HOHHOF -- Early Era -- Round 3 Results

[MXD]

Here are the results for Round 3 of the History of Hall Hall of Fame -- Early Era group.

There were 27 voters (108 votes) submitted this time around. Participation level was quite stable, and there was some pretty interesting discussions as well. The discussions can be read here

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=30777191

There was some serious streamlining in the voting this round, leading to 3 new inductees (and one that missed by the smallest possible margin)

The History of Hockey Hall of Fame is please to welcome...

A pioneer, high-principled gentleman, and an extremely skilled pucked controler; A cornerstone of the first dynasty of the NHL who also found success with weaker teams; and a terrific mix of toughness, offensive prowess, defensive effeciency and nutcase-ism.

- Rover/F Russel Dubbie Bowie
- G Clint Benedict
- D Sprague Cleghorn

History of Hockey Hall of Fame -- Round 3

| Player | Votes | % of votes |
1| Russel "Dubbie" Bowie |24|88.89%
2| Clint Benedict |24|88.89%
3| Sprague Cleghorn |23|85.19%
4| Joe Malone |21|77.78%
5| Dan Bain |6|22.22%
6| Harvey Pulford |2|7.41%
7| Cy Denneny |2|7.41%
8| Frank McGee |2|7.41%
9| Hobey Baker |2|7.41%
10| Georges Vezina |1|3.70%
11| Lester Patrick |1|3.70%

Reflexions?
- Malone missed by a vote, and was in for a while.
- We lost some voters, which might explain why some guys lost votes (Dan Bain, amongst others).
- The next round might give some really interesting discussions, and I wouldn't be surprised to see guys who didn't get a vote this round get quite a few next round. It's safe to say that this round is quite a serious turning point.

Click to read more...

 

[finchster]

Good we got three players in this time, makes up for the last round where we only had one. Joe Malone wasn’t on my vote but I think he should get in with about 90% next round. This is the point where we need some serious debate as it is wide open.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Nice to see some of the obvious ones go in so we can get to a real debate. I have my doubts - after Malone I am highly skeptical this crowd can agree on even 4 more candidates in the next 7 rounds.

 

[EagleBelfour]

I was pretty much in conformity with the results in this round: My top-4 are the top-4 vote getter this round.

From this round until the end, I feel the vote will be VERY wide open. I wonder what happen if we can't include anyone in a specific round?

Joe Malone is a shoe-in for next round, and an absolute on my list.

I don't think Dan Bain is one of the four best player remaining, but his contribution to the sport is enough for me to probably cast a vote for me.

If we had to vote today, my other two votes would go to Lester Patrick and Cy Denneny.

A player who received no vote that should get some vote in this round is defenceman Mike Grant, whom is perhaps just as good, if not better of a hockey player than Harvey Pulford.

 

[Dreakmur]

Agreed that Malone will almost certainly get in next round.

After him, it's complete crapshoot.

I think Clint Benedict is the only goalie who will get in for a while. The next guys are pretty far off the rest of the skaters available.

There are 4 defensemen who are all pretty close: Hod Stuart, Harvey Pulvord, Mike Grant, and Lester Patrick. That doesn't even cound guys like Moose Johnson, Eddie Gerard, or George Boucher.

Up front, I think there is one that stands out: Cy Denneny.

If I'm voting now, it's Joe Malone, Cy Denneny, Hod Stuart, and one of Harvey Pulford, Mike Grant, or Lester Patrick.

 

[seventieslord]

Malone's in for sure next time (I'm one of his biggest critics but he still gets my vote), and after that, who knows. I think now is the time for some of us to really put together a case for our favourite candidate, to sway others.

Pulford, Vezina, and Lester Patrick stick out for me right now.

 

[VanIslander]

I have no time fro research at the moment but in the ATDs I have posted and linked before:

- a newspaper article profiling his defensive exploits as the defensive hero of the game, the very first stanley cup playoff game, as he turned away attack after attack only for Ottawa to concede to Montreal on goals in the last period (1994?)

- He has played the 2nd or 3rd most games played of all in the 1890s (there's a chart someone assembled here at HB's.)

- the role of defensive defenseman was active because of no forward pass he could literally end up checking the entire squad trying to make a rush (according to Farley - ah heck, don't recall anything spsific at the kpomenmt)

- Harvey Pulford and and Al Smith are the core of the identity Silver Seven of the earliest twentiest century stanley cup successes and while there there are cases to Smith's meanness without Pulford, there aren't any of toughness with out Pulford that I have ecever found. He was the captain. The true first defensive defensemen hockey star whose career is long, enveloping the emerging 90s and formulatibe 00s.

