Mikita vs Dionne

[Neutrinos]

Hart voting record, scoring finishes, all-star teams, etc.

All of that is used to determine who had the better career, but it's quite irrelevant in a discussion about who was the better player

What qualities did each player bring to the ice every game that would put them ahead of the other?

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Hart voting record, scoring finishes, all-star teams, etc.

All of that is used to determine who had the better career, but it's quite irrelevant in a discussion about who was the better player

What qualities did each player bring to the ice every game that would put them ahead of the other?

But being a better player results in winning those awards...

 

[pappyline]

Two more points:

In the 60s, Mikita and Hull had the advantage of seeing more ice time than stars on other teams, on a team that was more offensive minded than other teams. Similar to Jagr, Anaheim Selanne/Kariya, or Florida Bure during the dead puck era. Not saying Mikita was as weak defensively as those guys; just that his offensive stats due need to be taken in that context. All that said, even after context, I take his regular season offense alone over Dionne, and regular season offense is all Dionne really has.

Crosby was has widely been considered the best player of his generation. Mikita was 3rd or 4th.

As someone who was watching hockey in the 60's I disagree with your ice time premise. Every team in the league ran 3 lines in the 60's. Any extra ice time Hull & Mikita got was to kill penalties which hardly added to their offense numbers.

 

[Canadiens1958]

As someone who was watching hockey in the 60's I disagree with your ice time premise. Every team in the league ran 3 lines in the 60's. Any extra ice time Hull & Mikita got was to kill penalties which hardly added to their offense numbers.

Montreal and Toronto ran 4 lines.

 

[pappyline]

Montreal and Toronto ran 4 lines.

Nope. They ran 3 like everyone else. Montreal did have PK specialists which meant that their stars never had to kill penalties and could focus on offense.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Below Orr, Esposito and Clarke for sure. Equal to Lafleur for 4th/5th.


I like Robinson, Potvin alot. Park too but those guys all fall squarely in the 'what do you need' category when comparing them to game breaking centers/wingers with the exception of Orr. Potvin and Robinson were probably as valuable as Esposito and Clarke to their teams but for pure game breaking ability they didn't do it as often as Dionne.

robinson vs dionne is a legit argument, though i think most will side with robinson.

but i strongly disagree that you can possibly argue potvin vs dionne. among non-generational players, he is flawless. even on just pure ability to generate offense, 70s potvin hangs with dionne in rs scoring and murders him in the playoffs. if you want to talk about little help from his teammates, look at potvin's first two playoffs.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Nope. They ran 3 like everyone else. Montreal did have PK specialists which meant that their stars never had to kill penalties and could focus on offense.

Montreal
Four centers - Beliveau, H.Richard, Backstrom, Goyette,

Four RW - from amongst Geoffrion, Provost, Rousseau,Hicke, later Larose, Cournoyer,

Four LW- from amongst Gilles Tremblay, Bonin, Moore, Gendron/Pronovost.

Marshall played all three forward positions.You had swing men like Turner, Talbot and Roberts. Two position wingers -B0nin and Provost.

1960-61 Montreal Canadiens Roster and Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Leafs also. Loaded with centers and multi-position forwards, swingmen.

1960-61 Toronto Maple Leafs Roster and Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Used 1960-61 to illustrate but applicable to all seasons.

 

[Neutrinos]

But being a better player results in winning those awards...

That's simply not true when they're from different eras

There are also other factors that go into voting, ie. linemates, injuries, team success, etc.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

That's simply not true when they're from different eras

There are also other factors that go into voting, ie. linemates, injuries, etc.

Then how else do you want to evaluate players? Eye test?

 

[Michael Farkas]

That's a good start for those who are qualified, absolutely.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Then how else do you want to evaluate players? Eye test?

Never underestimate the eye-test. The fact is, EVERYTHING needs to go into the blender when you rank players: goals, assists, linemates, clutch goals, defensive abilities, offensive abilities, era, hardware won, consistency, peak years, etc. etc. etc.

For the record, I have Mikita considerably ahead of Dionne in my top 120 players of all time list.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Montreal and Toronto ran 4 lines.

I didnt' think there were enough players on the playing rosters in the 60's and most of the 70's to run four lines. You had three lines and one or two extra guys (depending on whether you went with an extra defenseman or extra forward).

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Never underestimate the eye-test. The fact is, EVERYTHING needs to go into the blender when you rank players: goals, assists, linemates, clutch goals, defensive abilities, offensive abilities, era, hardware won, consistency, peak years, etc. etc. etc.

For the record, I have Mikita considerably ahead of Dionne in my top 120 players of all time list.

The eye test is important. That's why historical awards voting, especially from the Original 6 era, is a valuable resource, since the awards voters watched these guys play.

 

[streitz]

look at potvin's first two playoffs.

Both those islander rosters were substantially better then anything Dionne had to work with on the kings.



Frankly it's a moot point for me. I consider Potvin the 3rd or 4th best defenceman of all time. Was he more valuable then Dionne? Probably but like I said I'm higher on Dionne then most people.



This thread isn't about Potvin though, it's about Dionne vs Mikita and there I'd take Dionne.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Then how else do you want to evaluate players? Eye test?

Some players are much better at winning individual awards and skill tests than others.

The others may be much better at integrating a team and contributing to team success.

