Who is more overrated: Robinson or Bossy?

[c-carp]

At least I dont see anyone saying I'm biased towards French Canadians here.

I said a lot of nice things about both players and the truth includes the bad. Live with it.

The guys who didnt want to hear a year ago that New Orleans needed bigger levees have the same mentality as those who dont want anyone to write that Bossy coudnt stickhandle, pass, check, etc. or that Robinson was about the same as Lapointe and Savard.

It got wrote, baby.

Most people here are pretty respectable most of the time for an internet board. I didnt mean anything bad towards you I just meant that most are going to disagree big time with your point.

 

[Chileiceman]

You have strange views on hockey Chooch.
First Gretzky and now this.

 

[KH1]

Bossy:

Was a premier sniper who could score at will, bouncing puck, tough checking, playoffs etc. Don't have much else good to say.

Was weak defensively. Never dominated a single game, N-e-v-e-r. Always needed to be set up. Couldnt stickhandle or cut at speed. Every see him dance away from 5 players and score a timely goal?

Bottom line: was greatly assisted by starting out on an expansion team (imagine Lafleur in Oakland ?) and by playing with the best all round player of his generation and the best defensiveman.

His stock has greatly risen after retirement based on inflated 80's stats.


Bossy gets my vote for more overated

Neither is overrated at all. I just had to point out the contradictions you made in your post about Bossy though. How can he be able to score at will but at the same time need to be set up on every play? For that matter how could he play absolutely no defense yet at the same time be a tough checker?

 

[Rolexmaster]

Bossy scored 50+ goals 9 straight seasons before retiring from injury !!!!



Even Gretzky didn't do that !!!! And Bossy had to stop because of injury...imagine if he had stayed in shape..........10-11 straight seasons of 50 goals ???


He is the best scorer of all time.......period !!!! Better then Gretzky, Lemieux, Dionne, and all the other Legends !!!!

Bossy, if anything, is soooooo underated by everyone when they talk about the top 10 players of all time....he is easily amongst them....


3-4 Cups + 9 STRAIGHT freakin' 50+ goals season

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

I know that part of the reason this board exists is to debate 'who the best' was. I think that most of us realize that though it is fun, it is not purely definable. Ogo and some others define players by contribution, but circumstance dictates so much of a player's career that you can't be exact. Purely as a scorer,stick to the back of the net,Bossy can be part of the greatest goal scoreer arguement with #99,66 and all the usual suspects. Trottier was a great player who was solid in all assets of the game. Chooch says Trottier was a better player. Why ? I imagine because he did more things, thus the elusive 'complete player' we all gush over. The most complete player isn't necessarily the best player. I don't know how you measure that. They were a duo. they complimented each other. Who would I draft for my team ? Depends on who I already have. If either is drafted by a different team or if either doesn't have a player similar to the other to play with,how do they progress. Robinson was part of the greatest trio of d men ever on one team. I think, in retrospect, he got to freelance the most, as Savard would encourage Larry to 'go' knowing he'd be back there to cover up. Lapointe seemd to pair with the developing young guy more than the other 2 and I'm not sure why. Maybe Bowman thought it gave him the most balance. I think Lapointe is underrated historically a bit, maybe because he's been less visible than Larry over the last 15 years. Around but not as front and centre. Ask any Bruin fans from those days,their biggest rival by far, how good Lapointe was. The 70's Habs weren't the type of team that was defined by one player. They had a great defense, I don't remember arguing much about who was better. Robinson may have been the popular favorite because he had that larger than life Big Bird persona, but he earned the popularity. Again,if I'm drafting a team,of the 3 I'd start with Larry,but as long as I got one of them I wouldn't care.

Can someone confirm that I'm not having an acid flashback. Did Bucky say Poopy Head ?

Fo shizzle, baby.. Fo shizzle.. I said that poopy thang all over the place, if you know what I mean

 

[mattihp]

Neither is overrated IMO.

 

[Crosby=Gretzky]

Neither is overrated IMO.

I'll second that.

 

[12# Peter Bondra]

I'll second that.

Ill third that.

 

[mcphee]

At least I dont see anyone saying I'm biased towards French Canadians here.

I said a lot of nice things about both players and the truth includes the bad. Live with it.

The guys who didnt want to hear a year ago that New Orleans needed bigger levees have the same mentality as those who dont want anyone to write that Bossy coudnt stickhandle, pass, check, etc. or that Robinson was about the same as Lapointe and Savard.

It got wrote, baby.

