What if there WAS a "Coffey Trophy"?

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Okay, here's the premise: I see lots of good arguments during the ranking of top forwards all time, and of course hardware comes into play a lot. Specifically, I see arguments in favour of players like Sakic, Yzerman, and Fedorov being places higher than other similarly talented offensive forwards because of their defense, and Selke trophies are there to support the claim. To the extreme, there are players like Bob Gainey whose defensive game is deemed all that is necessary to justify a fairly high ranking against other forwards that may have been "more (offensively) talented."

Now, to spin that in the other direction, defensemen do get consideration for the number of points they scored in their career, but arguments boil down to number of Hart, Conn Smythes, and, of course, Norris trophies.

So, what if there had traditionally been a trophy for the best offensive defenseman in the league going back the same number of years as the Norris? Kind of like a defensemen's Art Ross. Would the simple fact of having that hardware in the trophy case sway that debate, and would the number of "Coffey" trophies compared to the next guy with similar stats and trophies otherwise affect people's rankings?

I'd like to lean on pnep and Hockey Outsider, the ultimates in statistical historians, to provide a list of defensemen who led all defensemen in scoring each year going back to the first Norris (=Coffey trophy winner); or just a table with the names and how many times they would have won. And as the rest of you check out the list, does the recognition of this award (if considered as legit as an Art Ross or Selke) provoke any change in your rankings?

Link to HOH Top 100: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=486479

edited to show just defensemen rankings:

This is the final list of the Top 100 Hockey Players as determined by the History of Hockey community at HFBoards:

NOTE: Please report any errors via PM to FissionFire

Top 100 Hockey Players

Rank | No. | Player | Pos | Height | Weight | Career
2|4| Bobby Orr |D|6'0"|199|1966-1977;1978-1979
7|2| Eddie Shore |D|5'11"|194|1924-1944
9|2| Doug Harvey |D|5'11"|190|1947-1969
11|77| Raymond Bourque |D|6'0"|219|1979-2001
17|5| Denis Potvin |D|6'0"|205|1973-1988
18|4| Leonard "Red" Kelly |D|6'0"|195|1947-1967
26|5| Nicklas Lidstrom |D|6'2"|190|1991-Present
32|19| Larry Robinson |D|6'3"|220|1972-1992
35|2| Viacheslav Fetisov |D|6'1"|215|1974-1975;1976-1998
40|22| Brad Park |D|6'0"|190|1968-1985
42|24| Chris Chelios |D|6'1"|190|1983-Present
T-46|7| Paul Coffey |D|6'0"|200|1980-2001
51|3| Pierre Pilote |D|5'10"|178|1955-1969
T-53|7| Francis "King" Clancy |D|5'7"|155|1921-1937
58|7| Tim Horton |D|5'10"|180|1949-1974
61|17| Earl Seibert |D|6'2"|198|1931-1946
64|2| Al MacInnis |D|6'2"|204|1981-2004
T-69|6| Sprague Cleghorn |D|5'10"|190|1910-1928
83|4| Bill Gadsby |D|6'0"|180|1946-1966
T-85|21| Borje Salming |D|6'1"|193|1970-1993
92|4| Scott Stevens |D|6'2"|215|1982-2004
97|6| Valeri Vasiliev |D|5'11"|187|1966-1984
98|18| Serge Savard |D|6'3"|210|1966-1983
100|2| Brian Leetch |D|6'0"|185|1987-2004;2005-2006

Click to read more...

 

[Dark Shadows]

I wonder how much it would affect the veracity of voting if players needed to have points removed because they were playing some of their time as a forward?

I.E Housley played 10+ games as a forward for the Jets in 92-93.


However, regarding your original point, I don't think an offensive defenseman trophy would make much difference in rankings.

