Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 9
- Thread starter quoipourquoi
- Start date
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,815
- 16,549
I'm not blaming you -- I'm just making sure there isn't an undue amount of credibility given to voting results that, frankly, doesn't make much sense. None of us would take seriously, say, Sidney Crosby getting a high Hart finish in 07-08. For the sake of fairness, we probably should do the same with Syl Apps as far as 39-40 is concerned.
Because those seasons are really, really similar.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Agree with the support- but some distinctions need to be drawn, based on a clarification of our terms. C. Conacher had a Surface-of-Sun Hot Peak, an excellent, six year (not five year- more on that later) Prime, and little of consequence to a 'Top-of-All-Time' discussion outside of that. Ultimately, that last doesn't matter to me so much at this stage of the project. He's worthy.
Let's start with some background. First thing we need to know about All-Star and Hart voting in the Depression era is- ballots had a single entry. There was no '1st-2nd-3rd' etc. for the Hart, you voted for ONE guy. Likewise with the All-Star Team. 1st Team Center- you voted for ONE guy. 2nd Team Center- ONE guy. Led to some results that look kind of peculiar when viewed in contrast to modern Hart/All-Star ballots.
Second thing we need to know, limned by a perspective from our Case History...
For years, a lot of us thought that Eddie Shore was superior to Doug Harvey, because- well, you know, because Four Harts. Then, we got some illumination, by way of a demonstration that in Shore's day, voters were considerably more likely to support Defensemen for the Hart than in Harvey's era. This was shown to the satisfaction of the majority of us- clear enough that the judgement of Harvey over Shore is now the Orthodox viewpoint here.
Thing that I thought recently was- we've developed that picture well enough, but what would happen if we examined the negative of that particular film? That is to say- if the voters who voted for Shore instead voted in a manner consistent with modern voters, who would receive (a couple of) his Harts, instead? More to the immediate point, where would the voters place their votes if they were as disinclined to vote for Defensemen generally as they were (are) in later Eras? It's the starting point to an inquiry that leads to some interesting discoveries-- and I'll share some of mine, soon.
You're right about All-Star Teams (writers had 1 vote for 1st Team, 1 vote for 2nd Team) but I don't think you are right about Hart voting I'm not sure how many players were on the Hart ballot every year, but just perusing some articles from the "research thread for NHL awards:"
1923-24: Voters voted for their top 8 for Hart: The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search
1942-43: "Bill Cowley wins the Hart trophy with 94 of a possible 120 votes (Thursday, April 8, 1943; page 17). This season, there are twelve voters (two per NHL city). Each writer gets 10 votes. A first-place vote is worth 10 points, a second-place vote is worth 9 points, etc. He becomes the 4th multiple-Hart winner in history (Shore, Morenz, Stewart)." (Globe and Mail via @Hockey Outsider )
I didn't find any sources from the 1930s in my 10 minutes of browsing that thread, but my guess is that it would be similar - fewer voters, but much deeper ballots than Hart voting today.
As for your last point, it's true that Conacher finished 2nd to Eddie Shore in Hart voting once, but that's still almost certainly his only top 3 finish among forwards. When Conacher finished 4th in Hart voting the following year, he was behind Sweeney Schriner and Hooley Smith. Those are his only known finishes (keeping in mind that we only know the top 5 in Hart voting for most of his career).
Last edited:
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Taking a different tact. Apps was not a 1938 Hart finalist with a better scoring record, centering Gord Drillon who was the NHL scoring leader. Yet in 1939 and 1940 with lower scoring totals Apps was a finalist:
Syl Apps Stats | Hockey-Reference.com
Leafs won their division in 1938, finishing 3rd in a 7 team league in 1939 and 1940.
Batis
Registered User
It is clear that Kharlamovs scoring achiviements on the international stage are far more impressive than his scoring achiviements domestically. In these posts you can get a closer look at Kharlamovs international scoring.
Kharlamov has his outstanding 70/71-75/76 stretch and as you can see above only Makarov and Firsov dominated their peers more than Kharlamov did when it comes to scoring at major and minor international tournaments over their 5 best years.
While I think that Kharlamovs lack of dominance when it comes to scoring in the Soviet League is a relative weakness on his resume I also think that it is worth noting that missed time was a contributing factor to that and when looking at points per game finishes his Soviet League scoring looks somewhat stronger. So all in all I would say that while Kharlamovs scoring achiviements may not quite live up to his very high reputation as a player he still performed very well as a scorer over the course of his prime when looking at the whole picture.
