Round 2, Vote 2 (HOH Top Wingers)

[Hawkey Town 18]

IMPORTANT NOTE: Post 2 of every voting thread will contain instructions as to who to send your votes to. If you send your votes to the wrong person, we can't guarantee that they will be counted.

MOD: This is a strictly on-topic thread. Posts that don't focus on the wingers listed in Post 2 will be deleted or moved at the discretion of the moderators. This will be strictly enforced in every Round 2 voting thread, regardless of who the OP is - TDMM

Before we begin, just a recap on how Round 2 will operate:

Round 2

• The top 8-12 ranked players from the aggregate list will be posted in a thread
• Players will be listed in alphabetical order to avoid creating bias
• Player merits and rankings will be open for discussion and debate for a period of at least five (5) days. Administrators may extend the discussion period if it remains active
• Final voting will occur for two (2) days, via PM. Everyone ranks their top 8 players.
• Top 4 players will be added to the list
• Final results will be posted and the process repeated for the next 4 places with remaining players until a list of 60 wingers is obtained
• If there are major breaks in the Round 2 voting totals, we may add more or less than the targeted 4 players in certain rounds
• The number of players available for discussion at once will increase from 8 as we move down the list, based on natural breaks in the aggregate list put together in Round 1

These might be tweaked to allow longer or shorter debating periods depending on how the process moves along.

Additionally, there are a couple guidelines we'd ask that everyone agree to abide by:

• Please try to stay on-topic in the thread
• Please remember that this is a debate on opinions and there is no right or wrong. Please try to avoid words like "stupid" "dumb" "wrong" "sophistry" etc. when debating.
• Please treat other debaters with respect
• Please don't be a wallflower. All eligible voters are VERY HIGHLY encouraged to be active participants in the debate.
• Please maintain an open mind. The purpose of the debate is to convince others that your views are more valid. If nobody is willing to accept their opinions as flexible there really is no point in debating.

Eliglible Voters (23):
Andros , Art of Sedinery , BillyShoe1721 , Dennis Bonvie , Hawkey Town 18 , intylerwetrust , kmad , MadArcand , reckoning , Rob Scuderi , ted1971 , TheDevilMadeMe , the edler , tony d , Ursaguy , bigbuffalo313 , Canadiens1958 , Darth Yoda , Hardyvan123 , MXD , tarheelhockey , unknown33 , seventieslord , Johnny Engine

All posters are encouraged to participate in the debates and discussions, but only those listed above will be eligible for the final votes.

Click to read more...

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Vote 2 will begin now and debates are scheduled to run through Wednesday Oct 1 at 9 PM EST. You may PM votes to Hawkey Town 18 starting on Tuesday, Sep 30.

We will be sending out confirmations when we receive ballots from the voters. Any voter who does not get a confirmation within 24 hours of submitting a ballot should assume we never received it and should resubmit it and post in this thread saying they did so.

Vote 2 will be for places 5 through 8 (4 places) on the Top 60 list.

There are 9 eligible candidates for Vote 1. You will still only rank your Top 8 when voting.

Here are the candidates, listed alphabetically:

Mike Bossy
Charlie Conacher
Bill Cook
Valeri Kharlamov
Guy Lafleur
Ted Lindsay
Frank Mahovlich
Sergei Makarov
Alexander Ovechkin

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Preliminary thoughts:

Going into this round, I see a pretty clear divide between the top 10 wingers of all time and the next group. My top 10? The 9 who were all available last time plus Alexander Ovechkin.

I think Bill Cook, Sergei Makarov, and Guy Lafleur all have cases for #5 overall, and I think it's very likely they'll go 1-3 on my list in some order.

My next tier comprises of Bossy, Lindsay, and Ovechkin. Of those 3, Ovechkin has a huge advantage in Hart recognition, but the other two were significant contributors to dynasties on top of their strong regular season stats. Note it isn't just that they played for dynasties, they were significant contributers. These 3 are likely to go 4-6 on my list in some order.

