Leading Defensive Centers

[Killion]

No team was going to tie-up a valuable roster place for a one position winger.

Flexibility. Vitally important. I used to wonder why so many players from the early era were listed as C/LW or C/RW or R/C etc. With the smaller rosters & the strategies employed, provided you as the coach were lucky enough to have some skilled right handed shot forwards, youd be wanting to move players around like men on a chessboard depending on who they faced much like todays line-up matches however; consider youve only got one-line for the whole game. Your Left Winger might take the face-off against a Right Hander etc. All kinds of positional shifts & nuances.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Much has been made about no lineage to his developmental career.

No, not really. That was a digression from the topic of discussion and was really not relevant.

What is being overlooked is that Billy Bell played in the NHL when game rosters comprised 8-10 players. The regular starting centers for the 3 or 4 NHL teams were all HHOF quality. The supporting cast forwards had solid backgrounds as centers because a strong defensive center could play any forward position for the amount of time required. No team was going to tie-up a valuable roster place for a one position winger.

As a sub, it is very likely that Bell played more than just a single position. Some of the top-tier subs as discussed above may have played exclusively one position (for instance when Montreal used Jack McDonald and Louis Berlinguette at LW), but most of the second-tier subs probably played whatever position was needed.

But then look at the 23/24 Canadiens, Bell's last team. Their starters were Morenz, Joliat and Billy Boucher. This was Morenz's rookie season, and he was being broken in, evidenced by his point totals being significantly lower than Joliat's or Boucher's. Thus we have Odie Cleghorn as the leading sub, the only forward sub who had significant ice time (6 points in 22 games to Morenz's 16 in 24); ie, a first-tier sub as I described above. The rest of the forward subs were second-tier, combining for 50 games played, zero points and one minor penalty.

The team used 3 forward subs per game. They already had two players sharing centre. One of the other subs was Joe Malone. Another was Bobby Boucher, whose position is usually listed as centre. There just wasn't any room for Bell to be playing at centre as well. It seems most likely that Malone and Billy Cameron (the only two LHS subs) primarily subbed Joliat, while Bell and Bobby Boucher primarily subbed Billy Boucher. Each of these subs only played a partial season with the Habs.

And it's quite likely that wing subs in the NHL at the time played centre in senior leagues, since generally speaking the best players will play centre (as I indicated in the other thread). But the topic in this thread is leading NHL defensive centres. Having played centre at some point in the past does not make you a centre in the NHL, and occasionally playing it as a sub (while mostly playing wing) also does not make you a centre in the NHL.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Flexibility. Vitally important. I used to wonder why so many players from the early era were listed as C/LW or C/RW or R/C etc. With the smaller rosters & the strategies employed, provided you as the coach were lucky enough to have some skilled right handed shot forwards, youd be wanting to move players around like men on a chessboard depending on who they faced much like todays line-up matches however; consider youve only got one-line for the whole game. Your Left Winger might take the face-off against a Right Hander etc. All kinds of positional shifts & nuances.

This is not necessarily the case. At least part of the reason so many players are listed with multiple positions is that there were only three starting forward positions available on any one team. If you acquired a very good player (say Joe Malone) who played centre on his previous team, and you already had a very good centre yourself (say Newsy Lalonde), in order to get the new centre into the lineup you need to shift somebody around.

It's not the same situation today where the new centre could play on the second line. In the above example the new players in his prime would be wasted as a sub, so you want to find a place for him to play.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Billy Bell was a referee in pro and amateur circles including the NHL until his death.

He was one of the referees - along with Jerry Laflamme - involved in the game that earned Billy Coutu his lifetime suspension from the NHL.

Incidentally, Dr. Jerry Laflamme was an excellent defensive centre himself in the OHA, at the same time as Bell's playing career. He later moved to the blueline.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Not How It Works or Worked

This is not necessarily the case. At least part of the reason so many players are listed with multiple positions is that there were only three starting forward positions available on any one team. If you acquired a very good player (say Joe Malone) who played centre on his previous team, and you already had a very good centre yourself (say Newsy Lalonde), in order to get the new centre into the lineup you need to shift somebody around.

It's not the same situation today where the new centre could play on the second line. In the above example the new players in his prime would be wasted as a sub, so you want to find a place for him to play.

Not how it worked or works today.Acquisitions are dictated by leaving or lost player assets. Before the acquisition not after, the new team knew what their starting line-up(s) would be, who would play where as dictated by opponents, circumstances and the unforeseen - injuries.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The Details

No, not really. That was a digression from the topic of discussion and was really not relevant.


As a sub, it is very likely that Bell played more than just a single position. Some of the top-tier subs as discussed above may have played exclusively one position (for instance when Montreal used Jack McDonald and Louis Berlinguette at LW), but most of the second-tier subs probably played whatever position was needed.

