Chris Pronger

[Epsilon]

First of all, I don't think it would be unreasonable to think that Pronger could have two more Norris trophies if not for injuries (2001 and 2007), while the same could not be said for Salming. Second, you seem to be forgetting something else fairly important: playoffs. Pronger has been excellent in just about every playoff season in which he has played, and could easily have been awarded the Conn Smythe trophy in either 2006 or 2007. As for his Hart trophy season, Jagr may have been better, but Pronger was at worst the third best player in the league that year. Furthermore, Pronger still has several years left to supplement what he has already done, although I think his accomplishments to date already put him ahead of Salming.

WRONG, Pronger had several stinker playoff performances pre-lockout, especially against the Red Wings. A lot of people act like his playoff play over the past 4 seasons (well 3 of the 4, he didn't really do anything in the Duck's 1st round exit the year after winning the Cup) is representative of his entire career, which is blatantly false.

 

[overpass]

What Pronger "could have" accomplished means absolutely nothing. The facts are that his Norris voting record is not as impressive as Salming's.

Pronger's play-off superiority doesn't outweigh Salming's superior competition.

Norris trophy voting in itself means absolutely nothing. "Could have" won the Norris trophy means that he was the best defenceman in the league that season when he played. That means a lot to most people, more than where the player finished in Norris voting at the end of the year.

 

[Dreakmur]

Norris trophy voting in itself means absolutely nothing. "Could have" won the Norris trophy means that he was the best defenceman in the league that season when he played. That means a lot to most people, more than where the player finished in Norris voting at the end of the year.

Norris voting means a lot more than one person's opinion.

Salming "could have" won the Norris a few times.

 

[overpass]

Norris voting means a lot more than one person's opinion.

Salming "could have" won the Norris a few times.

Strictly speaking, all Norris trophy voting shows us is how worthy the writers thought he was to win the Norris trophy as the best defenceman in the NHL for a given season. If a player missed more than 10-15 games, his Norris trophy votes drop precipitously, even if he is regarded as being the best defenceman in the NHL at the time by a majority of hockey fans.

In 2001 Chris Pronger was tied with Eric Desjardins in Norris trophy voting. Pronger was possibly the best defenceman in the NHL, but only played 51 games. Should 51 regular season games and 15 playoff games as the best defenceman in the world be given the same value as 82 games of Eric Desjardins on an all-time scale? I don't think so, and I don't think most fans would. Norris trophy voting misses the point in evaluating greatness in this case.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

WRONG, Pronger had several stinker playoff performances pre-lockout, especially against the Red Wings. A lot of people act like his playoff play over the past 4 seasons (well 3 of the 4, he didn't really do anything in the Duck's 1st round exit the year after winning the Cup) is representative of his entire career, which is blatantly false.

I honestly think many do not realize Pronger had a career before the lockout.... where he won a Hart, but was also incredibly inconsistent... especially in the playoffs.

 

[Dreakmur]

Strictly speaking, all Norris trophy voting shows us is how worthy the writers thought he was to win the Norris trophy as the best defenceman in the NHL for a given season. If a player missed more than 10-15 games, his Norris trophy votes drop precipitously, even if he is regarded as being the best defenceman in the NHL at the time by a majority of hockey fans.

In 2001 Chris Pronger was tied with Eric Desjardins in Norris trophy voting. Pronger was possibly the best defenceman in the NHL, but only played 51 games. Should 51 regular season games and 15 playoff games as the best defenceman in the world be given the same value as 82 games of Eric Desjardins on an all-time scale? I don't think so, and I don't think most fans would. Norris trophy voting misses the point in evaluating greatness in this case.

Even if you want to give him credit for the 2001 season, it doesn't close the gap enough.

 

[Clown Baby*]

WRONG, Pronger had several stinker playoff performances pre-lockout, especially against the Red Wings. A lot of people act like his playoff play over the past 4 seasons (well 3 of the 4, he didn't really do anything in the Duck's 1st round exit the year after winning the Cup) is representative of his entire career, which is blatantly false.

And Steve Yzerman was always the gutsy, clutch, captain of the Detroit Red Wings?

 

[Epsilon]

And Steve Yzerman was always the gutsy, clutch, captain of the Detroit Red Wings?

Swwwwwwwing and a miss. Not only irrelevant, but apparently you've confused me for SGY19 or some other Yzerman nut-hugger.