53/54: Red Kelly
54/55: Doug Harvey
55/56: Bill Gadsby
56/57: Doug Harvey
57/58: Bill Gadsby
58/59: Bill Gadsby
59/60: Doug Mohns(However also played as a forward)/Pierre Pilote
60/61: Doug Harvey
61/62: Jean Guy Talbot
62/63: Doug Harvey
63/64: Pierre Pilote
64/65: Pierre Pilote
65/66: Pierre Pilote
66/67: Pierre Pilote
67/68: Mike McMahon
68/69: Bobby Orr
69/70: Bobby Orr
70/71: Bobby Orr
71/72: Bobby Orr
72/73: Bobby Orr
73/74: Bobby Orr
74/75: Bobby Orr
75/76: Denis Potvin
76/77: Larry Robinson
77/78: Denis Potvin
78/79: Denis Potvin
79/80: Mark Howe(However also played as Forward)/Larry Robinson
80/81: Randy Carlyle
81/82: Paul Coffey
82/83: Paul Coffey
83/84: Paul Coffey
84/85: Paul Coffey
85/86: Paul Coffey
86/87: Ray Bourque
87/88: Gary Suter
88/89: Paul Coffey
89/90: Paul Coffey
90/91: Al Macinnis
91/92: Brian Leetch
92/93: Phil Housley(However also played as forward)/Paul Coffey
93/94: Ray Bourque
94/95: Paul Coffey
95/96: Brian Leetch
96/97: Brian Leetch
97/98: Nick Lidstrom
98/99: Al Macinnis
99/00: Nick Lidstrom
00/01: Brian Leetch
01/02: Sergei Gonchar
02/03: Al Macinnis
03/04: Sergei Gonchar
05/06: Nick Lidstrom
06/07: Scott Niedermayer
07/08: Nick Lidstrom
08/09: Mike Green

 

[Canadiens1958]

Doug Mohns

Doug Mohns played some left wing during the 1959 - 60 season.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Doug Mohns played some left wing during the 1959 - 60 season.

In 59/60, the newspaper articles point that he was only the 2nd blueliner to ever score 20 goals in a season.

However for some reason, I have thing nagging flickering feeling in my head that you are right and maybe that he even played more LW than Defense that year though. Some fleeting memory that I cannot quite place.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Doug Mohns LW/D

In 59/60, the newspaper articles point that he was only the 2nd blueliner to ever score 20 goals in a season.

However for some reason, I have thing nagging flickering feeling in my head that you are right and maybe that he even played more LW than Defense that year though. Some fleeting memory that I cannot quite place.

Check 1959-60 per the following:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BOS/1960.html

 

[Dark Shadows]

Check 1959-60 per the following:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/BOS/1960.html

It lists him as D/LW in every single year, even the ones where he played only 1 position. Hockey-reference is terrible for that.

Here is something more concrete which proves you right.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Attachment

It lists him as D/LW in every single year, even the ones where he played only 1 position. Hockey-reference is terrible for that.

Here is something more concrete which proves you right.

Hockey cards. Using hockey cards could prove that Jacques Lemaire played for the Buffalo Sabres.

Hint #1 see attached

 

[Dark Shadows]

Hockey cards. Using hockey cards could prove that Jacques Lemaire played for the Buffalo Sabres.

Hint #1 see attached

There is a large difference between an artist depiction error(An artist who possibly did not even watch Hockey) and the statistical facts they printed on the cards.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Very Cold

There is a large difference between an artist depiction error(An artist who possibly did not even watch Hockey) and the statistical facts they printed on the cards.

True about write-ups as opposed to stats as well.

Very cold and heading towards freezing. My attachment did not contain errors. Continue this by PM.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

thornton's right. having a coffey trophy doesn't change too much about ranking defencemen all-time. one guy whose career comes out looking significantly better, though, is gonchar.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

If anything, the benefit of the Coffey trophy is how it would change Norris voting.

 

[Big Phil]

In 59/60, the newspaper articles point that he was only the 2nd blueliner to ever score 20 goals in a season.

However for some reason, I have thing nagging flickering feeling in my head that you are right and maybe that he even played more LW than Defense that year though. Some fleeting memory that I cannot quite place.

