Chelios vs Stevens
- Thread starter Pwnasaurus
- Start date
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
Playoffs
Stevens - 24 playoff series wins. 3 Stanley Cups
Chelios - 26 playoff series wins. 2 Stanley Cups
Intimidation? Chelios would carve you up with his stick without even thinking about it. Chelios has always been an intimidating presence. On-rushing forwards knew that a one-on-one with Chelios was an immediate loss. Stand in front of the net when Chelios was on the ice? You'd get a healthy dose of stick to your back. Battle in the corners with Chelios? Good luck.
Leadership? Chelios could put a team on his back for an extended period of time.
Playoff success? Stevens only has one more ring than Chelios. Both players were integral parts of all their Cup wins.
As for the stiff who suggested earlier that Chelios' Norris wins were based on reputation: stick to the NHL board. Don't bring your ignorance to this part of the board. You look like a fool. Not considered a top-five defenceman in a season? There were years I would have considered Chelios a top-five player.
If reputation was the deciding factor, then Coffey would have beat Chelios for the Norris in 1989 (Coffey had two already at that point, Chelios had none) and Bourque would have beaten Chelios in 1993 and 1996. And trust me: voters would have much rather given the Norris to Coffey and Bourque over Chelios, who won't go down as the most popular guy ever.
Chelios was better offensively than Stevens, and he was Stevens equal defensively, physically (a different brand of physical play, but whatever works) and leadership. A better skater and puck-mover. And better at thinking the game.
Stevens is my all-time favourite defenceman. I'm not a Chelios fan, although I'd give up just about anything to get him on my team. And I'd take Chelios. He is, for my money, the best defenceman outside of the big seven. (Orr, Shore, Harvey, Bourque, Potvin, Robinson and Kelly).
Greeneye
Registered User
Wisent
Registered User
And how is that a knock against Chelios? i seriously can`t understand the overrating of the frickin`letter "C" on the jersey. Do people really think that no players would know what to do if the captain wasn`t there to tell them? These are pros, they know there game and they know what to do.
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
I could care less about Cups won while captain, both were significant players and leaders during their Cup victories.
Derien Hatcher was a captain of a Cup winner, doesn't make him a better leader than Chelios.
Pwnasaurus
Registered User
This kinda came about when I was telling an outside observer about who I had taken in the ATD and he inquired as to why I took Chelios before Stevens and I had basically told him the same thing GBC said in this thread which was outside of Orr, Shore, Harvey, Bourque, Potvin, Robinson and Kelly who I also had ranked in that order, I had Chelios next. I love Stevens as well and think it's pretty close in terms of who I'd want to start a franchise with but went with Chelios because of his edge in a few eyeball categories like skating, puck moving, etc because most of his other traits were of equal value to Stevens'. I told him I'd start a thread about it and see what others whose opinions I respect had to say.
Here is my final word on the subject:
As you all can tell from the name I use on these boards I am a Devil fan. So I will have to keep in mind that I will have some bias toward Stevens. as I have seen a lot more of him than Chelios. I will also keep in mind that there is a huge bias (hatred) of New Jersey on these boards and therefore a bias against Stevens as well.
Before I checked the numbers I myself would have been convinced that Chelios was the superior offensive talent, while in my opinion Stevens was the superior defensive talent. Appaently that is not the case:
Games Played Stevens 1635 Chelios 1541
Goals 196 182
Assists 712 754
Pts 908 936
+/1 377 338
Their playoff number are nearly identical as well. It seems to me that both numbers are comparable. Therefore even offensive players. That does not factor in that the majority of Stevens career (in his prime) was spent in NJ where everyone loves to point out that they are a defensive, trap oriented team that doesn't play offense. What would Stevens numbers look like if he played in Chicago/Detroit. I don't think I even need to answer that question.
Defensively, Stevens was the better of the player. I never heard anyone in 20 years of watching hockey say that players better keep their heads up as they cross the blue line, which you had better do when Stevens was on the ice. Maybe you had better watch out that Chelios might slash you in front of the net or in the corners. That doen's make him a better hockey player. Chelios is 190 lbs (wet) and not feared in the hitting game like Stevens was.
Without Scott Stevens NJ has zero Stanely Cups. I know people say Marty was the reason for the Cups but as someone who has had season tickets since before NJ played its first game there is no doubt in my mind that if Scott Stevens were not on those Cup winning teams the results would be drastically different. Can the same be said of Chelios on his Cup winning teams. I don't think so. Detroit was known for their offense and Hasek. Look at the results when NJ played Detroit. The hit on Slava Kozlov set the tone for that series. That is the type of game Stevens brought on the ice, night in and night out.
I will reiterate that Chris Chelios is a very, very good hockey player. I just happen to think that Stevens had a bigger impact on his team than Chelios did on his.
As you all can tell from the name I use on these boards I am a Devil fan. So I will have to keep in mind that I will have some bias toward Stevens. as I have seen a lot more of him than Chelios. I will also keep in mind that there is a huge bias (hatred) of New Jersey on these boards and therefore a bias against Stevens as well.
Before I checked the numbers I myself would have been convinced that Chelios was the superior offensive talent, while in my opinion Stevens was the superior defensive talent. Appaently that is not the case:
Games Played Stevens 1635 Chelios 1541
Goals 196 182
Assists 712 754
Pts 908 936
+/1 377 338
Their playoff number are nearly identical as well. It seems to me that both numbers are comparable. Therefore even offensive players. That does not factor in that the majority of Stevens career (in his prime) was spent in NJ where everyone loves to point out that they are a defensive, trap oriented team that doesn't play offense. What would Stevens numbers look like if he played in Chicago/Detroit. I don't think I even need to answer that question.