 

[Clown Baby*]

Swwwwwwwing and a miss. Not only irrelevant, but apparently you've confused me for SGY19 or some other Yzerman nut-hugger.

I don't care whose nuts you have in and around your mouth. That's your business.

My point is, most players have to experience those growing pains before they get to the point where success seems almost intrinsic - Brian Leetch and Steve Yzerman included. Not everyone steps into the league a first-ballot Hall of Famer.

 

[Epsilon]

I don't care whose nuts you have in and around your mouth. That's your business.

My point is, most players have to experience those growing pains before they get to the point where success seems almost intrinsic - Brian Leetch and Steve Yzerman included. Not everyone steps into the league a first-ballot Hall of Famer.

None of which has anything to do with the fact that Chris Pronger was not a good playoff performer before the lockout (which consists of the majority of his career), yet many people completely ignore that fact.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

I honestly think many do not realize Pronger had a career before the lockout.... where he won a Hart, but was also incredibly inconsistent... especially in the playoffs.

Yup.

Pre-lockout he flip-flopped between being the 9th best d-man ever and a poor man's Derian Hatcher.

 

[MS]

None of which has anything to do with the fact that Chris Pronger was not a good playoff performer before the lockout (which consists of the majority of his career), yet many people completely ignore that fact.

This statement is a gross exaggeration.

From the point of his breakout in 1997 until 2004, Pronger appeared in 66 playoff games, scoring 44 points and posting a +15 rating.

That's pretty good. About 56 points/+20 over 82 games.

Yeah, he had a couple poor series thrown in there. But *every* player to ever play the game has a couple crappy playoffs on his resume. Lidstrom certainly has a couple as well, as does Niedermayer. Between 1979 and 1985, dead in the middle of his career, Larry Robinson posted 0-11-11 in 36 playoff games as Montreal suffered through a series of playoff upsets.

By and large, though, Pronger has been a playoff beast. He should have won the Conn Smythe in both 2006 and 2007 - in 2006 he was the best player in the playoffs but on a team that didn't win the Cup, and in 2007 he was miles better than Niedermayer (15 points +10 vs. 11 points +2, and Pronger played more minutes/game) but negative publicity after a couple cheapshot elbows probably cost him the award.

If he'd stayed healthy and wasn't such an unlikeable guy, Pronger could easily have 3 Norris Trophies, 2 Conn Smythes, and a Hart. Hell, he's probably the frontrunner for the Norris again this year at this point. I don't think people really appreciate yet how good his career has been on the larger scale.

 

[MS]

Yup.

Pre-lockout he flip-flopped between being the 9th best d-man ever and a poor man's Derian Hatcher.

When?

He broke out during the 1997-98 season.

He played 4 full seasons between 1997 and the lockout, and was a post-season All-Star in 3 of them. The season he was 'off' (2001-02) he still scored 47 points, was a +23, and finished 5th in Norris and All-Star balloting.

So he didn't have a full season where he was worse than the 5th-best defender in the league.

Of the other 3 seasons, he missed one of them entirely (only played 5 games) and would probably have cakewalked to his 2nd straight Norris in 2001 if he didn't only play 51 games, as he was brilliant that year. The other year (1998-99), he finished 5th in All-Star balloting and 4th in Norris voting despite missing 15 games.

That means that of the 7 seasons between 1997 and 2004, he was a top-5 defender in the sport in 6 of them, and only played 5 games in the 7th.

That's not inconsistent.

 

[Fredrik_71]

I think Salming get lots of attention being one of the first europeans playing in the NHL and making an impact. He singlehanded changed the way north americans view european players, chicken swedes anyone

I now this shouldn't be relevant but I do think Salming had it way tuffer then most d-men, and still put up a show. And during the Ballard years.

With that said I have started to appricate Pronger more and more the last years. He is a really good hockeyplayer and should be on pair with Salming career wise soon.

/Cheers

 

[Big Phil]

I'd put Pronger ahead of Salming as well.

I have some major issues with how highly people seem to rate the group of defenders who were at their peaks from 75-79.

On one hand, I don't think anyone would argue that that was probably the worst period in NHL history in terms of overall talent level/parity/quality of competition. Between going from 6 teams to 18 in a span of 8 years and then tossing 10 WHA teams into the mix as well, it was a crap product through that period.

