Jump to content

Giroux - Best Flyer Ever?

icehole

By icehole
in Philadelphia Flyers

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply
brelic Newbie

brelic

Posted
Posted

Just for kicks...

 

From 1969-1983 (the Robert Earl Clarke period)

Bobby Clarke was 4th in points, 16th in goals, 1st in assists, 32 in points/game @ 1.07 (Gretzky was a filthy 2.22).

 

From 2008-Now (the Claude Giroux period)

Claude Giroux is 7th in points, 31st in goals, 6th in assists, 18th in points/game.

 

They are both very similar in that they were top-level elite NHLers. 

 

C'mon Fletch, let's get Giroux at least one Cup before he retires!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elmatus Contributor

elmatus

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, intheslot said:

Count the the Cups Won ... !!!!!.

I've seen all of them play in person heart and drive goes to Clarkie.

 Brut force goes to The Big E.

 G is good but.. !!! 

I M O ..

 

I hear what you're saying, but using just cups won as a metric to judge the effectiveness of a single player on a 20+ player roster over several years, changes in the game, changes in the coaching staff, and so many other factors is just bad math.

 

Cup wins require a team effort. They require great coaching. They require more than just one guy with skill. They require a whole slew of variables that simply cannot be attributed to one single player, no matter who that player is. 

 

Clarke didn't win those cups. The Flyers of the day won those cups. Gretzky won a ton of cups in Edmonton, not quite so many anywhere else. Was Gretzky the best King ever? Of course he was. 

 

Today's game is very different. Giroux is a child of this new era of hockey, and he's clearly the best we've ever had over his tenure in the O&B. The question now is whether he was better than Clarke or E (or Parent, though I would agree that goalies are even more difficult to compare in this). 

 

I don't know the answer to that. I don't think it's really possible to have an answer to that. It's too broad of a metric if taken just as "best Flyer". We can compare ppg adjusted to the era, if that's your thing. We can compare percentage of pts scored with G vs without him (we can't really do this for the other two though). We can compare things like faceoffs and points made when behind (again for G anyway). We can talk about physicality, which between G and E is clearly not a contest by any stretch, but physicality isn't nearly as big a factor nowadays as it was in the 90s.

 

Point being, saying 'best Flyer ever' with no measurable metric is really just a popularity contest. That's fine too, but it shouldn't be mistaken for best in terms of actual skill or relative effectiveness. My favourite ever is Lindros by a mile, but I'm not sure he's the best ever from a skill standpoint. He was the best for a short period of time, but he had a different set of skills and better linemates. Giroux is doing more with less imo, so does that make him better? 

 

Again, either it's popularity or it's just impossible to measure. And cups won does not apply to an individual player in a sport like hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mojo1917 Veteran

mojo1917

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Podein25 said:

I just wanna say that lost in a thread like this is what a great playmaking center Bobby Clarke was.  Everybody knows how hard he worked, his leadership, his guts and grit. And the best face-off guy ever (I don't even think it's close to be honest).

 

But the guy could pass a puck. I've said it before and will say it again, who is the last center to have a drunk right winger score 60 goals? Don't @ me. 

 

It only takes a second to google the stats and  to see Clarke is to the Flyers what Gretzky is to the league,  more productive by 100s of points. It's kind of amazing actually.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JR Ewing Grand Master

JR Ewing

Posted
Posted

My immedate thought, upon reading the title of the thread was "I think you mean to say Bobby Clarke", but figured I would contribute via the Keltner Test. It's not the only way to do this, but it gives a framework, if nothing else.

 

1. Was he ever commonly thought of as the best player in hockey while he played?
Clarke- Commonly? No, not with guys like Orr in the league.
Giroux- Same answer, but with names like Crosby.

 

2. Was he ever commonly thought of as the best player at his position while he played?
Clarke- He had years where he was up there, but I'm not so sure the was generally regarded to be the best centre in the NHL.
Giroux- Same. Brutal competition.

 

3. Was he ever among the top 10 leaders in any key stats? (G, A, Pts, W, SO, etc)
Both Clarke and Giroux have repeatedly done this. (1 to each)

 

4. Did the player ever lead the league in any key stats? (G, A, Pts, W, SO, etc)
Clarke- Yes, he led the league in assists twice. (2)
Giroux- No. (1)

 

5. Did he ever have an impact on a deep playoff run?
Clarke- Yes, in 1974, '75, '76 and 1980. (3)
Giroux- Yes, in 2010. (2)

 

6. Was he a key member of a Stanley Cup winner?
Clarke- Yes, in 1974 and '75. (4)
Giroux- Almost. (2)

 

7. Was he ever a team Captain?
Clarke- Yes (5)
Giroux- Yes (3)

 

8. Was he ever team Captain of a Stanley Cup winner?
Clarke- Yes, he was the captain for both of the Flyers cup wins. (6)
Giroux- No. (3)

 

9. Did many regard him to be an excellent defensive player?
Clarke- Yes. Won a Selke, though it was only introduced when he was older, and he had high finishes in voting the other years. The authors of Ultimate Hockey named as the deserving winner in '74 and '75 if the trophy had been handed out in those years. (7)
Giroux- Has finished in the top 20 in Selke voting a couple of times, and a couple other years where he was ~40th. He definitely understands that there are two nets on the ice, but I'm not sure I would label him as an excellent/elite defensive player. (3)

 

10. Did many regard his physical play/hitting to be an intimidating factor? (NOTE: We're not looking for pests here)
Clarke- I'm of two minds on this. On one hand, his teammates did a lot more fighting than Clarke, but on the other, there was literally nothing that he wouldn't consider doing to win. A great example: the breaking of Valeri Kharlamov's ankle in the '72 series. Still, this is more of a point where the Lindros and Scott Stevens-types will get the nod. No. (7)
Giroux- He hits quite a bit, but he's more the "seperate the guy from the puck" variety of hitter than the "call the coroner" sort. (3)