Frank Mahovlich is an "easy last" this round for me. Not convinced he was any better than fellow left wings Dickie Moore or Cy Denneny, among others.
____________________________________

This round, I plan on focusing on the case for Bill Cook, comparing Sergei Makarov with Valeri Kharlamov, and comparing Alexander Ovechkin to the other short prime players available this round (Lafleur, Kharlamov, Conacher). I was thinking I would make the general case for Sergei Makarov, but it sure doesn't look like I have to.

Will also post some on Guy Lafleur if nobody else does it.

 

[unknown33]

Right now the 5 players that didn't make it last round are in the running for Top 4 for me:
Guy Lafleur
Sergei Makarov
Bill Cook
Mike Bossy/Ted Lindsay

Out of the new guys I rate Ovechkin the highest initially.

Preliminary thoughts:

Going into this round, I see a pretty clear divide between the top 10 wingers of all time and the next group. My top 10? The 9 who were all available last time plus Alexander Ovechkin.

^that

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'm not going to post the disclaimers every round.

Top 5 and Top 10 NHL point scoring finishes 1926-27 to 2013-14

PLAYER | TOP 5- | TOP 10 | TOTAL
Gordie Howe | 20 | 21 | 41
Maurice Richard | 9 | 11 | 20
Bobby Hull | 8 | 11 | 19
Jaromir Jagr | 8 | 11 | 19
Andy Bathgate | 9 | 9 | 18
Ted Lindsay | 6 | 8 | 14
Mike Bossy | 6 | 8 | 14
Guy Lafleur | 6 | 6 | 12
Bill Cook** | 5 | 7 | 12
Alex Ovechkin | 5 | 7 | 12
Teemu Selanne | 4 | 7 | 11
Charlie Conacher | 5 | 5 | 10
Doug Bentley | 4 | 6 | 10
Bernie Geoffrion | 3 | 7 | 10
Frank Mahovlich | 3 | 7 | 10
Busher Jackson | 4 | 5 | 9
Martin St. Louis | 4 | 5 | 9
Sweeney Schriner | 3 | 6 | 9

NHL Top 5/10 GOAL scoring finishes 1926-27 to 2013-14

Since in modern times, the primary job of a winger is often to score goals, and because goals have been statistically more valuable than assists since the 1940s, I thought it might be useful to make a table only focusing on goal scoring.

PLAYER | TOP 5- | TOP 10 | TOTAL
Gordie Howe | 14 | 19 | 33
Maurice Richard | 12 | 13 | 25
Bobby Hull | 12 | 13 | 25
Mike Bossy | 8 | 9 | 17
Alex Ovechkin | 8 | 8 | 16
Ted Lindsay | 5 | 10 | 15
Roy Conacher | 6 | 8 | 14
Bernie Geoffrion | 6 | 8 | 14
Frank Mahovlich | 6 | 8 | 14
Jaromir Jagr | 6 | 8 | 14
Bill Cook** | 5 | 8 | 13
Brett Hull | 4 | 8 | 12
Ilya Kovalchuk | 4 | 8 | 12
Bryan Hextall, Sr | 5 | 6 | 11
Gordie Drillon | 5 | 6 | 11
Guy Lafleur | 5 | 6 | 11
Teemu Selanne | 5 | 6 | 11
Luc Robitaille | 2 | 9 | 11
Charlie Conacher | 5 | 5 | 10
Pavel Bure | 5 | 5 | 10
Busher Jackson | 4 | 6 | 10
Michel Goulet | 4 | 6 | 10
John LeClair | 4 | 6 | 10
Peter Bondra | 4 | 6 | 10
Andy Bathgate | 3 | 7 | 10

Seven year weighted Vs. X score - 1927 to 2014

Basically a measure of a player's best 7 regular seasons from a point scoring perspective, compared to a typical #2 scorer. The 2nd number for some players is the war year adjustment.

