Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 14

[The Macho King]

Where does Dit Clapper fit in?

Norris record Tim Horton

53-54: 4th
54-55: 6th
60-61: 6th
61-62: 5th
62-63: 3rd
63-64: 2nd
64-65: 4th
65-66: 9th
66-67: 4th
67-68: 3rd
68-69: 2nd
70-71: 12th
72-73: 9th

Norris record Al MacInnis

86-87: 6th
88-89: 3rd
89-90: 2nd
90-91: 2nd
93-94: 3rd
97-98: 8th
98-99: 1st
99-00: 8th
00-01: 7th
02-03: 2nd

All-Star record of Dit Clapper (D only):

37-38: 12th
38-39: 2nd
39-40: 1st
40-41: 1st
41-42: 6th
42-43: 6th
43-44: 4th
44-45: 9th

Overall records:

Horton: 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 9, 9, 12
MacInnis: 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 6, 7, 8
Clapper: 1, 1, 2, 4*,6, 6', 9*, 12
*war year
'partial war year

Clapper had a fantastic 3-year peak as a defenseman from 1938-39 to 1940-41, but he doesn't look to have been at that level ever again.
________________________

Compare to Brian Leetch, Bill Gadsby, and Borje Salming (3 more defensemen who finished about Clapper in the defensemen project):

Gadsby: 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11
Salming: 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 10, 14
Leetch: 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 5, 8, 11, 11

Clearly better records AS DEFENSEMEN ONLY than Clapper, as well.

____________________________

You pretty much have to put a lot of stock into Clapper's time at RW to rank him high this round.

Clapper at RW

Goals

1929-30 NHL 41 (2nd)

1930-31 NHL 22 (8th)

1934-35 NHL 22 (3rd)

1936-37 NHL 17 (10th)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Assists

1929-30 NHL 20 (10th)

1931-32 NHL 22 (7th)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Points

1929-30 NHL 61 (3rd)

1931-32 NHL 39 (8th)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

My educated guess is that Clapper would have been 2nd Team RW in 1929-30 if there were voting.

No All-Star voting in 1929-30.

These are the top 5 scorers:

1.	Cooney Weiland* • BOS	73
2.	Frank Boucher* • NYR	62
3.	Dit Clapper* • BOS	61
4.	Bill Cook* • NYR	59
5.	Hec Kilrea • OTS	58

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

No other RW particularly close to Clapper and Cook. Based on this and Cook's reputation as a tough guy leader, I'd GUESS that Clapper finishes as the 2nd Team AS under Bill Cook. But it's just an educated guess - neither Clapper nor Cook finished with relevant Hart votes.

Clapper's Overall All-Star record:

As RW:
1929-30: 2nd (estimated based on performance)
1930-31: 2nd
1931-32: 4th
1934-35: 2nd
1935-36: 4th
1936-37: 4th

As D:
37-38: 12th
38-39: 2nd
39-40: 1st
40-41: 1st
41-42: 6th
42-43: 6th
43-44: 4th
44-45: 9th

__________________________________

Horton/Macinnis's Norris records compared to Clapper's FULL All-Star record:
Horton: 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 9, 9, 12
MacInnis: 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 6, 7, 8
Clapper: 1, 1, 2, 2#, 2#, 2#, 4#, 4#, 4#, 4*,6, 6', 9*, 12
*war year
'partial war year
#As RW

Conclusion: If you treat Clapper's placements as the 2nd or 4th best RW in the league as equivalent to being the 2nd or 4th best D, then his record looks very similar to Horton and MacInnis's.

Question: Should we treat Clapper's RW placements as equal in value to placing the same as a D?

Clapper's RW competition was also pretty stacked. We're talking Charlie Conacher, Bill Cook, some Hextall, so it's not soft AS placements there.

 

[MXD]

The biggest issue with Clapper's RW placement is that one of them came in 29-30 and he was on the team that broke the system (... while not actually himself breaking the system).

Also, it should be noted that his 1st AST (along with, you know, getting the most votes) is problematic, considering the Hart award was won by a D-Men.

 

[MXD]

Clapper's RW competition was also pretty stacked. We're talking Charlie Conacher, Bill Cook, some Hextall, so it's not soft AS placements there.