I believe you are correct. Flash Hollett was the first d-man to get 20 goals and Orr was the next one, so I think they consider Mohns to have been a LW too that year.

 

[Dark Shadows]

True about write-ups as opposed to stats as well.

Very cold and heading towards freezing. My attachment did not contain errors. Continue this by PM.

"Very cold headed towards freezing"? What does this have to do with conversation?

My attachment did not contain errors either, and I have no desire to speak with you in a PM, nor any idea why we need to.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Remember, I'm kind of asking everyone to change their thinking a bit. Imagine this "Coffey" trophy was as covetted as an Art Ross or Selke trophy. One interesting section is in the 11th-13th spots among defensemen. Taking a cursory look:

11 - Chelios, 2 Norris, 0 Coffey
12 - Coffey, 2 Norris, 9, er, Coffey
13 - Pilote, 3 Norris, 5 Coffey
(11th and 13th separated by 9 players in the top 100 list)

Also:

3 - Harvey, 7 Norris, 4 Coffey
7 - Lidstrom, 6 Norris, 4 Coffey
(and mind you, they are separated by 15 or 16 players in the complete top 100 players).

19 - Gadsby, 0 Norris, 3 Coffey
24 - Leetch, 2 Norris, 4 Coffey
(I know what's going on here, but they are still separated by 17 spots overall).

It is over-simplifying things to an extent, because certain of these guys factored into top 3 or 5 place voting continuously (or widely considered a "top 3 or 5" defenseman repeatedly), while some players' only top 5 appearance may have actually culminated in a Norris trophy.

So even if it wouldn't be enough of a factor for some to change the order among the defensemen, would not some of these guys possibly earn merit to leap ahead of the other positional players above them if there was a legitimate piece of hardware like this?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

If anything, the benefit of the Coffey trophy is how it would change Norris voting.

Interesting point. At the end of the regular season, we would know who the "Coffey" winner was. Would he then be assumed to be a favourite for the Norris (or atleast certainly a candidate), or assumed to be a candidate for the Hart (much as the Art Ross winner has traditionally been)? How much do you figure the Art Ross has/is affect(ed/ing) Hart/LBP voting? Seems to me there is too strong of a correlation between leading the league in points and winning the MVP trophy.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Interesting point. At the end of the regular season, we would know who the "Coffey" winner was. Would he then be assumed to be a favourite for the Norris (or atleast certainly a candidate), or assumed to be a candidate for the Hart (much as the Art Ross winner has traditionally been)? How much do you figure the Art Ross has/is affect(ed/ing) Hart/LBP voting? Seems to me there is too strong of a correlation between leading the league in points and winning the MVP trophy.

It's hard to say. Either they'd have a stronger chance of winning more, or maybe Norris voters would value defence. Would Horton be higher if he had a Norris? Would Gonchar be higher?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Adjustment Needed

Okay, here's the premise: I see lots of good arguments during the ranking of top forwards all time, and of course hardware comes into play a lot. Specifically, I see arguments in favour of players like Sakic, Yzerman, and Fedorov being places higher than other similarly talented offensive forwards because of their defense, and Selke trophies are there to support the claim. To the extreme, there are players like Bob Gainey whose defensive game is deemed all that is necessary to justify a fairly high ranking against other forwards that may have been "more (offensively) talented."

Now, to spin that in the other direction, defensemen do get consideration for the number of points they scored in their career, but arguments boil down to number of Hart, Conn Smythes, and, of course, Norris trophies.

So, what if there had traditionally been a trophy for the best offensive defenseman in the league going back the same number of years as the Norris? Kind of like a defensemen's Art Ross. Would the simple fact of having that hardware in the trophy case sway that debate, and would the number of "Coffey" trophies compared to the next guy with similar stats and trophies otherwise affect people's rankings?

I'd like to lean on pnep and Hockey Outsider, the ultimates in statistical historians, to provide a list of defensemen who led all defensemen in scoring each year going back to the first Norris (=Coffey trophy winner); or just a table with the names and how many times they would have won. And as the rest of you check out the list, does the recognition of this award (if considered as legit as an Art Ross or Selke) provoke any change in your rankings?

