Horton vs Pronger
- Thread starter Ziostilon
- Start date
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,146
Right now Horton for sure. Pronger is 35 and it could be assumed he has some good hockey left in him and I'll admit I've been impressed with him this season but we have to remember Horton was still a very elite defenseman after 35 years old too. He was a 2nd team all-star once and a First team two more times. Not sure Pronger can match that, so we'll see. But I think year in and year out Horton was more solid and steady. Pronger won a Hart and then didn't have an elite year for 4 more years. He's had his injury troubles and has had some "feast or famine" moments in his career. I think with Horton you always knew what you were going to get. He was rock solid and arguably the strongest player in NHL history. Someone else mentioned his durability. That's true, he played until he was 44 and his career ended only because of a fatal car crash 
Tim Horton for me
Tim Horton for me
Dissonance
Registered User
Right now Horton for sure. Pronger is 35 and it could be assumed he has some good hockey left in him and I'll admit I've been impressed with him this season but we have to remember Horton was still a very elite defenseman after 35 years old too. He was a 2nd team all-star once and a First team two more times. Not sure Pronger can match that, so we'll see. But I think year in and year out Horton was more solid and steady. Pronger won a Hart and then didn't have an elite year for 4 more years. He's had his injury troubles and has had some "feast or famine" moments in his career. I think with Horton you always knew what you were going to get. He was rock solid and arguably the strongest player in NHL history. Someone else mentioned his durability. That's true, he played until he was 44 and his career ended only because of a fatal car crash
Tim Horton for me
Agree with most of your post, but this bit seems slightly unfair to Pronger. Injuries have been a problem, sure, but he's been remarkably consistent when healthy. Here are his Norris finishes:
97-98: 3rd
98-99: 4th
99-00: 1st
01-02: 5th
03-04: 3rd
05-06: 7th
06-07: 3rd
'07-'08: 8th
In 2000-'01 he was arguably the best defenseman in the league but missed 30 games and wasn't going to be a finalist for anything. '02-'03 he missed the whole season. And then he probably should have been a Norris finalist this season.
Last year was pretty much his only real 'off' season when healthy in more than a decade, and he's had a whole bunch of top-5 years (granted, Norris voting's a little haphazard the further down you go). And he's been a pretty consistently elite playoff player since the lockout. That said, Horton's longevity was really something else.
Last edited:
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,146
I hear what you are saying, but I can't reward a guy for being injured. Durability is a nice trait as well and Pronger has lacked that in his career even if it isn't entirely his fault.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Tim Horton Injuries
Midway in the 1955-56 season Tim Horton was caught with his head down by Bill Gadsby. Result fractured jaw and leg which ended his season and caused Horton to adjust his style - more stay at home.
Horton also missed games during the next few seasons and 1960-61.
Midway in the 1955-56 season Tim Horton was caught with his head down by Bill Gadsby. Result fractured jaw and leg which ended his season and caused Horton to adjust his style - more stay at home.
Horton also missed games during the next few seasons and 1960-61.
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
Was Horton's adjustment to more of a stay at home style because of fear (he didn't want to get injured again) or because the Gadsby leg injury left him less mobile?
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,271
- 2,808
Horton definitely has the edge on longevity and consistency. But here's another question. Who was better at their best in the playoffs? Horton from 1962 to 1967? Or Pronger since the lockout until now? I don't know enough to comment but it would be interesting to hear from someone who does.
Tim Horton definately for now, but it does seem that Pronger is a very valuable playoff performer. He should have won the Conn Smythe in 2006 despite edmonton losing in game 7.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Less Mobile
Medical technology was not the same. Broken leg or knee ligament damage usually impacted a players skating and reduced mobility.
Horton's mobility was impacted. Likewise Serge Savard who survived knee surgery(junior) and two broken legs(early NHL) to have a HHOF career - initially he was considered close to Bobby Orr, a junior contemporary.
Medical technology was not the same. Broken leg or knee ligament damage usually impacted a players skating and reduced mobility.
