Bryan Trottier vs Stan Mikita

[Trottier]

Yes totally not fair to judge him then. And despite the controversy surrounding his Hart in 1990 the truth is, even if Bourque wins it, that's still a spectacular season (his best) and the voters found a way to put him in as a First Team all-star over Gretzky, Yzerman and a banged up Lemieux. Messier just thrived in whatever he did. Canada Cups, playoffs, New York, Edmonton. Even for those who hate Messier have got to admit there are precious few that are as decorated all time as he is.

I know you are an Islanders fan, but when I think about Messier I often think about the goal he scored deking Potvin out of his jock and past Smith in the 1984 Cup finals

I remember well the 1990 Hart and the controversy surrounding it - not just Bourque, but Mario. I give the voters credit for not going simply with the personal numbers (Mario). Even though Mario was the best player in the world by then, Messier's feat that season (leading the Oilers) was remarkable.

As for '84, the moment you describe is when many us knew that one dynasty was coming to a close and another beginning. An electrifying, great play.

PS - Hockey fan first, Isles fan second. And too young to remember the Isles dynasty.

 

[poise]

I do not understand why a lot of these threads are seeming like bash one player to prop another.

For me, I never saw Mikita play until very recently and sparingly on old game clips, but I did watch Bryan Trottier, and let me just say, if Mikita was really so much better than Trottier (as one might gather from simply looking at relative dominance or awards voting) then he must have been quite the player indeed, because Bryan Trottier was insanely good at everything. A lot of the good two way forwards are primarily playmakers, because it is easier to stay in good position defensively that way, but Trottier could score goals and play well in his own end better than anyone I've seen except Kurri. People remember his physicality but Trottier was also one of the smartest players around.

Mikita may very well be the better player as he had longevity that Trottier probably doesn't, but even with a guy like Mikita, it is hard to say that Trottier at his best is not at least very close to Mikita at his best.

People from america dont get CBC, i knew you were full of it.

Yes they do, in the metro Detroit area for example. You can pick up a signal without cable or dish even...

 

[canucks4ever]

I do not understand why a lot of these threads are seeming like bash one player to prop another.

For me, I never saw Mikita play until very recently and sparingly on old game clips, but I did watch Bryan Trottier, and let me just say, if Mikita was really so much better than Trottier (as one might gather from simply looking at relative dominance or awards voting) then he must have been quite the player indeed, because Bryan Trottier was insanely good at everything. A lot of the good two way forwards are primarily playmakers, because it is easier to stay in good position defensively that way, but Trottier could score goals and play well in his own end better than anyone I've seen except Kurri. People remember his physicality but Trottier was also one of the smartest players around.

Mikita may very well be the better player as he had longevity that Trottier probably doesn't, but even with a guy like Mikita, it is hard to say that Trottier at his best is not at least very close to Mikita at his best.



Yes they do, in the metro Detroit area for example. You can pick up a signal without cable or dish even...

Yeah its also available in washington state, but not in california.

By the way, the trottier in his prime was a great player no doubt and he deserves to be anywhere between 27-40 on all time lists. However, top 20 lists are meant for people that dominated thier generation and thats what mikita-hull-beliveau did during the 1960's. They were the same 3 guys ruling the league.

 

[Dreakmur]

So, did you watch him his entire career?

He retired before I was born.

I have been lucky enough to catch about a dozen of his games from the 60s on TV.

 

[On Edge]

Trottier for me...obvioisly Mikita was great. I did get to see him a few times but obviously at the end of his career and not as much as Trottier.

I am trying to be objective and but it may not be entirely possible however I do think Trottier gets short end of stick here (I'm not losing sleep over it).

One on one, in their primes, I'd take Trottier over Stan. Six Stanley cup rings means a lot too but that's just me.

 

[fan67]

As long as that rational unbiased person is also educated in hockey history, no they would never choose Trottier over Mikita.

He retired before I was born.

I have been lucky enough to catch about a dozen of his games from the 60s on TV.

You cant be serious. How can you say with such conviction that Mikita was substantially better than Trottier, when you weren't alive during makita's career was (and i can only assume you were too young to have taken in Trottier's prime). 12 games is a small sample size. You're being ignorant.

 

[seventieslord]

You cant be serious. How can you say with such conviction that Mikita was substantially better than Trottier, when you weren't alive during makita's career was (and i can only assume you were too young to have taken in Trottier's prime). 12 games is a small sample size. You're being ignorant.

You're right. Let's just close the HOH section. No sense in trying to compare players from different generations because it is absolutely, 100% impossible to do unless you saw 100 live games of each of them. We've been wasting our lives.

 

[fan67]

Im not suggesting that we shouldnt discuss and compare players of past generations, im suggesting that when you're dealing with a sample size of 12games that perhaps you should present your opinion as just that(an opinion), and not as hard facts. I also dont think its much of a stretch to suggest that when discussing players you tend to have a better grasp on there careers if you were actually drawing breath during them. I love discussing players that i never witnessed live but i also dont pretend to an expert.

