Ernie Russell VS Alf Smith
- Thread starter JFA87-66-99
- Start date
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Russell: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=22078837&postcount=30
Smith: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=25162393&postcount=180
I wish my colleague was able to put together a better bio for Alf Smith. But what you need to know is he was basically mr. intangibles. He was tough, dirty, good defensively, and a leader. His scoring was ok (but don't let the rankings fool you, 5th-8th was often well behind 1st-2nd) - I did a quick study and Smith's offensive contributions compared to a catalyst like Frank McGee were very similar to, say, Gillies or Tonelli compared to Mike Bossy.
In a nutshell, Russell was the sparkplug and leading scorer (but not the leader or actual best player) of an early dynasty. Smith was the sparkplug and leader (but not the leading scorer or actual best player) of another earlier dynasty.
Since Russell's scoring is not as easily replaced, I'd choose him over Smith. Smith's a natural winger, though, so expect to see him selected 300 spots earlier in the ATDs, to play a 2nd line glue guy role on the wing and for Russell to end up a 4th line center, or possibly a winger on a deep and astute team if he falls.
Smith: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=25162393&postcount=180
I wish my colleague was able to put together a better bio for Alf Smith. But what you need to know is he was basically mr. intangibles. He was tough, dirty, good defensively, and a leader. His scoring was ok (but don't let the rankings fool you, 5th-8th was often well behind 1st-2nd) - I did a quick study and Smith's offensive contributions compared to a catalyst like Frank McGee were very similar to, say, Gillies or Tonelli compared to Mike Bossy.
In a nutshell, Russell was the sparkplug and leading scorer (but not the leader or actual best player) of an early dynasty. Smith was the sparkplug and leader (but not the leading scorer or actual best player) of another earlier dynasty.
Since Russell's scoring is not as easily replaced, I'd choose him over Smith. Smith's a natural winger, though, so expect to see him selected 300 spots earlier in the ATDs, to play a 2nd line glue guy role on the wing and for Russell to end up a 4th line center, or possibly a winger on a deep and astute team if he falls.
Hey seventies thanks for all this info. I knew I could count on you to help me out. I'd like to hear some other people's thoughts as well.
One thing I noticed when looking over Ernie Russell/Alf Smith statistics was that Ernie Russell was 10 years younger than Alf Smith.They both played in the first decade of the 1900's so when studying there stats I realized I was comparing a 32-35 year old Alf Smith to a 22-25 year old Ernie Russell. So that leads me somewhat to beileve that Alf Smith was possible a better player. I'd really like to hear some other thoughts on this thread. Seventies, if possible could you rank the best players from the 1890-1915 era according to you? Thanks guys!!
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,354
Ernie Russell's goalscoring feats were amongst the best of his era, though he is hardly one of the first guys who receives mention when discussing stars of a century ago. His 1907 season is particularly outstanding. He led the league with 42 goals in nine games in leading the powerful Wanderers to the Cup. His next closest teammate had just 15, though it was a roster that featered multiple HOFers. He led the Wanderers in goals repeatedly over the next few years and helped them form a Stanley Cup dynasty.
His teammates Art Ross, Lester Patrick, and Ernie Johnson are generally much more highly regarded by history; not really sure why Russell got lost in the shuffle, despite being one of the premier goalscorers in all of hockey from about 1905-1910. Perhaps he was a very one-dimensional goal scorer, though in the era of no forward passing it's hard to fathom that the aforementioned were simply setting him up with a bunch of tap-ins. Amongst his direct contemporaries, only Russell Bowie exceeded his career goal total.
Alf Smith's scoring exploits are not nearly so impressive, but he was a catalyst on the Silver Seven dynasty. He had enough skill to be a decent scorer, and was constantly mixing it up with his rough and dirty play. Presumably got under the skin of his opponents, and more often than not went down the ice and scored a goal just to rub it in. Think of Claude Lemieux in his Conn Smythe-winning playoff season, and span it out over the course of several seasons, and that probably describes Alf Smith.
This is a tough call for voting. I think I'll follow sevetieslord's line of thinking here and go with Russell. Most team's had an Alf Smith, just maybe not quite as good or effective. Player's with Russell's scoring ability weren't completely unheard of, but certainly didn't grow on trees.
