Career Value Serge Savard or Rod Langway

[Psycho Papa Joe]

I think langway's norris's were justified, making an impact on your team and playing the best defence should bring more value than 'points'. Saying someone was better because they scored more points is stupid, unless its a bobby orr situation where they blow the league out of the water.
He was the best defensive-dman of those years and the capitals saw a huge improvement in thiers goals allowed, therefore he was the most valuable defencemen.

As was already stated, Mark Howe arrived in Philly in the same year and the Flyers GA improved by more than Washingtons, so the GA improvement doesn't hold that much water. In addition Washington added Englom, Riggin, Houston, Duchense, Jarvis and Stevens that year which also helped improve their Goals Against. In addition, his competition were not offensive d-men. They were great all-round players who's defense was almost on the same level as Langway's, yet whose offense was significantly ahead.

 

[MS]

I think langway's norris's were justified, making an impact on your team and playing the best defence should bring more value than 'points'. Saying someone was better because they scored more points is stupid, unless its a bobby orr situation where they blow the league out of the water.
He was the best defensive-dman of those years and the capitals saw a huge improvement in thiers goals allowed, therefore he was the most valuable defencemen.

As Psycho Joe said above, we aren't comparing him to Phil Housley.

Potvin (especially), Howe, and Bourque were right in Langway's neighborhood defensively. If you think there's a gap in 1983-84 between Langway and a 30 y/o Denis Potvin - possibly an all-time top-10 defender - having one of his best seasons, you're just wrong.

And the gap offensively was just ridiculous. These guys were scoring triple what Langway was.

And as mentioned before, Howe had a bigger impact on Philly defensively than Langway had on Washington.

Langway was an excellent player. But he was never the best defender in the NHL.

_________

Langway's Norris' are *entirely* the result of Paul Coffey polarizing the award voters, who then tried to prove a point by voting for the anti-Coffey instead of just voting for the best all-around defender. He was in the right place at the right time.

 

[Dark Shadows]

As Psycho Joe said above, we aren't comparing him to Phil Housley.

Potvin (especially), Howe, and Bourque were right in Langway's neighborhood defensively. If you think there's a gap in 1983-84 between Langway and a 30 y/o Denis Potvin - possibly an all-time top-10 defender - having one of his best seasons, you're just wrong.

And the gap offensively was just ridiculous. These guys were scoring triple what Langway was.

And as mentioned before, Howe had a bigger impact on Philly defensively than Langway had on Washington.

Langway was an excellent player. But he was never the best defender in the NHL.

_________

Langway's Norris' are *entirely* the result of Paul Coffey polarizing the award voters, who then tried to prove a point by voting for the anti-Coffey instead of just voting for the best all-around defender. He was in the right place at the right time.

You all are going to far in this Langway detracting. Those specific years in which he won the Norris, his defensive play hit a level that has not been seen since. Quite literally, he would will people not to score. As nice as it is to say others were in his ballpark defensively, nobody was at the time.

He was considered by most the be the Most valuable player after Gretzky for several years. Offensive contributions or not. He WAS the guy who made those caps become better teams. None of the other players from the caps you mentioned had remotely close to the impact Langway did. In addition, Pelle Lindbergh's rookie season and the arrival of Brad McCrimmon had a bunch to do with Philly's improvement as much as Mark Howe.

Furthermore, Philly merely had an "off" year the year before. Talking about them like their GAA improved significantly because of any individual player is wrong. They were already that good. They merely had a bad year, and then got back to where they already had been. Washington literally had been a bottom barrel team for years, and Langway was VISIBLY the guy who turned them around. The rest were followers.

Now granted, I believe excellent two way play deserves the Norris. I would cast my Norris vote for Mark Howe, one of my favorite players in 83, while casting the Hart vote for Langway. I would cast the norris vote for Bourque in 84(Over both Langway and Coffey and yes, Over Potvin) while again giving Langway the Hart. He had something more than tangible those eyar, and he was a head and shoulders defensively over some of the best of all time in as much as they were a head and shoulders above him offensively.

 

[MS]

You all are going to far in this Langway detracting. Those specific years in which he won the Norris, his defensive play hit a level that has not been seen since. Quite literally, he would will people not to score. As nice as it is to say others were in his ballpark defensively, nobody was at the time.

Honestly, that just sounds like romanticizing the player, like how Mickey Mantle's home runs get longer the further into history his career gets.

To claim that any player in 1982-84 (the highest-scoring period in NHL history) hit a level of defensive play not seen in the ensuing 30 years doesn't compute.

Neither does claiming that, for ie., Denis Potvin in his prime wasn't 'in Langway's ballpark' defensively. Again, this is probably a top-10 all-time NHL defender.

Was he at the top of the league defensively? Sure. Was he on a different level than any player of his era was able to reach? Not bloody likely.

He was considered by most the be the Most valuable player after Gretzky for several years. Offensive contributions or not. He WAS the guy who made those caps become better teams. None of the other players from the caps you mentioned had remotely close to the impact Langway did. In addition, Pelle Lindbergh's rookie season and the arrival of Brad McCrimmon had a bunch to do with Philly's improvement as much as Mark Howe.

And Langway had Brian Engblom (2nd-team All-Star in '82 and an outstanding defensive defender in his own right) and Selke winner Doug Jarvis joining Washington at the same time.

Interestingly, looking at the numbers, it looks like Engblom was actually the icetime leader on the Caps in '82-83 because he played pretty much every shift with Langway at ES/SH, but also got a fair bit of PP icetime.

Now granted, I believe excellent two way play deserves the Norris. I would cast my Norris vote for Mark Howe, one of my favorite players in 83, while casting the Hart vote for Langway. I would cast the norris vote for Bourque in 84(Over both Langway and Coffey and yes, Over Potvin) while again giving Langway the Hart. He had something more than tangible those eyar, and he was a head and shoulders defensively over some of the best of all time in as much as they were a head and shoulders above him offensively.

The Hart is different territory altogether and I don't even want to go there, because when you get into how 'Most Valuable to his Team' gets interpreted you could go a hundred ways. Definitely, he was very valuable to that franchise and made a large impact there. No-one would argue that.

To me, the bottom line is that this player was probably the 2nd-best defender (at best) in 1983 and the 4th-best defender (at best) in 1984.

He did not deserve the Norris in either year. And you even admit that.

It was one of the worst examples of voter groupthink in NHL history.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

as i stated previously in this thread, i'm not saying langway necessarily deserved the norris those years, but his victories are hardly as ridiculous as MS paints them.

one argument i would make is that langway gave washington its identity. of course he was part of a great defensive system with jarvis and others, but he was the leader and defensive conscience. similar to scott stevens when he went to NJ, but to a greater degree-- he certainly wasn't the only factor in turning that team into a defensive juggernaut, but everything went through him and his abilities as a defender.

whether this is more deserving of the hart than the norris is open to debate. but to the degree that howe and bourque were the most important players on their teams in the 80s (i think, no question for bourque, and only very slightly in question for howe when you factor in the great years from lindbergh and, later, hextall), their importance is of a different kind than langway's.

it's not quite as simple as offense^9 + defense^9 > offense^3 + defense^10. what langway meant to that team can't be measured by that equation.