 

[Trottier]

Im not suggesting that we shouldnt discuss and compare players of past generations, im suggesting that when you're dealing with a sample size of 12games that perhaps you should present your opinion as just that(an opinion), and not as hard facts. I also dont think its much of a stretch to suggest that when discussing players you tend to have a better grasp on there careers if you were actually drawing breath during them. I love discussing players that i never witnessed live but i also dont pretend to an expert.

You are 100% correct.

But such are the limitations of a message board. All one can do is set his/her own standards when it comes to weighing the opinion of various posters.

After you are here a bit, it'll be easy enough to identify the truly knowledgable types.

 

[Axxellien]

Stanislas:

Stan The Man All the way!!

 

[Blades of Glory]

Mikita, in my humble opinion, is one of the game's most under-rated legends. His raw dominance of an entire decade is astounding enough. That is even before we get into his absolutely spectacular competition, an argument usually used as an excuse for a player who wasn't able to win a certain trophy. In his case, he actually won those trophies OVER that competition, which is probably the most amazing I have ever seen.

1967-68
HART: (103-69)
1. Stan Mikita, Chi C 52 (34-18)
2. Jean Beliveau, Mtl C 43 (4-39)
3. Bobby Hull, Chi LW 32 (32-0)
4. Bobby Orr, Bos D 29 (29-0)
5. Gordie Howe, Det RW 16 (4-12)

Wow. That's a top five for you, isn't it?

I consider Mikita as the 8th best forward of all-time, behind Gretzky/Howe/Lemieux/Hull/Beliveau/Richard/Morenz. In front of Lafleur and Esposito. To me, he's closer to the first group than the guys behind him. Now, in my obviously flawed and subjective rankings, I rank Mikita as the 15th best player of all-time and Trottier at 25. I do, however, believe that the gap between them is slightly significant.

Mikita was the quiet superstar, overshadowed by a certain Chicago winger, but he deserves a little more credit than I think he gets. The fans and media loved Hull so much, deservedly so, but few truly appreciated his center the way he deserved to be. It's tragic.

If there's one story that sums up Mikita, it has to be this one.

The little boy approached the two men in the restaurant. "May I have your autograph, Mr. Hull?" he asked the blond one sheepishly. "Certainly," said Bobby. "Why don't you ask Stan Mikita for his, too?

http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com/2009/05/stan-mikita-better-than-bobby-hull.html

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

You're right. Let's just close the HOH section. No sense in trying to compare players from different generations because it is absolutely, 100% impossible to do unless you saw 100 live games of each of them. We've been wasting our lives.

When you speak in absolutes, when discussing two great centers, you better have more than I saw a guy play 12 games. Sure, I think Mikita was better based on Harts, All-Stars noms and Art Ross trophies, and talking to people who saw him at his best, but damned the Trottier I saw was one of the 3 or 4 most complete forwards I've ever seen play the game, so unless the guy's name is M.Lemeiux or W.Gretzky, no center is "Easily" ahead of Trottier.

 

[seventieslord]

When you speak in absolutes, when discussing two great centers, you better have more than I saw a guy play 12 games. Sure, I think Mikita was better based on Harts, All-Stars noms and Art Ross trophies, and talking to people who saw him at his best, but damned the Trottier I saw was one of the 3 or 4 most complete forwards I've ever seen play the game, so unless the guy's name is M.Lemeiux or W.Gretzky, no center is "Easily" ahead of Trottier.

As great as Trottier is, there are still other centers "easily" ahead of him - Beliveau, Morenz, and Mikita. There are others, but those three should be no-brainers.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

As great as Trottier is, there are still other centers "easily" ahead of him - Beliveau, Morenz, and Mikita. There are others, but those three should be no-brainers.

I guess people have different definitions of 'easily'.

 

[seventieslord]

I guess people have different definitions of 'easily'.

The higher up you go, the bigger the apparent "gaps" get between players.

You've got your big-4, then a dropoff. There is generally considered to be a dropoff after the likes of Richard, Hull, Beliveau, Harvey and Shore before guys like Bourque, Morenz, Mikita and the goalies.

Gap from 1st-11th? Massive.
Gap from 11th-21st? Huge.
Gap from 31st-41st? Significant.
Gap from 61st-71st? Small.
Gap from 201st-211th? Miniscule.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

The higher up you go, the bigger the apparent "gaps" get between players.

You've got your big-4, then a dropoff. There is generally considered to be a dropoff after the likes of Richard, Hull, Beliveau, Harvey and Shore before guys like Bourque, Morenz, Mikita and the goalies.

