What would it take for a player of today to challenge for a spot in the big 4?

[PenguinSpeed]

I can only assume you never saw Esposito play by your description.

-Look at his stats. How do you put up below average stats in Chicago before Boston, suck with the Rangers after Boston, and suck without Orr in 1968? That defines Espo to a T. He was nothing without Orr.


Phil Esposito - Wikipedia

 

[ResilientBeast]

-Look at his stats. How do you put up below average stats in Chicago before Boston, suck with the Rangers after Boston, and suck without Orr in 1968? That defines Espo to a T. He was nothing without Orr.


Phil Esposito - Wikipedia

He played with Bobby Hull in Chicago, I doubt he spent a lot of time with the puck. Hull would typically bring it up himself, if I remember correctly.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

-Look at his stats. How do you put up below average stats in Chicago before Boston, suck with the Rangers after Boston, and suck without Orr in 1968? That defines Espo to a T. He was nothing without Orr.


Phil Esposito - Wikipedia

I asked about your description of his play. Which was 100% inaccurate. (Stood in front of the goal for half the game)

He sucked without Orr in 1968? Led the league in assists, second in scoring, 2nd team all-star behind Mikita.

 

[PenguinSpeed]

I asked about your description of his play. Which was 100% inaccurate. (Stood in front of the goal for half the game)

He sucked without Orr in 1968? Led the league in assists, second in scoring, 2nd team all-star behind Mikita.

-It was hyperbole. But yes, he camped out in front of the net. He had an accurate shot, heavy stick, and decent size. Orr played 46 games in 1968. When Orr went down, Espo's production went down with it.

 

[JackSlater]

These exposes have been eye opening. Lafleur and Dionne sucked offensively and Esposito being a top ten scorer twice before arriving in Boston was below average. I do anxiously await whatever comes next.

 

[Michael Farkas]

When Orr went down, Espo's production went down with it.

Some people make bets with John Buccigross on Twitter: "Tiger Woods makes the cut, you send me a shirt...he doesn't, I buy two."

I have one. 1968: Esposito scores more points per game without Orr, you leave. Esposito scores less points per game without Orr, I buy you a shirt...deal?

 

[PenguinSpeed]

Some people make bets with John Buccigross on Twitter: "Tiger Woods makes the cut, you send me a shirt...he doesn't, I buy two."

I have one. 1968: Esposito scores more points per game without Orr, you leave. Esposito scores less points per game without Orr, I buy you a shirt...deal?

-Its irrelevant and Ill save you the time. Because Orr shattered his collarbone and injured his knee in the same season. He was half a player, and still played. It was Orr's worst season in his career

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm going to take that as tacit agreement, because you can only state what-you-believe-to-be facts and then slink out of them so many times in a night...

Esposito scored more points per game WITHOUT Orr in 1968. In 1973, the difference was only -0.08 points per game without Orr. That's 42 games and Esposito's production was virtually unaffected. Then you factor in the 1972 Summit Series where Esposito was Canada's best player without Orr...

Not bad for some slob who just loitered at the top of the crease with his gangland cronies and mooched NHL-record-caliber seasons off of someone else...

The only person you've exposed so far is yourself...and it ain't pretty...here's a towel, slick, cover your shame...

 

[GlitchMarner]

-Its ironic this claim is made. Since in the other thread Jagr beat every player in the NHL except 2 players to win the Art Ross by 30+ points, and the refute logic was the talent was weak when he slaughtered the field in 1999. It cant be argued both ways, its either one or the other.

Who thinks (high-end) NHL talent was weak in 1999? It wasn't.

 

[Sentinel]

Mainly because they had seven consecutive first place finishes during the RS. Never accomplished by another team.

OMG. You are the one who proclaimed regular season is but a warm-up for playoffs! How many personalities do you carry?

 

[Sentinel]

Sorry dude, you need to be able to count the number of teams in the league at each time with some context. Crosby's three Cups in a thirty team era > Howe's four Cups in a six team era.

The Pens are the most successful franchise during Crosby's era. The Wings are 3rd best in a six team league. His Cup record is no better than Crosby's.