On the other hand, everyone wants to call the defenders who dominated that period the 'deepest group ever'. Personally, I don't think it's surprising at all that the top defenders of that era looked *really good* compared to the dreck that they were on the ice with/against.

With the start of the '80s and the integration of the WHA, the quality of the league went way up. And Salming/Robinson/Potvin were still well inside their 20s and should have had years of prime hockey ahead of them. And they simply didn't look *nearly* as dominant as the league got better. Yeah, they were still great, but the gap went way down.

I disagree that the '70s were that dilluted. By the time the mid '70s hit no one not named Bobby Hull cared about the WHA. Anyone that could make the NHL, made it. The WHA was a fad that started in 1972, once NHL teams anted up then ALL of the stars were back in the NHL, rather than most.

That being said, I can't think of a post-Bourque defenseman that would have won a Norris in the '70s. Okay no one wins one anyways with Orr, so let's do '76-80 then. Potvin wins three and Robinson two. Lidstrom doesn't win one in that time frame. Pronger doesnt. Heck even Bourque might not have. Not to mention that there was still elite defenseman like Salming, Lapointe, Park, Savard, etc. grabbing all-star spots. That's pretty elite

And as for the '80s arriving and having them fall off the face of the earth, well, it was more gradual than you think. Salming didn't do anything special in the '80s, Park was older, Robinson was a First team all-star in '80 and Second team in '81 and '86, and Potvin was a first team in '81 and 2nd team in '84 as well as being a 4 time Cup winner. Those guys in the '70s WERE as good as you think. By the time the '80s rolled around there was Bourque, Coffey etc. Young players who rightfully so gobbled up the all-star selections.

 

[MS]

I disagree that the '70s were that dilluted. By the time the mid '70s hit no one not named Bobby Hull cared about the WHA. Anyone that could make the NHL, made it. The WHA was a fad that started in 1972, once NHL teams anted up then ALL of the stars were back in the NHL, rather than most.

That being said, I can't think of a post-Bourque defenseman that would have won a Norris in the '70s. Okay no one wins one anyways with Orr, so let's do '76-80 then. Potvin wins three and Robinson two. Lidstrom doesn't win one in that time frame. Pronger doesnt. Heck even Bourque might not have. Not to mention that there was still elite defenseman like Salming, Lapointe, Park, Savard, etc. grabbing all-star spots. That's pretty elite

And as for the '80s arriving and having them fall off the face of the earth, well, it was more gradual than you think. Salming didn't do anything special in the '80s, Park was older, Robinson was a First team all-star in '80 and Second team in '81 and '86, and Potvin was a first team in '81 and 2nd team in '84 as well as being a 4 time Cup winner. Those guys in the '70s WERE as good as you think. By the time the '80s rolled around there was Bourque, Coffey etc. Young players who rightfully so gobbled up the all-star selections.

Again, I don't buy it.

No-one post-Bourque would have won a late '70s Norris? Well, it's a hard argument to have, obviously, because defenders simply aren't allowed the freedom to score as much in the system-oriented modern NHL. But I'd sure as hell say that Lidstrom's best few seasons and Pronger's best season would certainly have been right there.

There were still enough good players in the WHA post-1975 to fill up a couple NHL teams, and the NHL had expanded a ridiculous amount already.

The quality of competition at that time was *terrible*. Rosters were thin as hell. There was the lowest level of parity in the history of the sport - teams posting the best records ever (Bruins, Habs) and teams posting the worst records ever (Capitals, Scouts). Goon hockey thrived because teams loaded up on tough players to fill up rosters. And when you watch the games, some of the 'NHL' players are just *terrible* to a shocking degree - something you don't notice to nearly that extent from games in either the 1960s or 1980s.

And 6 defenders (3 of them on one ridiculously-stacked team) looked amazing.

And it *is* notable that all of them saw their star dim a bit when the '80s rolled around. All of them were still in their 20s, and all of them saw substantial offensive declines at a time when scoring was still going up. After 1980, they were still great players, but not head-and-shoulders above the competition like they were before.

And I really don't understand how a Lidstrom/Pronger/Niedermayer/Chara group is *that* much worse in terms of quality of competition. All of those guys are HHOF-bound, too. And the 2nd tier of players now (Zubov/Blake/Markov/Keith/Gonchar) seems much stronger to me than the Stackhouse/Turnbull/Sargeant/Beck group of that era, also.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The problem with Pronger is inconsistency. At his best, he's absolutely better than Salming. At his best, he might even be Larry Robinson's equal. But he had so many down seasons or injury-riddled seasons in there.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

When?

