| Author |
 Topic  |
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
 Posted - 03/15/2007 : 19:47:16
|
Poll Question:
After Orr, who is the best defenceman of the post-expansion era?
|
|
|
|
ryschevy1
Rookie
Canada
186 Posts |
Posted - 03/15/2007 : 22:48:32
|
Ray Bourque!! I think he was just a small step ahead of all those other guys, who are/were also great, don't get me wrong. Also I couldn't help but notice that Paul Coffey, Chris Pronger, and Scott Niedermayer were missing from that list.
GO OIL!!! YA!!! |
 |
|
|
1 Crosby fan
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1454 Posts |
Posted - 03/15/2007 : 22:52:15
|
| No offence dude but there is a other option and that means you can say whoever you want and i voted Nick Lidstrom Ray Bourque a close second |
|
|
|
Novie
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
452 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 05:35:12
|
Scott Stevens
Go Sens
Crosby is God
Tucker is a douche |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 06:44:25
|
Yeah, I realize that I left off a few great defencemen, but the "other" category was there. I agree that Scott Stevens is probably a contender to this crown. Maybe a few others should be on the list too, though I am not sure if, say Pronger or MacInnis for example, are major contenders here. I mean, there are different levels of greatness.
Something to think about - some say that Brad Park would have won lots of Norris Trophies if he would have played in an era without Bobby Orr to compete with.
Also, I must say that I DID purposely leave Paul Coffey off the list. He was a great offensive defensman, but in my opionion, despite one amazing defensive play at a key time in international play, he generally was not a very good defensive defenceman (and I'm being polite). Fact is, and no disrespect to him, but I think it's kind of crazy that he won three Norris trophies. A player with his defensive deficiencies has no business with his name on that trophy in my opinion. That's another argument in favour of Bourque I guess as he was the runner-up ripped off in those years as I recall. |
|
|
|
Saku Steen
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1102 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 06:55:47
|
| I voted Bourque but Coffey would have been a close 2nd. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 07:22:48
|
I can appreciate that Paul Coffey was not as stong defensively as many other players. Some people consider a great player has to be an all around player. However, some players, in my opinion, have certain traits that far outweight weaknesses. For example, Gretzky. Not amazing defensively like Orr/Howe/Messier. But not bad defensively. But his ofensive skills far out weight the fact he was not amazing defensively.
Paul Coffey fits into the role. He was not a horrible defensemen. He was average on the defensive end. But his offensive skills far exceeded his defensive being average.
I would put Paul Coffey on this list. However, my vote would got to Ray Bourque or Denis Potvin. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 12:06:29
|
Beans (or should I call you Mr. Oiler),
Coffey is indeed an interesting case. He was such a great skater and fit that Oiler powerhouse's style so well. Obviously they had tremendous results as a team so it's hard to argue that even Bourque could have done much better in his place. But we are doing individual comparisons here and the real key thing in that comparison, I think, is that a very legitimate argument can be made that, if Coffey wasn't "horrible" defensively, he was at least "not very good" defensively (I'm being polite again).
So even though it is true that to a certain degree offensive accomplishments should outweigh defensive weaknesses, I think that when assessing the greatness of a "DEFENCEman" you can only take that line of thinking so far. In other words, instead of calling him an "awful defenceman" deserving of a really low ranking as a defenceman because of his defensive play, you would move him up to somewhere maybe between the 4th and 10th best overall defenceman of his era. In other words, I still think that we are talking about at least one step down from being a legitamate Norris trophy winner or getting the "best ever (after Orr)" honours. |
|
|
|
Guest7418
( )
|
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 12:15:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Beans (or should I call you Mr. Oiler),
Coffey is indeed an interesting case. He was such a great skater and fit that Oiler powerhouse's style so well. Obviously they had tremendous results as a team so it's hard to argue that even Bourque could have done much better in his place. But we are doing individual comparisons here and the real key thing in that comparison, I think, is that a very legitimate argument can be made that, if Coffey wasn't "horrible" defensively, he was at least "not very good" defensively (I'm being polite again).
