Does PK make the hall?

the canadian dream

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
6,402
Liked Posts:
14
That's a good point and just because it's not widely talked about in hockey doesn't mean that it shouldn't be. It should be taken into account. I doubt we see another player who scores 60 or 70 goals a season on any kind of regular basis or racks up 150+ points and it's not because there was such a huge gap in talent from then and now, it's like you said, defense and, not goalie pads, but goalie technique.



Imagine Ovechkin or Crosby or any of today's top players back in the 70s or 80s or earlier playing against goalies most of whom didn't employ some form of the butterfly. You think they'd top out at 40 maybe 50 something goals like they are now? Especially with all the shots a player like Ovechkin takes? No way. That's what makes Gretzky's records untouchable. The era he played in. Not saying he wasn't a great player, he was, he was beyond his time. It just so happened his time was also already a very highly offensive favoring time in the NHL.





I agree with this. But I do have to throw in the one thing about that era that is completely different to the game right now. That is the 2 line pass and the active red line. I think you still have to give credit to those players of that era having to play with that one extra stride which put you off side or onside. I am not sure if half the players could play with that 2 line pass rule (some are just too damn fast lol). I think guys like Wayner/Lemiux/Lafontaine/etc etc etc (the list goes on and on) had that great ability to see plays develop like no one else and how to position themselves. It's the eye for the game that made these guys so good. But imagine the defensemen today playing with that rule? Good god!! Add on the bigger goalies and the bigger pads and there would be no goals scored at all!!!!



But I guess the trap game today sort of compensates for the non active red line.



It's an interesting debate. And it does show how much this game has changed. And it certainly allows us to split hockey up into eras and ask who was the best of those eras at their positions etc. I am not sure if there is another pro sport which has changed so much and so fast..and it continues to do so. Everything has changed. The equipment, the rules, styles and techniques, the ice surface is totally different. I think the only thing that has stayed fairly constant..is the puck....give or take a glowing one here and there.
 

dlrob315

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Oct 25, 2010
Posts:
1,153
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Demolished, No Longer Standing
I agree with this. But I do have to throw in the one thing about that era that is completely different to the game right now. That is the 2 line pass and the active red line. I think you still have to give credit to those players of that era having to play with that one extra stride which put you off side or onside. I am not sure if half the players could play with that 2 line pass rule (some are just too damn fast lol). I think guys like Wayner/Lemiux/Lafontaine/etc etc etc (the list goes on and on) had that great ability to see plays develop like no one else and how to position themselves. It's the eye for the game that made these guys so good. But imagine the defensemen today playing with that rule? Good god!! Add on the bigger goalies and the bigger pads and there would be no goals scored at all!!!!



But I guess the trap game today sort of compensates for the non active red line.



It's an interesting debate. And it does show how much this game has changed. And it certainly allows us to split hockey up into eras and ask who was the best of those eras at their positions etc. I am not sure if there is another pro sport which has changed so much and so fast..and it continues to do so. Everything has changed. The equipment, the rules, styles and techniques, the ice surface is totally different. I think the only thing that has stayed fairly constant..is the puck....give or take a glowing one here and there.





The other sports did change....the concept of utilizing speed took place in basketball & football in the 80's. It took the NHL longer to grasp that concept!
 

Variable

New member
Joined:
Jul 24, 2010
Posts:
3,023
Liked Posts:
122
Yeah I was going to say, hockey was actually behind the other sports in that aspect. Which brings up sort of an interesting parallel in a way of comparing eras and the "best of"s of those eras and doing those crossover debates, the one most likely to come about being Gretzky vs. Jordan. You have Gretzky who is undoubtedly an amazing player already, a Hall of Famer no matter what, who played a lot of his career in the high scoring era of hockey. Then you got Jordan, who played his early career in probably the most, or at least one of the most defensive time periods of the NBA, where you could get away with a whole hell of a lot more playing defense than you could ever dream of in today's game. And he was averaging over (easily over in several seasons) 30 points a game, every year playing against that. Put that in perspective and see how in today's game, where it's easier than ever to score, draw a foul, get to the line etc, and you have today's top players getting sometimes close to the 30 ppg mark, rarely over it.