He broke out during the 1997-98 season.

He played 4 full seasons between 1997 and the lockout, and was a post-season All-Star in 3 of them. The season he was 'off' (2001-02) he still scored 47 points, was a +23, and finished 5th in Norris and All-Star balloting.

So he didn't have a full season where he was worse than the 5th-best defender in the league.

Of the other 3 seasons, he missed one of them entirely (only played 5 games) and would probably have cakewalked to his 2nd straight Norris in 2001 if he didn't only play 51 games, as he was brilliant that year. The other year (1998-99), he finished 5th in All-Star balloting and 4th in Norris voting despite missing 15 games.

That means that of the 7 seasons between 1997 and 2004, he was a top-5 defender in the sport in 6 of them, and only played 5 games in the 7th.

That's not inconsistent.

I meant on a game to game, week to week and month to month level, not a season to season level.

 

[pappyline]

Again, I don't buy it.

No-one post-Bourque would have won a late '70s Norris? Well, it's a hard argument to have, obviously, because defenders simply aren't allowed the freedom to score as much in the system-oriented modern NHL. But I'd sure as hell say that Lidstrom's best few seasons and Pronger's best season would certainly have been right there.

There were still enough good players in the WHA post-1975 to fill up a couple NHL teams, and the NHL had expanded a ridiculous amount already.

The quality of competition at that time was *terrible*. Rosters were thin as hell. There was the lowest level of parity in the history of the sport - teams posting the best records ever (Bruins, Habs) and teams posting the worst records ever (Capitals, Scouts). Goon hockey thrived because teams loaded up on tough players to fill up rosters. And when you watch the games, some of the 'NHL' players are just *terrible* to a shocking degree - something you don't notice to nearly that extent from games in either the 1960s or 1980s.

And 6 defenders (3 of them on one ridiculously-stacked team) looked amazing.

And it *is* notable that all of them saw their star dim a bit when the '80s rolled around. All of them were still in their 20s, and all of them saw substantial offensive declines at a time when scoring was still going up. After 1980, they were still great players, but not head-and-shoulders above the competition like they were before.

And I really don't understand how a Lidstrom/Pronger/Niedermayer/Chara group is *that* much worse in terms of quality of competition. All of those guys are HHOF-bound, too. And the 2nd tier of players now (Zubov/Blake/Markov/Keith/Gonchar) seems much stronger to me than the Stackhouse/Turnbull/Sargeant/Beck group of that era, also.

Good post. Big Phil really doesn't have a clue about the impact of the WHA. Since we are talking about defencemen, the WHA had at least 5 Dmen who if in the NHLwould have been vieing for AS spots--Mark Howe, JC Tremblay, Paul Shymr, Lars-Erik Sjoberg, Pat Stapelton. Imo the NHL was at its most diluted & unbalanced during 67-79(and prob several years past that) since WW II.

 

[member 51464]

The problem with Pronger is inconsistency. At his best, he's absolutely better than Salming. At his best, he might even be Larry Robinson's equal. But he had so many down seasons or injury-riddled seasons in there.

Very high praise in my opinion. I've always had a soft spot for Larry Robinson for no particular reason.

 

[Big Phil]

Good post. Big Phil really doesn't have a clue about the impact of the WHA. Since we are talking about defencemen, the WHA had at least 5 Dmen who if in the NHLwould have been vieing for AS spots--Mark Howe, JC Tremblay, Paul Shymr, Lars-Erik Sjoberg, Pat Stapelton. Imo the NHL was at its most diluted & unbalanced during 67-79(and prob several years past that) since WW II.

Oh please now. Not one of those d-men was Norris caliber at that time. By the mid '70s Stapleton and Tremblay were in their mid to late '30s. Howe was too young to have challenged in the '70s for a Norris, even an AS spot. Paul Shymr? Remind me again what exactly did he do at the NHL level? The WHA was a very, very watered down league. Talent was thin in the '70s to an extent in the NHL but when they added 4 new teams in 1979 there were awful, awful teams well into the '80s as well. It all balances out.

The truth is while the Chara/Niedermayer/Pronger/Lidstrom group is solid most people would regard the '70s as a higher level of talent for defensemen. Park/Potvin/Lapointe/Robinson/Salming clearly trumps that above group. I'm certainly not taking anything away from the '00s group either though. The best season there is Pronger's Hart season, and I still don't think he takes any of Potvin's Norrises away and certainly not Robinson in 1977, perhaps 1980. It was just a strong era for d-men.