Horton's mobility was impacted. Likewise Serge Savard who survived knee surgery(junior) and two broken legs(early NHL) to have a HHOF career - initially he was considered close to Bobby Orr, a junior contemporary.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Tim Horton
Tim Horton, mainly because the level of competition in the playoffs was greater game after game. From 1960-1967 except for the 1962 series against the Rangers, Horton would be on against the likes of a Jean Beliveau,Henri Richard, Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita, virtually every shift. Even against the Rangers in 1962 he would have faced Andy Bathgate.
Looking at Chris Pronger's playoff career, match-ups against the top forwards of his era were few and far between.
Tim Horton, mainly because the level of competition in the playoffs was greater game after game. From 1960-1967 except for the 1962 series against the Rangers, Horton would be on against the likes of a Jean Beliveau,Henri Richard, Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull, Stan Mikita, virtually every shift. Even against the Rangers in 1962 he would have faced Andy Bathgate.
Looking at Chris Pronger's playoff career, match-ups against the top forwards of his era were few and far between.
Last edited:
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,146
The Gadsby check (what a thunderous check) was a rare moment Horton was injured throughout his career. He once went 6 seasons straight without missing a game. I think Horton was an extremely resilient player more so than Pronger
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
Tim Horton was a bit before my time, and I didn't really get to see him in his prime. Why is he so highly regarded, at least to the point of being considered better than Pronger? I am not arguing for either player, I just want to make my point and hopefully someone can tell me more about Horton.
Horton never really came close to winning the Norris. I mean, yeah, he finished as runner-up twice, but both times, it was by a very wide margin behind the winner. It's not like his competition for the Norris, during his prime, was that spectacular, either. Norris voting records don't seem to indicate him being recognized during the Doug Harvey era, and his peak, at least in terms of Norris voting, happened in between the Harvey era and the Orr era.
I just have trouble comprehending Horton being better than Chris Pronger. The latter has a collection of accolades that is just spectacular. Hart, Norris, 2 Olympic Golds, Stanley Cup, easily could have 2 Conn Smythe Trophies and should have at least 1, but was bypassed due to his dirty (and terribly dominant) play. Pronger's Norris voting record is better, and has been accomplished against better competition.
I really just don't know much about Horton, and if he really was better than Pronger, I really hope someone explains to me why. Horton does have one more first-all star team berth, but Pronger has faced tougher competition for that first-team defense pairing.
Horton never really came close to winning the Norris. I mean, yeah, he finished as runner-up twice, but both times, it was by a very wide margin behind the winner. It's not like his competition for the Norris, during his prime, was that spectacular, either. Norris voting records don't seem to indicate him being recognized during the Doug Harvey era, and his peak, at least in terms of Norris voting, happened in between the Harvey era and the Orr era.
I just have trouble comprehending Horton being better than Chris Pronger. The latter has a collection of accolades that is just spectacular. Hart, Norris, 2 Olympic Golds, Stanley Cup, easily could have 2 Conn Smythe Trophies and should have at least 1, but was bypassed due to his dirty (and terribly dominant) play. Pronger's Norris voting record is better, and has been accomplished against better competition.
I really just don't know much about Horton, and if he really was better than Pronger, I really hope someone explains to me why. Horton does have one more first-all star team berth, but Pronger has faced tougher competition for that first-team defense pairing.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Horton is given credit for his major role on the 1960s Maple Leafs dynasty. He was also reportedly the only defenseman in the league strong enough to contain Gordie Howe, which was a huge factor in why Toronto repeatedly beat Detroit in the playoffs in the 60s.
Now why Horton is considered better than Scott Stevens is another story.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Interesting Questions Raised
You raise a number of interesting questions which I will try to answer in the context of the respective eras.
Achievements.
Horton being a member of four Stanley Cup teams is a very strong point. Stanley Cup wins with a good chance of 1 retro Conn Smythe are very telling. Possibility of winning Olympic gold did not exist.
Pronger - achievements have a certain randomness to them. The standout season from time to time but no stretch of sustained championship level play. He may have had a slightly larger pool of competing defensemen for the first all star team BUT no one from the pool faced the same high level of forwards game after game.