Link to HOH Top 100: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=486479

edited to show just defensemen rankings:

You have to adjust your comparisons.

The Norris and Selke are equivalent since they are opinion based and not stats based.

The Ross would be the best comparison to your "Coffey" since it is points based and awarded by default without any voting required.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

You have to adjust your comparisons.

The Norris and Selke are equivalent since they are opinion based and not stats based.

The Ross would be the best comparison to your "Coffey" since it is points based and awarded by default without any voting required.

Yeah, I realize that. That's why I mentioned all of them. But I'm not talking about number of Selkes vs number of Coffeys, nor number of Norrises vs Coffeys. I'm saying there are top offensive players like Fedorov, Yzerman, and Datsyuk (wow, all Red Wings...) who get bonus points for their Selkes when it comes to ranking top 100s, and players like Sakic who constantly rank highly in offense and get bonus points for often ranking highly in Selke voting.

So what about those Norris winners who had nothing else to peg to their name, but might ALSO have had Coffey trophies (I'm tired of calling them that now) that would act as legitimate bonus points for their offense. Think about it, talk concerning forwards at times revolve around number of Art Ross vs Hart vs LBP vs Selke vs all-star selections. Very rarely are the first 3 applicable to defensemen. Talk concerning defensemen revolves around, well, Norris and all-star selections.

And like we just got talking about, how would that trophy affect Norris voting. Would it be considered one of those essentials (or at least a huge plus) to have on a HOF resume? Etc, etc.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Purpose of Trophies

Yeah, I realize that. That's why I mentioned all of them. But I'm not talking about number of Selkes vs number of Coffeys, nor number of Norrises vs Coffeys. I'm saying there are top offensive players like Fedorov, Yzerman, and Datsyuk (wow, all Red Wings...) who get bonus points for their Selkes when it comes to ranking top 100s, and players like Sakic who constantly rank highly in offense and get bonus points for often ranking highly in Selke voting.

So what about those Norris winners who had nothing else to peg to their name, but might ALSO have had Coffey trophies (I'm tired of calling them that now) that would act as legitimate bonus points for their offense. Think about it, talk concerning forwards at times revolve around number of Art Ross vs Hart vs LBP vs Selke vs all-star selections. Very rarely are the first 3 applicable to defensemen. Talk concerning defensemen revolves around, well, Norris and all-star selections.

And like we just got talking about, how would that trophy affect Norris voting. Would it be considered one of those essentials (or at least a huge plus) to have on a HOF resume? Etc, etc.

Original purpose of the various individual NHL trophies was to recognize a specific area of excellence or contribution to a team effort.

The Hart was the recognition of the most valuable individual contribution regardless of position to a team's success, etc.Check the history of the other major trophies and you will see the purpose and the historic trend.

The only purpose your proposal has is facilitating rankings, discussions, fantasy league selections and ratings. It does not reflect the path that led to the existing trophies being created nor does it have historic merit.

 

[mercury]

And why no Gretzky Trophy for the assists leader in a season?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Original purpose of the various individual NHL trophies was to recognize a specific area of excellence or contribution to a team effort.

The Hart was the recognition of the most valuable individual contribution regardless of position to a team's success, etc.Check the history of the other major trophies and you will see the purpose and the historic trend.

The only purpose your proposal has is facilitating rankings, discussions, fantasy league selections and ratings. It does not reflect the path that led to the existing trophies being created nor does it have historic merit.

Well, they have a goal scorer's trophy (only 10 years old... "historic merit"?), but no playmaker's trophy.
They have an Art Ross (defensemen always have to play [arbitrary assessment of] twice as well as the best forward of the same year to get more points AND this is basically made redundant by the Hart trophy which goes to the top scorer over 90% of the time... YOU check the historic trend) and a best defensive forward trophy (31 years old... "borderline" historic merit?), but no best offensive defenseman trophy. I'm not saying they HAVE to add one... I'm saying just imagine if they DID.