By the time Jordan had left the Bulls, it wasn't like the Detroit Piston's Bad Boy era anymore, but things like hand checking were still allowed. When Jordan came back with the Wizards, hand checking was on it's way out as well, and it became easier than ever to score from the perimeter, changed the game completely (big reason why we're seeing small point guards like Derrick Rose, Chris Paul, Deron Williams,etc, become monsters) . At ages 38-40 years old, Jordan was still able to average over 20 points a game and play close to his career average in minutes. On two bad knees. There'd be no way he'd be able to do that if the game hadn't changed as such. No way. This example works in reverse for Gretzky and the time he played in. Everything is opposite in his circumstance.



2 line pass, the red line, I think players of today would handle that and be able to adapt to it. Would it make sense to bring it back? No. Would you see a decrease in scoring in today's game if they did? Probably,yes. Would that prove anything? No, because you wouldn't be bringing the mindset of the stand up goalie style back along with those rules, because goalies know it doesn't work. They know there exists better techniques, which were fleshed out and perfected by guys like Patrick Roy. Whereas during that time, it was in it's infancy, nowhere near widely practiced. Again, it really wasn't the goalie equipment that made the impact, it was improved defense and the evolution of the butterfly technique and it's hybrids. It was that turnover of ideas with the younger up and coming goalies acceptance of them and putting them into practice that made the impact.



A new wave of goalies took over. You can point to Roy popularizing the style back in 85', his rookie year, a year in which the average save % in the NHL was .875. Wow right? The days of goalies standing on their feet trying to make saves. Until Roy. From that year on, goalies were filtered out, those who adapted stayed, those who didn't they didn't last too long. And the save percentages started going up. Most importantly, that all happened before the goalie equipment started getting bigger. It had little to do with the scoring drop. By the time the 93'-94 season rolled around with the save percentage for the first time going above .90%, almost all of but a handful (I think 6 or 7 players including Roy) of goalies that played during Roy's rookie season were gone, out of the league. Again, all before the goalie equipment got bigger. And of course all during this time period the "Jordan" example in Dominik Hasek was playing out of his mind (had to get that in there).



Throughout the 80s and early to mid 90s, the NHL's average save % was below .900, hitting low points around .870 something. Compared to today where it's over .910. It took a dip (pretty much just that first season back) after they changed the rules after the lockout, including restrictions to goalie equipment size, to try to promote more scoring, but players and teams adapted and it's right back to where it was before the lockout.One of the very few great goalies, Roy changed the position and changed the game. May have not been the first to use it, but he was the one who pioneered it to what it is today.
 

Rex

Chief Blackcock
Joined:
Jul 17, 2010
Posts:
3,447
Liked Posts:
449
Location:
Grimson's Sweet Ass
Good question. Warrior with no hardware. Hall of Good or Hall of Fame?



Considering they put GIlmour in there, it's Hall of Good. Putting Gilmour over Bure is a fucking travesty.
 

Tater

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
13,392
Liked Posts:
5,207
I agree with this. But I do have to throw in the one thing about that era that is completely different to the game right now. That is the 2 line pass and the active red line. I think you still have to give credit to those players of that era having to play with that one extra stride which put you off side or onside. I am not sure if half the players could play with that 2 line pass rule (some are just too damn fast lol). I think guys like Wayner/Lemiux/Lafontaine/etc etc etc (the list goes on and on) had that great ability to see plays develop like no one else and how to position themselves. It's the eye for the game that made these guys so good. But imagine the defensemen today playing with that rule? Good god!! Add on the bigger goalies and the bigger pads and there would be no goals scored at all!!!!



But I guess the trap game today sort of compensates for the non active red line.