So even though it is true that to a certain degree offensive accomplishments should outweigh defensive weaknesses, I think that when assessing the greatness of a "DEFENCEman" you can only take that line of thinking so far. In other words, instead of calling him an "awful defenceman" deserving of a really low ranking as a defenceman because of his defensive play, you would move him up to somewhere maybe between the 4th and 10th best overall defenceman of his era. In other words, I still think that we are talking about at least one step down from being a legitamate Norris trophy winner or getting the "best ever (after Orr)" honours.
You should go check out the Coffey thread.. I dont agree. I think Coffey was a skilled defenseive defenseman as well.. but there are lots of factors why that wasnt apparent. |
|
|
|
ED11
Rookie
Canada
224 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 12:50:54
|
| Coffey hands down in my opinion. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 12:55:40
|
Thanks, I didn't see that before. It was interesting. Sorry for the slight overlap here - though this poll excludes pre-67 guys like Harvey, Howell, etc. and isn't just about Coffey. For example, Beans, why is Potvin not on your list? I hope he is Number 6 at least.
As for Guest 7418's Coffey comment, I think one way to go about this debate is to imagine what would have happened if Coffey would have purposely toned down the offence in the same way that Park did for the Bruins in the mid/late 70s (I think in Park's case it was partially due to injuries and also due to the defense first concept of those late 70s Bruins teams). So, and I know it is hard to imagine this, but what if Coffey wasn't on the Oiler powerhouse but rather a defensive-minded team and his free-wheeling style didn't fit in. Would he have done anywhere near as good a job defensively as Park did for the Bruins? I just don't think so.
As I say, Coffey is an interesting case. You almost have to rank him up higher as a hockey player than you do if just focussing on him as a defenceman, if that makes any sense. |
Edited by - andyhack on 03/25/2007 21:00:17 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 14:18:58
|
You can call me Mr. Oiler is you wish. As my love for the game was developed watching the 80's Oilers in Edmonton, I am quite bias towards them.
I think you hit the nail on the head in the fact that Coffey played on an offensive powerhouse team. I believe that if he was coached and played on a defensive team, he would have been a better defensive player. He had the physical talent and the hockey knowledge, he just used it offensively. So it not that I don't think he could have been a great "defensive" defenseman. He role was never was to be anything but offensive.
|
|
|
|
dummy101
Top Prospect
Canada
33 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 15:20:04
|
| I picked Robinson but imo you could throw a blanket over Bourque, Niedermeyer and him. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 15:39:46
|
Beans (as it is your actual name it seems),
You say about Coffey,
"I believe that if he was coached and played on a defensive team, he would have been a better defensive player. He had the physical talent and the hockey knowledge, he just used it offensively."
I think this is where we basically disagree, which is okay.
I also think the defensive ability issue is the key point on whether to include Coffey here. You can't have a debate about defencemen and ignore defensive ability.
Yes, I do see him becoming a little better defensively if put in a different situation, BUT still not anywhere near the class of defensive play as the other guys we are talking about here. He wouldn't just naturally adjust and become GREAT defensively the way Park did for the Bruins. That's the way I see it anyway.
Also, Willus3's Scotty Bowman comments on his Coffey thread were very telling. I never heard those ones in particular but I do remember hearing similar comments from coaches and players in the 80s.
Don't get me wrong, though, I think Coffey was incredible. He was unique. Earlier I said there are different levels of greatness. I guess Coffey points out that there are different types of greatness too. As I see it, there is not a specific award for his type of greatness. If there were, it would be for best offensive defenceman. Maybe they should create the Paul Coffey Award? But if they do, they should go back and give his Norris trophies to Bourque or the two or three other more worthy candidates of that era.
|
|
|
|
admin
Forum Admin
Canada
2337 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 16:25:36
|
| Hey Andy I like this poll so I set it as our feature for the weekend! I tweaked the question slightly for clarity. Good debate gang! |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 16:53:16
|
I think that Coffey, from being a kid through juniors and into the NHL, would have been moved to a forward position if he was just average on the defensive end. He was, in many opinions, the fastest skater in history. Also, he has a nose for the net, great hands, and is a great passer. Do those skills not have forward written all over it?? There was a reason he was a defensemen and not a forward. Granted, I will not argue that he did not have the defensive skills of Potvin or Park or Bourque. But lets make sure that we are not confusing him of being a goat on the defensive end. Not as skilled as others yes, but not a total meathook.
