Round 2, Vote 3 (HOH Top Centers)

[VanIslander]

Reading all those articles over the past few days makes it seem like Taylor was the better player than Lalonde.

I have read a dozen history books which have significant chapters on early era hockey and all of them spill a lot of ink on Cyclone and several have scant mention of Lalonde. Putting Newsy ahead of Cyclone seems to me to be re-writing history. Perhaps there are history books that emphasize differently, or maybe the best history book on the matter has yet to be written.

The significance of a player to the history of the game is the sort of thing halls of fame usually consider (unlike the ATDs in which the paramount focus is on analyzing on-ice effectiveness).

 

[overpass]

Is it Lalonde's physical play that puts him in front of Taylor on this defense and intangibles list?

Re: Lalonde's intangibles, Stephen Harper's new book on early Toronto hockey noted that Lalonde was viewed as a traitor by Toronto fans after he left Toronto to go to Montreal. For the rest of his career he frequently received poor reviews in the Toronto papers. Game recaps would often accuse him of loafing and being outskated or outplayed by his Toronto counterpart.

It's interesting because maybe there was some truth to the accusations - even if Lalonde wasn't lazy he may have been that type of player who can be accused of it. But more interesting is the suggestion that hometown bias and fan feeling played a large part in the reporting of the day.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

“number nerds†don’t, and never have picked the MVP. In fact, you’re using that term derisively when it in fact is much better to be a number nerd than what I’m accusing some awards voters of being: number dummies.
*
If they were “number nerdsâ€, they’d have figured out that advanced stats (and the eye test) made Orr quite clearly the MVP every season. Number dummies saw Esposito collect more points than Orr, and gave him two Harts. That’s my hypothesis.
*
This also really takes nothing away from Espo as a player. He was what he was, and I can’t make him any better or worse. I try not to rely too heavily on “trophy counting†whenever possible but many of us still do, and as such, it’s my duty to remind them that Esposito should never have been higher than 2nd in Hart voting because there was always one teammate who deserved to be higher.

Actually, I was referring to you as the numbers nerd. No offense.

The people that voted, like myself, actually saw these guys play. And Esposito was justifiably the MVP in 68-69.

 

[overpass]

Reading all those articles over the past few days makes it seem like Taylor was the better player than Lalonde.

Few questions, does anyone know why Taylor was left off THN's top 100 player list?

One thing I'm confused about. Is the top end talent in late 1910s NHL any stronger than the PCHA? Lalonde had to compete with Malone and Nighbor. Taylor had to compete with MacKay and Dunderdale. There's (seems) to be quite the separation in top end talent.

Taylor never played in the NHL and was outside the scope of their list.

Mackay and Taylor were teammates and did not compete except in practice.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Reading all those articles over the past few days makes it seem like Taylor was the better player than Lalonde.

Few questions, does anyone know why Taylor was left off THN's top 100 player list?

THN's Top 100 list was specifically NHL only. They don't have any Europeans who made their names outside the NHL, either.

One thing I'm confused about. Is the top end talent in late 1910s NHL any stronger than the PCHA? Lalonde had to compete with Malone and Nighbor. Taylor had to compete with MacKay and Dunderdale. There's (seems) to be quite the separation in top end talent.

To an extent, this is true, though Frank Nighbor (like Bobby Clarke) wasn't really an offensive outlier, though he was very good offensively - the big difference is that Joe Malone was in the NHA, though even Malone had his years when he was beat out by Tommy Smith in scoring.

Lalonde and Nighbor did each spend a season in the PCHA, however.

I realize that's kind of a lame answer, sorry. Perhaps if Lalonde is still available next round (he probably will be right?) someone can compare his scoring feats with Joe Malone.

 

[bigbuffalo313]

Proof might be a strong term to use, bobby increased from 31 to 64 points from 68-69, Phil went up 42 points.


No one is arguing that Phil wouldn't have been a PPG player, and even slightly above without Orr (even a 50 goal 100 point guy but not a lock for it) but it is really really clear who was driving the bus, and the spike in production in Boston from 70-75.

And if Trottier dropped due to the Bossy affect, with less evidence for it as well, there was the Hull affect (or lack of it) on Phil as well.

Guys like Sakic, Yzerman, Taylor, Dionne (and Trottier) and even Apps and Lalonde in this round have more suggestions of being elite offensive players, independent of their team mates, than Phil does.

Looking at 69 in isolation isn't really very telling, one needs to look at the big picture.

I know that he played almost all of his prime with Orr, but he was able to win an Art Ross before Orr scored at ridiculous rates.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I know that he played almost all of his prime with Orr, but he was able to win an Art Ross before Orr scored at ridiculous rates.

