Who retired with MORE hardware than they probably deserved?

[crobro]

Rod Langway over PAUL Coffey

No way

 

[MXD]

Are you getting confused with Connie Francis, chanteuse?

I dont even know who that is.
Shows the risks of vocal rec without proofreading.

 

[Voight]

Lidstrom was robbed of hart trophy a couple of times. If anything, he should had more hardware. That's how important he was. Look at the red wings after he retired. They went from a contender every year to a regular playoff team with no chance at the cup.

Whenw as he robbed of the Hart?

His highest finished are 4 (2008) and 6 (2007) - he had no case over Ovy or Sid those years.

Rod Langway over PAUL Coffey

No way

Coffey finished with one more Norris than Langway.

Shame on Langway for being the best DEFENCEman

 

[67 others]

Whenw as he robbed of the Hart?

His highest finished are 4 (2008) and 6 (2007) - he had no case over Ovy or Sid those years.



Coffey finished with one more Norris than Langway.

Shame on Langway for being the best DEFENCEman

As good as Langway was, I agree with his Hart nominations, but not his norris nominations.

It would be like voting for Marc Edouard Vlasic over Brent Burns or Drew Doughty last year.

Or giving it to Defensive only Stevens in the early 2000's. Lidstrom fans would have thrown a tiff too.

 

[Rhiessan71]

As good as Langway was, I agree with his Hart nominations, but not his norris nominations.

It would be like voting for Marc Edouard Vlasic over Brent Burns or Drew Doughty last year.

Vlasic is NOT on Langway's level defensively.

Or giving it to Defensive only Stevens in the early 2000's. Lidstrom fans would have thrown a tiff too.

That's not even a remotely accurate comparison since Lidstrom was on the same level as Stevens defensively.

 

[67 others]

Vlasic is NOT on Langway's level defensively.




That's not even a remotely accurate comparison since Lidstrom was on the same level as Stevens defensively.

Take it from this angle then. Bourque was amazing defensively and outscored Langway 96 to 33. In fact Bourque almost outscored him on goals alone.

Langway was not THAT much better defensively that year

 

[Big Phil]

Remember, Langway walked into a horrible franchise and turned them around immediately. How else can you explain this:

Goals against for Washington 1982: 338
Goals against for Washington 1983: 283
Goals against for Washington 1984: 226 (1st)

Langway joined the team for the 1982-'83 season and you can see the immediate impact he made. The Caps also jumped leaps and bounds in points those years from 65, 94, 101 and they remained there for a bit. Langway was the reason for this. People forget he actually finished 5th in Norris voting while he was with the Habs and he had other years where he finished high outside of his Norris years. Granted, he probably wins the Norris based on just how drastic he turned the team around rather than whether he was better than Coffey or Bourque but for a couple of years he was good enough to win against these guys. It happens. Heck, Mike Green was a Norris candidate for a brief time too. Sometimes there are players who are good enough to hold it together for a couple years with the best of them but just not good enough to do it for 15 years. Langway falls in this category, and by the way was way more impactful than Green, just not Coffey or Bourque over the long haul.

 

[JackSlater]

Remember, Langway walked into a horrible franchise and turned them around immediately. How else can you explain this:

Goals against for Washington 1982: 338
Goals against for Washington 1983: 283
Goals against for Washington 1984: 226 (1st)

Langway joined the team for the 1982-'83 season and you can see the immediate impact he made. The Caps also jumped leaps and bounds in points those years from 65, 94, 101 and they remained there for a bit. Langway was the reason for this. People forget he actually finished 5th in Norris voting while he was with the Habs and he had other years where he finished high outside of his Norris years. Granted, he probably wins the Norris based on just how drastic he turned the team around rather than whether he was better than Coffey or Bourque but for a couple of years he was good enough to win against these guys. It happens. Heck, Mike Green was a Norris candidate for a brief time too. Sometimes there are players who are good enough to hold it together for a couple years with the best of them but just not good enough to do it for 15 years. Langway falls in this category, and by the way was way more impactful than Green, just not Coffey or Bourque over the long haul.

This has been gone through many times. The Capitals gaining a very good defenceman in Langway, and also had beneficial changes in coaching, goaltending and in other roster spots. Besides that though, it's difficult to make the case for Langway over Howe or Coffey in 1983 or any of Potvin, Bourque or Coffey in 1984. Unless Langway was more than twice as good as them defensively (or more in the case of Coffey) then his Norris trophies aren't defensible.

 

[67 others]

Remember, Langway walked into a horrible franchise and turned them around immediately. How else can you explain this:

Goals against for Washington 1982: 338
Goals against for Washington 1983: 283
Goals against for Washington 1984: 226 (1st)

Langway joined the team for the 1982-'83 season and you can see the immediate impact he made. The Caps also jumped leaps and bounds in points those years from 65, 94, 101 and they remained there for a bit. Langway was the reason for this. People forget he actually finished 5th in Norris voting while he was with the Habs and he had other years where he finished high outside of his Norris years. Granted, he probably wins the Norris based on just how drastic he turned the team around rather than whether he was better than Coffey or Bourque but for a couple of years he was good enough to win against these guys. It happens. Heck, Mike Green was a Norris candidate for a brief time too. Sometimes there are players who are good enough to hold it together for a couple years with the best of them but just not good enough to do it for 15 years. Langway falls in this category, and by the way was way more impactful than Green, just not Coffey or Bourque over the long haul.

