QUOTE (Lafleurs Fries @ May 12 2009, 11:12 PM)
Richard easily could've had another Hart trophy to his credit and there are a lot of people who believe that the league inflated the scorers of players on other teams in order to deny Rocket a scoring title. I realize that there is no objective proof of this but there are a lot of people who believe this. Its not hard to believe he got jobbed out of a scoring title or two.
It's part of the francofolk hero legend.
Lafleur wasn't a superstar who brought the fans out of their seats? Dude, he's arguably the most exciting player of all-time. Nobody would bring the crowd out of their seats the way Lafleur did. Even today people compare fan reaction towards Ovechkin to that of Lafleur. He was every bit the superstar that Ovechkin is today (moreso actually.) And the man made his very own disco album, how in the world can you say that he didn't have charisma? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtR7z4KHnWY&feature=fvst
Once again, I'm not going to toss Morenz down to make my point though. I never saw the man play. But Guy won two Harts (easily could've won another) and had three Art Rosses to Morenz's two. And unlike Morenz he did it consecutively, how can you sit there and say that he wasn't the best player in the game the way Morenz was? Morenz was better longer but I'd say Guy's peak was probably a little higher actually.
I think reasonable people can disagree on this one. Its not nearly as cut and dry as you're saying it is.
I was talking about Morenz/Plante, not Morenz/Lafleur.
I'm sorry, but I don't weigh the HOH list the way you do. As for the THN list, Morenz is three spots up on Plante. Its pretty damn close.
Can't cling to that list forever. 12 years have passed. It didn't include overseas or pre-NHL players. it was not ever discussed or justified. And cup-counting seemed to be the #2 or #3 criteria.
As I said in the past, go ahead and show me a situation where the HOH and THN list disagree on two players, and I'll be glad to defend the HOH list. I would have no trouble doing so.
Beliveau is wicked. As I said in the other thread, I'm not going to cut him down any more than I would with Hull. I just think the Rocket was better based on his insane performances in the playoffs.
Sorry man, I thought I had already done this in the other thread. He's arguably the greatest clutch scorer in the history of the game. Again, you can say that Beliveau is more well rounded and I'd agree with you but Richard was just a little bit more dominant. And the THN guys agree.
Being 20% better at scoring goals while being less than half as good at setting them up, that doesn't compute. Beliveau's easily better.
Don't feel like you're trashing Beliveau or Harvey, let loose, man. If you feel that strongly, there has to be some really good reasons besides a few playoff goals. Sometimes when you're making a case for one player over another it can look like you're trashing them. I don't want to trash Richard, but he's just a step below those guys. He's a great player, a generational talent. I have him 13th all-time. I realize this is probably lower than anyone else. But it wasn't a case of hating Richard, I just realized, player by player, that 12 guys built better resumes than him; most didn't have the benefit of hype.
it's like the italian chef said: "I only consider you scum compared to Krusty!"