When Robinson was 34 he put up 82 points. When Potvn was 31 he put up 85. Robinson had great playoffs well into his 30s in the mid to late '80s. They still did fine, but the NHL didn't belong to these defensemen anymore as much. Park was 32 in 1980 but still put up good numbers until his retirement in 1985. Players decline in their 30s it is inevitable. Good young players take their place. This is why we saw big seasons by Wilson and Langway and dominance from a young Bourque and Coffey. Also not to forget an emergence with MacInnis and Stevens etc. There aren't going to be a lot of all-star spots up for grabs (and there wasn't) with these guys hitting their prime

 

[canucks4ever]

NHL DEFs. Total "HHOF Monitor" Points: (Seasons 1917-18/2007-09)

# | Player | Career | Seasons | Total "HHOF Monitor" PTS | Per Season "HHOF Monitor" PTS 1 | Ray "Bubba" Bourque | 1979-01 | 22 | 4066.00 | 184.82 2 | Bobby "Number Four" Orr | 1966-79 | 12 | 3654.95 | 304.58 3 | Eddie "The Edmonton Express" Shore | 1926-40 | 14 | 3506.80 | 250.49 4 | Doug "Dallying Doug" Harvey | 1947-69 | 20 | 3353.15 | 167.66 5 | Nicklas "Lidas" Lidstrom | 1991-09 | 17 | 3000.00 | 176.50 6 | Red "Cornflakes" Kelly | 1947-60 * | 13 | 2410.50 | 185.42 7 | Paul "Coff" Coffey | 1980-01 | 21 | 2276.95 | 108.43 8 | Denis "Baby Bear" Potvin | 1973-88 | 15 | 2189.35 | 145.96 9 | Chris "Cheli" Chelios | 1983-09 | 25 | 2155.45 | 86.20 10 | Francis "King" Clancy | 1921-37 | 16 | 2134.35 | 133.40 11 | George "Buck" Boucher | 1917-32 | 15 | 2097.40 | 139.83 12 | Pierre "The Bantam Bouncer" Pilote | 1955-69 | 14 | 2074.70 | 148.19 13 | Douglas "Brad" Park | 1968-85 | 17 | 1822.15 | 107.19 14 | Larry "Big Bird" Robinson | 1972-92 | 20 | 1810.65 | 90.53 15 | Sprague "The Big Train" Cleghorn | 1918-28 * | 9 | 1807.00 | 200.78 16 | Al "Chopper" Macinnis | 1981-04 | 23 | 1781.95 | 77.48 17 | Scott "Captain Crunch" Stevens | 1982-04 | 22 | 1644.45 | 74.75 18 | Earl "SI" Seibert | 1931-46 | 15 | 1602.95 | 106.86 19 | Scott "Nieds" Niedermayer | 1991-09 | 17 | 1515.50 | 89.12 20 | Butch "The Big Beekeeper" Bouchard | 1941-56 | 15 | 1461.05 | 97.40 21 | Tim "Superman" Horton | 1949-74 | 24 | 1427.15 | 59.46 22 | Bill "Gads" Gadsby | 1946-66 | 20 | 1401.35 | 70.07 23 | Jack "Black Jack" Stewart | 1938-52 | 12 | 1370.85 | 114.24 24 | Brian "Leetchie" Leetch | 1987-06 | 18 | 1325.90 | 73.66 25 | Harry "Cammie" Cameron | 1917-23 | 6 | 1317.85 | 219.64 26 | Aubrey "Dit" Clapper | 1937-47 * | 10 | 1286.75 | 128.68 27 | Marcel Pronovost | 1949-70 | 21 | 1253.50 | 59.69 28 | Sylvio Mantha | 1923-37 | 14 | 1249.55 | 89.25 29 | Jacques "Lappy" Laperriere | 1962-74 | 12 | 1185.35 | 98.78 30 | Allan "Snowshoes" Stanley | 1948-69 | 21 | 1144.75 | 54.51 31 | Rod "Secretary of Defense" Langway | 1978-93 | 15 | 1133.70 | 75.58 32 | Lionel "Connie The Clutch" Conacher | 1927-37 * | 10 | 1117.30 | 111.73 33 | Chris "Prongs" Pronger | 1993-09 | 15 | 1100.00 | 73.33 34 | Tom "Bow Tie" Johnson | 1947-65 | 17 | 1046.75 | 61.57 35 | Bill "Quack" Quackenbush | 1942-56 | 14 | 1043.90 | 74.56 36 | Guy "Pointu" Lapointe | 1968-84 | 16 | 1012.80 | 63.30 37 | Larry "Murphs" Murphy | 1980-01 | 21 | 985.25 | 46.92 38 | Jean Guy Talbot | 1954-71 | 17 | 981.00 | 57.71 39 | Rob "Blakey" Blake | 1989-09 | 19 | 973.00 | 51.20 40 | Ebbie "Poker Face" Goodfellow | 1935-43 * | 8 | 962.75 | 120.34 41 | Borje "King" Salming | 1973-90 | 17 | 957.40 | 56.32 42 | Frank "Flash" Hollett | 1933-46 | 13 | 945.80 | 72.75 43 | Mark Howe | 1981-95 * | 14 | 940.15 | 67.15 44 | Serge "The Senator" Savard | 1966-83 | 17 | 915.80 | 53.87 45 | Carl "Skitz" Brewer | 1957-80 | 12 | 844.90 | 70.41 46 | Jean-Claude "Superstar" Trembley | 1959-72 | 13 | 842.45 | 64.80 47 | Ken "Big Ox" Reardon | 1940-50 | 7 | 839.05 | 119.86 48 | Babe "The Honest Brakeman" Pratt | 1935-47 | 12 | 816.00 | 68.00 49 | Kevin "Vicious" Lowe | 1979-98 | 19 | 795.40 | 41.86 50 | Ching "The Holding Corporation" Johnson | 1926-38 | 12 | 780.55 | 65.05

