,502
Stan Fischler was Howe's teammate? I know, I know, you meant Ebbie Goodfellow.... but he played no more games with Howe than Fischler did.

Oh well, I guess the Wings alumnist wasn't biased at all...

And you can't argue with the authority of a guy who'd take Potvin over Orr...

Not that either of them are making the statements that Hull was terrible defensively that you want.
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
Oh well, I guess the Wings alumnist wasn't biased at all...

He only served on the Hockey Hall of Fame selection committee for 20+ years...

And you can't argue with the authority of a guy who'd take Potvin over Orr...

Being wrong on other things doesn't automatically mean he's wrong on this one.

Not that either of them are making the statements that Hull was terrible defensively that you want.

First of all, I don't want anything except something that's close to the truth.

Second, you're right that they don't say he is horrible. They both do say that he wasn't good, which goes against this board's historical canon.
 

RabbinsDuck

Registered User
Feb 1, 2008
4,761
12
Brighton, MI
I never heard Hull was a liability defensively, but I have always heard Mikita was a great two-way player, from old-timers. Never heard the same about Hull.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->