Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
Too small of a sample size 19 games, has to be somewhere close to half a season to draw any conclusions from. It is hard to tell how good he was really during that 3 year stretch, however most people think he is better than Adam Oates, I'm fairly sure he ranks higher on an all-time list, and I think that is just wrong as far as I can see.
Being a lesser player than Bure is not an insult no, but if I were to do a poll stating, "Based on what they actually accomplished, who was the better goalscorer/player?" I have a good feeling Brett would win both 3 to 1, when the reality of it is, Bure was the slightly better player when looking at the bulk of their better/best seasons in proper context. It is fairly close I might add, but when comparing them Hull's career totals will be brought up, which favour him very well for a few obvious reasons. Bure gets flack for his defense, but what did Hull do defensively? What was he capable of doing other than getting open and firing a shot in back of the net? (not like this is a bad thing) What other type of player is going to benefit more from the 2 second best pure playmaker of the time?
Didn't Hull become defensively responsible in Dallas and Detroit? You pretty much had to be to play the systems of those teams.