But then look at the 23/24 Canadiens, Bell's last team. Their starters were Morenz, Joliat and Billy Boucher. This was Morenz's rookie season, and he was being broken in, evidenced by his point totals being significantly lower than Joliat's or Boucher's. Thus we have Odie Cleghorn as the leading sub, the only forward sub who had significant ice time (6 points in 22 games to Morenz's 16 in 24); ie, a first-tier sub as I described above. The rest of the forward subs were second-tier, combining for 50 games played, zero points and one minor penalty.

The team used 3 forward subs per game. They already had two players sharing centre. One of the other subs was Joe Malone. Another was Bobby Boucher, whose position is usually listed as centre. There just wasn't any room for Bell to be playing at centre as well. It seems most likely that Malone and Billy Cameron (the only two LHS subs) primarily subbed Joliat, while Bell and Bobby Boucher primarily subbed Billy Boucher. Each of these subs only played a partial season with the Habs.

And it's quite likely that wing subs in the NHL at the time played centre in senior leagues, since generally speaking the best players will play centre (as I indicated in the other thread). But the topic in this thread is leading NHL defensive centres. Having played centre at some point in the past does not make you a centre in the NHL, and occasionally playing it as a sub (while mostly playing wing) also does not make you a centre in the NHL.

The 1923-24 season details. Morenz was a rookie. Odie Cleghorn was 32 and had reduced ice time. Joe Malone did not make it to the playoffs. Bobby Boucher, Billy Cameron, Billy Bell. Bobby Boucher was the forward prospect on the team - 19 years old, never played another game in the NHL, died in 1931, while Sylvio Mantha was the defensive prospect.Billy Cameron was a 27 year old NHL rookie who re-surfaced in the NHL about five seasons latter. LHS compliment to Bell a RHS without the NHL experience.

In the final SC game against Calgary - a shutout, Morenz was hurt in the second period leaving the game.

Previously you made a comment about the value of subs not doing anything "stupid".

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/bellbi01.html

Notice Billy Bell's penalty totals from his NHA days vs his NHL career.Combined with his other attributes the type of player a coach would want.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Not how it worked or works today.Acquisitions are dictated by leaving or lost player assets. Before the acquisition not after, the new team knew what their starting line-up(s) would be, who would play where as dictated by opponents, circumstances and the unforeseen - injuries.

Obviously. I did not mean to imply that such decisions were made after the player acquisition. Clearly such considerations were part of the decision.

However, the essential point of my post remains unchanged: that in today's game you have the option of putting the new centre on the second line, whereas in Bell's say there was no such option, since there weren't any lines.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

The 1923-24 season details. Morenz was a rookie. Odie Cleghorn was 32 and had reduced ice time. Joe Malone did not make it to the playoffs. Bobby Boucher, Billy Cameron, Billy Bell. Bobby Boucher was the forward prospect on the team - 19 years old, never played another game in the NHL, died in 1931, while Sylvio Mantha was the defensive prospect.Billy Cameron was a 27 year old NHL rookie who re-surfaced in the NHL about five seasons latter. LHS compliment to Bell a RHS without the NHL experience.

Okay. None of this rebuts anything I said, which involved who played how much rather than why. Your point?

Previously you made a comment about the value of subs not doing anything "stupid".

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/bellbi01.html

Notice Billy Bell's penalty totals from his NHA days vs his NHL career.Combined with his other attributes the type of player a coach would want.

I had noticed this. You can intepret it as him doing less stupid things in the NHL, or you can interpret it as evidence of seriously reduced ice time in the NHL. Probably a bit of both.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Stupid Things

Okay. None of this rebuts anything I said, which involved who played how much rather than why. Your point?


I had noticed this. You can intepret it as him doing less stupid things in the NHL, or you can interpret it as evidence of seriously reduced ice time in the NHL. Probably a bit of both.

Not a rebuttal just a statement of fact with the added irony that the roster was ideally structured to cover for injury as happened with Morenz in the last SCF game against Calgary in 1924.

Having coached into the midget level undisciplined players do not require time to do stupid things. They manage quite well with minimal time. Years ago they would be moved very quickly unless their talent was at the Eddie Shore level, even Sprague Cleghorn types wore out their welcome fairly quickly.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Having coached into the midget level undisciplined players do not require time to do stupid things. They manage quite well with minimal time. Years ago they would be moved very quickly unless their talent was at the Eddie Shore level, even Sprague Cleghorn types wore out their welcome fairly quickly.

Nonsense. Billy Coutu played 11 years in the NHL, mostly with one team, before being banned for life for assaulting Bell and Laflamme. Sprague Cleghorn played 16 years in the NHA and NHL, including six consecutive for the Wanderers. Bert Corbeau played 13 years in the NHA/NHL, the first 8 for a single team. Cully Wilson played 15 season of major-league hockey, including several significant stint with several teams. Then there's Joe Hall, of course.

You didn't need to be Eddie Shore or Newsy Lalonde to get away with that kind of stuff. It was pretty ubiquitous.