Art Ross by 15% over second place, Orr out of the top 20 in scoring.

Esposito's 1968-69 Hart is unassailable as far as I'm concerned, especially considering how lopsided his margin of victory was.

I realize that having even pre-prime Orr there definitely still helped, but Esposito is far from the only player to be helped by playing with a top offensive defenseman.

 

[ted2019]

Just remember, Dionne did more with less talent around Him then any other player possibly in the top 40 list.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Just remember, Dionne did more with less talent around Him then any other player possibly in the top 40 list.

And yet that "less talent" regularly outscored Dionne in the playoffs.

I mean, Dionne is a shoe-in for our list, but I can't see him finishing ahead of Esposito, Sakic, Trottier, or Yzerman, and those are just the post-expansion players.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I realize that's kind of a lame answer, sorry. Perhaps if Lalonde is still available next round (he probably will be right?) someone can compare his scoring feats with Joe Malone.

If Lalonde is still around I'll try to do a comparison. Pre-1925 hockey is just so damn difficult to contextualize.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Actually, I was referring to you as the numbers nerd. No offense.

The people that voted, like myself, actually saw these guys play. And Esposito was justifiably the MVP in 68-69.

And from 70-75 was there any justifiable Hart winner other than Orr really?

Even in 69 Orr has a strong case right?

 

[Hardyvan123]

And yet that "less talent" regularly outscored Dionne in the playoffs.

I mean, Dionne is a shoe-in for our list, but I can't see him finishing ahead of Esposito, Sakic, Trottier, or Yzerman, and those are just the post-expansion players.

Dionne probably won't finish ahead of any of these guys but then again what if Dionne had played with any of the supporting cast that these 4 guys had?

What is the best 5 man unit that Dionne ever got to play with anyways?

Something to consider me thinks.

 

[thom]

Why did Esposito get more Ted Lindsey award as nhl player than Bobby Orr.Just askiMany players consider the Lindsey award more important than a media award.Obviously Orr was better but just wondering why orr only got 1 pearson now called Lindsey award.Can someone give me a correct answer

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Why did Esposito get more Ted Lindsey award as nhl player than Bobby Orr.Just askiMany players consider the Lindsey award more important than a media award.Obviously Orr was better but just wondering why orr only got 1 pearson now called Lindsey award.Can someone give me a correct answer

Because most players who vote on the award are forwards?

I mean, just a guess, but for whatever reason, forwards are favored in Pearson/Lindsay voting even more than in Hart voting

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

And yet that "less talent" regularly outscored Dionne in the playoffs.

I mean, Dionne is a shoe-in for our list, but I can't see him finishing ahead of Esposito, Sakic, Trottier, or Yzerman, and those are just the post-expansion players.

Actually, that's not true.

Perhaps you meant rarely instead of regularly.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Dionne probably won't finish ahead of any of these guys but then again what if Dionne had played with any of the supporting cast that these 4 guys had?

What is the best 5 man unit that Dionne ever got to play with anyways?

Something to consider me thinks.

When Dionne played with Simmer & Taylor, to me they were one of the 3 or 4 best lines I've ever seen. Check their numbers (points and +/-) compared to the rest of their teammates. Its really remarkable. Especially the 79-80 season.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Actually, that's not true.

Perhaps you meant rarely instead of regularly.

I got it slightly wrong - that regular talent matched Dionne on the playoffs more often than not.

Dionne made the playoffs every year from 1976 to 1982 - during this 7 year period, he only led his team in playoff scoring outright twice, 4 times tying for the team lead, 1 time falling behind a teammate. In 1985, he finished behind a teammate in playoff scoring, as well.

So that's 8 playoffs in his prime, 2 times leading his team in playoff scoring, 4 times tied with at least one and often multiple teammates, 2 times behind at least one teammate.

So either his teammates were better than is being claimed, or Marcel Dionne couldn't distinguish himself from those crap teammates when it mattered.

 

[seventieslord]

I got it slightly wrong - that regular talent matched Dionne on the playoffs more often than not.

Dionne made the playoffs every year from 1976 to 1982 - during this 7 year period, he only led his team in playoff scoring outright twice, 4 times tying for the team lead, 1 time falling behind a teammate. In 1985, he finished behind a teammate in playoff scoring, as well.

So that's 8 playoffs in his prime, 2 times leading his team in playoff scoring, 4 times tied with at least one and often multiple teammates, 2 times behind at least one teammate.

So either his teammates were better than is being claimed, or Marcel Dionne couldn't distinguish himself from those crap teammates when it mattered.