With this said I personally "only" have Kharlamov ranked as the third greatest Soviet forward behind Makarov and Firsov at the moment. But Kharlamov and Firsov are in my opinion so very close that I have had a hard time deciding between them and at this point of the project I think that Kharlamov looks very good.
Kharlamov has his outstanding 70/71-75/76 stretch and as you can see above only Makarov and Firsov dominated their peers more than Kharlamov did when it comes to scoring at major and minor international tournaments over their 5 best years.
While I think that Kharlamovs lack of dominance when it comes to scoring in the Soviet League is a relative weakness on his resume I also think that it is worth noting that missed time was a contributing factor to that and when looking at points per game finishes his Soviet League scoring looks somewhat stronger. So all in all I would say that while Kharlamovs scoring achiviements may not quite live up to his very high reputation as a player he still performed very well as a scorer over the course of his prime when looking at the whole picture.
With this said I personally "only" have Kharlamov ranked as the third greatest Soviet forward behind Makarov and Firsov at the moment. But Kharlamov and Firsov are in my opinion so very close that I have had a hard time deciding between them and at this point of the project I think that Kharlamov looks very good.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
No, he definitely is the greatest leaf of all-time.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Could quibble amongst a few dynasty Leafs, 1947-51 and 1962-67.
But have to appreciate a fan base not trying to foist the scorers post 1967 expansion as greats.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
There were two criteria for these games. 3 or more GA AND .879 save percentage or less. So saving 22 of 25 wouldn't get on the list in spite of being a 3 GA game. Neither would saving 10 of 12, in spite of being a low save percentage game.
Those are low impact or negative impact games from goaltenders. And Dryden could win them a lot easier than his contemporaries (34-209 record for all NHL goalies in the 1971-79 playoffs, excluding Ken Dryden's 13-18 record).
There's a good bit in The Game that describes the plight of Ken Dryden feeling irrelevant after giving up 5 goals when the Habs rallied to win anyways. Can't find it but it ends with something along the lines of Dryden complaining I couldn't even lose the game.
'40 Leafs With Apps: 15-7-5 (.648)
'40 Leafs without Apps: 10-10-1 (.500)
'08 Pens with Crosby: 31-18-4 (.623)
'08 Pens without Crosby: 16-9-4 (.621)
ImporterExporter
"You're a boring old man"
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,815
- 16,549
It just means Apps was more valuable. Not that he was better. Not to mention, the Leafs won 10 games without Apps. The Rangers won a grand total of zero games without Dave Kerr.
Nick Hansen
Registered User
- Sep 28, 2017
- 3,122
- 2,652
Apps not to be compared with Crosby any way, though it seems like Apps was very important for the Leafs.
But the low number of games played some years certainly put his Hart voting in context. He'd not get those votes today.
But the low number of games played some years certainly put his Hart voting in context. He'd not get those votes today.
ChiTownPhilly
Not Too Soft
Charlie Conacher's Prime- Year-by-Year:
1) 1930-1931: 31 Goals (1st), 12 Assists, 43 Points (3rd)- NOT a 1st or 2nd Team All-Star, finishing behind Bill Cook (no shame in that, but) Cook was 30G (2nd) 12A, 42P (4th) [and took 6 more games to put up those numbers]. Also finished behind Dit Clapper for 2nd Team, by a vote. {22G 8A 30P}
2) 1931-1932: 34G (1st) 14A 48P (4th), 2nd Team All-Star, again behind a strong Bill Cook, who is once more in statistical arrears- 33G (2nd) 14A 47P (5th), in 4 more games than Conacher played. [P.S.: this was the Toronto Stanley Cup Year- a Conacher "Retro-Smythe," at least per the HHoF project.]
3) 1932-1933: 14G 19A (his best playmaking season ever?) 33P, 2nd Team All-Star behind Cook- but missed a sixth of the season to injuries- and was t-3rd for points among RWs that year, and was 2nd in PPG. Not an outrageous AS selection.
Now come the two Monster Years...