All things I considered, I think Harvey Pulford the first defenseman worthy of induction. I've just been too busy with other thinag to make a case for it.

glwhatever

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Joe Malone is the only player I'm voting for who peaked after WW1. Sorry Denneny. The "Early Era Committee" is in danger of becoming "the decade after World War 1 Committee plus Bowie as a token earlier guy."

Bowie wasn't even noticably better than Tommy Phillips, Frank McGee, or Hod Stuart - all of them were at multiple points referred to as "the best player in the world" in the 1900-1910 decade - he just played for longer.

Why all the love for Pulford over Stuart? Sure, he had a long career with a great winning pedigree, but was he ever considered the best player in the world. Frank McGee was clearly better when Stuart and Pulford played together.

Stuart is generally regarded as the better player historically:

Here are the best of the pre-and non-NHLers.
THN’s First Team
G: Hugh Lehman
D: Hod Stuart
D: Lester Patrick
R: Cyclone Taylor
LW: Tommy Phillips
C: Frank McGee
RW: Didier Pitre

In a 1925 article (Lester) Patrick was asked to select his all-time all-star team. Here's what he said:

"My opinion is based on consistency of players over a period of years, and the fact that men selected possessed nearly all the fundamentals of an ideal player - physique, stamina, courage, speed, stick-handling, goal-getting ability, skill in passing, proper temperament and, above all, hockey brains."

Patrick selected Hughie Lehman in goal, Sprague Cleghorn and Hod Stuart on defence, and up front he chose Tom Phillips, Arthur Farrell and Fred "Cyclone" Taylor.

Notice the appearance of Stuart and Phillips on both lists. Lehman too, but there weren't many elite goalies who never played an NHL game.

(Maybe one of us should do more research into Arthur Farrell for a future round).

My thoughts for now:

1. Joe Malone - the class of the post WW1 generation and the only one from that generation I will consider voting for until more pre-WW1 guys get in.

2. Frank McGee - say what you want about a short career, he was absolutely dominant for those 4 years. Only Tommy Phillips could contend with McGee for the "best in the world" title. McGee was also historically significant as the star player for the team that really popularized hockey in the east.

Here's a more recent profile of him: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=31073111&postcount=65

3. Tommy Phillips

"At a tme when hockey fans argued on behalf of the Russell Bowies, Frank McGees, and Hod Stuarts as hockey’s top player, “Nibs†was easily the all-around pick of the litter." - Ultimate Hockey

"Who is the best hockey player in Canada? Nine out of ten people will tell you it is either Frank McGee or him. " - THe Montreal Gazette, 1906.

"Out west, he was often called the greatest player in the game, much like Frank McGee in the East" - "Honoured Members"

Lester Patrick considered Phillips the best player in the world as late as 1909 and Art Ross said he was the best player he had ever seen (does anybody know the date of that quote from Ross?)

As late as 1922, Phillips was still considered "the perfect hockey player" to whom others were compared out west.

Full profile: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=31105485&postcount=72

4. Hod Stuart

I think he has the weakest case of the 4 candidates for the best player of the 1900-1909 decade (behind Phillips/Bowie/McGee in any order), but "the Bobby Orr of the Early Era" seems to be thought of more highly than fellow defenseman Harvey Pulford (who should be inducted, but not before Stuart)

Recent Profile:http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=30991681&postcount=61

Summary: I think it's very important that this HOF take care to induct any player who was considered the best player in the world for a fair length of time by a fair number of people. There are no post-WW1 players available who fit that category - only Lalonde, Taylor, and Nighbor were considered as such. Joe Malone was never really considered the best player in the world, but is the best left of the post-WW1 generation, so he has my only vote among men from that generation.

I think McGee, Phillips, and Stuart are the only guys left after Bowie to be routinely called "best in the world" in the 1900-1909 decade, and they should be inducted before anyone else who peaked after 1900.

I am open to arguments that a worthy 1890s player could bump one of those 4 off my list this time, however.

 

[Dreakmur]

During McGee's and Phillips' primes, Hod Stuart was playing in the United States. That's likely why he wasn't called the best player in the world by the Canadian newspapers.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

During McGee's and Phillips' primes, Hod Stuart was playing in the United States. That's likely why he wasn't called the best player in the world by the Canadian newspapers.

Ohhh missed that one.... heh.

That would definitely explain the wording of the Montreal Gazette quote provided above:

Who is the best hockey player in Canada? Nine out of ten people will tell you it is either Frank McGee or him. "

At this point I'm likely to vote for all three of Phillips, McGee, and Stuart unless someone blows me away with an 1890s guy. (I do think Grant and Bain at minimum should be inducted at some point though).