I know there's really no defending Dionne's playoff record in this group of players. But, the seasons you're talking about are all extremely small sample sizes on their own. Over the course of the 43 games he played for the Kings, he was still clearly their best scorer.

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

And I'm not just referring to points, that would be extremely cheap for obvious reasons. But based on PPG, he was easily the highest (1.00) among the 22 players who played at least 16 games over that time. If what you were saying held true over the large sample, there would be a smattering of players who had a few playoffs with the Kings and managed to have a higher PPG than Dionne. Anyway, I realize this is not hugely significant, but it's more significant than looking at all these 3-4 game playoffs as "playoff seasons" on their own. And, it should be said that he participated in 33.9% of their goals over this time... correct me if I'm wrong, but that's not very good.

 

[BraveCanadian]

No. I don’t.
*
Voters in the 40s regarded Schmidt much more highly than one would think based on his hockey card stats (i.e. the surface). There was more to him as a player and the Hart voting reflects it. We also have no advanced statistics of any sort to refute that, if we wanted to. In fact, if advanced stats existed, they would likely confirm that there was more to Schmidt than the good-but-not-great offensive numbers. Furthermore, Schmidt’s voting was achieved in a time when we can be almost certain that the voters watched the players play.
*
In the 70s, Esposito often “looked†like an MVP on the surface (i.e., hockey card stats) but we DO have advanced stats that cast serious doubt on him being the MVP (that is, there was always a significantly more valuable player on his team). Furthermore, there was nothing else below the surface that would skew perceptions in his favour (defense, physicality). The very idea that he could be a hart winner over Orr also demonstrates that by the 12-17 team era, votes were becoming more “hockey card stat†based and less “eye test†based. Unless Esposito was immensely better on special teams, There is no chance that Esposito was as valuable as Orr. None. (1969 was close)
*
I don’t see a contradiction in what I am saying.

It isn't a contradiction it is a double standard and it is glaring.

Great voting record + so so hockey card stats + no "advanced stats" available = guy was even better than his hockey card stats

Great voting record + great hockey card stats + "advanced stats" = guy didn't deserve it.


Where "advanced stats" = a derivative of unit stats we should all be able to agree don't reliably describe individual play.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

In spite of Marcel Dionne's two Pearsons, I agree that he doesn't deserve any fate other than the one towards which he appears to be heading. However, I'd hypothesize that in the Playoffs, teams recognized that Dionne was just about the only thing that could hurt them- and placed even more focus on him. [Including the borderline restraining fouls that tend to get called less frequently in the playoffs.]

Still having trouble wrapping my mind around the circumstance that Esposito needs any kind of apologia... but I'm not sure where the "Orr was always the best player in the league" crowd was when people were waving Bobby Clarke's three Harts in our collective faces.

 

[ted2019]

And yet that "less talent" regularly outscored Dionne in the playoffs.

I mean, Dionne is a shoe-in for our list, but I can't see him finishing ahead of Esposito, Sakic, Trottier, or Yzerman, and those are just the post-expansion players.

Dionne was a bad playoff performer because He had no help around Him. It's easy to put up numbers in the playoffs when You have other talented players on Your team. Check the margin of difference I posted about Dionne and the closest person behind Him on His team in points every year. The other team basically keyed on Dionne in the playoffs, because They had no one else to really worry about.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I'm not sure where the "Orr was always the best player in the league" crowd was when people were waving Bobby Clarke's three Harts in our collective faces.

Exactly.. my point, too.

Although to be fair in Clarke's case that only impacts two of his Hart trophies.

The inconsistency of which trophies some people decide to retcon and when drives me nuts.

 

[Sturminator]

Like I've said before, let the number nerds pick the MVP. Actually seeing the players play is irrelevant.

And again, Esposito was not weak defensively. Nor was Dionne. Neither great, but not weak.

I disagree with your assessment of Esposito's defensive prowess. He was notorious for getting beaten down the ice in transition for a number of reasons, weak skating and horribly long shifts most prominent among them. Phil's defensive positioning and tenacity when in position were pretty good, but he was far too often out of position to defend at even strength, and I don't think he ever did much penalty killing.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I disagree with your assessment of Esposito's defensive prowess. He was notorious for getting beaten down the ice in transition for a number of reasons, weak skating and horribly long shifts most prominent among them. Phil's defensive positioning and tenacity when in position were pretty good, but he was far too often out of position to defend at even strength, and I don't think he ever did much penalty killing.

On the ice for 199 PPGA not counting his first four seasons.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Voting Ends Tonight

Voting ends at 11:00pm EST today. If you already submitted your vote you should have received confirmation from me. If you have not received confirmation please send again and post in this thread.