GMR
Registered User
Has any Hall of Famer been traded more often? Five times by my count.
Also, did any of those trades make sense, even at the time?
Also, did any of those trades make sense, even at the time?
ken houston was a good offensive defenceman who in the previous seven years averaged 45 points and 90 PIMs.
Ken Houston didn't play D at all in the NHL, he played right wing - he was like Wendel Clark and was converted to wing in training camp. He was listed on rosters in guide books and on hockey cards for years as a defenseman, but I don't recall him ever playing D at all.
Ken Houston didn't play D at all in the NHL, he played right wing - he was like Wendel Clark and was converted to wing in training camp. He was listed on rosters in guide books and on hockey cards for years as a defenseman, but I don't recall him ever playing D at all.
Oh that's right. I forgot his last few years in the league where he played for seemingly every team.
I can't see a single way it would make sense to trade Murphy for Dimitri Mironov. I also can't see how it made sense to give him away to Detroit. It was the trade deadline - make a contender pay you something for the guy. I remember being happy to just lose him and get younger as a team, but in retrospect, who does that anymore? Even a broken down Mark Streit was worth something at the deadline, and this was Larry Freaking Murphy.
The Johnson and Dahlquist thing was crazy but at least is was a 2-for-1. In retrospect you clearly lose, selling a Murphy and Gartner for Ciccarelli and Rouse, but at the time it would have looked like a prety fair hockey trade.
I can't see a single way it would make sense to trade Murphy for Dimitri Mironov. I also can't see how it made sense to give him away to Detroit. It was the trade deadline - make a contender pay you something for the guy. I remember being happy to just lose him and get younger as a team, but in retrospect, who does that anymore? Even a broken down Mark Streit was worth something at the deadline, and this was Larry Freaking Murphy.
The Johnson and Dahlquist thing was crazy but at least is was a 2-for-1. In retrospect you clearly lose, selling a Murphy and Gartner for Ciccarelli and Rouse, but at the time it would have looked like a prety fair hockey trade.
edit: oops! taglianetti was there too. So this just makes no sense at all. Johnson was a 19-20 minute guy in his prime. Taglianetti 18, and Dahlquist 18. it would make some sense trading any of those three guys one-for-one, but throw in a #1 defenseman for a second #4 guy? nonsense.
the first trade, for Houston and Engblom at least makes some sense. A simple, defensive guy who made the 2nd all-star team 2 years ago, and a tough middle six forward with upside, seems about fair for an offensive #1-2 defenseman. At the time, Engblom was just as heavily used and relied on as Murphy was, just without the PP upside, and was 6 years older.
I never got the hate Toronto had for Murphy. Was it just his contract?
But the trade with Mironov was in 1995. It was when Murphy went from Pittsburgh to Toronto.
I never got the hate Toronto had for Murphy. Was it just his contract?
No, Murphy was not particularly a defensive stalwart. Fans in Washington also heckled him during his first years in the league. As skilled as Murphy was he sure would make some bad looking plays defensively. Once the booing started his play seemed to be more mistake prone.
It wasn't just Toronto where he had distractors. When the Leafs went to Washington the first year with Murphy fans kept blowing a whoop whistle that was given away that night. The Capitals faithful brought them back for the next visit, and a chorus of whoop whistles would follow whenever he touched the puck.
While I think he got too much whipping boy blame in Toronto I still don't see how he gets as much love as he does on these boards. He could be a liability defensively and a costly one at times at that. Wasn't a physical D man, TBH, he may have been better suited for today's game, good passer, skater. His D shortcomings would not be as egregious today.
You know I know this, right?
He was seen as a turnstile. I mean, he was, but so was every Leaf that season. I don't think people cared that much about his contract, it was the wild west back then with no cap.
Good skater? Isn't Murphy exhibit A or B in the list of players who managed to achieve great things despite being poor skaters?
You know I know this, right?
No, Murphy was not particularly a defensive stalwart. Fans in Washington also heckled him during his first years in the league. As skilled as Murphy was he sure would make some bad looking plays defensively. Once the booing started his play seemed to be more mistake prone.