It's an interesting debate. And it does show how much this game has changed. And it certainly allows us to split hockey up into eras and ask who was the best of those eras at their positions etc. I am not sure if there is another pro sport which has changed so much and so fast..and it continues to do so. Everything has changed. The equipment, the rules, styles and techniques, the ice surface is totally different. I think the only thing that has stayed fairly constant..is the puck....give or take a glowing one here and there.



I'll see your two line pass and raise you a clutch and grab era.
 

the canadian dream

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
6,402
Liked Posts:
14
I'll see your two line pass and raise you a clutch and grab era.



That too. I would love to see how the majority of players today would play under a clutch and grab era with the active redline. Would love to see if guys like Ovechkin are as effective as they are now with less open ice to play on.



Sorry guys my point was how fast Hockey has changed. Not that it has had more changes as other pro sports. I don't think those other major pro sports had as many changes in such a short time period. Look back 12 years ago and hockey was a completely different game as far as rules (the change from the active redline was huge, that was a major part of the game and changed it completely). I am not sure if the other major pro sports have had as many changes in a 12 year period as far as rule changes and the culture of said sport.
 

bierboy

New member
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
1,015
Liked Posts:
0
Location:
Quad Sillies
PK, if his career ended today would probably not make the hall. I am betting though that he makes it in the future, as his play becomes better and better and he matures.

You mean IF his play gets better and better and IF he matures. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm still not sold that Kane will be a long haul, great player. I hope I'm wrong...
 

CLWolf81

Fan Captain
Joined:
May 15, 2010
Posts:
3,107
Liked Posts:
96
Location:
Chicago, Illinois
Considering they put GIlmour in there, it's Hall of Good. Putting Gilmour over Bure is a fucking travesty.



Considering that Bure was a Canuck, wouldn't you? I know its a different era of the franchise, but still... once a Canuck, always a Canuck... -.-
 

PatrickShart

New member
Joined:
May 17, 2010
Posts:
4,782
Liked Posts:
452
You mean IF his play gets better and better and IF he matures. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm still not sold that Kane will be a long haul, great player. I hope I'm wrong...





HF50? Is that you?



His numbers are only behind Ovechkin, Crosby and Malkin in players drafted the last 10-15yrs at this stage of his career...and he came in younger and smaller than any of them. Not bad for an undersized, US born player.



Why is it assumed Toews is destined for greatness...yet the jury out on Kane?
 

MassHavoc

Moderator
Staff member
Joined:
May 14, 2010
Posts:
17,853
Liked Posts:
2,553
HF50? Is that you?



His numbers are only behind Ovechkin, Crosby and Malkin in players drafted the last 10-15yrs at this stage of his career...and he came in younger and smaller than any of them. Not bad for an undersized, US born player.



Why is it assumed Toews is destined for greatness...yet the jury out on Kane?

It really bothers me when people get so focus on their prejudices that they become to stubborn to change their mind or admit they were wrong.
 

Chief Walking Stick

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
May 12, 2010
Posts:
48,297
Liked Posts:
26,807
It really bothers me when people get so focus on their prejudices that they become to stubborn to change their mind or admit they were wrong.



Yea! I knew everyone but bierboy would come around and accept the beast... john scott!!



Lol just bustin your balls bier
 

R K

Guest
It really bothers me when people get so focus on their prejudices that they become to stubborn to change their mind or admit they were wrong.





I wasn't going to say anything because it's Kane related but agree 100%. There is no fucking jury out on Kane at this point. None. Calder, Silver Medal, SC winning goal, Stanley Cup, all before the age of 22. How much better does he need to get? Really? His number will improve sure but must he win 4 Stanley Cups before people throw out their stigma of him?