Gap from 1st-11th? Massive.
Gap from 11th-21st? Huge.
Gap from 31st-41st? Significant.
Gap from 61st-71st? Small.
Gap from 201st-211th? Miniscule.

Well if that's your scale, fine, but honestly I don't see that big a difference between the 10th best and 30th best. I've seen guys who are typically ranked in the 10-15 range and guys typically in that 20 to 30 range and IMO there isn't that big a difference. I don't really see that great Isles team being that much better with a prime Mikita rather than a prime Trots.

 

[seventieslord]

Well if that's your scale, fine, but honestly I don't see that big a difference between the 10th best and 30th best. I've seen guys who are typically ranked in the 10-15 range and guys typically in that 20 to 30 range and IMO there isn't that big a difference. I don't really see that great Isles team being that much better with a prime Mikita rather than a prime Trots.

That may be true, and that team was great. Why mess with something that worked, to the tune of four cups. But there is ZERO doubt that Stan Mikita was a better hockey player who should rank ahead on any scholar's list.

Stan Mikita's 5th-best season from a goals perspective: 4th in NHL (behind only Ullman, Hull, Howe)
Trottier's 5th-best season: 19th in NHL (behind guys like Vaive, Bullard, Larouche, Middleton, Tanti, Simmer, Ogrodnick, Bellows, Federko, Mullen, Nicholls)
Mikita had 5 more seasons better than Trottier's 5th-best.

Stan Mikita's 5th-best season from an assists perspective: 2nd in NHL (tied with Beliveau and behind Bathgate)
Trottier's 5th-best season: 5th in NHL (behind Gretzky, Coffey, Pederson, Stastny)

No amount of physicality and defense could overcome such an offensive gap. Besides, this isn't Luc Robitaille he's being compared to - it's Stan Freakin' Mikita! A feisty competitor who is loaded with intangibles of his own.

 

[Big Phil]

As great as Trottier is, there are still other centers "easily" ahead of him - Beliveau, Morenz, and Mikita. There are others, but those three should be no-brainers.

You are correct. I hate to say the word "easily" because it seems like I'm disrespecting Trottier but the truth is if Beliveau, Morenz, Mikita and Trottier were on the table for a GM then Trottier would be 4th. Gretzky and Lemieux are the other obvious choices.

Then the gap narrows a bit and you have Esposito and then Messier who are both ahead of Trottier. Then I would slot Trottier in there. And call me crazy but as great as Clarke was I have always slotted Sakic ahead of him, but Trottier beats out Sakic

 

[seventieslord]

You are correct. I hate to say the word "easily" because it seems like I'm disrespecting Trottier but the truth is if Beliveau, Morenz, Mikita and Trottier were on the table for a GM then Trottier would be 4th. Gretzky and Lemieux are the other obvious choices.

Just to add to this, Trottier has been the lowest-selected of the four in 5 of the last 6 ATDs. The exception was the last one, where he was taken one spot ahead of Morenz.

Then the gap narrows a bit and you have Esposito and then Messier who are both ahead of Trottier. Then I would slot Trottier in there. And call me crazy but as great as Clarke was I have always slotted Sakic ahead of him, but Trottier beats out Sakic

I'm a big Sakic fan, but Clarke is possibly the best defensive forward of all-time. His GA numbers are absolutely unreal. They are in Gainey/Ramsay territory even though he was a top offensive player. That's unheard of.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

That may be true, and that team was great. Why mess with something that worked, to the tune of four cups. But there is ZERO doubt that Stan Mikita was a better hockey player who should rank ahead on any scholar's list.

Stan Mikita's 5th-best season from a goals perspective: 4th in NHL (behind only Ullman, Hull, Howe)
Trottier's 5th-best season: 19th in NHL (behind guys like Vaive, Bullard, Larouche, Middleton, Tanti, Simmer, Ogrodnick, Bellows, Federko, Mullen, Nicholls)
Mikita had 5 more seasons better than Trottier's 5th-best.

Stan Mikita's 5th-best season from an assists perspective: 2nd in NHL (tied with Beliveau and behind Bathgate)
Trottier's 5th-best season: 5th in NHL (behind Gretzky, Coffey, Pederson, Stastny)

No amount of physicality and defense could overcome such an offensive gap. Besides, this isn't Luc Robitaille he's being compared to - it's Stan Freakin' Mikita! A feisty competitor who is loaded with intangibles of his own.

You don't have to make a case for Mikita to me. I have him as the 4th best center of all time. I just don't think he is 'easily' better than the next 4 or 5. Better, yes. But not 'easily' better. IMO there is a substantially bigger difference between Gretzky and Mikita, than there was between Mikita and Trots. I could buy an argument that Gretzky was 'easily' better than Mikita.