Context of each era.
The Norris voting in Horton's era has to be analyzed within a context. In the O6 part of Horton's career, each team had at least one if not two HHOF caliber defensemen virtually every season. Boston in the mid sixties being the exception for a couple of seasons. Also each team had at least 1 or 2 HHOF caliber forwards, some as many as six.
During Chris Pronger's career, at any given time, he may have been playing against 6-8 HHOF caliber defensemen, effectively at least 20 of the teams would not have HHOF caliber defensemen. Likewise very few teams have any HHOF caliber forwards, let alone multiples stretching to six.
Comparing the two during the regular season leads to an obvious question. During how many shift was each defenseman seriously put to the test. Horton playing against Montreal would see the Beliveau and Richard Line two out of every three shifts, supported by quality HHOF defensemen at least half the time. Same thing against Chicago - Mikita and Hull line two out of three shifts supported by Pierre Pilote. Detroit with the Howe and Ullman line supported by two HHOF d-men. Even the non-playoff teams had one solid line supported by a HHOF caliber defenseman. Horton was put to the test at least 1/2 of each game, mostly 2/3 of each game by quality opponents. On the other hand Chris Pronger has many games where he is rarely tested by HHOF quality opposition.
In the playoffs this is most noticeable. Look at Pronger this year. New Jersey - Kovalchuk playing without an elite HHOF center or defenseman mananged 1.2PPG against the Flyers and Pronger. The Bruins would have eliminated the Flyers with an average NHL coach.
Pronger certainly did not look too physical against Lucic - not a Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull or Jean Beliveau caliber player. Against the Canadiens. Two good games against an offensively weak team then a bit of a turnaround tonight.
Physicality.
I'll throw in Scott Stevens because someone added his name. It is much easier for a defenseman to be physical today because the forwards leave themselves vulnerable and the defensemen are not very supportive - suicide passes or bad passes into a players skates,etc. A hitting defenseman just waits and crashes into the vulnerable player.
Also you have video analysis. Today's defenseman can scout tendancies and plan hits. Video was not a factor in Horton's era.
Horton did not have the advantage of playing in an era when defensemen made their own forwards vulnerable with bad passing so you could get a dissuasive hit early. Part of his game would be physically defending territory against the likes of Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull and Jean Beliveau. Two seven game series against in one playoff against first Montreal then Detroit was very demanding physically. Today such match-ups are few and far between.
You raise a number of interesting questions which I will try to answer in the context of the respective eras.
Achievements.
Horton being a member of four Stanley Cup teams is a very strong point. Stanley Cup wins with a good chance of 1 retro Conn Smythe are very telling. Possibility of winning Olympic gold did not exist.
Pronger - achievements have a certain randomness to them. The standout season from time to time but no stretch of sustained championship level play. He may have had a slightly larger pool of competing defensemen for the first all star team BUT no one from the pool faced the same high level of forwards game after game.
Context of each era.
The Norris voting in Horton's era has to be analyzed within a context. In the O6 part of Horton's career, each team had at least one if not two HHOF caliber defensemen virtually every season. Boston in the mid sixties being the exception for a couple of seasons. Also each team had at least 1 or 2 HHOF caliber forwards, some as many as six.
During Chris Pronger's career, at any given time, he may have been playing against 6-8 HHOF caliber defensemen, effectively at least 20 of the teams would not have HHOF caliber defensemen. Likewise very few teams have any HHOF caliber forwards, let alone multiples stretching to six.
Comparing the two during the regular season leads to an obvious question. During how many shift was each defenseman seriously put to the test. Horton playing against Montreal would see the Beliveau and Richard Line two out of every three shifts, supported by quality HHOF defensemen at least half the time. Same thing against Chicago - Mikita and Hull line two out of three shifts supported by Pierre Pilote. Detroit with the Howe and Ullman line supported by two HHOF d-men. Even the non-playoff teams had one solid line supported by a HHOF caliber defenseman. Horton was put to the test at least 1/2 of each game, mostly 2/3 of each game by quality opponents. On the other hand Chris Pronger has many games where he is rarely tested by HHOF quality opposition.