It wasn't just Toronto where he had distractors. When the Leafs went to Washington the first year with Murphy fans kept blowing a whoop whistle that was given away that night. The Capitals faithful brought them back for the next visit, and a chorus of whoop whistles would follow whenever he touched the puck.
While I think he got too much whipping boy blame in Toronto I still don't see how he gets as much love as he does on these boards. He could be a liability defensively and a costly one at times at that. Wasn't a physical D man, TBH, he may have been better suited for today's game, good passer, skater. His D shortcomings would not be as egregious today.
I do remember there being maybe one season (?) where the Caps' fans heckled Murphy a bit, for reasons I'll never understand. (The crazy Leafs' fans did, too, but that's what happens when you haven't won anything since color TV -- you can't recognize a good player). I think you are being way too critical of Murphy's play. a "liability defensively"? Really? There's just no way to justify that.No, Murphy was not particularly a defensive stalwart. Fans in Washington also heckled him during his first years in the league. As skilled as Murphy was he sure would make some bad looking plays defensively. Once the booing started his play seemed to be more mistake prone.
It wasn't just Toronto where he had distractors. When the Leafs went to Washington the first year with Murphy fans kept blowing a whoop whistle that was given away that night. The Capitals faithful brought them back for the next visit, and a chorus of whoop whistles would follow whenever he touched the puck.
While I think he got too much whipping boy blame in Toronto I still don't see how he gets as much love as he does on these boards. He could be a liability defensively and a costly one at times at that. Wasn't a physical D man, TBH, he may have been better suited for today's game, good passer, skater. His D shortcomings would not be as egregious today.
Were the LA Kings so loaded with young defensemen that Murphy became expendable? That to me was the weirdest trade. Teams don't usually trade defensemen who are in their early 20's. Then again, Murphy was traded by Washington in his late 20's.
Other than Zubov, how many other future Hall of Fame defensemen were traded twice in their 20's? There can't be many.
Well, he played for four clubs in 16 years, which isn't that much if you played through the 90s. But his final five seasons, he bounced around a lot.My goodness guy must have kept a packed suit case
The Zubov trades were honestly worse than any Murphy trade. The Rangers and Penguins were known for stupid trades around the mid 90's. No surprise they come up often in these discussions.housley. what do the three of them have in common? all were one or several rungs lower relative to their contemporaries who were already in when they were inducted.
the fourth guy in recent times traded twice by 30? chris pronger, who would never in a million years have been traded from st louis if not for the introduction of the salary cap in 2005.
the one older guy that comes to kind is allan stanley, who is an odd case. late bloomer who really wasn’t on the HOF track until well into his thirties.
That was around the time when teams were obsessed with Russian players. The Russians in Detroit likely had something to do with that. Mironov was especially overrated.I can't see a single way it would make sense to trade Murphy for Dimitri Mironov. I also can't see how it made sense to give him away to Detroit. It was the trade deadline - make a contender pay you something for the guy. I remember being happy to just lose him and get younger as a team, but in retrospect, who does that anymore? Even a broken down Mark Streit was worth something at the deadline, and this was Larry Freaking Murphy.
The Johnson and Dahlquist thing was crazy but at least is was a 2-for-1. In retrospect you clearly lose, selling a Murphy and Gartner for Ciccarelli and Rouse, but at the time it would have looked like a prety fair hockey trade.
edit: oops! taglianetti was there too. So this just makes no sense at all. Johnson was a 19-20 minute guy in his prime. Taglianetti 18, and Dahlquist 18. it would make some sense trading any of those three guys one-for-one, but throw in a #1 defenseman for a second #4 guy? nonsense.
the first trade, for Houston and Engblom at least makes some sense. A simple, defensive guy who made the 2nd all-star team 2 years ago, and a tough middle six forward with upside, seems about fair for an offensive #1-2 defenseman. At the time, Engblom was just as heavily used and relied on as Murphy was, just without the PP upside, and was 6 years older.
That was around the time where teams were obsessed with Russian players. The Russians in Detroit likely had something to do with that. Mironov was especially overrated.