His teammates Art Ross, Lester Patrick, and Ernie Johnson are generally much more highly regarded by history; not really sure why Russell got lost in the shuffle, despite being one of the premier goalscorers in all of hockey from about 1905-1910. Perhaps he was a very one-dimensional goal scorer, though in the era of no forward passing it's hard to fathom that the aforementioned were simply setting him up with a bunch of tap-ins. Amongst his direct contemporaries, only Russell Bowie exceeded his career goal total.
Alf Smith's scoring exploits are not nearly so impressive, but he was a catalyst on the Silver Seven dynasty. He had enough skill to be a decent scorer, and was constantly mixing it up with his rough and dirty play. Presumably got under the skin of his opponents, and more often than not went down the ice and scored a goal just to rub it in. Think of Claude Lemieux in his Conn Smythe-winning playoff season, and span it out over the course of several seasons, and that probably describes Alf Smith.
This is a tough call for voting. I think I'll follow sevetieslord's line of thinking here and go with Russell. Most team's had an Alf Smith, just maybe not quite as good or effective. Player's with Russell's scoring ability weren't completely unheard of, but certainly didn't grow on trees.
Thanks for your post. In the book "Ultimate Hockey" it matches up the Ottawa Silver Seven VS The Montreal Wanderers with ratings. Alf Smith was the highest rated player with a 9.0 for offense value, 8.5 for defensive value, and a 9.0 for leadership value. A total of 8.83 for Alf Smith. Ernie Russell has a 9.5 for offensive value(tied with Frank McGee for highest offensive value), and a 7.5 for both defensive and leadership value for a grand total of 8.17. This is very interesting to me because its basically says Alf Smith was the best overall player over McGee and others. I'd be curious to find out how the authors of the book came up with these ratings. Any thoughts?
Perhaps a better comparism would be Ernie Russell VS Marty Walsh? After doing some research I realized that Russell/Walsh had very similar careers at least based of stats. For my research I decided to use just the seasons that they played together in the same league ECAHA/NHA. Since Ernie Russell retired for the 1908-1909 season, and Marty Walsh had his best season that year I used Russel's 1906-1907 seaon in the ECAHA were he had similar stats as comparism for that year.
1906-1907 Russell 9 GP-42 G-4 A-46 PTS-26 PIM
1908-1909 Walsh 12 GP-42 G-5 A-47 PTS-41 PIM
1907-1908 Walsh 9 GP-27 G-3 A-30 PTS-30 PIM
1907-1908 Russell 9 GP-20 G-1 A-21 PTS-37 PIM
1909-1910 Russell 12 GP-32 G-0 A-32 PTS-51 PIM
1909-1910 Walsh 11 GP-19 G-0 A-19 PTS-44 PIM
1910-1911 Walsh 16 GP-37 G-5 A-42 PTS-51 PIM
1910-1911 Russell 11 GP-18 G-2 A-20 PTS-56 PIM
1911-1912 Russell 18 GP-23 G-2 A-25 PTS-47 PIM
1911-1912 Walsh 12 GP-11 G-1 A-12 PTS-10 PIM
Totals-Ernie Russell 59 GP-135 G-9 A-144 PTS-217 PIM
Totals-Marty Walsh 60 GP-136 G-9 A-145 PTS-176 PIM
Very similar numbers to say the least, but in Stanley Cup games Ernie Russell takes a bit of a lead but with more games played.
Russell 13 GP-35 G-0 A-35 PTS-45 PIM
Walsh 6 GP-21 G-0 A-21 PTS-15 PIM
It seems they were very similar players both with great offensive instincts and goal-scoring ability with Ernie Russell being a bit more gritty. Let me know what you guys think?