* - DEF Seasons Only
​

I agree with your ranking of Brad Park above Larry Robinson. I have seen clips of them play and Park just seemed better. He was more smooth with his transition game and he was so valuable to those bruins. Park was better offensively and defensively. His playoff ppg is even better.

Park has 5 first team all stars, Robinson has 3. Park has better regular season and playoff numbers. Larry won his two norris trophies when Orr was gone and Potvin was injured in 1980. Brad Park was better than him.

 

[pappyline]

Oh please now. Not one of those d-men was Norris caliber at that time. By the mid '70s Stapleton and Tremblay were in their mid to late '30s. Howe was too young to have challenged in the '70s for a Norris, even an AS spot. Paul Shymr? Remind me again what exactly did he do at the NHL level? The WHA was a very, very watered down league. Talent was thin in the '70s to an extent in the NHL but when they added 4 new teams in 1979 there were awful, awful teams well into the '80s as well. It all balances out.

Give me a break. All 5 Dmen I mentioned where playing at a very high level in the mid 70's. Stapelton & Tremblay were both allstars just before they left the NHL & continued to play at a high level for several more years. Howe was in his early 20's & was a force. Shymr hit his peak in the WHA. he was invited to the Team canada 76 training camp & was a late cut.

Sure the WHA was a watered down league but so was the NHL in the 70's. NHL accomplishments in the 70's have to be taken with a grain of salt as there were some absolutely terrible teams. If anything, the 4 new teams in 79 helped the league as it brought some quality players back.

 

[Big Phil]

Give me a break. All 5 Dmen I mentioned where playing at a very high level in the mid 70's. Stapelton & Tremblay were both allstars just before they left the NHL & continued to play at a high level for several more years. Howe was in his early 20's & was a force. Shymr hit his peak in the WHA. he was invited to the Team canada 76 training camp & was a late cut.

Sure the WHA was a watered down league but so was the NHL in the 70's. NHL accomplishments in the 70's have to be taken with a grain of salt as there were some absolutely terrible teams. If anything, the 4 new teams in 79 helped the league as it brought some quality players back.

I wouldn't go that far at all. Grain of salt? I disagree. If you look at the Canada Cup roster in '76 you will see one player, Hull, who had a WHA spot. No defensemen. They were all good defensemen, but none of them would have qualified for the Norris at that time. After seeing the core of Park/Potvin/Robinson/Lapointe/Salming etc. wouldn't you agree that these guys would have won their Norrises in other non-Orr eras for a good chunk? The NHL players didn't just roll over and die and let the Habs stroll to 4 straight Cups either.