Rank|Player|Score
1 | Gordie Howe | 126
2 | Jaromir Jagr | 114.6
3 | Bobby Hull | 107.1
4 | Maurice Richard | 105.7/102.5
5 | Guy Lafleur | 104.9
6 | Ted Lindsay | 104.8
7 | Andy Bathgate | 101.2
8 | Alex Ovechkin | 97.5
9 | Charlie Conacher | 97.1
10 | Bill Cook** | 96.6
11 | Doug Bentley | 96.2/87.2
12 | Mike Bossy | 94.4
13 | Teemu Selanne | 92.9
14 | Martin St. Louis | 92.9
15 | Toe Blake | 92.6/85.3
16 | Sweeney Schriner | 91.9
17 | Bernie Geoffrion | 90.2
18 | Busher Jackson | 90
19 | Roy Conacher | 88.8/85.4
20 | Mark Recchi | 88.6
21 | Brett Hull | 88.2
22 | Jari Kurri | 88.1
23 | Gordie Drillon | 88.1
24 | Syd Howe | 87.9/84.3
25 | Jarome Iginla | 87
26 | Dickie Moore | 86
27 | Pavel Bure | 86
28 | Frank Mahovlich | 85.5
29 | Paul Kariya | 85.4
30 | John Bucyk | 85.3

Top 5 in Hart voting 1923-24 to 2013-14

For a couple of years in 1930s, we only have top 3 or 4, but for the most part, this is complete.

Player|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|Total
Gordie Howe | 6 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 16
Bobby Hull | 2 | 2 | 4| 0 | 1 | 9
Jaromir Jagr | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 |0 | 7
Guy Lafleur | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6
Maurice Richard | 1 | 2 | 3 |0 | 0 | 6
Alexander Ovechkin | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4
Andy Bathgate | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4
Brett Hull | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3
Aurele Joliat| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2| 3
Jarome Iginla | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3
Doug Bentley | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3
Markus Naslund | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3
Syd Howe | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3
Teemu Selanne | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3
Martin St. Louis | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2
Bill Cook** | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2
Charlie Conacher | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2
Mike Bossy | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2
Ted Lindsay | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
Frank Mahovlich | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2

**Cook had 3 peak seasons in the WCHL before coming to the NHL

 

[MXD]

Conacher should be an afterthought, and hopefully we get a big gap between Kharlamov and Makarov.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Bill Cook - Skill Set and Anecdotes

Many of these quotes were collected from other posters on hfboards (BM67, Dreakmur, Nalyd Psycho)

Cook was a power forward, captain of 2 Cup winners, and should probably be credited with the equivalent of 3-4 Art Rosses.

General quotes on skill set

A burly right winger with the desire of Rocket Richard and the physical prowess of Gordie Howe…played a very similar style to that of Gordie Howe - a hard and physically dominating style, overpowering his opponents, going through them instead of around them. But like Gordie he had some great skills as well, especially his nose for the net.

He had it all - he was an intelligent hockeyist, charismatic, and a physical force. If he were around for us to see play today we would be in awe of his uncanny stickhandling skills, his "hard and fast" skating, and his fantastic shooting ability. And if you were an opponent of him you surely wouldn't want to get on his bad side for his temper and mean streak were among the most volatile of his era.

“He was a remarkable blend of brains, beauty and brawn. He was an outstanding stick-handler, a hard and fast skater, and had an incredible shot. He was a huge physical presence with a mean streak.”

Right wing on the team would be filled by the far-famed Bill Cook, who knows all that’s needed about the game, can adapt himself to a clean or rough game as occasion may call for and is an exponent of combination play at all times.

Lester Patrick on Bill Cook's Leadership

Legendary coach Lester Patrick, while still with the Rangers, was asked his philosophy "on the handling of hockey games and hockey players." He was not asked about Bill Cook, but immediately brought him up.

It's very simple. I look for the leaders. Then I let them lead. I give my last instructions in the dressing room right before the game, the I sit and let them think about whatever they like. I see some of the players just sitting there placidly, thinking about nothing much and worrying about less. Then I look to the bench and see Bill Cook. A great player. An outstanding player. He's already made his mark and has nothing to worry about.

But is he at ease? Not on your life. He sits there rubbing his thighs and rocking back and forth on the bench, a bundle of nerves just aching to get at it and break the tension.

The placid player can be depended on for a safe, steady game, but for the kind of inspired hockey needed to win championships, I need the Bill Cooks. The other players, when it comes right down to the crunch, will follow the Bill Cooks. Then I just tag along and I enjoy it.