Key is differentiating between the two and evaluating accordingly.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I didnt' think there were enough players on the playing rosters in the 60's and most of the 70's to run four lines. You had three lines and one or two extra guys (depending on whether you went with an extra defenseman or extra forward).

Era featured 17 skaters plus goalies, then 18 skaters plus goalies.

Teams rolling 2 defence pairings had 13 the 14 skaters, more than enough for four lines especially if the roster featured players with positional diversity.

 

[tony d]

Both were good but this is Mikita.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Some players are much better at winning individual awards and skill tests than others.

The others may be much better at integrating a team and contributing to team success.

Key is differentiating between the two and evaluating accordingly.

So essentially a claude Lemieux vs a joe Thornton?

 

[pappyline]

Era featured 17 skaters plus goalies, then 18 skaters plus goalies.

Teams rolling 2 defence pairings had 13 the 14 skaters, more than enough for four lines especially if the roster featured players with positional diversity.

I think it was 16 skaters. All teams rolled 3 forward lines and 2 defense pairings.Usually they had 2 spare forwards and 1 spare defenseman. I used to have a link to roster limits over the years but can't find it. Can someone provide a link?

I will address your post on 60-61 Montreal & Toronto rosters in more detail when I have some time.I remember that season well. I will say this though-There is no way that Beliveau & H. Richard were only out there every 4th shift.

 

[DannyGallivan]

think it was 16 skaters. All teams rolled 3 forward lines and 2 defense pairings.Usually they had 2 spare forwards and 1 spare defenseman. I used to have a link to roster limits over the years but can't find it. Can someone provide a link?

That's what I was led to believe. Phil Esposito stated that he always played on a three line team, and Bobby Hull had five minute shifts (and reportedly an eight minute shift at least once) in his career.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I think it was 16 skaters. All teams rolled 3 forward lines and 2 defense pairings.Usually they had 2 spare forwards and 1 spare defenseman. I used to have a link to roster limits over the years but can't find it. Can someone provide a link?

I will address your post on 60-61 Montreal & Toronto rosters in more detail when I have some time.I remember that season well. I will say this though-There is no way that Beliveau & H. Richard were only out there every 4th shift.

Shifts would run up to 2 minutes at times a bit longer but not all lines played equal shifts all the time.

 

[57special]

Great question. I will bet that Makita will win out because his team had far more visibility, won a Cup, etc., and the KIngs had next to zero visibility.

Very, very close.

 

[pappyline]

Montreal
Four centers - Beliveau, H.Richard, Backstrom, Goyette,

Four RW - from amongst Geoffrion, Provost, Rousseau,Hicke, later Larose, Cournoyer,

Four LW- from amongst Gilles Tremblay, Bonin, Moore, Gendron/Pronovost.

Marshall played all three forward positions.You had swing men like Turner, Talbot and Roberts. Two position wingers -B0nin and Provost.

1960-61 Montreal Canadiens Roster and Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Leafs also. Loaded with centers and multi-position forwards, swingmen.

1960-61 Toronto Maple Leafs Roster and Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Used 1960-61 to illustrate but applicable to all seasons.

Focusing on 1960-61. As deep as these 2 teams were (esp Montreal) they still ran 3 forward lines. I am only including players that played a significant number of games.

Toronto:

Mahovlich Kelly Nevin
Duff Keon Armstrong
Olmstead Pulford Stewart

Spares were Harris & Shack who filled in for injuries etc. and to occasionally stir the pot.Harris would have filled in for Pulford when he was injured and Shack would have spelled off Olmstead a bit.

Montreal

Bonin Beliveau Geoffrion
Moore Richard Hicke
G.Tremblay Backstrom Provost

spares were Gendron, Marshall & Goyette

I think Marshall filled in for Moore when he was injured. Goyette used to be the third line centre but Backstrom took over his spot. Goyette dressed for 61 games but his numbers really dropped off from 59-60.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Focusing on 1960-61. As deep as these 2 teams were (esp Montreal) they still ran 3 forward lines. I am only including players that played a significant number of games.

Toronto:

Mahovlich Kelly Nevin
Duff Keon Armstrong
Olmstead Pulford Stewart

Spares were Harris & Shack who filled in for injuries etc. and to occasionally stir the pot.Harris would have filled in for Pulford when he was injured and Shack would have spelled off Olmstead a bit.

Montreal

Bonin Beliveau Geoffrion
Moore Richard Hicke
G.Tremblay Backstrom Provost

spares were Gendron, Marshall & Goyette

I think Marshall filled in for Moore when he was injured. Goyette used to be the third line centre but Backstrom took over his spot. Goyette dressed for 61 games but his numbers really dropped off from 59-60.

To get credit for a game played a player had to have one second of running time on the ice. Dressed but no ice time = no game played

Spares created the 4th line, plus you had Bob Turner left over.

Check the playoffs for an easier overview.

Leafs. You overlooked MacMillan and Regan who combined for 68 games.

 

[The Panther]

Not saying Mikita was as weak defensively as those guys; just that his offensive stats due need to be taken in that context.

It might be worth noting here that Mikita had the best plus/minus (i.e., 5-on-5 results) of any player in the 60s.

I dunno, I mean: 4 Art Rosses (vs. 1 Dionne), 6 First-team All Star (vs. 2 for Dionne), 2 Hart trophies (vs. none for Dionne), better playoff stats than Dionne's (despite Mikita's playing in a less offensive era), and Mikita was the most dominant 5-on-5 player of his era.