As for the "maturing" part give me a fucking break. He's done more than 50% of the entire NHL and he's 22. He's not here to be "mature" not that he's not like ANY normal 22 year old kid making 6.2 mil per year, he's here to score game winning goals.
 

supraman

New member
Joined:
May 16, 2010
Posts:
8,024
Liked Posts:
196
Location:
St.Pete, FL
I wasn't going to say anything because it's Kane related but agree 100%. There is no fucking jury out on Kane at this point. None. Calder, Silver Medal, SC winning goal, Stanley Cup, all before the age of 22. How much better does he need to get? Really? His number will improve sure but must he win 4 Stanley Cups before people throw out their stigma of him?



As for the "maturing" part give me a fucking break. He's done more than 50% of the entire NHL and he's 22. He's not here to be "mature" not that he's not like ANY normal 22 year old kid making 6.2 mil per year, he's here to score game winning goals.



I think Kane's game with get further refined over time, I mean look at his defensive work it is a lot better than it was his first two seasons. I agree with the idea that there is no more jury out. He's going to be a great player. If he plays a normal length career he's going to the hall. I think JT will be considered the better player but that doesn't mean Kane isn't a bad player he's a great player actually. I love that we have him on the squad.
 

R K

Guest
I agree 100%. He came in premature though. Many thought he would be right back to London. He had no or very little defensive skills and was much smaller in size than he is now. Although he still led the team in points that year. He's progressed every year on his two way game. Had he not had the ankle injury last year who knows where he'd have finished as far as points. He skated on one leg for 25 games or more, and finished the season playing with a broken hand.



His biggest question now is for him to stay healthy all 82 games. If he does that 100pts are definitely not out of the question.



There is absolutely NOTHING he still has to prove to ANY fans other than him continuing on improving his two way game. Absolutely nothing. How any one can have reservations about him at this point baffles me.
 

supraman

New member
Joined:
May 16, 2010
Posts:
8,024
Liked Posts:
196
Location:
St.Pete, FL
I agree 100%. He came in premature though. Many thought he would be right back to London. He had no or very little defensive skills and was much smaller in size than he is now. Although he still led the team in points that year. He's progressed every year on his two way game. Had he not had the ankle injury last year who knows where he'd have finished as far as points. He skated on one leg for 25 games or more, and finished the season playing with a broken hand.



His biggest question now is for him to stay healthy all 82 games. If he does that 100pts are definitely not out of the question.



There is absolutely NOTHING he still has to prove to ANY fans other than him continuing on improving his two way game. Absolutely nothing. How any one can have reservations about him at this point baffles me.



Agreed. It is almost a shame that while he is a blackhawk he will always play pippen to JT's Jordan
 

R K

Guest
Very true, but I'm not sure he look's at it that way. Which I guess it what really counts. I think the Hawks don't win the Cup without one or the other, so in that sense they are both paramount.



Similar to the Bulls but Jordon was far better at his sport than Toews is at his IMO. Not knocking Toews, rather pointing out just how good Jordon became. JT is not in the coversation of best overall hockey player of all time. MJ is not only part of that conversation, but probably IS/was the best all time.
 

PatrickShart

New member
Joined:
May 17, 2010
Posts:
4,782
Liked Posts:
452
And as far as goal scoring goes with Sharp.....Kane has more to do with that than Toews does.



It's not mere coincidence that Sharp went from a 15-20g player to 30+ when Kane got here. Not many better passers in the entire league - Toews included - from the half boards as well as finding trailers or players on the back side of the ice than Patticakes.
 

R K

Guest
Kanes vision on the ice is almost unmatched in the NHL. No question. When he's 33 lets have this conversation again. By that time even if he goes at the same pace, without any improvement, he will be HOF no question.



It's time for the haters to stop hating. His time of judgement is past.
 

PatrickShart

New member
Joined:
May 17, 2010
Posts:
4,782
Liked Posts:
452
I'd bet as well...when another team preps to play the Hawks, its Kane #1 on the list they play to shut down/key on...because he is the catalyst to the team's offense - 100%.
 

R K

Guest
but he's still not mature. May never get there. <sorry bier> had too!
 

Top