The Patrick's, Hockey's Royal Family, pg 180-181

Toughness and Physical Play

Nobody fooled around with Bill because he was tough - real tough...Bill was the best (right winger) we ever played against

Note that Primeau played with Charlie Conacher, so this wasn't an attempt to compare the two.

When I was a player, I believed in being uncivil

The Milwaukee Journal - Google News Archive Search

Newsy Lalonde selected Bill Cook as one of two RWs on his "All-Time Meanest-Toughest Team:"

Bill Cook, Ranger ex-great and Hall of Famer, has the right wing spot on Newsy's second-stringers "because of what I saw him dish out during the three years I played with him in Saskatoon."

Ottawa Citizen - Google News Archive Search

In 1958, the six NHL general managers "the six NHL general managers were asked to name the toughest player they ever saw and the toughest men playing at that time..." One of them named Bill Cook as the toughest he ever saw. Source = Blood on Ice by Ira Gitler

Cook was known for having an amazing backhand shot (in addition to his forehand shot)

“He's my choice for the best right winger hockey ever knew. He was better than The Rocket and, in my estimation, better than Gordie Howe as well……he had a very hard wrist shot from close in and could score equally well backhand or forehand"

I'm providing the above quote not for Boucher's ridiculously biased assessment of his former linemate's place on an all-time list, but for the description of the skill set.

One of his pet tricks was to fake a shot on one side of the net, but hold the puck and go right across the mouth of the goal and then let fly with that backhand into the other corner. I used to pretend that I had fallen for that fake and then crowd the near side of the net. But before the puck had left Bill's stick on his favorite backhand shot, I'd have swung over to the other side and was ready for it.

All-Time Teams

He (Aurele Joliat) picked an all star team (at the request of W.A. Howard, a writer for Canadian National Magazine) confined to players who played against him during his 16 years as a professional. He puts Benedict or Gardiner in goal; Shore and Noble on defense; Nighbor at centre; with Cook and Jackson on the wings. It's a well balanced unit.

Boucher tapped for his all-time, all-star team goalie Chuck Gardiner of the Chicago Black Hawks, defensemen Eddie Shore of the Boston Bruins and Ching Johnson of the Rangers, center Frank Nighbor of Ottawa, left winger Aurel Joliat of the Montreal Canadiens and right winger Bill Cook.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Bill Cook regular season stats (mainly a repost from last round with a few edits)

Should we take his age 24 and 25 years in the amateur NHML and NOHA seriously? I'm guessing we shouldn't because his first professional season in the WCHL wasn't all that impressive.

WCHL career (ages 26-29)

1923 (age 26): 8th in WCHL scoring when probably about 1/4 of the overall North American talent was in the WCHL. Good, not great. This was Bill Cook's first professional season.

1924 (age 27): led the WCHL in goals, assists, and points. The WCHL had surpassed the PCHA by this point - the two leagues played an interlocking schedule and Cook led the combined leagues in scoring. The NHL still had about half the talent, however (maybe slightly less). Cook led his league in scoring 40-34 (by 18%), the widest margin of any of the leaders. A decent chance of being the Art Ross winner in a consolidated league.

1925 (age 28): Missed 3 games and finished 1 point behind the two players who tied for the scoring championship. 3rd in points and goals, 5th in assists.

1926 (age 29): led the WCHL (now called WHL) in points and goals by very large margins (6th in assists). More likely than not, the Art Ross winner in a consolidated league. (Note: Some sources apparently have Art Gagne finishing 1st with a ridiculous outlier year for him. Others don't).

After 1926, the WHL folded and the best players joined the NHL. Led by Bill Cook former WHL players were all over the NHL scoring boards. 3 of the top 4, 6 of the top 10, and 11 of the top 20 NHL scorers in 1927 had spent the previous year in the WHL.