As for my name, call me Beans, or call me Brad. Either work.
|
Edited by - Beans15 on 03/16/2007 17:22:00 |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 16:55:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I think that Coffey, from being a kid through juniors and into the NHL, would have been moved to a forward position if he was just average on the defensive end. He was, in many opinions, the fastest skater in history. Also, he has a nose for the net, great hands, and is a great passer. Do those skills not have forward written all over it?? There was a reason he was a defensemen and not a forward. Granted, I will not argue that he did not have the defensive skills of Potvin or Park or Bourque. But lets make sure that we are not confusing him of being a goat on the defensive end. Not as skilled as others yes, but not a total meathook.
Both Gretzky and Lemieux called Coffey the best passer they have ever seen. |
|
|
|
jbraiter
PickupHockey Pro
577 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 19:45:23
|
rory fitzpatrick
Go Canucks |
|
|
|
Guest4567
( )
|
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 20:35:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by andyhack
Thanks, I didn't see that before. It was interesting. Sorry for the slight overlap here - though this poll excludes pre-67 guys like Harvey, Howell, etc. and isn't just about Coffey. For example, Beans, why is Potivn not on your list? I hope he is Number 6 at least.
As for Guest 7418's Coffey comment, I think one way to go about this debate is to imagine what would have happened if Coffey would have purposely toned down the offence in the same way that Park did for the Bruins in the mid/late 70s (I think in Park's case it was partially due to injuries and also due to the defense first concept of those late 70s Bruins teams). So, and I know it is hard to imagine this, but what if Coffey wasn't on the Oiler powerhouse but rather a defensive-minded team and his free-wheeling style didn't fit in. Would he have done anywhere near as good a job defensively as Park did for the Bruins? I just don't think so.
As I say, Coffey is an interesting case. You almost have to rank him up higher as a hockey player than you do if just focussing on him as a defenceman, if that makes any sense.
I really hate the what if answer to all the polls people put on. I mean come on what if Coffey was on a defensive minded team..the fact is he didnt have to be defensive thats what Kevin lowe and Lee fogilin gave Edmonton just like Gord Klucek helped bourque as did Wesley. it takes 2 men to make the D then 3 forwards to help out and if your team is all offence and coffey led the d charge then he fit their style or else they wouldnt of even drafted him. GMs have a plan and Coffey was Edmontons d plan. I mean why not argue because Bryan fogarty was the best jr dman ever breaking all Orrs jr records he should be on the list. What if he wasnt a drunk and didnt die at age 28. I mean what if..the fact was he was a drunk and did die so he aint on the list so stop with the what ifs and just use facts..thanks |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/16/2007 : 21:35:09
|
Guest 4567,
The point of the "what if" had nothing to do with saying that Coffey was helped by the strong Oiler team. Others may make that point, but I don't. The "what if" point was raised only because we were discussing Coffey's defensive abilities, and some of the "Coffey guys" seem to be suggesting that there were reasons related to the Oilers system/style that his defensive ability didn't come out. As someone who doesn't think he was very good defensively, I can respond to that in two ways: 1) your way actually - and say "what ifs" are b.s. and just go watch the old coverage of Coffey in his own end when he didn't have the puck or 2) say okay, lets think about that point a bit and explore it - which is what I did and what led to the "what if"
|
|
|
|
Guest9696
( )
|
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 10:36:35
|
| Paul Coffey is definitely the best since. I can't believe he's not 1 of the choices. |
|
|
|
Guest6656
( )
|
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 11:09:42
|
After Orr?
Who says Orr is the best? |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 11:41:14
|
My guess is that most people (over 98%), knowledgable or not that knowledgable, would say Orr is the best. I could be wrong about that estimate but I would hope that I am not.
As for the earlier "I can't believe Coffey wasn't on the list" comment, that's fine, I respect your opinion. My opinion, looking at the results of the poll so far, is that Denis Potvin and Brad Park are incredibly underrated, by this sites viewers anyway (or, more likely, the people voting just didn't see these two guys because they're too young and haven't checked up on them enough). Trust me, they were both very good both offensively and defensively and strong arguments can be made for either one of them here. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 14:04:04
|
| Andyhack, the vast majority of the people on this site are under the age of 25. Hence, Potvin and Park not getting thier due respect. |
|
|
|
Blubberboy
Rookie
155 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 15:19:22
|
I think Chris Pronger Should be mentioned.