4) 1933-1934: 32G (1st) 20A (5th) 52P (1st), 1st Team All-Star, spear-point of Prince of Wales trophy winning Team, potting a league-shattering 174 Goals for (runner up- 120). Conacher's Points per Game were c. 20% higher than the next nearest pursuer, linemate Joe Primeau [1.24 v. 1.02]. Didn't register in the extent Hart Trophy voting record. [Are you kidding me?!?] Voters instead opted for Aurele Joliat, 21G (t-4th) 15A (t-21st to 26th) 36P (t-9th). [AND saw fit to give more consideration to at least four others that year.] What in the Actual f***??!
5) 1934-1935: 36G (1st) 21A 57P (1st, by 10p over nearest pursuer), 1st Team All-Star, Team again wins Prince of Wales trophy and leads circuit in goals scored. Speaking of goal-scoring, this is maybe THE great goal-scoring season, pre-Howe. The 36 potted led 2nd place by eleven. Led in: Goals. Even-strength goals. Game-winning goals. First goals. [Only tied for 2nd in Power-play goals, though.] As stated upthread, 2nd place in the Hart to Shore.
Eddie Shore did not gap Defensemen in offensive output the way Conacher gapped fellow Forwards that year. This looks like an h-job, to me.
6) 1935-1936: 23G (1st) 15A 38P (t-4th), 1st Team All-Star, 4th in Hart voting- behind Shore, again, Hooley Smith (who had the same number of points in three more games), and Sweeney Schriner.
So- in conclusion, if one knew nothing about these seasons other than what we found in the statistical record, would it have surprised you if Conacher's All-Star record had instead been: 1,1,2,1,1,1 [as opposed to- X,2,2,1,1,1]? If Lindsay/Pearson-style voting took place in his era, would you not favor him for that award in both 1933-34 & 1934-35?
1) 1930-1931: 31 Goals (1st), 12 Assists, 43 Points (3rd)- NOT a 1st or 2nd Team All-Star, finishing behind Bill Cook (no shame in that, but) Cook was 30G (2nd) 12A, 42P (4th) [and took 6 more games to put up those numbers]. Also finished behind Dit Clapper for 2nd Team, by a vote. {22G 8A 30P}
2) 1931-1932: 34G (1st) 14A 48P (4th), 2nd Team All-Star, again behind a strong Bill Cook, who is once more in statistical arrears- 33G (2nd) 14A 47P (5th), in 4 more games than Conacher played. [P.S.: this was the Toronto Stanley Cup Year- a Conacher "Retro-Smythe," at least per the HHoF project.]
3) 1932-1933: 14G 19A (his best playmaking season ever?) 33P, 2nd Team All-Star behind Cook- but missed a sixth of the season to injuries- and was t-3rd for points among RWs that year, and was 2nd in PPG. Not an outrageous AS selection.
Now come the two Monster Years...
4) 1933-1934: 32G (1st) 20A (5th) 52P (1st), 1st Team All-Star, spear-point of Prince of Wales trophy winning Team, potting a league-shattering 174 Goals for (runner up- 120). Conacher's Points per Game were c. 20% higher than the next nearest pursuer, linemate Joe Primeau [1.24 v. 1.02]. Didn't register in the extent Hart Trophy voting record. [Are you kidding me?!?] Voters instead opted for Aurele Joliat, 21G (t-4th) 15A (t-21st to 26th) 36P (t-9th). [AND saw fit to give more consideration to at least four others that year.] What in the Actual f***??!
5) 1934-1935: 36G (1st) 21A 57P (1st, by 10p over nearest pursuer), 1st Team All-Star, Team again wins Prince of Wales trophy and leads circuit in goals scored. Speaking of goal-scoring, this is maybe THE great goal-scoring season, pre-Howe. The 36 potted led 2nd place by eleven. Led in: Goals. Even-strength goals. Game-winning goals. First goals. [Only tied for 2nd in Power-play goals, though.] As stated upthread, 2nd place in the Hart to Shore.
Eddie Shore did not gap Defensemen in offensive output the way Conacher gapped fellow Forwards that year. This looks like an h-job, to me.
6) 1935-1936: 23G (1st) 15A 38P (t-4th), 1st Team All-Star, 4th in Hart voting- behind Shore, again, Hooley Smith (who had the same number of points in three more games), and Sweeney Schriner.