Which is why I said he deserved Hart, but not the Norris.

His 33 points and excellent defense vs Bourque who also has nearly equal defense and as many goals as L had points

 

[The Panther]

I like Langway, he was great. (I especially like that he is the only NHL-er ever to be born in my old home, Taiwan!) 1980-82, he was already one of the top D-men in the NHL for Montreal. Full marks. He was already up there with Larry Robinson in Norris voting before he was traded (he was +66, in 66 games, in 1982 with Montreal). Washington's improvement was largely down to him. I say, he fully deserved his two Norris trophies.

By the way, if any D-man didn't get enough hardware in that era, it's probably Mark Howe. Damn, he was great.

 

[67 others]

I like Langway, he was great. (I especially like that he is the only NHL-er ever to be born in my old home, Taiwan!) 1980-82, he was already one of the top D-men in the NHL for Montreal. Full marks. He was already up there with Larry Robinson in Norris voting before he was traded (he was +66, in 66 games, in 1982 with Montreal). Washington's improvement was largely down to him. I say, he fully deserved his two Norris trophies.

By the way, if any D-man didn't get enough hardware in that era, it's probably Mark Howe. Damn, he was great.

No argument there. There were a lot of guys in that era who had amazing seasons and runs. It was just such a star studded era for Dmen.

Mark Howe had 2 seasons that could have won a Norris any season from the mid 90's - today

and of course, people who come in 2nd to Gretzky or Lemieux for the Hart might as well have won the thing by normal standards.

 

[67 others]

I like Langway, he was great. (I especially like that he is the only NHL-er ever to be born in my old home, Taiwan!) 1980-82, he was already one of the top D-men in the NHL for Montreal. Full marks. He was already up there with Larry Robinson in Norris voting before he was traded (he was +66, in 66 games, in 1982 with Montreal). Washington's improvement was largely down to him. I say, he fully deserved his two Norris trophies.

By the way, if any D-man didn't get enough hardware in that era, it's probably Mark Howe. Damn, he was great.

+/- is a bit variable. I am not disagreeing that Langway was the biggest cog in Washington's rise from mediocrity, but he was not the only cog. The other defenseman sent to the caps, Engblom, was +63 and +78 in consecutive years with Montreal too and was also a Norris nominee alongside Langway in Montreal. Jarvis, another person in the trade, was a Selke candidate twice in Montreal, won it once in Washington and was still a Selke candidate after leaving Washington to Hartford.

The defense of the caps the year before Langway came over was:
Rick Green, Terry Murray, Darren Veitch, Greg Theberge, randy holt and a slew of filler.

A rookie Scott Stevens also came in and was immediately under Langway's tutelage and more effective than any of the caps previous ineffective ragtag crew. Basically you added Langway, Engblom, Stevens to the blueline and a total shift happened, Langway being the main guy and leader to turn the ship around and the guy who groomed Stevens into what he became.

What Langway did almost epitomizes what the hart Trophy stands for.

But his defense was not 3 times better than Ray Bourque, whose offense and transition game WAS at least 3 times better than Langway's while being close defensively.

 

[The Panther]

But his defense was not 3 times better than Ray Bourque, whose offense and transition game WAS at least 3 times better than Langway's while being close defensively.

I agree, although the award in question is for best "defenceman", not best player -- I think everyone (?) would agree Bourque at his best was a better player than Langway at his best.

I think it was one of those situations where NHL writers were looking at Randy Carlyle's Norris win and thinking, "Okay, this offensive-defenceman thing has gone too far. That guy wasn't better than Robinson, Bourque, Potvin. Let's swing the pendulum the other way and go for a guy who's really concentrating on 'defence'."

I'm not saying it was right or wrong, but I think that's partly why Langway beat out Coffey and Bourque (and others) those two years.

 

[JackSlater]

I like Langway, he was great. (I especially like that he is the only NHL-er ever to be born in my old home, Taiwan!) 1980-82, he was already one of the top D-men in the NHL for Montreal. Full marks. He was already up there with Larry Robinson in Norris voting before he was traded (he was +66, in 66 games, in 1982 with Montreal). Washington's improvement was largely down to him. I say, he fully deserved his two Norris trophies.

Unless Howe/Potvin/Bourque were all pretty much bad defensively, as Langway was offensively, and Coffey was completely atrocious defensively, there is no way that Langway was the better player and deserved the trophy.

 

[MoonDragn]

A little late to this conversation but has anyone mentioned the recording bias of NJ devils home arena shot counters? They were notorious in under-counting shots faced in NJ rinks since 2000-2001 season.
This can result in lower SV% for Devils goaltenders.

http://objectivenhl.blogspot.com/2009/03/in-previous-posts-it-was-shown-how-some.html

 

[Voight]

As good as Langway was, I agree with his Hart nominations, but not his norris nominations.

It would be like voting for Marc Edouard Vlasic over Brent Burns or Drew Doughty last year.

Or giving it to Defensive only Stevens in the early 2000's. Lidstrom fans would have thrown a tiff too.

Disagree, when Langway won they cared about how you played in your own end rather than gaudy point totals