In the playoffs this is most noticeable. Look at Pronger this year. New Jersey - Kovalchuk playing without an elite HHOF center or defenseman mananged 1.2PPG against the Flyers and Pronger. The Bruins would have eliminated the Flyers with an average NHL coach.
Pronger certainly did not look too physical against Lucic - not a Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull or Jean Beliveau caliber player. Against the Canadiens. Two good games against an offensively weak team then a bit of a turnaround tonight.
Physicality.
I'll throw in Scott Stevens because someone added his name. It is much easier for a defenseman to be physical today because the forwards leave themselves vulnerable and the defensemen are not very supportive - suicide passes or bad passes into a players skates,etc. A hitting defenseman just waits and crashes into the vulnerable player.
Also you have video analysis. Today's defenseman can scout tendancies and plan hits. Video was not a factor in Horton's era.
Horton did not have the advantage of playing in an era when defensemen made their own forwards vulnerable with bad passing so you could get a dissuasive hit early. Part of his game would be physically defending territory against the likes of Gordie Howe, Bobby Hull and Jean Beliveau. Two seven game series against in one playoff against first Montreal then Detroit was very demanding physically. Today such match-ups are few and far between.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
I'm not sure how relevant this is. It seems like you are saying that players who played in a smaller, more concentrated league were better because the league was more concentrated. Talent was much more concentrated then, but it applied to every player.
Pronger didn't play against Kovalchuk. The Flyers had him stapled to Parise all series long, and he did an amazing job at containing Parise. Kovalchuk went against Timonen at even strength. Also, most of Kovalchuk's points were on the powerplay, where he was the featured player (so he was almost guaranteed at least a secondary assist if the team scored on the PP).
Blades of Glory
Troll Captain
So, would you guys say that while Pronger's best is obviously better than Horton's best, Horton was more consistently at his best than Pronger has been? I think the one major knock on Pronger is that he rarely has shown the form, at least in the regular season, that he was in during his Hart and Norris season. The playoffs are another story, though.
I am understanding that Horton was just more consistent than Pronger has been through his career, at least in terms of consistently performing at an elite level. The physicality has been brought up. Pronger doesn't play overly physical until the playoffs roll around. He's not an open-ice hitter, either. But Pronger's ability to physically interfere with and in the end, dominate, star forwards in the playoffs is what gains massive points for him in my books. He possesses a very rare ability to make entire forward lines vanish in a playoff series. It's been a consistent trend since the lockout, when the switch seemingly flipped for him. Remember what he did to Joe Thornton in 2006 and 2009? Or the utter failure that Ottawa's dominant top line became when they met him in the 2007 Cup Finals?
I am understanding that Horton was just more consistent than Pronger has been through his career, at least in terms of consistently performing at an elite level. The physicality has been brought up. Pronger doesn't play overly physical until the playoffs roll around. He's not an open-ice hitter, either. But Pronger's ability to physically interfere with and in the end, dominate, star forwards in the playoffs is what gains massive points for him in my books. He possesses a very rare ability to make entire forward lines vanish in a playoff series. It's been a consistent trend since the lockout, when the switch seemingly flipped for him. Remember what he did to Joe Thornton in 2006 and 2009? Or the utter failure that Ottawa's dominant top line became when they met him in the 2007 Cup Finals?
Last edited:
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Toi
TOI - Pronger enjoyed almost an 8 minute advantage over Parise. Kovalchuk and Parise shared PP time which Pronger helped defend against.
TOI - Pronger enjoyed almost an 8 minute advantage over Parise. Kovalchuk and Parise shared PP time which Pronger helped defend against.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Part of the TOI differential is that Kovalchuk didn't kill penalties, while Pronger obviously did. And of course the fact that Pronger was a defenseman.
Kovalchuk played the whole PP in NJ, but he played the point, so he wasn't really Pronger's responsibility per se.