Bryan Hextall was never, ever in any kind of competition whatsoever at RW with Dit Clapper. Conacher didn't break out yet in 29-30,

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The biggest issue with Clapper's RW placement is that one of them came in 29-30 and he was on the team that broke the system (... while not actually himself breaking the system).

Also, it should be noted that his 1st AST (along with, you know, getting the most votes) is problematic, considering the Hart award was won by a D-Men.

I know what you mean about 1929-30 (when the NHL first allowed the forward pass, then had to institute offsides halfway through the season to counteract cherrypickers). The Bruins in particular put up laughably high point totals...

But I don't think we can just throw out that season entirely, either.

 

[seventieslord]

To be clear, this "VsX equivalence" that you use for pre-1926 players doesn't make adjustments for the low number of assists given out?

correct, it does not.

 

[The Macho King]

The biggest issue with Clapper's RW placement is that one of them came in 29-30 and he was on the team that broke the system (... while not actually himself breaking the system).

Also, it should be noted that his 1st AST (along with, you know, getting the most votes) is problematic, considering the Hart award was won by a D-Men.

Why is that problematic? There are two 1st AS that go to Dmen. We have the equivalent of a Norris, plus two times coming in second in the Norris, plus one more as 3rd/4th in Norris voting. That's a quality finish for a player being considered at this point of the top 100 by itself.

I don't know - this guy is *elite* at two positions. That has to count for something.

 

[MXD]

I know what you mean about 1929-30 (when the NHL first allowed the forward pass, then had to institute offsides halfway through the season to counteract cherrypickers). The Bruins in particular put up laughably high point totals...

But I don't think we can just throw out that season entirely, either.

Clapper had two teammates with better Hart support. Also, a few RW led their teams in scoring that season (Ace Bailey and Carson Cooper, amongst others), so the conclusion that Clapper would've the 2nd AST at RW is far from a certain one.
... I mean, Clapper DID get on the AST the next year despite being clearly outscored by both Conacher and Cook.

 

[MXD]

Why is that problematic? There are two 1st AS that go to Dmen. We have the equivalent of a Norris, plus two times coming in second in the Norris, plus one more as 3rd/4th in Norris voting. That's a quality finish for a player being considered at this point of the top 100 by itself.

I don't know - this guy is *elite* at two positions. That has to count for something.

I was referring to 1939-40. The Hart was won by Ebbie Goodfellow. Besides, both players weren't playing on the same side, so they weren't even competing one against another.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Top 4 in RW AS voting season-by-season while Clapper was a RW:

No actual voting in 1929-30
1930-31: 1. Bill Cook; 2. Dit Clapper; 3. Charlie Conacher; 4. Hooley Smith
1931-32: 1. Bill Cook; 2. Charlie Conacher; 3. Hooley Smith; 4. Dit Clapper
1932-33: 1. Bill Cook; 2. Charlie Conacher; 3. Jimmy Ward; 4. Baldy Northcott
1933-34: 1. Charlie Conacher; 2. Bill Cook; 3. Larry Aurie; 4. Jimmy Ward
1934-35: 1. Charlie Conacher; 2. Dit Clapper; 3. Larry Aurie; 4. Bill Cook
1935-36: 1. Charlie Conacher; 2. Cecil Dillon; 3. Larry Aurie; 4. Dit Clapper
1936-37: 1. Larry Aurie; 2. Cecil Dillon; 3. Johnny Gagnon; 4. Dit Clapper

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To be clear, this "VsX equivalence" that you use for pre-1926 players doesn't make adjustments for the low number of assists given out?

correct, it does not.

Thanks. So it would tend to overrate shoot-first players like Denneny and Malone, while tending to underrate pass-first players like Nighbor.

What would you make of this argument that MXD made in the voting results thread?

Denneny led the NHL exactly once in 1924 when playing with pretty much the four lone pass-first guys in hockey at that point. Of course, in the grand scheme of things, Dennenny might have been better through longevity. I really, but really don't care about Denneny finishing 3rd in the NHL in a 3-team league when playing with an obvious reluctant shooter who was a MUCH better player.