1906-1907 Russell 9 GP-42 G-4 A-46 PTS-26 PIM
1908-1909 Walsh 12 GP-42 G-5 A-47 PTS-41 PIM
1907-1908 Walsh 9 GP-27 G-3 A-30 PTS-30 PIM
1907-1908 Russell 9 GP-20 G-1 A-21 PTS-37 PIM
1909-1910 Russell 12 GP-32 G-0 A-32 PTS-51 PIM
1909-1910 Walsh 11 GP-19 G-0 A-19 PTS-44 PIM
1910-1911 Walsh 16 GP-37 G-5 A-42 PTS-51 PIM
1910-1911 Russell 11 GP-18 G-2 A-20 PTS-56 PIM
1911-1912 Russell 18 GP-23 G-2 A-25 PTS-47 PIM
1911-1912 Walsh 12 GP-11 G-1 A-12 PTS-10 PIM
Totals-Ernie Russell 59 GP-135 G-9 A-144 PTS-217 PIM
Totals-Marty Walsh 60 GP-136 G-9 A-145 PTS-176 PIM
Very similar numbers to say the least, but in Stanley Cup games Ernie Russell takes a bit of a lead but with more games played.
Russell 13 GP-35 G-0 A-35 PTS-45 PIM
Walsh 6 GP-21 G-0 A-21 PTS-15 PIM
It seems they were very similar players both with great offensive instincts and goal-scoring ability with Ernie Russell being a bit more gritty. Let me know what you guys think?
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Doesn't really matter which way you do it; Ernie Russell is far, far superior to Alf Smith offensively. Comparing them at different ages is not fair, no, but comparing their career offensive achievements in a way similar to how we'd do it for modern players clearly shows Russell was better.
Russell was 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 5th, 8th in scoring in his best 7 years.
Smith was 1st, 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 9th.
And not all 1sts are created equal - Russell's 1st was much more dominant than Smith.
I don't have time to compile lists right now but the first chart in my Ernie Russell bio does a pretty good job of showing where he ranks among forwards of similar birth year.
It's entirely possible that Alf Smith was a better overall player, and I won't pretend it's not close. But there's no way he's comparable to Russell offensively.
Ultimate Hockey isn't perfect. That was written by three published authors but I don't think their individual credentials as researchers are any better than at least 10 ATD GMs. It is a good resource but don't take anything in there too seriously or as gospel.
For example, there's just no way that Smith is a 9.0 in offensive value, no matter what scale you use, because that would imply he's 90% as good as a player with a 10.0, the best you could get. Smith was very mediocre offensively compared to guys like McGee, Russell and Walsh.
I, too, would be curious to find out how the authors of the book came up with these ratings. The offensive stuff can come from stats, that's fine (although they botched that big time) and the defensive and leadership ratings are likely purely subjective based on book and newspaper passages. (It's interesting to note that Leadership counts just as much as offensive and defensive ability though)
Yes, Walsh is a better comparison than Smith. For one thing, they are both centers. They are closer in age, and their scoring credentials are very similar. Note that Walsh shows up in that chart in the Russell bio that I pointed you to. (as well as in the playoff scoring charts, both total and with easy games removed)
I would definitely take Walsh over Russell, though. Despite his shorter career, Walsh was an even more dominant scorer, and there is legitimate info supporting his defensive skill, grit, agitation, toughness, clutch play, and hard working nature:
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=24856640&postcount=143
Walsh is probably one of the most underappreciated players of all-time. (no way a team with him as their 4th-best center shouldn't steamroll their way to the ATD final)
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Walsh, no question.
Smith was better at scoring goals, and even that is a bit foggy considering so many of his goalscoring exploits were in a few lesser leagues. His playmaking numbers are extremely poor and though it's said that he was scrappy, we know nothing of his defense, leadership, or work ethic.
Smith's ability to play the wing may make him a higher ATD pick (he's a poor man's 2nd line LW in the right circumstance) but Walsh should be considered the better and more valuable player all-time.
To get better reads on some of these players:
http://news.google.com (the archive search is very powerful and has been a goldmine for many older players, I even found an article on the first stanley cup game that told in remarkable detail the work of players like Allan Cameron and Tom Paton)
http://www.sihrhockey.org (the annual membership fee is $30 and it is well worth it for the stats database alone. It's one thing using sites like hockey-reference.com to see the numbers, it's another thing entirely to be able to look at league lists to truly put it into perspective - I've referred 8 happy new members to date. And no, I don't get anything for this)
Thanks seventies and your opinion I trust. I am a member already to SIHR thats were I get the stats from, and they also have many good notes on players as well.