What's the second best? Just askin'.

Gawd... *Facepalm*

 

[Michael Farkas]

Team Canada is my guess...that's the only other team Sid played for...

 

[Sentinel]

-There is a clear as day pattern


-Its exposing players for what they are.

Phil Esposito, another one

-His career before Bobby Orr was weak. His career after Orr was weak. He used to park in front of the goal and camp there half the game with his linemates and Orr setting him up. . And he couldnt do anything noteworthy when he wasnt a Bruin without Orr carrying that team and him on his back. The stats tell the truth. In 1968 Orr played under 50 games and Espoito couldnt break 90 points. Orr returned the next year and remained injury free and then the Art Rosses were coming in for Espo.

-Esposito is the anti Jagr. Lemieux retired in 1997, Jagr won the Art Ross the next 4 years without Lemieux. Esposito was nothing special at all without Orr.

Esposito's only dent is that he didn't play for the Penguins. If he did, you and Daver would be ranking him as #4 of all time (behind 66, 87, and 68).

Esposito was terrific without Orr. He even lead his lowly Rangers to the Finals in his twilight years, something Jagr couldn't come close to.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

-Look at his stats. How do you put up below average stats in Chicago before Boston, suck with the Rangers after Boston, and suck without Orr in 1968? That defines Espo to a T. He was nothing without Orr.


Phil Esposito - Wikipedia

so...much...wrong. but not surprising from the Crosby Fan Club

so we are willfully ignoring:

Espo's Hart/Ross year in '68-'69 before Orr blew up? Orr had 64 pts that year, Espo had 126

Or '67-'68 where Orr plays only 46 games and scores 31 pts, while Espo finishes 2nd in scoring by only 3 pts and leads the league in assists?

Espo "sucked with the Rangers"...huh?

in his 4.5 full seasons, he put up 1.08, 1.03, 1.00, .98, .98 ppg at ages 33-37. Well past what is the prime years for ANY player.


fact is, Crosby has work left to do to make the Top 10...nevermind sniffing 5th overall

 

[PenguinSpeed]

I'm going to take that as tacit agreement, because you can only state what-you-believe-to-be facts and then slink out of them so many times in a night...

Esposito scored more points per game WITHOUT Orr in 1968. In 1973, the difference was only -0.08 points per game without Orr. That's 42 games and Esposito's production was virtually unaffected. Then you factor in the 1972 Summit Series where Esposito was Canada's best player without Orr...

Not bad for some slob who just loitered at the top of the crease with his gangland cronies and mooched NHL-record-caliber seasons off of someone else...

The only person you've exposed so far is yourself...and it ain't pretty...here's a towel, slick, cover your shame...

-Its irrelevent because Orr wrecked his collarbone December 9th before the knee injury that year. It would be one thing if Orr actually had a good season. Or Boston had a good season. Boston was crushed in the first round by Montreal 4 games to 0 in complete beat downs. The Bruins were completely irrelevant without Orr.

 

[PenguinSpeed]

so...much...wrong. but not surprising from the Crosby Fan Club

so we are willfully ignoring:

Espo's Hart/Ross year in '68-'69 before Orr blew up? Orr had 64 pts that year, Espo had 126

Or '67-'68 where Orr plays only 46 games and scores 31 pts, while Espo finishes 2nd in scoring by only 3 pts and leads the league in assists?

Espo "sucked with the Rangers"...huh?

in his 4.5 full seasons, he put up 1.08, 1.03, 1.00, .98, .98 ppg at ages 33-37. Well past what is the prime years for ANY player.


fact is, Crosby has work left to do to make the Top 10...nevermind sniffing 5th overall

-Just so everyone can see for yourself, here are your stat leaders from 1975 through 1981. 1 point per game in that era was complete garbage. Phil Esposito was ranked 162nd in the entire NHL during this frame of time. In other words, he was a complete nobody.



http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?rep...2&filter=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=pointsPerGame

 

[Michael Farkas]

It wasn't before last week...I pray it returns to a civil, well-informed place to discuss history again soon...

