Round 2, Vote 3 (HOH Top Centers)

[BraveCanadian]

Really no way?

Well in 77 a pretty much washed up Orr had a line of 20-4-19-23 plus 6 on that Hawks team.

I suggest that it's much more likely and probable, from all that we know from both players, that Orr racks up 100 assists alot easier and more likely than Phil racking up anything over 55 goals or 110ish points.

55 goal scoring 110 point scoring centers don't grow on trees.

Even if that was his maximum he would still be a multiple goal scoring and point scoring title guy.

All 3 of these relationship aren't the same, just compare Phil and Bryan in their 1st 2 years in the NHL, you know the one where Phil is playing with another guy named Bobby and Bryan with Billy Harris. Trottier had 95 points as a rookie in the NHL while playing excellent defense, you of all people should know how much better Bryan was without Bossy, than your comment implies.

That was sarcasm because everyone seems to be trying to attribute a players success to someone else in these threads lately. Not just you with Espo and Orr.

I'm fully aware that Trottier was a front line caliber scorer and great two-way player before and after Bossy.

And we have all of those red flags, or question marks for Phil outside of his time with Orr, which quiet frankly deserves a much larger..."but come on" right?

I honestly don't think so.

A young guy who went from playing behind another all timer in Chicago to playing prime time minutes and lots of them in Boston would be expected to pick up his production.

Both through his natural improvement, more ice time, AND Bobby Orr.

Similarly when Esposito was already on the decline and moved to a worse off team.. you'd expect it to drop even more.

It's a fair question to ask, when the evidence is there to support it like in the case of Phil, we need to take it seriously.

Where is this evidence? His career path follows a pretty common trajectory for players of that time.

 

[bigbuffalo313]

He isn't in my top 4 as his dominance seems to be either

A) too related to Orr or

B) his start and finish to his career, ie his time outside of Boston is weaker than many others in this round.

If one is primarily a peak guy and thinks that Esposito has similar seasons without Orr, or at least nothing drastically less, then I can see him in the top 4 but I don't see it.

It's just too easy to put him first by simply looking at the numbers, if one looks closely there are enough questions and red flags for Phil IMO.

1-While he certainly benefitted from Orr, he also won 5 Art Ross trophies. Orr couldn't have been to much help

2-Messier had a pretty awful finish to his career that many people try to use to diminish him, yet he ended up at 6. Why is it different for Espo?

 

[tarheelhockey]

All 3 of these relationship aren't the same, just compare Phil and Bryan in their 1st 2 years in the NHL,

Something to consider:

1978-79
Trottier, age 22 and playing with Bossy, Potvin, Gillies, etc - 47 goals
Esposito, age 36 and playing with Hedberg, Hickey, Greschner, etc - 42 goals


Esposito's 4 full seasons in New York saw him score 34, 38, 42 and 34 goals. He was one of the oldest players in the league at the time. His scoring fell off after Boston to be sure, but it's not like he just disappeared or something.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

2-Messier had a pretty awful finish to his career that many people try to use to diminish him, yet he ended up at 6. Why is it different for Espo?

The difference is that Esposito played in the early-mid 70s, and Hardyvan obviously thinks hockey during that period sucks.

He spent the better part of two years arguing that Lidstrom > Orr; yet now says that Espo was a product of Orr.

He also complained about Clarke being available "already" and in the past has expressed a preference for Fedorov over Clarke.

He's entitled to his opinion like anyone else, but I wish he would be more forthcoming about it.

 

[bigbuffalo313]

The difference is that Esposito played in the early-mid 70s, and Hardyvan obviously thinks hockey during that period sucks.

He spent the better part of two years arguing that Lidstrom > Orr; yet now says that Espo was a product of Orr.

He also complained about Clarke being available "already" and in the past has expressed a preference for Fedorov over Clarke.

He's entitled to his opinion like anyone else, but I wish he would be more forthcoming about it.

Do you remember what thread this was? I really wnt to see the arguments.