So- in conclusion, if one knew nothing about these seasons other than what we found in the statistical record, would it have surprised you if Conacher's All-Star record had instead been: 1,1,2,1,1,1 [as opposed to- X,2,2,1,1,1]? If Lindsay/Pearson-style voting took place in his era, would you not favor him for that award in both 1933-34 & 1934-35?
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,815
- 16,549
It was just an obvious apples to apples comparison: both played the same proportion of games and both were having good (but not league-leading) PPG.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
You live in a different universe than I do. It is clearly an open question who is the greatest Leaf of all-time and there are several worthy candidates.
(And I have published three articles in The Hockey News, so get off your high chair.)
ChiTownPhilly
Not Too Soft
Wednesday Morning Waxings:
Let's get this out of the way first:
Reminded myself that King Clancy and Charlie Conacher were teammates for the entire relevant length of Conacher's career. Of course, absolutely no doubt in my mind that they were mutually beneficial to one another. And- as long as I was circling back for another look at Clancy- did you see that damned stone freak of a season he had with Ottawa in 1929-30?! Four points shy of a point a game. Transcends anything Eddie Shore did- and looks like the premier offensive output season for a Defenseman, between the dawn of consolidation and the arrival of Red Kelly in Detroit*. And- speaking of Red Kelly- I thought- do you suppose that Clancy had some sniper forwards in Ottawa that year (like Kelly had in Detroit)? Just no- he was helping guys named Hec Kilrea and Joe Lamb have career years.
Soooo... Ottawa trades Clancy- for a couple of bodies and a money-satchel. And sinks to a combined 52 games under .500 in their next three campaigns, before Major Hockey operations come to a close in Ottawa, for a half-century plus...
*Babe Pratt had a couple of freak 'offensive-output-for-defenseman' seasons in the '40s, one of which led to a Hart... but War-depletion was surely a factor. He never did anything like it before OR after the War.
Let's get this out of the way first:
I freely concede error on my part concerning this. When I saw Hart voting results that only went five deep, it looked like the sort of result that one would expect if each ballot only named one person. For whatever reason, it just seems that the record for vote-getters past five has been lost to the mists of history. Mea culpa.
When I made my Prelim List, I had C. Conacher ahead of Apps- and didn't think I was doing anything particularly controversial. And it's funny- here's the thing- Syl Apps is (to me) an easy guy to admire. Clean living, Wartime service- all around laudable. I'd like to find reasons to give him more consideration than my view of the record inclines me to give him at this time. Mind remains open- I have three more days to look. Not seeing it now, though.
Reminded myself that King Clancy and Charlie Conacher were teammates for the entire relevant length of Conacher's career. Of course, absolutely no doubt in my mind that they were mutually beneficial to one another. And- as long as I was circling back for another look at Clancy- did you see that damned stone freak of a season he had with Ottawa in 1929-30?! Four points shy of a point a game. Transcends anything Eddie Shore did- and looks like the premier offensive output season for a Defenseman, between the dawn of consolidation and the arrival of Red Kelly in Detroit*. And- speaking of Red Kelly- I thought- do you suppose that Clancy had some sniper forwards in Ottawa that year (like Kelly had in Detroit)? Just no- he was helping guys named Hec Kilrea and Joe Lamb have career years.
Soooo... Ottawa trades Clancy- for a couple of bodies and a money-satchel. And sinks to a combined 52 games under .500 in their next three campaigns, before Major Hockey operations come to a close in Ottawa, for a half-century plus...
*Babe Pratt had a couple of freak 'offensive-output-for-defenseman' seasons in the '40s, one of which led to a Hart... but War-depletion was surely a factor. He never did anything like it before OR after the War.
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,354
This provides some hints that Conacher was perhaps a bit of a one-trick pony.
He probably would have fared better in award voting in the modern era, but then we'd have probably just understood it to be lazy voting by writers just looking at hockey cards stats to inform their votes, a la Ovechkin in some of his post-peak seasons.
Voters of this era seemed to prefer guys who drove the bus. They loved 60-minute defensemen, and we know they loved Apps in spite of his injury troubles. Conacher was perhaps seen as a key component of a great line, but not THE key.
At this point, I'm comfortable placing him behind Apps and Clancy. All three played for the same franchise in succession, and there seems to be little doubt in my mind that Apps and Clancy were more revered by observers of the era. Conn Smythe bet his bankroll on a horse race, using the funds to buy Clancy. Jack Adams thought Apps was better than Morenz. Maybe stuff like this strays close to the "fluff" category, but we are 80 years down the road, and you have to take what you can get in terms of information.