Chooch, the biase charge was ridiculous. You are biased towards Mtl. Canadiens to an extent, the same extent that I am. I disagree with your premise entirely here. If,on an individual basis,Lapointe and Savard can be underrated,that doesn't by logic, have to infer that Robinson was overrated. Each had a role,each was great.Trying to compare one against the other is purely preference. When you have 3 such players on a team, their roles are complimentary to each other. How would a Brad Park have fared if he was on that team and Lapointe was a Ranger ? Neither would have been a abetter or worse player but they may be remembered differently. As for Bossy, you can say that for arguements sake, he couldn't do a number of things. I think that you are just wrong and base your opinion on too narrow of a sample. As I posted earlier, Bossy developed what he didn't have as a rookie. As for your analogy, I don't think we face catastrophe if we don't agree with your premise. The premise of needing a running mate can apply to just about any great player. It isn't always true,but you can always say it. That Orr would have been nothing without Dallas Smith.

 

[reckoning]

How would a Brad Park have fared if he was on that team and Lapointe was a Ranger ? Neither would have been a abetter or worse player but they may be remembered differently.

I like that analysis a lot. Let`s say that Guy LaPointe played for Pittsburgh in the 70s instead of Montreal:

Would Pittsburgh have won a Cup with him? No.

Would the Montreal dynasty still take place without him? Yes

Would he be in the Hall of Fame? No

Would he have been just a good a player? Yes

Circumstances often influence how a player is remembered, and it`s usually an inaccurate influence.

 

[arrbez]

Bossy scored 50+ goals 9 straight seasons before retiring from injury !!!!



Even Gretzky didn't do that !!!! And Bossy had to stop because of injury...imagine if he had stayed in shape..........10-11 straight seasons of 50 goals ???


He is the best scorer of all time.......period !!!! Better then Gretzky, Lemieux, Dionne, and all the other Legends !!!!

Bossy, if anything, is soooooo underated by everyone when they talk about the top 10 players of all time....he is easily amongst them....


3-4 Cups + 9 STRAIGHT freakin' 50+ goals season

How was Gretzky not a better scorer than Bossy? He hit heights Bossy never hit (71, 73, 87, 92), and had more goals in his first 9 seasons than Bossy did (583 vs. 535). If he had played a full season in 1988 (which he was on pace for about 55 in), he would have 10 straight seasons with 50+.

If Gretzky had only recorded 40 or 50 assists a season, might be regarded as the best pure goal scorer of all time. I think his incredible playmaking skills overshadow his ability to put the puck in the net

 

[Trottier]

How was Gretzky not a better scorer than Bossy?

Might want to ask Wayne himself, as he stated as much. He said that Bossy was the purest goal scorer he ever saw. Anyone who watched #22 would understand why.

What I am about to say requires a disclaimer, lest anyone wrongly accuse me of slamming #99. Gretzky was unquestionably the better player and playmaker; he was the most dominant athlete period of any single decade in professional sports history.

That said, the style of play his team played was conducive to many more scoring chances than was NYI's. The Oilers played river hockey, to borrow Denis Potvin's (and many other's) description. That is not a knock; they were easily the most potent offensive machine ever. The Isles played the game any way you wanted, physical, wide open, etc. and would beat you at it. But their game did not allow for as many scoring chances per game, on average, as did Edmonton's. Put another way: the Isles would typically beat you 4-1. The Oilers would beat you 8-4.

One needs to consider that when looking at the two players goal scoring totals.

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

neither player is overrated. I cant believe a thread like this lasted this long.

how can anyone say 2 HOF are overrated.
unbelievable.

 

[Lou is God]

Might want to ask Wayne himself, as he stated as much. He said that Bossy was the purest goal scorer he ever saw. Anyone who watched #22 would understand why.

What I am about to say requires a disclaimer, lest anyone wrongly accuse me of slamming #99. Gretzky was unquestionably the better player and playmaker; he was the most dominant athlete period of any single decade in professional sports history.

That said, the style of play his team played was conducive to many more scoring chances than was NYI's. The Oilers played river hockey, to borrow Denis Potvin's (and many other's) description. That is not a knock; they were easily the most potent offensive machine ever. The Isles played the game any way you wanted, physical, wide open, etc. and would beat you at it. But their game did not allow for as many scoring chances per game, on average, as did Edmonton's. Put another way: the Isles would typically beat you 4-1. The Oilers would beat you 8-4.

One needs to consider that when looking at the two players goal scoring totals.

As usual great post Trots.

Before I was a Devils fan I rooted for the Islanders as a kid from 1977-86 and Bossy was not only the best sniper I ever saw but my favorite Islander along with Butch Goring.

And I noticed that alot of people have mentioned his unreal nine seasons in a row scoring 50 or more goals, and sorry if it's been mentioned but what makes this even more unreal is that this was done in his first nine seasons before he scored "just" 38 goals in his final and 10th year.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=3423790#post3423790

Overrated my ***, and the same goes for Larry.