Overall Points: 8th (1923), 1st (1924), 3rd (1925), 1st (1926)
Overall Goals: 1st (1924), 3rd (1925), 1st (1926)
Overall Assists: 1st (1924), 5th (1925), 6th (1926)

NHL career(ages 30-40)

Points: 1st (1927), 10th (1928), 7th (1929), 4th (1930), 4th (1931), 4th (1932), 1st (1933)

Goals: 1st (1927), 10th (1928), 6th (1929), 6th (1930), 2nd (1931), 1st (1932), 1st (1933), 5th (1935)

Assists: 8th (1929), 3rd (1930), 6th (1933)

 

[MXD]

Somebody -- I think it was Hockey Outsider -- once made a lengthy and detailed comparison between Cook and Conacher. Anybody can find this ? (Tough to do on cell phone).

 

[unknown33]

Somebody -- I think it was Hockey Outsider -- once made a lengthy and detailed comparison between Cook and Conacher. Anybody can find this ? (Tough to do on cell phone).

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=13898630&postcount=13

 

[Hardyvan123]

The thing with Lafleur is that he has a great 6 year consecutive peak, both in the playoffs and regular season to be in this round, outside of that peak, the rest of his career is barely in the top 60 of all time for wingers and even that might be a stretch.

He and Makarov, along with AO probably have the highest contextual peak this round but at some point we really should consider entire careers as well.

AO and Makarov are my front runners for 5th after that it gets a bit murky, will post both the strengths and weaknesses for all players alter this round as I see it.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Conacher should be an afterthought, and hopefully we get a big gap between Kharlamov and Makarov.

Really? I had him a handful of spots ahead of Mahovlich.

I feel like Lafleur/Boosy/Cook/Makarov will be the front runners for the top 4 spots, with Ovechkin my next guy with a chance to break that group.

Lindsay/Concaher/Varlamov/Mahovlich will battles it out for the next round.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Bill Cook's playoff stats

If anyone has stats for his WCHL years, please post or PM me.

WARNING, NOT TOO MUCH SHOULD BE TAKEN FROM SMALL SAMPLE SIZES

Cook's NHL playoff career needs to be divided into 3 stages - pre-forward pass, post-forward pass prime years, and post-prime years. An overall look at his playoff stats will underrate him - he spent a large portion of his prime playoffs before the forward pass was allowed in the offensive zone and overall scoring was incredibly low. While he was past his regular season prime (no longer a top 10 scorer) in the mid 30s when overall playoff scoring was increasing.

Pre forward pass. Top playoff scorers (1927-1929)

player|GP|G|A|P
Frank Boucher|17|8|3|11
Harry Oliver|15|7|3|10
Percy Galbraith|15|3|4|7
Bill Cook|17|3|3|6
Cy Denneny|10|5|0|5
Frank Fredrickson|10|2|3|5
Bun Cook|17|3|1|4
Frank Finnigan|8|3|1|4
George Hay|4|2|2|4
Eddie Shore|15|2|2|4
Hooley Smith|15|1|3|4
Nels Stewart|11|2|2|4

Frank Boucher and Harry Oliver killed it during this time (and notice that "killing it" was still well under a point per game). Cook was part of the pack.

The Rangers won the 1928 Stanley Cup.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Prime years post forward pass. Top Player scores (1930-1933)

1932-1933 was Bill Cook's last season as a top 10 scorer and his points in the regular season fell off sharply afterwards. So it's a case where we have a pretty clear indication of when a player's statistical prime ends.

player|GP|G|A|P
Frank Boucher|22|6|11|17
Bill Cook|23|9|6|15
Cooney Weiland|11|7|8|15
Murray Murdoch|23|6|8|14
Cecil Dillon|19|10|4|14
Bun Cook|23|10|2|12
Howie Morenz|22|5|7|12
Johnny Gagnon|16|7|5|12
Dit Clapper|16|7|5|12
Marty Barry|16|6|6|12
Aurele Joliat|22|4|7|11
Pit Lepine|21|7|4|11
Busher Jackson|18|8|3|11
Charlie Conacher|18|7|4|11

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

I don't think Cook's performance during this time was legendary, but it was pretty strong.

The Rangers won the 1933 Stanley Cup
_________

In 1933-34, Bill Cook was 37 years old looks like he was starting to decline.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Really? I had him a handful of spots ahead of Mahovlich.

The issue with Conacher is that he compares unfavorably to contemporary Bill Cook, and fellow short prime players Lafleur and Ovechkin.