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 28,862
- 16,354
another mark in chelios' favour-- he was a real student of the game. montreal didn't work? he learns a lesson: leave the fighting-with-cops-drunk-getting to belfour.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Upon more review you are correct.
1938 Apps had no Hart consideration as the Leafs won their division.
1939 and 1940, seven team league, Leafs were a comfortable third. Not at risk of missing the playoffs even though in 1939 they were a sub 0.500 team. Main reason they were third is their poor record against the Bruins and the Rangers. Roughly 0.300-0.350. Not Hart quality.
Syl Apps Stats | Hockey-Reference.com
Puzzling.
Last edited:
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
A season that probably would have gotten more support from today’s voters. Just as we can fetch parallels that suggest overstated Hart support, it does appear that the inverse happens as well.
Now if we can just dig up three or four more healthy seasons from Brad Park that were undervalued by voters, I’ll understand his top-50 candidacy.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Park lacked healthy seasons so four of the 2-3rd Norris finishes are puzzling.
Granted some vote splitting amongst teammates and injuries to other d-men factored in.
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
The most interesting thing about all-time great Leafs is that the franchise is behind all the other original six teams in terms of where you'd likely place their best players on a list such as this. That's surprising given their success up to '67.
Issue of Soviet goaltending
It has been pointed out many times in the past that the Soviets had trouble of developing elite goalies compared to their arrays of great forwards and a few great defensemen too. I have found a little bit of something to this topic in the contemporary Czech hockey / sporting press. As far as the beginnings of Soviet hockey, I´ll just be quoting what was posted here on forum in the past. Info that I´ve found concerns the 1960s and 1970s. For some voters, it may be helpful to assess the value that Tretiak represented for the Soviet national team. Main takeaway from this is that the struggle which Soviets continually had with developing goalies was a real thing.
1940s, 1950s:
1960s:
These two pictures come from the Kopaná-hokej magazine, 1966 editions. First one is interview with Arkady Chernyshov, the second one is reproduction of Vyacheslav Starshinov´s views primarily on his experience with encounters with Canadian hockey. Translations of key parts:
Kopaná-hokej, question: “How else could this cooperation look like?”
A. Chernyshov: “For example: Czechoslovaks have very good goalies. It´d be very interesting for us to send our coach to Czechoslovakia so that he can watch how the work with goalies conducts itself. Likewise for you [= Czechoslovaks], it would surely be interesting to find out about our way of physical conditioning trainings. This cooperation could be carried out through conferences of which we´ve talked about.”
V. Starshinov
“When he [= Starshinov] was in Canada this year, he had the biggest interest in games of professionals from all players as he wanted to learn and watch something from them. ‘Every player, if he wants to rise with his performance, has to learn from the better ones that which he has not mastered yet. I have learnt to skate into free spaces in front of the goal and to manipulate with the stick close to the body!’ Those couple of games he has watched gave him so much. That´s why Soviet hockey managers officially asked LIHG this year for permission to play with professionals. ‘It is also our wish,’ Starshinov said. ‘Soviet team would like to try it out in this year´s trip to Canada too, but the managers of Canadian profi-teams have been still making excuses and they´ve lined up just a two or three real professional players against the Soviet players for a test. But we´ve played against the best goalie, professional Plante. He is perhaps the best in the world and we could not score a goal on him no matter what. So we lost 1:2. Our squad would need such a goalie! Although to go to Canadian goaltending school would be pointless. That is why our experts aim to get goalies on the level that Czechoslovakia has.’”
1970s:
Another thing that points to ongoing goaltending pains of the Soviets that I´ve found, happened in 1976. Most of you have probably heard about the infamous game Poland vs. USSR with one of the most shocking results in history (6:4) at WHC 1976. This loss was partially caused by weak goaltending from A. Sidelnikov, not Tretiak himself. Sidelnikov got 4 goals and then, at 24th minute, was exchanged for Tretiak who finished the rest of the game. Sidelnikov did not play a single minute after.
Tretiak played fine in most of tough match-ups. USSR x Sweden 6:1 where the Swedes actually outshot the Soviets (29:36 shots against), game report from Československý sport says that Tretiak “was outstanding in the goal.” Otherwise the Soviets “won highly and without problems.”