 

[Forever27]

Damn chooch... you got owned six ways from sunday.

Or 3 pages.

Whatever. First post. Hey all.

 

[gallagher]

Worst. Poll. Ever.

If you had to pick two HOF guys and rate them as undeserving, there HAS to be someone else to pick. This whole thing is ridiculous.

 

[chooch*]

Neither is overrated at all. I just had to point out the contradictions you made in your post about Bossy though. How can he be able to score at will but at the same time need to be set up on every play? For that matter how could he play absolutely no defense yet at the same time be a tough checker?

Cant you read properly? He coudl score at will like shutt when someone got him the puck but he couldnt stickandle or pass or skate very well - he needed to be set up. I said he scored thru tough checking.

 

[chooch*]

Chooch, the biase charge was ridiculous. You are biased towards Mtl. Canadiens to an extent, the same extent that I am. I disagree with your premise entirely here. If,on an individual basis,Lapointe and Savard can be underrated,that doesn't by logic, have to infer that Robinson was overrated. Each had a role,each was great.Trying to compare one against the other is purely preference. When you have 3 such players on a team, their roles are complimentary to each other. How would a Brad Park have fared if he was on that team and Lapointe was a Ranger ? Neither would have been a abetter or worse player but they may be remembered differently. As for Bossy, you can say that for arguements sake, he couldn't do a number of things. I think that you are just wrong and base your opinion on too narrow of a sample. As I posted earlier, Bossy developed what he didn't have as a rookie. As for your analogy, I don't think we face catastrophe if we don't agree with your premise. The premise of needing a running mate can apply to just about any great player. It isn't always true,but you can always say it. That Orr would have been nothing without Dallas Smith.

Thanks for you analysis. I just think that in the early 70's Lapointe was as good as Robinson was in the late 70's early 80's and Savard was great on his own way - so why does only Robinson show up on all time lists?

ps. An all time player should stand out anywhere/ any team.

Also re Bossy: he only had basically 2 out of 9 seasons where he had more assists than goals -thats clearly not the mark of a complete player but rather a 1 dimensional goal scorer.

 

[KH1]

Cant you read properly? He coudl score at will like shutt when someone got him the puck but he couldnt stickandle or pass or skate very well - he needed to be set up. I said he scored thru tough checking.

Well regardless of whether or not I graduated the 1st grade, that's just wrong. Plenty of great offensive players have had plenty more career goals than assists--that isn't a sign of inferiority, just a sign that they were the best finisher on the ice for most of their careers.

Bossy on the other hand was not one of them, as he finished with only 20 more goals than assits on his career. On the offensive side of th puck he could do just about anything Al Arbour wanted him to.

 

[EagleBelfour]

Neither of them are overrated

Top 10 in their respective position, easily in top 40 of all-time.

Top 30 IMO.

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

Cant you read properly? He coudl score at will like shutt when someone got him the puck but he couldnt stickandle or pass or skate very well - he needed to be set up. I said he scored thru tough checking.

Really, does it get any better than this??

 

[habfan4]

A flame worthy premise for a thread which could have been interesting if you had added any context. i.e., Which of these two players would you want on the current roster of your favourite team?

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

Might want to ask Wayne himself, as he stated as much. He said that Bossy was the purest goal scorer he ever saw. Anyone who watched #22 would understand why.

What I am about to say requires a disclaimer, lest anyone wrongly accuse me of slamming #99. Gretzky was unquestionably the better player and playmaker; he was the most dominant athlete period of any single decade in professional sports history.

That said, the style of play his team played was conducive to many more scoring chances than was NYI's. The Oilers played river hockey, to borrow Denis Potvin's (and many other's) description. That is not a knock; they were easily the most potent offensive machine ever. The Isles played the game any way you wanted, physical, wide open, etc. and would beat you at it. But their game did not allow for as many scoring chances per game, on average, as did Edmonton's. Put another way: the Isles would typically beat you 4-1. The Oilers would beat you 8-4.

One needs to consider that when looking at the two players goal scoring totals.

Agreed. Put Bossy on the 80's Oilers teams along side Gretzky playing 'River Hockey' and IMO Bossy would have hit the 100 goal mark, more than once. Of guys I saw play, I only think Bossy and Brett Hull could have managed that mark in that particular perfect senario.

 

[chooch*]

Really, does it get any better than this??

you missed many other typos, coco head

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

you missed many other typos, coco head

Please don't call names.. When I asked you to stop p.m.ing me it was just because I wasn't interested in more than being just friends. I know that was hard for you, but reacting in anger isn't going to help.