On Topic-While I have said I think Clarke is overrated (whne I said defensive play, I kind of meant defensive forwards in general, which includes Clarke) I think he deserves his top ten spot. I would move him down and insert Espo, but he deserves it. I don't know why anyone would think that hockey sucked during that period. It had Orr, Espo, Clarke, etc.

 

[VanIslander]

The difference is that Esposito played in the early-mid 70s, and Hardyvan obviously thinks hockey during that period sucks.

Does he? Or maybe he just thinks play in the NHL was diluted with the six expansion teams, the WHA poaching with high salaries and the Soviets and Czechs emerging as near equals in terms of the best of the era.

Other decades, like the nineties of Yzerman and Sakic, have the best players in the world choosing the NHL, making for perfomances there clearly the best on best.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Does he? Or maybe he just thinks play in the NHL was diluted with the six expansion teams, the WHA poaching with high salaries and the Soviets and Czechs emerging as near equals in terms of the best of the era.

Other decades, like the nineties of Yzerman and Sakic, have the best players in the world choosing the NHL, making for perfomances there clearly the best on best.

I do think the 70s were a time of relatively low parity but that wouldn't just affect Espo.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Does he? Or maybe he just thinks play in the NHL was diluted with the six expansion teams, the WHA poaching with high salaries and the Soviets and Czechs emerging as near equals in terms of the best of the era.

Other decades, like the nineties of Yzerman and Sakic, have the best players in the world choosing the NHL, making for perfomances there clearly the best on best.

I don't think I've ever heard people say the early 70s Czechs were equal to Canadians.

The WHA's impact on Esposito is overstated. He won 3 Art Rosses before the league even existed. One of which was his 76-76 year.

The six expansion teams is a fair argument.


If the era argument doesn't affect Orr's near-unanimous spot as the #1 d-man I don't see why Espo should lose MASSIVE points to it. Especially when the year before expansion Espo finished 7th in scoring while losing his PP time and freedom to Mikita. If a minutes reduced/PP free Espo can finish 7th in scoring I don't know why it's a stretch that he could finish higher when given the opportunity to do so.

 

[VanIslander]

I don't think I've ever heard people say the early 70s Czechs were equal to Canadians.

The Czechs beat the Soviets three times in the world championships in the 1970's and were very competitive in other years that decade. So, according to the logical law of transitivity (A=B, B=C therefore A=C), the fact that the Soviets proved themselves equal to the NHL's best, and the Czechs proved themselves equal to the Soviets, it's given that the Czechs were on the same tier as the Soviets and NHL in terms of top level play for the decade. That was my initial point in talking about all of the best not being in the NHL that decade compared to, for instance, the nineties.

 

[Hardyvan123]

55 goal scoring 110 point scoring centers don't grow on trees.

No they don't grow on trees but then again I was being charitable to that being Phil's peak without Orr, but then again all of that is subjective.

That was sarcasm because everyone seems to be trying to attribute a players success to someone else in these threads lately. Not just you with Espo and Orr.

The thing is that it is a fair question to ask and it affects different players differently there isn't a common factor on how much a great line mate helps or hinders any players argument, looking at before and after might give us a clue though.

I'm fully aware that Trottier was a front line caliber scorer and great two-way player before and after Bossy.

My main point is that there is a lot more evidence of Bryan being a great player without Bossy than there is for Phil without Orr.

A young guy who went from playing behind another all timer in Chicago to playing prime time minutes and lots of them in Boston would be expected to pick up his production.

Once again we see young guys stepping up and playing really well from the beginning on teams with another great center on those teams (Detroit and Colorado examples to come up soon one would hope). Those guys aren't up yet but while one could argue that Phil was being held back, it can be equally argued that he just wasn't as good as early as some other guys.

Both through his natural improvement, more ice time, AND Bobby Orr.

Similarly when Esposito was already on the decline and moved to a worse off team.. you'd expect it to drop even more.



Where is this evidence? His career path follows a pretty common trajectory for players of that time.