USSR x CSSR 2:3, Soviets got outshot again (34:41 shots against). Tretiak seems to have played well, no blame for the goals allowed and solved several dangerous situations. Czechs played overall a bit better than Soviets but the game could definitely go either way.
USSR x Sweden 3:4, Soviets this time heavily outshot the Swedes (47:28 shots against) but lost. Sweden “won fully deservedly.” Swedes played tightly defensively and didn´t allow Soviets to really get into their combinatory cycling game. Tretiak had weak game, let several soft goals in, 3 of the Swedish goals were scored during 3 min. in the 2nd period. Tretiak wanted to be exchanged but Kulagin didn´t let him so he finished the game.
USSR x CSSR 3:3, Soviets were outshot once again (27:30 shots against) but finished the tournament with this tie and silver medal (Czechs went undefeated to the 1st place). Soviets were outplayed in this game again, though outplayed by small margin, no specific mention of Tretiak´s play in the report.
Now I am going to cite how Russian and Czechoslovak press commented Tretiak´s weak performance vs. Sweden that basically cost the Soviets the chance to defend the title. I think it reveals a danger of Soviets overworking Tretiak as well as the “goalie desert” behind Tretiak´s back on the Russian territory.
Komsomolska Pravda wrote: “Losses of the fourteen times world champions can be explained not by bad luck, but mostly by mistakes which happened during the preparation of our team for the World Championship. It can barely be considered as a normal situation, when one and the same goalie is practically without substitution forced to protect the goal in all important international games. A man is not from iron. It has been talked about for several years now and yet Vladislav Tretiak has had no dignified alternating goalie so far. And by the way, no equivalent replacement has been found for injured Maltsev, Kapustin and Shadrin too.”
Československý sport wrote after the game: “His [Tretiak´s] goaltending colleague Sidelnikov did not succeed against Poland right in the initial game so coaches have been giving priority to him [Tretiak]. But he is so much tired from difficult season that he would definitely need a rest. No wonder then, that the match with Swedes did not work out as well as he´d wish. But not coach nor even players blamed him for anything after the game…”
Československý sport wrote after the championship: “The [Soviet] team also missed more balanced goaltending duo. Sidelnikov, who played weak in the initial clash with Poland, sat out the remaining games on the bench and Tretiak could not take a rest in a single game. It was shown through his weak performance with the Swedes too.”
Tretiak had to play at least over 60 games throughout the season, but quite possibly over 70 games given the amount (League + Olympics + World Championship + remaining international games + NHL Superseries). Hence some claims of possible overplaying and fatigue.
At the end of this season, Tretiak won his third straight 'Soviet Player of the Year' award.
It has been pointed out many times in the past that the Soviets had trouble of developing elite goalies compared to their arrays of great forwards and a few great defensemen too. I have found a little bit of something to this topic in the contemporary Czech hockey / sporting press. As far as the beginnings of Soviet hockey, I´ll just be quoting what was posted here on forum in the past. Info that I´ve found concerns the 1960s and 1970s. For some voters, it may be helpful to assess the value that Tretiak represented for the Soviet national team. Main takeaway from this is that the struggle which Soviets continually had with developing goalies was a real thing.
1940s, 1950s:
1960s:
These two pictures come from the Kopaná-hokej magazine, 1966 editions. First one is interview with Arkady Chernyshov, the second one is reproduction of Vyacheslav Starshinov´s views primarily on his experience with encounters with Canadian hockey. Translations of key parts:
Kopaná-hokej, question: “How else could this cooperation look like?”
A. Chernyshov: “For example: Czechoslovaks have very good goalies. It´d be very interesting for us to send our coach to Czechoslovakia so that he can watch how the work with goalies conducts itself. Likewise for you [= Czechoslovaks], it would surely be interesting to find out about our way of physical conditioning trainings. This cooperation could be carried out through conferences of which we´ve talked about.”