Parise was the guy Pronger was matched up against.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Comparison
The difference is that Pronger rarely had regular season demands placed on him to play his best physical game while Horton had to bring his best physical game virtually every night.As evidenced by your comment Pronger was able to take nights off.
Pronger's ability to make entire forward lines vanish in the playoffs has to be examined in the context of the forwards he faced in the playoffs. Was Joe Thornton anywhere near as physical as a center as Jean Beliveau? No - Thornton is mainly a perimeter player while Beliveau played the slot and the corners. Thornton regularly takes himself out of the play, Beliveau never did. Spezza/Heatley/Alfredsson. Alfredsson is a bit physical the other two are marginal. Far from Gordie Howe who would simply wear down defensemen over a long series - evidenced by Pierre Pilote. Alfredsson or Thornton never wore down anyone. Defensemen never talk about them as being physically tough to play against.
The difference is that Pronger rarely had regular season demands placed on him to play his best physical game while Horton had to bring his best physical game virtually every night.As evidenced by your comment Pronger was able to take nights off.
Pronger's ability to make entire forward lines vanish in the playoffs has to be examined in the context of the forwards he faced in the playoffs. Was Joe Thornton anywhere near as physical as a center as Jean Beliveau? No - Thornton is mainly a perimeter player while Beliveau played the slot and the corners. Thornton regularly takes himself out of the play, Beliveau never did. Spezza/Heatley/Alfredsson. Alfredsson is a bit physical the other two are marginal. Far from Gordie Howe who would simply wear down defensemen over a long series - evidenced by Pierre Pilote. Alfredsson or Thornton never wore down anyone. Defensemen never talk about them as being physically tough to play against.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Really...............
The point pretty well dictates the defensive formation and the role of the defensemen. In Jacques Lemaire's PP the point will generate points by getting the defensemen to commit and then making appropriate choices.
The point pretty well dictates the defensive formation and the role of the defensemen. In Jacques Lemaire's PP the point will generate points by getting the defensemen to commit and then making appropriate choices.
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,271
- 2,808
Andy Bathgate would be another one from that time who was limited, by a knee injury. Also, now that I think of it, was George Armstrong slowed by injuries when he was younger, or were his knee injuries only later in his career? I've read that he was considered a good skater as a junior and when he broke into the league, but later in his career he was known as a slow skater.
Back on topic. Although Pronger has certainly enjoyed better medical care than Horton did, he had multiple knee and wrist injuries in the 2001-2003 period. I remember he had a lot of trouble recovering from the wrist injury in particular.
I don't watch the Western Conference enough to see, but does anyone think Pronger's injuries affected him, long term? Pronger was averaging almost a point per game in 2001 when he injured his knee, and was coming off his Hart Trophy season.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
You could say something like this about any O6 player compared to any modern player.
Horton was a top defenseman and faced top players. It is reasonable to assume that he faced about the same average skill of player as his contemporaries (other top defensemen) did. Pronger, likewise, is a top defenseman and lines up against the best players just as often as other top defensemen do. The fact that not all of them are top-100 material is irrelvant.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Level of Competition
Level of competition has always been relevant. Specifically when evaluating or drafting. In a historic context it is relevant as evidenced by people making adjustments by era - scoring in the eighties, etc.
The main issue is that today we have the ability to evaluate how players, in this case defensemen, play against various levels of competition. It is possible to show how each does specifically against teams, against players, against tendancies.
The data is used by coaches when choosing goalies or match-ups against specific teams and as such is very relevant.
Level of competition has always been relevant. Specifically when evaluating or drafting. In a historic context it is relevant as evidenced by people making adjustments by era - scoring in the eighties, etc.
The main issue is that today we have the ability to evaluate how players, in this case defensemen, play against various levels of competition. It is possible to show how each does specifically against teams, against players, against tendancies.
The data is used by coaches when choosing goalies or match-ups against specific teams and as such is very relevant.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Speculation: Victor Olofsson, will he get a contract?- Latest: Ledge And Dairy
-