See this is one of the biggest differences here between Phil and some of the others left, others hit the ground running and Phil took a while to develop (even not developing fully with Hull it seems).

Phil's career path might be normal for most players but for top 10 or even top 12 of all time we have players here with better resumes and career paths, along with less questions.

1-While he certainly benefitted from Orr, he also won 5 Art Ross trophies. Orr couldn't have been to much help

Orr is seen as the best offensive Dman by many including myself, and it's not a stretch to suggest that he had a large part in Phil's success...to argue otherwise is charitable at best IMO.

2-Messier had a pretty awful finish to his career that many people try to use to diminish him, yet he ended up at 6. Why is it different for Espo?

We need to compare similar ages to get any sort of accurate comparison, Phil's declining years were a 5 year period ages 34-38, compare Moose in the same time frame, after 38 is a totally different comparison. Both guys are judged the same by me.

The difference is that Esposito played in the early-mid 70s, and Hardyvan obviously thinks hockey during that period sucks.

Man that's weak coming form you, can't a guy acknowledge that there were non Canadian not playing in the NHL in the 70's when they could have excelled and not be labeled as your post implies as calling the NHL "sucking at that time?"

Since at least the 70's till the early 90's there were many elite players who didn't or weren't allowed to play in the NHL, it needs to be taken into account right?

He spent the better part of two years arguing that Lidstrom > Orr; yet now says that Espo was a product of Orr.

Are the 2 arguments somehow not compatible?

My argument for Lidstrom over Orr is focused on 20 years to 8 and Orr's impact on Phil is other a much shorter time frame and Orr has the best peak and prime of any Dman in history we aren't arguing that here..

He also complained about Clarke being available "already" and in the past has expressed a preference for Fedorov over Clarke.

He's entitled to his opinion like anyone else, but I wish he would be more forthcoming about it.

Hey i'm respecting the rules of the thread here and trying hard not to mention guys that aren't up yet, unless it's extremely relevant.

My observations and evaluations to Clarke were based on the guys he was up against in the voting round and not guys who haven't been brought up yet.

What am I not forthcoming about exactly here?

If anything I'm maybe too forthcoming on my opinions here, heck if I argued a strong case for Wayne being better than Mario, some guys here even might have put Mario ahead of Wayne as a reaction to me perhaps?

Everyone has an opinion, your're right there and I like to back mine up and even change it if the argument is there for it, I'm hoping others also have open minds as well.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Does he? Or maybe he just thinks play in the NHL was diluted with the six expansion teams, the WHA poaching with high salaries and the Soviets and Czechs emerging as near equals in terms of the best of the era.

Other decades, like the nineties of Yzerman and Sakic, have the best players in the world choosing the NHL, making for perfomances there clearly the best on best.

Pretty much this, I'm the biggest advocate here of judging apples with apples to get consistency over time, ie against an all Canadian standard that has existed ever since the NHL formed.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Something to consider:

1978-79
Trottier, age 22 and playing with Bossy, Potvin, Gillies, etc - 47 goals
Esposito, age 36 and playing with Hedberg, Hickey, Greschner, etc - 42 goals


Esposito's 4 full seasons in New York saw him score 34, 38, 42 and 34 goals. He was one of the oldest players in the league at the time. His scoring fell off after Boston to be sure, but it's not like he just disappeared or something.

How about:

Trottier Post-Bossy 365-84-139-223

Esposito Post-Orr 422-184-220-404

Consider Espo 2 years older post-Orr and playing on much worse teams than Trottier.
Production not even close.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Sakic Year 5 in Quebec was actually a 100 point club by that point with a +50 goal differential and Sakic was a minus 100 point player.

So no.

The upgrading of Sakic's career long defense around here is crazy.

Like I said earlier, I think I'm the first person to choose him over Yzerman in the ATD so don't get me wrong.. but I don't peg him as this two-way elite scoring centerman for 20 years straight. Similar to Yzerman he developed as the role of a front line center changed in the league.