 

[seventieslord]

You don't have to make a case for Mikita to me. I have him as the 4th best center of all time. I just don't think he is 'easily' better than the next 4 or 5. Better, yes. But not 'easily' better. IMO there is a substantially bigger difference between Gretzky and Mikita, than there was between Mikita and Trots. I could buy an argument that Gretzky was 'easily' better than Mikita.

Yeah, like I said - 1st-11th, massive gap. 11th-21st (which is roughly the Mikita/Trottier gap) is large, but not as large. Smaller the further down you go.

 

[Bert Marshall days]

I saw both play and NO WAY was Mikita so overwhelmingly better than Trottier. Mikita was a product of marketing while Trottier played in the obscurity of Long Island. Mikita was a little better offensively but Trottier was much better all around and defensively via checking, faceoffs and shutting down opponents and he was tougher and nastier. He did EVERYTHING right. EVERYTHING.

Whenever he had the puck in crucial situations I felt comfortable.

Al Arbour was once asked if had to pick 1 player to start a team with who would he pick. He answered Trottier. I never heard that about Mikita.

 

[Leafs Forever]

I saw both play and NO WAY was Mikita so overwhelmingly better than Trottier. Mikita was a product of marketing while Trottier played in the obscurity of Long Island. Mikita was a little better offensively but Trottier was much better all around and defensively via checking, faceoffs and shutting down opponents and he was tougher and nastier. He did EVERYTHING right. EVERYTHING.

Whenever he had the puck in crucial situations I felt comfortable.

Al Arbour was once asked if had to pick 1 player to start a team with who would he pick. He answered Trottier. I never heard that about Mikita.

Well, first I'll ask how much did you see of Mikita and how much of Trottier?

Secondly, there are other accounts that suggest Mikita better in addition to stats, and I find it hard to believe Trottier was "much" better in intangibles considering Mikita's proficency in that area as well.

Mikita a product of marketing? Are you kidding me? He was always playing behind the shadow of Hull, who was the golden boy everyone paid attention to. A person would walk up to the pair and ask Hull only for his autograph, and Hull would have to say "Why not get one from Mikita too?"

What did Mikita do wrong, exactly? (You say Trottier did everything right and say nothing of Mikita..)

And Al Abour isn't bias at all..what context was that in anyway?

As indicative of the ATD's at least, most would rather start their team off with Mikita if given the choice between the two.

 

[Bert Marshall days]

Well, first I'll ask how much did you see of Mikita and how much of Trottier?

Secondly, there are other accounts that suggest Mikita better in addition to stats, and I find it hard to believe Trottier was "much" better in intangibles considering Mikita's proficency in that area as well.

Mikita a product of marketing? Are you kidding me? He was always playing behind the shadow of Hull, who was the golden boy everyone paid attention to. A person would walk up to the pair and ask Hull only for his autograph, and Hull would have to say "Why not get one from Mikita too?"

What did Mikita do wrong, exactly? (You say Trottier did everything right and say nothing of Mikita..)

And Al Abour isn't bias at all..what context was that in anyway?

As indicative of the ATD's at least, most would rather start their team off with Mikita if given the choice between the two.

Seen from the mid 60's. Born in Chicago. Moved to NY in 1972. How about you? How much did you see of Trottier?

It's not even close how Trottier was better in intangibles and was MUCH better all round. Read as much professionally as you can and most everyone agrees Trottier was 1 of if not the best all around players EVER! Mikita was decent all around but not in Trottier's league.

Damn straight Mikita was marketed better thant Trottier. I never saw Trottier on my twirl stick metal table hockey game or main hockey cards or on TV much like I saw Mikita. Mikita might've taken a back seat to Hull but Trottier was marketed behind Messier and Gretzky and Lafleur etc. and his team was sandwiched between the dynasty Habs and Oilers not to mention taking 2nd fiddle in the NY press to the Rangers.

I already mentioned how Trottier did EVERYTHING right so use that in comparison to how he was much better than Mikita defensively. It was said Trottier made Bossy 10 times better. I never heard many people say Mikita made Hull 10 times better. Trottier killed penalties, put people through glass (literally) shut down opponents top scorers, had a great +/- and was the most important player on the best team in hockey history against physically tougher division opponents than Mikita. Stats aside.

Arbour's context was just what was said - if he was starting A TEAM who would he pick, not just if he was starting an Islanders team. I think I'll listen to him as he played with Mikita and against him. Not much bias there.

What I'm saying is it's not as overwhelmingly better for Mikita as it's implied in this thread. AND Trottier is greatly underrated by Canadian media and American media alike.

 

[seventieslord]

I never heard many people say Mikita made Hull 10 times better.

That's probably because:

a) Hull didn't need a certain type of player to get him the puck, he generated offense by himself, and

b) Mikita and Hull rarely played together.

Considering Trottier is universally regarded as a top-25 player all-time despite not being offensively dominant enough to warrant it (i.e. it is recognized that he was very valuable for other reasons) I find it difficult to fathom him being underrated.