If they all played at a time that undercounted assists, and Denneny was at times the only real shoot-first player on his team, then the officially recorded stats would tend to overrate him.

 

[MXD]

What would you make of this argument that MXD made in the voting results thread?

If they all played at a time that undercounted assists, and Denneny was at times the only real shoot-first player on his team, then the officially recorded stats would tend to overrate him.

There was some good-faith hyperbole here (and I somehow mixed up Frank and George Boucher...), but Denneny was playing with Clancy, Nighbor, G. Boucher, P. Broadbent (this was the hyperbole) and, apparently, quite a bit of Lionel Hitchman.

The first two have reputation as playmakers. Boucher has more reputation as a rusher than a playmaker, but managed to get quite a bit of assists throughout his career. Hitchman actually led the NHL in assists that season (along with Clancy), though he's mostly described as a Stay-at-home D.

My point was : who, in the NHL, was described as a playmaker then (keep in mind F. Boucher is playing in the West then)? It just seems the game was different then.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Two great Senators, Denneny and Benedict, played until 1928-29 and 1929-30 respectively - so it's probably fair to ask why they didn't get much more Hart consideration.

I'm quoting this from one of the first posts of the thread.

Based on everything I've read about the 1920s Senators, they were built around their centers (Frank Nighbor mostly; later Hooley Smith) and defensemen. It's why I was originally much lower on Denneny and Benedict than this - I had both of them in the 90s, I believe, along with Eddie Gerard. Gerard seems to have been the 2nd most important Senator after Nighbor while he played, but his career was so short, it is understandable that others who did more outside that time frame could rank higher.

 

[The Macho King]

I'm quoting this from one of the first posts of the thread.

Based on everything I've read about the 1920s Senators, they were built around their centers (Frank Nighbor mostly; later Hooley Smith) and defensemen. It's why I was originally much lower on Denneny and Benedict than this - I had both of them in the 90s, I believe, along with Eddie Gerard. Gerard seems to have been the 2nd most important Senator after Nighbor while he played, but his career was so short, it is understandable that others who did more outside that time frame could rank higher.

Gerard also benefited from having disgustingly good defense partners. He gets Cleghorn for the first part of his career, and then f***ing King Clancy comes in.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Gerard also benefited from having disgustingly good defense partners. He gets Cleghorn for the first part of his career, and then ****ing King Clancy comes in.

Gerard didn't play with Clancy much. He played with Georges Boucher. The Boucher-Gerard pairing is the least known or talked about pairing from that dynasty, yet it was the main one that was stable for 3 years straight in 1921*, 1922 and 1923, making it one of the greatest pairing of all-time if we also count "longevity of the pairing".

Following Gerard's retirement after the 1923 SC Finals, it was Boucher who played with rookie Hitchman one year, then young Clancy. Boucher gradually transitioned from an offensive defenseman that was good defensively, to a more defensively-minded defenseman as he slowed down and became team captain, ultimately winning the 1927 SC.

*In the 1921 playoffs some movement of position occured, Boucher sometimes playing center and rover and LW.

Edit: Not that it contradicts your point, since Boucher was a great defenseman in his own right. Both Boucher and Clancy credited Gerard for taking them under his wing, with Clancy also praising Boucher for doing the same.

 

[overpass]

The biggest issue with Clapper's RW placement is that one of them came in 29-30 and he was on the team that broke the system (... while not actually himself breaking the system).

Also, it should be noted that his 1st AST (along with, you know, getting the most votes) is problematic, considering the Hart award was won by a D-Men.

I know what you mean about 1929-30 (when the NHL first allowed the forward pass, then had to institute offsides halfway through the season to counteract cherrypickers). The Bruins in particular put up laughably high point totals...

But I don't think we can just throw out that season entirely, either.

Clapper was not among the league leaders in scoring when the offside rule change was instituted in December. See this thread.

1929-30 NHL Season Introducing the Forward Pass

I did the math in that thread for the leading scorers before and after offsides was implemented, and it appears Weiland and Clapper were the two leading scorers after the rule was changed. Their best scoring stretch was actually the final 10 games of the season. Frank Boucher had been the scoring leader before that point and Weiland overtook him in the final stretch. Clapper finished just behind Boucher.