IMO, he started off not as good as Yzerman, never got as good defensively as Yzerman, but did keep scoring longer than Yzerman.

At his peak, yes he was very good defensively and offensively at the same time and that is to his credit but damn guys..

Here's my question about Sakic:

For a player that is being presented as a great two-way player and playoff monster, how is it that Sakic is a minus in the playoffs over his career and only a +30 in the regular season? Dionne is a +28 for his career and he played on much worse teams than Sakic start to finish. Yzerman played on bad teams for a while too but he's a +185 in the regular season.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

How about:

Trottier Post-Bossy 365-84-139-223

Esposito Post-Orr 422-184-220-404

Consider Espo 2 years older post-Orr and playing on much worse teams than Trottier.
Production not even close.

I think that some people somehow think that Trottier's post-prime years as a third line checker for great teams is more impressive than post-prime Esposito leading pretty good teams in scoring because Espo was bad defensively by that point

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I think that some people somehow think that Trottier's post-prime years as a third line checker for great teams is more impressive than post-prime Esposito leading pretty good teams in scoring because Espo was bad defensively by that point

Really? Doesn't seem like we are currently rating any great third-line checkers compared to leading scorers. And you are being more than generous calling the Rangers of those years pretty good.

Its not like Trottier played like a Selke candidate for Pittsburgh.

He also had 2 years with the Islands where he put up 45 points in 73 games and 24 points in 59 games. He was the 3rd center on those teams because he wasn't as good as Lafontaine or Sutter.

But aside from all this late career scrutiny, should we really be using this as such an important factor in determining these players?

 

[Hardyvan123]

How about:

Trottier Post-Bossy 365-84-139-223

Esposito Post-Orr 422-184-220-404

Consider Espo 2 years older post-Orr and playing on much worse teams than Trottier.
Production not even close.

You're right, Bryan only had one more excellent season after Bossy then fell off of a cliff production wise but production is only 1 metric right?

Phil has a better peak, production wise but also a slower start (with Bobby Hull) so there is a lot to juggle here.

Also Phil after Orr while being older was below average at ES after Orr, even after accounting for his team situation.

Bryan isn't the only guy Phil is up against here, it's hard to put his aging years up against Sakic, Yzerman or Dionne in this metric.

Even Apps, Lalonde, Taylor and Schmidt probably have better aging metrics (for their eras)

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

You're right, Bryan only had one more excellent season after Bossy then fell off of a cliff production wise but production is only 1 metric right?

Phil has a better peak, production wise but also a slower start (with Bobby Hull) so there is a lot to juggle here.

Also Phil after Orr while being older was below average at ES after Orr, even after accounting for his team situation.

Bryan isn't the only guy Phil is up against here, it's hard to put his aging years up against Sakic, Yzerman or Dionne in this metric.

Even Apps, Lalonde, Taylor and Schmidt probably have better aging metrics (for their eras)

Sounds like the aging metric is what you want to use primarily while brushing off things like scoring titles & records, Goal scoring titles & records, Hart Trophies, all-star selections, etc. You even brush off the Summit Series like it was just some international tourney that Espo happened to have done alright in.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I think that some people somehow think that Trottier's post-prime years as a third line checker for great teams is more impressive than post-prime Esposito leading pretty good teams in scoring because Espo was bad defensively by that point

Personally I think Trottier was pretty much done after the 88 (his age 31 season).

Espsotio despite all of his defensive problems simply has more value than Bryan does after the age of 31 and certainly after the age of 32.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Phil has a better peak, production wise but also a slower start (with Bobby Hull) so there is a lot to juggle here.

Sounds like the aging metric is what you want to use primarily while brushing off things like scoring titles & records, Goal scoring titles & records, Hart Trophies, all-star selections, etc. You even brush off the Summit Series like it was just some international tourney that Espo happened to have done alright in.

I bolded it so it's clear.

Aging is one metric of many and other metrics don't affect it.

As for the 8 game series in 72, it wasn't like it was all good either, it's not an obvious edge or difference maker for me, others might treat it differently I guess.