And, are you saying to me that you think the defensive contributions of forwards contribute more to team success than the offensive contributions of defensemen, and thus deserve more recognition? 'Cause that's what it sounds like to me. We can't change what trophies are/aren't awarded, but can choose the arguments and opinions as to why/why not.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Historic Merit, Research,etc

Well, they have a goal scorer's trophy (only 10 years old... "historic merit"?), but no playmaker's trophy.
They have an Art Ross (defensemen always have to play [arbitrary assessment of] twice as well as the best forward of the same year to get more points AND this is basically made redundant by the Hart trophy which goes to the top scorer over 90% of the time... YOU check the historic trend) and a best defensive forward trophy (31 years old... "borderline" historic merit?), but no best offensive defenseman trophy. I'm not saying they HAVE to add one... I'm saying just imagine if they DID.

And, are you saying to me that you think the defensive contributions of forwards contribute more to team success than the offensive contributions of defensemen, and thus deserve more recognition? 'Cause that's what it sounds like to me. We can't change what trophies are/aren't awarded, but can choose the arguments and opinions as to why/why not.

Proper research would show that the Hart Trophy does not go to the top scorer 90% of the time so you are arguing based on a false premise to begin with.50% of the time since 1923-24 would be more accurate but I am making an educated estimate.

Historic merit. Goals have always been clearly defined in the NHL and all of hockey. The concept of an assist in hockey has evolved over time. Initially assists were not awarded at all progressing to assists only on passes in the offensive zone but not on rebounds, progressing to two assists, to the situation today where an assist is awarded for incidental contact with the puck.Quick summation without splitting hairs by league,era,etc.

Playmaker Trophy. Define playmaker. Filter out rebound assists (failed goal scorer not playmaker), incidental or insignificant second assists and chances are you get back to the same point where we are today.

 

[projexns]

To respect all historical integrity, I'd like to see the Norris Trophy renamed the nORRis Trophy...................

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Proper research would show that the Hart Trophy does not go to the top scorer 90% of the time so you are arguing based on a false premise to begin with.50% of the time since 1923-24 would be more accurate but I am making an educated estimate.

Historic merit. Goals have always been clearly defined in the NHL and all of hockey. The concept of an assist in hockey has evolved over time. Initially assists were not awarded at all progressing to assists only on passes in the offensive zone but not on rebounds, progressing to two assists, to the situation today where an assist is awarded for incidental contact with the puck.Quick summation without splitting hairs by league,era,etc.

Playmaker Trophy. Define playmaker. Filter out rebound assists (failed goal scorer not playmaker), incidental or insignificant second assists and chances are you get back to the same point where we are today.

Sorry, I should have said that over 90% of forwards who have won the Hart (since we're talking about forwards) just happen to be the Art Ross winner. Of course, some defensemen and goalies have stolen the rare Hart, and semi-obviously they weren't the league's leading scorers. Mikita (Art Rosses, no Hart), Messier and Clarke (Harts, no Art Ross) are deviations from the trend.

If your next argument is that goals have always been clearly defined, why is the Richard trophy so new? In fact, goals AND assists have been clearly defined since decades before the existence of the Richard trophy, so what is your point?

And finally, I'll support the elimination of "questionable" assists if you support the elimination of empty net goals from statistical totals, but you're still stretching there. I'm not going to argue this useless tangent past the point that shots that result in rebounds create secondary goal scoring chances, and if someone puts one in, why not give an assist? The guy could have shot into the chest or glove, but he challenged the goalie to the point where he couldn't recover in time to stop the goal, so...

Anyway, I didn't bring up the playmaker award, someone else did. I'm interested mostly in defensemen, since they lack the recognition through hardware relatively.

 

[nik jr]

Triffy made a thread about this a few months ago (called "most points by a defensemen annually"), and pnep posted charts of the top 3 d-men in scoring for each NHL season.

i tried to link to it, but the charts are so huge, that it crashed my internet browser.

it was made about 9 months ago.