But yes, his peak is just so much higher than Mahovlich's.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=13898630&postcount=13

Yeah, offensively Cook and Conacher's NHL careers look similar. But when you take into account Cook's legendary leadership and power forward attributes,* along with his WCHL career, it's pretty easy to pick Cook over Conacher.

*Conacher was apparently a "policeman" in that he would beat up anyone who messed with King Clancy, but nobody ever talks about him throwing his weight around on a regular basis or lists him as one of the toughest of his era like they do for Cook.

 

[unknown33]

The thing with Lafleur is that he has a great 6 year consecutive peak, both in the playoffs and regular season to be in this round, outside of that peak, the rest of his career is barely in the top 60 of all time for wingers and even that might be a stretch.

He and Makarov, along with AO probably have the highest contextual peak this round but at some point we really should consider entire careers as well.

Indeed we should and it looks to me that the entire career of Lafleur is still the best, he just did it in 6 years and not in 20.

 

[unknown33]

Yeah, offensively Cook and Conacher's NHL careers look similar. But when you take into account Cook's legendary leadership and power forward attributes,* along with his WCHL career, it's pretty easy to pick Cook over Conacher.

I think Cook's career is also better numberswise. When you take his WHL years into account it's a no-brainer.

But yes, his peak is just so much higher than Mahovlich's.

I'm not sure about that, with Mahovlich having an unfavourable position for putting up gaudy number. And Conacher being an all-goal player.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Indeed we should and it looks to me that the entire career of Lafleur is still the best, he just did it in 6 years and not in 20.

The way I see it right now, the main case for Lafleur over Cook is that Lafleur was a legendary playoff performer, while Cook just did about the norm of a star player. But last round, your comments about Richard made it seem like you didn't emphasize playoffs that much.

Just the way I see it. Am I off?

 

[MXD]

I think Cook's career is also better numberswise. When you take his WHL years into account it's a no-brainer.


I'm not sure about that, with Mahovlich having an unfavourable position for putting up gaudy number. And Conacher being an all-goal player.

This. Plus his multi-team contribution. Its possible to twist it in many ways, but a good case can be made that Mahovlich was the best skater on a whopping 6 teams that ended up raising the Cup.

And he's also the 2nd player so far -- Richard being the first -- that was up against a better player than him for AST at his given position.

Well, there's also Conacher, but Cook was already geriatric NY then, so I don't credit Conacher as much.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

This. Plus his multi-team contribution. Its possible to twist it in many ways, but a good case can be made that Mahovlich was the best skater on a whopping 7 teams that ended up raising the Cup.

And he's also the 2nd player so far -- Richard being the first -- that was up against a better player than him for AST at his given position.

Well, there's also Conacher, but Cook was already geriatric NY then, so I don't credit Conacher as much.

I think that that would be an awfully optimistic view of Mahovlich's career, though I am willing to be convinced otherwise

 

[MXD]

I think that that would be an awfully optimistic view of Mahovlich's career, though I am willing to be convinced otherwise

It would indeed be, not saying otherwise.

Obviously not comparing him to a prime Kelly or a prime Beliveau. Toughest nut to crack would mostly be vs. Horton, and while the later was probably more "valuable", I'm not ready to say he was outright better.

 

[Captain Bowie]

This. Plus his multi-team contribution. Its possible to twist it in many ways, but a good case can be made that Mahovlich was the best skater on a whopping 7 teams that ended up raising the Cup.

And he's also the 2nd player so far -- Richard being the first -- that was up against a better player than him for AST at his given position.

Well, there's also Conacher, but Cook was already geriatric NY then, so I don't credit Conacher as much.

I thought he only won 6 times? 4 Leafs, 2 Habs?

 

[unknown33]

The way I see it right now, the main case for Lafleur over Cook is that Lafleur was a legendary playoff performer

Do you think Cook has the edge in the regular season?