Go Canucks |
|
|
|
-oil-country-
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
988 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 15:54:35
|
| I would pick S.Niedermayer over Pronger any day but i would also pick any of the guys on the list over S.Niedermayer. I picked Bourque. |
|
|
|
leafsfan_101
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1530 Posts |
Posted - 03/17/2007 : 16:08:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Blubberboy
I think Chris Pronger Should be mentioned.
Go Canucks
Eww, not as the greatest defenceman of all time after Orr. Denis Potvin was so much better, as was Brad Park. All of the defenceman on that list are better in their prime then Pronger.
Long Live Leafs Nation!! |
|
|
|
Guest2180
( )
|
Posted - 03/18/2007 : 01:06:01
|
| I'm not saying that Al MaCinnes is better than any of the others mentioned. I just think he deserves to be mentioned along with Borque and Coffey. If it wasn't for Borque, MaCinnes would have a few more Norris trophies. |
|
|
|
dannywer0
Top Prospect
Canada
21 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2007 : 05:31:36
|
| MacCinnes big time. I mean he was with a bad team and he still contributed big time. But Ray Bourque was second on my list. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2007 : 07:11:49
|
Sunday Morning thought:
Beans - you are right, it is natural for the younger generation to vote for Lidstrom, and the poll seems to be showing that. And there is no argument from me that Lidstrom is near the very top and deserves to be considered here. But, objectively, not as a grumpy old man longing for the old days, I'd put Potvin as a Number 2 by a small margin over Bourque and Park (and you won't find a bigger fan of Bourque or Park). But it would be interesting to see how this poll would break down if we could sort the votes by age of the voters. Maybe we can assume that most of the votes for the '70s guys are from the older guys though. In that case, I would say again that Park is very underrated.
As for Robinson, I agree he was tremendous but I push him down slightly due to the clumsiness factor which he showed a little more than the others (probably due to physical factors). I will say though that the trio of Robinson, Savard and Lapointe was the best trio of defenceman on any team in NHL history. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2007 : 08:42:23
|
What??? Andyhack, how can you leave out the killer trio of Coffey, Lowe, and Huddy??
Kidding. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2007 : 20:51:59
|
This is a great poll and a very tough call. It's between Potvin and Park. I find it really hard to choose between these two. Park is generally overlooked because of his unfortunate timing. He played when Orr and Potvin were in their primes. He was runner up to win the Norris 6 times. Consider this... Put Bourque in the same situation. Bourque would also be runner up every year against those two. I can't stress it enough how under valued Park is. For me I'd be happy letting a coin toss decide, they are that close. But those two are definitely the next in line.
Robinson was truly great also. But Andyhack touched on a very valid point about him. He was a touch clumsy. And, especially later in his career, was prone to making bad mistakes.
Serge Savard is another who is completely under appreciated.
And as I've mentioned before, Coffey has no business in the top ten. Robinson made bad errors later in his career but Coffey did it through his entire career. I remember watching and thinking wow, I cannot believe he just did that. That's a junior level mistake. And he would do things like that several times a game sometimes.
BTW Andyhack, very glad to have you aboard. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 03/18/2007 : 20:54:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest6656
After Orr?
Who says Orr is the best?
This has to be one of the funniest posts I've seen here. |
|
|
|
tctitans
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
931 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 08:18:22
|
Ok... now that I have had the chance to pick him in my G.O.A.T draft, I think that there is another name to throw into the mix that hasnt been mentioned yet. :)
Viacheslav Fetisov.
There are many who argue that he is the 2nd best Dman in the modern era. I didnt have the chance (besides the rare international game here and there) to personally watch him play at anytime near his prime, so it's hard for me to judge personally, but he was said to be the complete package. Gifted offensively and as steady as they come in his own zone. His leadership qualities also made him a perennial captain of his Russian teams. He had a pretty impressive career after coming to the NHL, and that didnt start untiil he was 32 years old.
Definately worth a consideration... |
|
|
|
Mikhailova
PickupHockey All-Star
USA
2918 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 13:18:01
|
Wow tctitans...guess who I was going to pick next??