Defensively, Stevens was the better of the player. I never heard anyone in 20 years of watching hockey say that players better keep their heads up as they cross the blue line, which you had better do when Stevens was on the ice. Maybe you had better watch out that Chelios might slash you in front of the net or in the corners. That doen's make him a better hockey player. Chelios is 190 lbs (wet) and not feared in the hitting game like Stevens was.
Without Scott Stevens NJ has zero Stanely Cups. I know people say Marty was the reason for the Cups but as someone who has had season tickets since before NJ played its first game there is no doubt in my mind that if Scott Stevens were not on those Cup winning teams the results would be drastically different. Can the same be said of Chelios on his Cup winning teams. I don't think so. Detroit was known for their offense and Hasek. Look at the results when NJ played Detroit. The hit on Slava Kozlov set the tone for that series. That is the type of game Stevens brought on the ice, night in and night out.
I will reiterate that Chris Chelios is a very, very good hockey player. I just happen to think that Stevens had a bigger impact on his team than Chelios did on his.
Well said. That's my exact opinion. And Bourque is a Top 5 or 6 all-time, so that says a lot.
Slightly OT, but Chelios also happens to be the greatest American-born player of all time, in my opinion.
Chelios was pretty damn intimidating back in the day.
He was a nasty, mean, damn tough player who would go above the rules on occasion.
Wisent
Registered User
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
To me, it's like compairing Yzerman to Trottier or Clarke. Yzerman could bring the offence at a higher level, but couldn't backcheck or win. Then, Yzerman learned to backcheck and win, but then, his offence plummeted to be a lower level than Trottier and Clarke. While Trottier and Clarke could bring the offence at a high end level, play great defence and win all at the same time.
Stevens could be a very good offensive defenceman and nasty physical player. But was prone to putting himself out of position and his teams were not winners. Then, he learned to play great positional defence and win, was still a commanding physical pressence, but his offence was gone. Chelios was always able to be a strong defensive player, commanding physical pressence, winner and offensive d-man. Hi sbest offence wasn't as good as Stevens. But, he's consistently been a total package player. Stevens offence has diminished with age, but, that's not a fair knock, something had to.
Stevens could be a very good offensive defenceman and nasty physical player. But was prone to putting himself out of position and his teams were not winners. Then, he learned to play great positional defence and win, was still a commanding physical pressence, but his offence was gone. Chelios was always able to be a strong defensive player, commanding physical pressence, winner and offensive d-man. Hi sbest offence wasn't as good as Stevens. But, he's consistently been a total package player. Stevens offence has diminished with age, but, that's not a fair knock, something had to.
I honestly feel Bryan Trottier is way underrated on HFBoards. I really do.
Clarke less so, but many still think of him as a dirtbag and not as the well-rounded, gritty, talented, versatile leader/commander that he was.
Chelios was the complete package. Period.
There were some who were bigger. There were some that had better shots. There were some that were better skaters. There were some who were better leaders. There were some who were better passers. There were some that were better/equal defensively. But NO ONE IMO in the past twenty years or so combined ALL those traits at a high level like Chelios. I hate the ******* with all my heart. But I would have worshipped him as a Leaf.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
That's more or less my point. To me, there's no question Trottier is better than Yzerman, and no question Chelios is better than Stevens.
Spitfire11
Registered User
Depends which part of HF Boards you visit. Around here, Clarke and Trotts get their due. Just look at where they go in the all-time draft. Somewhere in the 20-25 range, usually, although they have slipped to around the 30 range.
I don't know what the no-nothing dimwits in the NHL forum think of them, and frankly, some things are better left unknown.
Offensively, they were pretty even:
Stevens:GP 1635 G 196 A 712 908 points
Chelios: GP 1541 G 182 A 754 936 points
Soon to be 5
Problem is, there is no real competition anymore. Pronger and Nieds are the only real ones. Redden and Chara are a shade of what they were previously.
Back in the day there was Bourque, Chelios, Stevens, Leetch, Robinson, Potvin, Coffey, Macinnis.......
#66
Registered User
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,353
To me, that is a pretty important factor. I'll take a Conn Smythe over a Norris Trophy any day of the week. Stevens and Chelios are pretty close, but Stevens' 2000 playoffs gives him the decision. He was at the height of his intimidation factor, and it seemed the aura around grew with each game. It seemed to all culminate with the Lindros hit. By the time the finals rolled around, it was a foregone conclusion who the Conn Smythe was going to, even though defensemen rarely win the award. That was really a performance for the ages IMO.
When it comes to the physical play and intimidation factor, it's true that Chelios can certainly hold his own. But Stevens was able to do it cleanly, which I think counts for something. Rarely did I see Stevens take a bad penalty at an important time. I can't say the same for Chelios.
Chelios was always key player on all of his teams, but I never got the impression that teams went into games thinking "what the hell are we going to do about Chelios?". When playing Stevens, teams (or at least the forwards) almost certainly went into games thinking "Oh crap, I gotta be careful or Stevens is going to crush me".
I think Chelios' reputation has become a little inflated in recent years simply because of his age. It's definately an accomplishment to continue playing at a reasonable level into your 40's, but some people seem to place Chelios on a pedestal simply because of his birthday.
Good lord...............Your headed towards the most uninformed poster of the year award with that one....
I guess the fact that Chelios has 2 norris trophies isn't hint enough for you....
Let me guess. You started watching hockey a year or 2 ago?
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Pinguins Bremerhaven @ Eisbaren Berlin - Pinguins Bremerhaven leads series 1-0Event closes- Updated:
-
-
2024 SoFi NBA Play-In Tournament Chicago Bulls @ Miami HeatWagers: 1Staked: $10.00Event closes- Updated:
-