Two points:
- Lafleur's value on his own team: he was the one getting all the Hart votes and being undisputed best player, despite playing on one of the most dominant teams of all time

- Despite Cook's scoring finishes looking slightly better on paper I don't think the seasons where he finished 1st in the W(C)HL (and we award him an Art Ross trophy - I don't have issues with that) are necessary better than the seasons were Lafleur finished 3rd behind Orr/Esposito (last season of scoring relevance) and Dionne/Gretzky (rookie) for example.
Not necessary era related, it's based on how the players were rated in past projects.

while Cook just did about the norm of a star player.

After reading a lot of playoff game descriptions, I have to retract my statement about Cook being below average in the playoff.
Due to the low number of goals scored and harsh assist counting a player would often not show up on the scoresheet, despite contributing.

In the field he's facing right now I would rate it as neither positive nor negative.

But last round, your comments about Richard made it seem like you didn't emphasize playoffs that much.

No, I just wanted to know more about Richard's playoff history and how much better it really was than Hull's or Jagr's.

 

[MXD]

I thought he only won 6 times? 4 Leafs, 2 Habs?

Indeed. Wow, I can't count up to 4 anymore, lol.

Post corrected.

 

[Captain Bowie]

Do you think Cook has the edge in the regular season?

Two points:
- Lafleur's value on his own team: he was the one getting all the Hart votes and being undisputed best player, despite playing on one of the most dominant teams of all time

- Despite Cook's scoring finishes looking slightly better on paper I don't think the seasons where he finished 1st in the W(C)HL (and we award him an Art Ross trophy - I don't have issues with that) are necessary better than the seasons were Lafleur finished 3rd behind Orr/Esposito (last season of scoring relevance) and Dionne/Gretzky (rookie) for example.
Not necessary era related, it's based on how the players were rated in past projects.


After reading a lot of playoff game descriptions, I have to retract my statement about Cook being below average in the playoff.
Due to the low number of goals scored and harsh assist counting a player would often not show up on the scoresheet, despite contributing.

In the field he's facing right now I would rate it as neither positive nor negative.


No, I just wanted to know more about Richard's playoff history and how much better it really was than Hull's or Jagr's.

I don't know if that's entirely true.

In the years Lafleur was a Hart finalist, his teammates finished as follows:

75/76:
Lafleur - 3rd
Dryden - 4th
P. Mahovlich - 7th

76/77:
Lafleur - 1st
Robinson - 5th

77/78:
Lafleur - 1st
Dryden - 10th
Robinson - 10th

78/79:
Lafleur - 2nd
Savard - 6th
Robinson - 12th
Gainey - 13th
Dryden - 16th

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Do you think Cook has the edge in the regular season?

Two points:
- Lafleur's value on his own team: he was the one getting all the Hart votes and being undisputed best player, despite playing on one of the most dominant teams of all time

- Despite Cook's scoring finishes looking slightly better on paper I don't think the seasons where he finished 1st in the W(C)HL (and we award him an Art Ross trophy - I don't have issues with that) are necessary better than the seasons were Lafleur finished 3rd behind Orr/Esposito (last season of scoring relevance) and Dionne/Gretzky (rookie) for example.

Yes, I think Cook has the advantage in regular season. Two reasons:

1) Length of prime. Lafleur's prime was awesome, but Cook was a star from 1923-24 until 1933-34. That's an 11-6 advantage in years. (He wasn't as consistent over those 11 years as Lafleur was over his dominant 6 year stretch, however). Perhaps the length vs consistency even out.

2) All-around game. Neither was anything special defensively, but Cook was known as one of the most physically punishing players of his era, and his leadership was highly praised.

As for the Hart voting, keep in mind that 2 of Cook's best 4 seasons were in the WCHL, when he would have been ineligible for the Trophy, and he was runner-up to a defenseman in his 2 best NHL years. Even taking those into account, Lafleur does have the advantage in Hart voting, though. His peak/prime was awesome.

After reading a lot of playoff game descriptions, I have to retract my statement about Cook being below average in the playoff.
Due to the low number of goals scored and harsh assist counting a player would often not show up on the scoresheet, despite contributing.

In the field he's facing right now I would rate it as neither positive nor negative.

That's the way I see it. Cook is no Guy Lafleur in the playoffs, but he's no Andy Bathgate either. (Bathgate is someone who I imagine would be already available if his playoff record were better).