Coffey vs. Leetch

[tarheelhockey]

It's Coffey, that's why, he's kind of an enigma when it comes to ranking him.
He kinda stands by himself in no mans land. He's just as far behind Bourque and Lidstrom as he is out in front of the Leetch's and Macinnis'.
His own little spot where he doesn't reach anyone and no one reaches him

This. If I wanted to win one game I'd take prime Coffey over prime Leetch. But if I were choosing a guy to be my franchise player and captain, I'd go with Leetch. This is just one of those weird comparisons that doesn't quite line up nicely.

 

[Rhiessan71]

"Joining the Oilers was a great opportunity for me to get a chance to play on a young team that had a lot of talent," Coffey said. "I was always a good skater, but I was not as offensively oriented as a junior as I was as a pro. That was the style Glen Sather wanted me to play. My first partner was Gary Lariviere and he gave me a lot of confidence. I had the green light every time I was on the ice. Then, working with Charlie Huddy, we took it to another level. He allowed me to play the way they wanted me to play. Charlie was a very good defenseman and we had a lot of fun playing together."

How much of Coffey concentrating so much on offense was a lack of his ability to do defense, and how much of it was that his coaches didn't want him concentrating on defense?

He did show he could play less risky, more conservative and still produce offensively while in Detroit.

Edit - And that play gets brought up a lot because it was a big stage.. a huge 2 on 1 and Coffey made a spectacular defensive play. Spectacular play tends to get brought up.

A lot of people like to bring up his time in Detroit as proof that he could play defense but the thing is from all accounts he didn't like it there and Bowman didn't like his play either.
While there are no flat out stories of him causing trouble in Detroit, he definitely wasn't an easy guy to get along with there.

 

[BraveCanadian]

A lot of people like to bring up his time in Detroit as proof that he could play defense but the thing is from all accounts he didn't like it there and Bowman didn't like his play either.
While there are no flat out stories of him causing trouble in Detroit, he definitely wasn't an easy guy to get along with there.

He definitely had a bad falling out with Bowman and maybe Coffey didn't like having reins on.. but the point is he could do it.

 

[Rhiessan71]

He definitely had a bad falling out with Bowman and maybe Coffey didn't like having reins on.. but the point is he could do it.

Granted but even then, the best you could say was that it was adequate to the point where it wasn't a glaring weakness.

 

[tarheelhockey]

He definitely had a bad falling out with Bowman and maybe Coffey didn't like having reins on.. but the point is he could do it.

It's a bit of a backhanded compliment to say a defenseman is capable of playing defense if the coach forces him do it...

 

[BraveCanadian]

It's a bit of a backhanded compliment to say a defenseman is capable of playing defense if the coach forces him do it...

You could say that but after being actively encouraged to be more of a rover for 10-12 years of his career and seeing the success it brought him and his team... could you blame him for wanting to stick with what worked?

The only thing you could fault him for possibly is not adapting as much as he needed to as he got older to stay among the very best.

Although a Norris quality season at 34 isn't too shabby either.

 

[Rhiessan71]

You could say that but after being actively encouraged to be more of a rover for 10-12 years of his career and seeing the success it brought him and his team... could you blame him for wanting to stick with what worked?

The only thing you could fault him for possibly is not adapting as much as he needed to as he got older to stay among the very best.

Although a Norris quality season at 34 isn't too shabby either.

This wasn't the first time though, you have said yourself that even Sather benched him from time to time for ignoring his defensive responsibilities.

 

[BlackDog13]

From a spectator's perspective, Coffey. From a coach's perspective, Leetch.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

He definitely had a bad falling out with Bowman and maybe Coffey didn't like having reins on.. but the point is he could do it.

I'm pretty sure Bowman was the main proponent of Coffey getting traded from Pittsburgh also.

 

[Trottier]

I would rank Coffey higher than Leetch, but I may not want him on my team more.

A provocative and insightful opinion. And one that I happen to share.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

A provocative and insightful opinion. And one that I happen to share.

Thank you. I truly do value a compliment from Mr. Trotts.

 

[jkrx]

A lot of people like to bring up his time in Detroit as proof that he could play defense but the thing is from all accounts he didn't like it there and Bowman didn't like his play either.
While there are no flat out stories of him causing trouble in Detroit, he definitely wasn't an easy guy to get along with there.

I don't get that. He wasn't great on defense in Detroit. In fact when it mattered the most he was below average. What made him look good in Detroit was the stay at home defensemen on his side.

 

[Big Phil]

Obviously, Coffey wins this poll.
But....

Why do people always bring up the one play where Coffey actually did the right thing defensively? Everyone has a good day. I can think of times when the chips were down where Coffey just stood there and let the other team score.

How did willus3 put it(He worded it almost perfectly)? More often than not, Coffey did the wrong thing defensively. He often just stood there and looked lost and let the other guy score on them like he did not know what to do. Always played the puck and never the man and it often cost him. Often afraid to go into corners.