I can only conclude that cherry picking before the rule change had basically nothing to do with Clapper and Weiland having high scoring seasons. On the other hand their linemate Dutch Gainor may have been boosted by cherry picking , as he scored 22 points in 14 GP before the change and 27 points in 28 GP after the change. (Weiland had 23 before and 50 after, and Clapper had at most 18 before and at least 43 after.)

 

[BenchBrawl]

Actually IIRC, Gerard's and Clancy's relevant career only intersected for 6 games during the 1923 playoffs and that's it.

 

[The Macho King]

Actually IIRC, Gerard's and Clancy's relevant career only intersected for 6 games during the 1923 playoffs and that's it.

Yeah that's fair. Clancy looks like he broke out *after* Gerard left.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Yeah that's fair. Clancy looks like he broke out *after* Gerard left.

He broke out against the Vancouver Maroons in the 1923 playoffs in a major way.So about 6 games before Gerard retired.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Regardless, I think Denneny should make the Top 100, but not sure he should be ranked right now.Him going over Eddie Gerard is ugly.I'd rank Clint Benedict and Georges Boucher over him, as well, but not as urgently as Gerard.

 

[seventieslord]

Thanks. So it would tend to overrate shoot-first players like Denneny and Malone, while tending to underrate pass-first players like Nighbor.

What would you make of this argument that MXD made in the voting results thread?



If they all played at a time that undercounted assists, and Denneny was at times the only real shoot-first player on his team, then the officially recorded stats would tend to overrate him.

I think it's essentially correct, although he is not as shoot first as many other players. He did get his chair of assists as well.

I could Redo all my early era numbers with pumped up assist totals to account for the difference in assist counting between eras, but I've never thought there was an appetite for such a thing. Do people actually want to see that, or is that just getting too far into imaginary stats territory?

 

[overpass]

Just realized that we have game logs now for all players in NHL history at nhl.com. So you can check Clapper’s game log from 1929-30 for yourself.

Dit Clapper Stats and News

Clapper did have a terrific run as a goal scorer at the start of the season and had basically no assists. After the rule change in December his goal scoring slowed down a bit but he started getting assists to make up for it. So maybe his goal scoring was boosted by cherry picking but his point scoring was still very productive after the offside rule was implemented.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Regardless, I think Denneny should make the Top 100, but not sure he should be ranked right now.Him going over Eddie Gerard is ugly.I'd rank Clint Benedict and Georges Boucher over him, as well, but not as urgently as Gerard.

Based on past projects, I don't think Gerard has a chance at top 100, even if I would like him there.

 

[The Macho King]

Based on past projects, I don't think Gerard has a chance at top 100, even if I would like him there.

Honestly I've researched so much in the past ~5 months in this project and now the ATD, I look at my initial list and I'm embarrassed. My list would be a *lot* different.

 

[overpass]

Regardless, I think Denneny should make the Top 100, but not sure he should be ranked right now.Him going over Eddie Gerard is ugly.I'd rank Clint Benedict and Georges Boucher over him, as well, but not as urgently as Gerard.

Just going to play devils advocate a bit. You’ve obviously done your research and I’d like to understand where you’re coming from a bit more.

When you’re ranking these Ottawa players, are you putting extra weight on the Cup-winning/dynasty years of 1920, 1921, and 1923–and is that why Denneny grades out so low for you? Or do you think Denneny was just not as important in, say, 1924-1926 as well?

Denneny was clearly behind Nighbor as the most important contributor, but doesn’t he have a case for #2 over the whole 1920-1927 stretch, considering that Gerard and Benedict weren’t there for the end?

How important do you think Denneny was at his peak? If you were to rank the Ottawa players in each individual season, does Denneny ever finish #1 or #2 for a season?

 

[sr edler]

There was some good-faith hyperbole here (and I somehow mixed up Frank and George Boucher...), but Denneny was playing with Clancy, Nighbor, G. Boucher, P. Broadbent (this was the hyperbole) and, apparently, quite a bit of Lionel Hitchman.

And Jack Darragh.