 

[Canadiens1958]

OMG. You are the one who proclaimed regular season is but a warm-up for playoffs! How many personalities do you carry?

Just explained why they were viewed as a dynasty since two SCs in a row is somewhat lacking.

Read:

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/148820839/

Never endorsed the position.

Suggest researching the old Prince of Wales Trophy.

 

[Canadiens1958]

It wasn't before last week...I pray it returns to a civil, well-informed place to discuss history again soon...

Part of the filtering process.

 

[GlitchMarner]

-Just so everyone can see for yourself, here are your stat leaders from 1975 through 1981. 1 point per game in that era was complete garbage. Phil Esposito was ranked 162nd in the entire NHL during this frame of time. In other words, he was a complete nobody.



NHL.com - Stats

What are you trying to prove exactly by trying to tear down Esposito?

 

[Canadiens1958]

He played with Bobby Hull in Chicago, I doubt he spent a lot of time with the puck. Hull would typically bring it up himself, if I remember correctly.

No, a stretch pass from a defenceman to
Hull approaching center red line or a relay via the center, Hay or Esposito to an onside Hull between the two blue lines.

 

[Canadiens1958]

What does league-wide scoring have to do with individual performances? Howe dominated his peers PPG-wise at a similar level to Crosby. There are a lot of factors that can contribute to league-wide scoring levels, why not just focus on the Top 10 - 20 scorers?

 

[PenguinSpeed]

What are you trying to prove exactly by trying to tear down Esposito?

-Discussing the Top 100 players and who generally is overrated and underrated all time.

-We touched on a few on both sides.


-And its hard to call me biased. I have Howe 5th all time, 1 spot or so overrated. Lidstrom underrated. I have Richard (ridiculously overrated, maybe most overrated player ever) and Lafleur overrated, Dryden underrated

-Esposito and Brodeur overrated. I probably wont do a Top 100 list. For it to be accurate would take months of work if not longer. Ill probably go to 25 and stop.

 

[Canadiens1958]

What does league-wide scoring have to do with individual performances? Howe dominated his peers PPG-wise at a similar level to Crosby. There are a lot of factors that can contribute to league-wide scoring levels, why not just focus on the Top 10 - 20 scorers?

League wide scoring reflects the overall strength of d-men, goalies and forwards

 

[The Panther]

even though '87 was gretzky's weakest finals run i don't think you can deny him his second conn smythe and give mario his second in '92 over barrasso (mario missed an entire round, in which his team waxed the presidents trophy/hart/norris winners) unless the "two conn smythes" rule has changed, unless the logic of how the conn smythe would be awarded changed, and unless something fundamental about the league itself changed.

what changed? 1992 was the end of ziegler's run as president. it also kicked off a new round of expansion and sunbelt franchise migration. quite frankly, the only surprise in all of this is that yzerman didn't get a "niedermayer" conn smythe in '97.

so anyway, i don't necessarily buy the hypothesis that crosby winning any more conn smythes would be an extraordinary achievement because he would have to be really really good to win them. i mean, they sure didn't make it especially tough on him to win the first two, did they?

I agree with you that there does seem to be a voter-style change in Conn Smythe trophies.

For a fun comparison..

1987 Finals (5.71 GPG):
Gretzky: 2G + 9A = 11 PTS (+5)
Result: no hardware

2016 Finals (4.50 GPG):
Crosby: 0G + 4 A = 4 PTS (0)
Result: Conn Smythe

I mean, I know Crosby did other things before the Finals in 2016, but I don't like it when the guy who wins the Conn Smythe wasn't dominant in the Finals. To me, that's really what it's about -- performance against the other 'best' team that year, in the big show. Of course rounds one and two 'count', but to me the real deal is being the best player on the biggest stages.


I really hate it when voter-fatigue (and its converse: voter-novelty) or voter-narrative becomes evident in hockey awards. Both lead to disastrous selections. Crosby was a legit Conn Smythe winner in 2017, but not in 2016. He only won it by a slim margin, and the difference there is likely voters who wanted to reward him for his career and give it a nice capper. Only they should have given it to someone else and waited to give one to Crosby in 2017, when he actually deserved it.