But when the chips were down Coffey had proved to be very responsible in his own end. He had some lax moments but in a tight game he was gold. Actually, all the Oilers managed to play better defensively when it counted. Coffey was no exception. Another example is the 1987 Canada Cup. There was a play that I personally don't have the footage for but it did happen during the Can/Rus final. In one of the games Coffey does one of his patented rushes. It fails. The Russians counter attack. Coffey ever so casually skates BACKWARDS, no let me rephrase that, GLIDES backwards until he is facing the oncoming rush. This is how bloody fast the guy was and how effortless he made things look. There are few players in NHL history you trusted more than Coffey or who were more beautiful to watch.

You would never see Mike Green do that. How many times in an important game has Green been the culprit who was out of position and was just gliding back to backcheck? You didn't see this with Coffey, it wasn't his calling card. He wasn't physical but I also wouldn't classify him as being out of position which cost the team.

 

[canucks4ever]

I actually disagree about the comments regarding who would you take as a coach. Brian Leetch's best years came when he was the offensive defensemen in the 'mark messier era'. As soon as the moose got traded and the trap kicked in, leetch became totally ineffective, although he made a good comeback in 2004.

I would choose Scott Stevens over Coffey any day of the week, but not Leetch.

 

[Loto68]

I actually disagree about the comments regarding who would you take as a coach. Brian Leetch's best years came when he was the offensive defensemen in the 'mark messier era'. As soon as the moose got traded and the trap kicked in, leetch became totally ineffective, although he made a good comeback in 2004.

I would choose Scott Stevens over Coffey any day of the week, but not Leetch.

I have a feeling you never watched the Rangers. First, after Moose left for Vancouver, by Free Agency btw, Leetch only had one season with a PPG rate under .6, during the trap era, playing on absolute crap teams and in 2000-01 he put up 79 points in 82 games leading the Rangers in points. BTW he was injured quite a bit in the last half of his career.

If you think he was completely ineffective I really want to know what the work effective means to you.

 

[canucks4ever]

^ I saw him play plenty of times, his defensive game became crappy after the trap set in, if you disagree then you need to watch the games yourself. He pretty much became a 4th forward.

He scored 79 points in 2001 but not chosen to the year end all star team, shows how much he was regarded that year.

 

[Tom Brady]

Coffey

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

^ I saw him play plenty of times, his defensive game became crappy after the trap set in, if you disagree then you need to watch the games yourself. He pretty much became a 4th forward.

He scored 79 points in 2001 but not chosen to the year end all star team, shows how much he was regarded that year.

And how much of Coffey did you see in the 80's?

If you think Leetch's defensive game was crappy I can't imagine what you would have called Coffey's defense in his first 12 years or so.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

As a GM, Coffey because puck possession is the best defense.

As a fan, Coffey because his skating is a beautiful thing, never been matched.

As a Dad of a young player, Coffey-see points above.


COFFEY

 

[mrzeigler]

I was a fan of both, but the artistry of some players is such that it earns extra points from me as a fan. Yeah, I know beauty doesn't translate into more wins, but I have not seen a more beautiful moment on ice than Paul Coffey swooping behind his net, taking those short, quick crossover strides and going end-to-end. As a season ticketholder, I cherish witnessing those breathtaking moments in person.

Leetch was a great player who I'd love to have on my team. But faced with a one-or-the-other choice, I'd rather pay to watch Coffey.

 

[Loto68]

I was a fan of both, but the artistry of some players is such that it earns extra points from me as a fan. Yeah, I know beauty doesn't translate into more wins, but I have not seen a more beautiful moment on ice than Paul Coffey swooping behind his net, taking those short, quick crossover strides and going end-to-end. As a season ticketholder, I cherish witnessing those breathtaking moments in person.

Leetch was a great player who I'd love to have on my team. But faced with a one-or-the-other choice, I'd rather pay to watch Coffey.

I don't know, Leetch waiting for like 2 months before finally shooting during game 7 of the 94 Stanley Cup finals was pretty beautiful. Pretty sure that wait caused a few thousand heart attacks.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I don't know, Leetch waiting for like 2 months before finally shooting during game 7 of the 94 Stanley Cup finals was pretty beautiful. Pretty sure that wait caused a few thousand heart attacks.

To me, no defenseman was better to watch in the final minute of a game with their team down a goal and the goalie pulled. Leetch seemed to own the puck in those situations and nearly always created great scoring chances. Perhaps it was because he had a lot more practice at it with the Rangers than Coffey ever did with the teams he played for.

 

[Oowatanite]

I'd pick Leetch, I feel that Coffey is overated, he started his career in Edmonton where he played with Gretzky,Messier and Kurri then leaves in 87-88 the same year Edmonton sweeps Boston in the finals without him then goes to Pittsburgh and playes with a prime Lemieux, wins a cup in 1991 only playing a minor role he leaves, then the pens sweep Chigaco in the 1992 finals, again without him. In Detroit he plays with a prime Yzerman and Fedorov who again pad his stats and as soon as they trade him they win the cup then he plays in philly with a prime Lindros. He got the luxury of playing with some of the best players and teams while Leetch did not

 

[Puck Scorer]

This is a no brainer COFFEY 5 times 100 points comon

 

[Oowatanite]

This is a no brainer COFFEY 5 times 100 points comon

yeah in the 1980's Leetch played most of his prime in the dead puck era