V. Starshinov
“When he [= Starshinov] was in Canada this year, he had the biggest interest in games of professionals from all players as he wanted to learn and watch something from them. ‘Every player, if he wants to rise with his performance, has to learn from the better ones that which he has not mastered yet. I have learnt to skate into free spaces in front of the goal and to manipulate with the stick close to the body!’ Those couple of games he has watched gave him so much. That´s why Soviet hockey managers officially asked LIHG this year for permission to play with professionals. ‘It is also our wish,’ Starshinov said. ‘Soviet team would like to try it out in this year´s trip to Canada too, but the managers of Canadian profi-teams have been still making excuses and they´ve lined up just a two or three real professional players against the Soviet players for a test. But we´ve played against the best goalie, professional Plante. He is perhaps the best in the world and we could not score a goal on him no matter what. So we lost 1:2. Our squad would need such a goalie! Although to go to Canadian goaltending school would be pointless. That is why our experts aim to get goalies on the level that Czechoslovakia has.’”
1970s:
Another thing that points to ongoing goaltending pains of the Soviets that I´ve found, happened in 1976. Most of you have probably heard about the infamous game Poland vs. USSR with one of the most shocking results in history (6:4) at WHC 1976. This loss was partially caused by weak goaltending from A. Sidelnikov, not Tretiak himself. Sidelnikov got 4 goals and then, at 24th minute, was exchanged for Tretiak who finished the rest of the game. Sidelnikov did not play a single minute after.
Tretiak played fine in most of tough match-ups. USSR x Sweden 6:1 where the Swedes actually outshot the Soviets (29:36 shots against), game report from Československý sport says that Tretiak “was outstanding in the goal.” Otherwise the Soviets “won highly and without problems.”
USSR x CSSR 2:3, Soviets got outshot again (34:41 shots against). Tretiak seems to have played well, no blame for the goals allowed and solved several dangerous situations. Czechs played overall a bit better than Soviets but the game could definitely go either way.
USSR x Sweden 3:4, Soviets this time heavily outshot the Swedes (47:28 shots against) but lost. Sweden “won fully deservedly.” Swedes played tightly defensively and didn´t allow Soviets to really get into their combinatory cycling game. Tretiak had weak game, let several soft goals in, 3 of the Swedish goals were scored during 3 min. in the 2nd period. Tretiak wanted to be exchanged but Kulagin didn´t let him so he finished the game.
USSR x CSSR 3:3, Soviets were outshot once again (27:30 shots against) but finished the tournament with this tie and silver medal (Czechs went undefeated to the 1st place). Soviets were outplayed in this game again, though outplayed by small margin, no specific mention of Tretiak´s play in the report.
Now I am going to cite how Russian and Czechoslovak press commented Tretiak´s weak performance vs. Sweden that basically cost the Soviets the chance to defend the title. I think it reveals a danger of Soviets overworking Tretiak as well as the “goalie desert” behind Tretiak´s back on the Russian territory.
Komsomolska Pravda wrote: “Losses of the fourteen times world champions can be explained not by bad luck, but mostly by mistakes which happened during the preparation of our team for the World Championship. It can barely be considered as a normal situation, when one and the same goalie is practically without substitution forced to protect the goal in all important international games. A man is not from iron. It has been talked about for several years now and yet Vladislav Tretiak has had no dignified alternating goalie so far. And by the way, no equivalent replacement has been found for injured Maltsev, Kapustin and Shadrin too.”
Československý sport wrote after the game: “His [Tretiak´s] goaltending colleague Sidelnikov did not succeed against Poland right in the initial game so coaches have been giving priority to him [Tretiak]. But he is so much tired from difficult season that he would definitely need a rest. No wonder then, that the match with Swedes did not work out as well as he´d wish. But not coach nor even players blamed him for anything after the game…”
Československý sport wrote after the championship: “The [Soviet] team also missed more balanced goaltending duo. Sidelnikov, who played weak in the initial clash with Poland, sat out the remaining games on the bench and Tretiak could not take a rest in a single game. It was shown through his weak performance with the Swedes too.”
Tretiak had to play at least over 60 games throughout the season, but quite possibly over 70 games given the amount (League + Olympics + World Championship + remaining international games + NHL Superseries). Hence some claims of possible overplaying and fatigue.
At the end of this season, Tretiak won his third straight 'Soviet Player of the Year' award.
Last edited:
Theokritos
Global Moderator
- Apr 6, 2010
- 12,542
- 4,947
Very illuminating comments by Chernyshov and Starshinov. Thanks a lot!
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Proposal: Free agency edition Trade Rumours/Proposals [MOD - Stay on Topic] 5- Latest: The Devilish Buffoon
-
