Canadiens1958
Registered User
By all means, I'm reasonably certain Plante delivered a significant impact on Parent's development during his brief stint in Toronto. Rather fortunately, the mentor/protege relationship isn't unique to the Sponsorship Era but spans across all generations in the historical record of human civilization. In this manner, the argument in support of this hypothesis is specious, at best.
The Flyers were a blip on the radar during the 1970s, but the Bruins were not? From 1969-70 to 1979-80, Boston won two Stanley Cups and appeared in five Stanley Cup Finals. During the exact time period, Philadelphia won two Stanley Cups and appeared in four Stanley Cup Finals. Of a significant note, the Bruins lost in the Stanley Cup Finals to the Flyers in 1974. When drawing comparison it appears very disingenuous to suggest one of those teams as a blip on the radar. That's a remarkably sizeable number of blips for each team and very comparable in scale. Perhaps the Bobby Orr halo effect influences logic and reasoning at times?
I'm at a considerable loss in understanding your perception of the 1980s as a period of more turmoil and relative chaos relative to the 1970s. There were 32 professional teams during the height of the WHA period, dating to 1976. This was reduced to 21 professional teams for the 1979 season and the player totality was reduced over a three year period to be folded within the NHL structure. Your suggestion that the WHA league "was a minor league infused into a professional league" actually weakens your supposition that the 1970s NHL comprised a relatively strong period. Once again, those 1970s WHA teams had a winning record against NHL teams over a large sample size (63 games). The stronger 1970s NHL teams were actually beating up on weaker NHL teams which were marginally inferior to those very WHA teams. Give pause and consider that fact. If this was occurring during the 1980s period, it would be the first point of contention for the detractors of that time period. When it doesn't fit the narrative, it's both completely and unfortunately overlooked. Choosing witty narratives about cars in living rooms does nothing to alter that fact.
This completely misinterprets my point. The reason Montreal was successful for such an incredible period of time was not because of the superiority of the Sponsorship Era, but the inherent unfairness of the system. During the initial years of the Draft Era, the Canadiens were deeply stocked with players unfairly acquired during the Sponsorship Era. They occasionally moved those players to the expansion teams for draft picks because the expansion teams desperately needed NHL-ready players. This structure benefited Montreal significantly, allowing them to trade remnants from the system for draft picks into the early 1980s. Once the benefits of the Sponsorship Era completely dissipated by the 1990s, the Canadiens faded into irrelevancy and have perpetually remained there to present day. I won't digress into the 'French Canadian Rule' as it pertains to the early draft system because I don't believe the Canadiens significantly benefitted from this additional bias.
Similar outputs are not necessarily reflective of identical inputs. It's near certain that increased scoring during the WWII era was reflective of talent depletion and resources redirected to the war effort. The rational for increased scoring during the 1970s and 1980s likely require a more hybrid approach towards such rationalization. I'm having difficulty recognizing why you feel a linear approach most closely approximates objective reasoning. You often note the importance of nuances in one's evaluation procedures but when something aligns with your pre-existing beliefs, it appears refinements are no longer beneficial to the process. I clearly cannot comprehend dismissing the significant probability that skater development/coaching outpaced goaltending evolution during the 1980s. Considering the contraction of the professional player pool and the complete dearth of 1970s transitional goaltending stars, it's the most logical starting point for any critical analysis.
A few? The NHL expanded from 6 to 18 teams. It tripled in size. The WHA also added 14 professional teams. They poached a significant amount of NHL talent from a league which quickly added almost 300 additional players to league size previously recorded at less than 150 players. I find the progression of discussion rather unfair when we are not addressing the facts in proper fashion. This is altogether an astonishing change in league size and an appreciable additional dilution of the talent pool by the WHA. It was certainly not a problem for a short period of time. It was a conspicuous problem for almost the entire 1970s decade.
No offensive taken. I don't find it dismissive in the slightest. I find it profoundly unaware. To that point, I see you're an aspiring scout. Let's consider the possibility you desire to retain an NHL affiliation and you manage to secure an interview to facilitate this career objective. Imagine a scenario where the interviewer requests you to elaborate your thoughts on player development as it relates to the current game. Would you consider a reply which reveals your belief in a need to 'refine' our player development, broadly reflecting the techniques of the 1960s? I can confidently assure you that revealing this perception to any professional organization would immediately disqualify you as a candidate. I wholly cannot perceive how anyone with an active involvement in the modern game regards the technical development from almost 50 years prior as a superior choice. My strictly logical conclusion is a misunderstanding of one era or both. For that reason, I'm apprehensive to tackle anything next.
WHA had a better exhibition schedule record against weak NHL teams. Canadiens for example never played a WHA team, neither did certain other NHL teams.
The Draft Era goes back to 1963.
There was no French Canadian rule. Please provide starting date and conditions of the French Canadian rule you claim.
The bolded in your last paragraph is a joke. AHL teams are moving to the proximity of the NHL team. Winnipeg Jets and Moose(AHL), Montreal and Laval(AHL) plus talk of ECHL in Trois - Rivières, Toronto Maple Leafs and Marlies(AHL), Ottawa and Belleville(AHL).Plus a strong number of American teams. This reflects O6 NHL/farm team relationships.