For example I would take more games over more tournaments to have more meaning.

The bottom line is that Phil was a better international player, than say Marcel Dionne but if I was using a numbering system for level of importance and points (say on a 1000 scale, those 8 games would be worth maybe an extra 5-10 points on Dionne maybe (the difference between the 2 in international play).

 

[MXD]

Expansion coincides with the beginning of the era where the oldest babyboomers were 22. Just saying.

 

[bigbuffalo313]

I know he didn't age well, but you have to focus on what he did before he declined. He is one of five players in history to win 5 Art Ross trophies. The other four are Gretzky(number 1 all time), Lemiuex(number 2 center, 4th all time), Howe(number 1 winger when we get to that project, 3rd all time) amd Jagr(will probably be top 5 in the winger project). Why is it that Espo isn't even top 12 for centers for you? Please give us on good reason that isn't Orr or aging well

 

[Hardyvan123]

I know he didn't age well, but you have to focus on what he did before he declined. He is one of five players in history to win 5 Art Ross trophies. The other four are Gretzky(number 1 all time), Lemiuex(number 2 center, 4th all time), Howe(number 1 winger when we get to that project, 3rd all time) amd Jagr(will probably be top 5 in the winger project). Why is it that Espo isn't even top 12 for centers for you? Please give us on good reason that isn't Orr or aging well

Well here are 2 more things then

1) Did any player here of the 9 accomplish less than Phil did by the age of 24? which resume is even remotely as poor as his aged 24 and lower?

2) Defensively, both peak and career is he even average for this group?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Skating

I know he didn't age well, but you have to focus on what he did before he declined. He is one of five players in history to win 5 Art Ross trophies. The other four are Gretzky(number 1 all time), Lemiuex(number 2 center, 4th all time), Howe(number 1 winger when we get to that project, 3rd all time) amd Jagr(will probably be top 5 in the winger project). Why is it that Espo isn't even top 12 for centers for you? Please give us on good reason that isn't Orr or aging well

Esposito's skating was below average for the center position. As a result he was limited in certain defensive and offensive situations(Cashman and Hodge were ideal linemates, Bobby Hull less so).

Question is to what extent his elite offensive skills and other attributes compensated.

 

[Killion]

As for the 8 game series in 72, it wasn't like it was all good either, it's not an obvious edge or difference maker for me, others might treat it differently I guess.

No it certainly wasnt all good, a lot of bad actually for Team Canada being out of shape as they were, Sinden slow on the uptake in understanding how to neutralize the Soviets potent offense. But in that pressure cooker, under the microscope Phil Esposito proved himself to be the best Canadian player out there despite Hendersons heroics', amassing huge minutes & throughout the series at various critical times carrying Team Canada on his back both offensively AND defensively.... that he was known as the Garbage Man in Boston, irresponsible or incapable defensively and unwanted by Chicago because his skating (along with about 98% of the leagues at that time btw) wasnt up to linemate Hulls' just a few of the bad raps Esposito's rep always seems to take when people are trying to assign him a place in the pantheon of great centers. Very enigmatic player seen only through a prism of video or stats on a page, even anecdotal inf, newspaper clippings of the day dont really paint a clear picture....

 

[Killion]

Esposito's skating was below average for the center position. As a result he was limited in certain defensive and offensive situations(Cashman and Hodge were ideal linemates, Bobby Hull less so).

Question is to what extent his elite offensive skills and other attributes compensated.

Well as I recall, he was hard to beat on the backcheck as he played the angles extremely well, big man with a huge reach & beyond crafty with his stick. Lay a right proper mugging on any number of players with far faster wheels than he had or at minimum force them into the waiting embrace of a team mate. Box canyon. Guy either released or got smoked like a Peace Pipe. What he lacked in speed he made up for in sheer will, determination & hard work. You were not going to beat Phil Esposito on the backcheck (though obviously some did at various times). My sense was he took a lot of pride in his overall game and a very deceptive player at that. Clever. Very clever.