If someone takes him I'll be mad   |
Edited by - Mikhailova on 03/19/2007 16:59:15 |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 16:57:53
|
Hey Willus3 - thanks, it's good to be on board. Hopefully our Orr/Potvin/Park ship will continue to sail despite the strong winds against it! But this is an interesting and fun site - particularly fun cause it gives us a chance to talk about the 70s! There were great movies in that decade too as you know, but that's for another site I guess.
Yes, Potvin and Park are close. I think all of our impressions are greatly influenced by who we actually saw. I saw a lot of Park as a Bruin, but I was pretty young when he was a faster slightly more offensive-minded Ranger. Perhaps if I would have seen him in his younger years I'd have given him the edge over Potvin (who I saw from the beginning and whose peak as a player probably coincided with my peak as a high school kid obsessing with the NHL/planning hockey pool picks in the back of science class, etc.). In those years, aside from those memorable checks, the thing that stand out for me is Potvin quarterbacking the Islanders powerplay - really something to watch. I hated the Islanders by the way. In their pre-cup choke years I wrote "Choke" on all of my Islander hockey cards. HOW STUPID, I DESTROYED LOTS OF CARDS THAT WOULD GO ON TO BE PRETTY VALUABLE!
One comment on Bourque. If he always played as well as he did (thankfully) against the Habs in the playoffs, he'd probably be my "Number 2 after Orr" guy. Bourque was pretty consistent overall, which I guess is a big point on his Resume, but there were some playoff series against the Habs where he was really extra special. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 17:26:55
|
The thing about Bourque for me though is this; he never really wowed me. I think you'll know what I'm saying Andyhack. He was the model of consistency and did everything very well, but there was just something lacking for me. I wouldn't say he was a guy who controlled the pace of a game. Don't get me wrong, I love Bourque but I would have a very hard time saying he was dominant. Orr, Harvey, Potvin, Park, Robinson and even Serge Savard had that ability to control games.
|
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 17:58:58
|
I know what you mean Willus3, but that's actually tied into the reason that I raised those Montreal series. Even then, partially because of Bourque's understated style, one may not say from the perspective of a fan that he "controlled" the game, but I bet if you ask the Hab players of that time, many would have said that he at least came close to controlling it (I remember reading a number of pretty praiseworthy comments from Habs to that effect after those series). And Don Cherry, who actually was never a HUGE Bourque fan (compared to Neely) as I recall, made a comment once that I think was something like "when Bourque plays the Habs, he plays like he is God". If you can, somehow try to get a hold of or see tapes of some of those games. In particular, I remember some special ones when Bourque was actually getting a little older - Games 6 and 7 of the 1994 Habs-Bruin playoff battle.
One thing you gotta give Bourque though - the sweater thing with Espo was up pretty close to the top of classy gestures in NHL history. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 18:35:49
|
Absolutely Bourque is a class act. Very old school that way. Another one of the truly humble guys.
Again don't get me wrong, Bourque is an all time great. No question.
I just wish he had that one thing that stood out. Orr had his incredible speed, Potvin and Park were huge hitters, etc...
Actually I hope you don't scoff too much at this but Chelios plays very similarly to Bourque. Chelios is slightly less offensive but their overall play is quite similar. Textbook defensemen. |
|
|
|
PainTrain
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
1393 Posts |
Posted - 03/19/2007 : 20:25:56
|
| Scott Stevens, he still maneged to get around 900 points but he could change a game around with a big hit, just ask Lindros. |
|
|
|
andyhack
PickupHockey Pro
Japan
891 Posts |
Posted - 03/20/2007 : 15:46:54
|
Willus3 - no major scoffing here about your Chelios-Bourque comment. But I think Bourque's edge in offence is probably a little greater than Chelios's edge, if any, in defence. I am almost sure too that I once read a Chelios quote where he said Bourque was the best amongst the defencemen he played against. That doesn't mean he was saying Bourque was better than him though, I know.
Anyway, I thought a bit about your point while walking home from work just now. You're basically right, Bourque didn't really have one major thing that absolutely "wowed" you. A sort of interesting thing came to my mind though, not a "wow" thing so much, but something I would say he did as well as anyone ever. That was, when Bourque made a mistake, as he occasionally did, he was amazing at immediately taking steps to make things right. Sure, this hopefully is natural for anyone, but he seemed particularly excellent at cleaning up his mistakes. And that's a good lesson for all of us, whether in hockey or in life in general. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
After Orr, who is the best defenceman since 1967? 