 

11. Did he play alot/well after he passed his prime?
Clarke- Was done at 34, though it was in no small part to take the GM job. He could have played for years, but I don't like giving points for "what if" and "could have". (7)
Giroux- Turns 32 in January, and is showing no signs of slowing down. Can't anser for him yet. (3)

 

12. Was he ever elected to the 1st or 2nd All-Star team?
Yes for each
Clarke (8), Giroux (4)

 

13. Are many any other players with similar statistics in the HHOF?
Clarke- Yes. (9)
Giroux- Only 11 years into his career, half of the most similar players are in the Hall. es. (5)

 

14. Did he win a Hart, Lindsay, Norris or Vezina Trophy? (NOTE for goalies: prior to 1982, use 1st All-Star selections)
Clarke- Yes, 3 Harts and Pearson. (10)
Giroux- No. He's had a couple of top-5 finishes in voting, though. (5)

 

15. Did he win a Conn Smythe Trophy? (pre-1965: see resources)
No to each.

 

16. Is there any evidence to suggest (due to circumstances beyond his control) that he was significantly better than is indicated by his statistics? (NOTE: We're looking for things like time missed due to global conflict, world politics, league wars, etc... NOT INJURY!)
I don't see it for it for either of them.

 

17. Did the player bring bring positive and intense focus on the game of hockey?
The Wayne Gretzky/Babe Ruth question. Almost impossible to get a point here. No, I says.

 

18. Was the player innovative, inspire a new style of play, or cause the league to change any of its rules as a result of the way he played?
Clarke- We always hear about the Flyers ushering in particular style of play, but I don't think it would be fair to credit Clarke for that here. (10)
Giroux- Very few will get a point here. (5)

 

Aside from the fact that Bobby Clarke is one of the very greatest hockey players of all-time, Claude Giroux is living proof of how damned difficult it can be to score points on this thing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Podein25 Proficient

Podein25

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, JR Ewing said:

Clarke- Yes, in 1974, '75, '76 and 1980

 

JR, if you see Leon Stickle around - maybe he has a retirement place near Victoria - could you punch him in face for me? Thanks, Pods

 

4 minutes ago, JR Ewing said:

Aside from the fact that Bobby Clarke is one of the very greatest hockey players of all-time, Claude Giroux is living proof of how damned difficult it can be to score points on this thing.

 

Ha ha, not the conclusion I was expecting. I LOL'd

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JR Ewing Grand Master

JR Ewing

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

 

JR, if you see Leon Stickle around - maybe he has a retirement place near Victoria - could you punch him in face for me? Thanks, Pods

 

 

See, you take that Earl Weaver approach to officials: he hated them all. In his opinion, they were only out there to phuck him.

 

I take it that linesmen occupy the same space in hell as refs for you?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Podein25 Proficient

Podein25

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, JR Ewing said:

Clarke- Was done at 34, though it was in no small part to take the GM job. He could have played for years

 

No, Clarke was done. I know he never liked to talk about his diabetes - it wasn't an issue for him. But I'd say you could say he was close to done at age 30 (not yet turned 31 I don't think) during the Finals against the Isles in 1980 (Stickle!!!). Just look at him in clips from those games. A man completely spent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Podein25 Proficient

Podein25

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, JR Ewing said:

 

See, you take that Earl Weaver approach to officials: he hated them all. In his opinion, they were only out there to phuck him.

 

I take it that linesmen occupy the same space in hell as refs for you?

 

 

My problem with all of those guys wearing stripes is that too few of them have played the game at a high enough level. I mean I get, those who can't do teach and all that so it can only ever be that way. But it makes them terrible at adjudicating the game of hockey (that they haven't played).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
intheslot Newbie

intheslot

Posted
Posted

Hope you'll understand I keep saying ....I M O .

very nice post @JR Ewing

Clarke was good with a stick,he'd carve you up ..

 Was also called the dirtiest player in the N H L .

one more thing it hard for any of the flyers get noticed.for good things 

They were the bullies ..

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JR Ewing Grand Master

JR Ewing

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Podein25 said:

 

My problem with all of those guys wearing stripes is that too few of them have played the game at a high enough level. I mean I get, those who can't do teach and all that so it can only ever be that way. But it makes them terrible at adjudicating the game of hockey (that they haven't played).

 

Honest question, then: I wonder what King Clancy was like as a ref? He played in the NHL for 16 years and then reffed for 11 after he retired from playing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Podein25 Proficient

Podein25

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, JR Ewing said:

 

Honest question, then: I wonder what King Clancy was like as a ref? He played in the NHL for 16 years and then reffed for 11 after he retired from playing.

 

 

 

I didn't know that. A good one I presume. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mojo1917 Veteran

mojo1917

Posted
Posted

@JR Ewing

You know I love the Keltner test, I believe there was a miscount though. 

#5 was a yes for Giroux yet his point total did not reflect the affirmative answer.  

Not that the outcome changes much because of it however it would help G's case.

I will definitely agree getting points on the test is really hard, more so when they aren't tallied ;-).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flyercanuck Veteran

flyercanuck

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

My immedate thought, upon reading the title of the thread was "I think you mean to say Bobby Clarke", but figured I would contribute via the Keltner Test. It's not the only way to do this, but it gives a framework, if nothing else.

 

1. Was he ever commonly thought of as the best player in hockey while he played?
Clarke- Commonly? No, not with guys like Orr in the league.
Giroux- Same answer, but with names like Crosby.

 

Clarke did manage to win the Hart Trophy 3 times during Orrs career...which is as many as Orr won. He also placed 2nd another year, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th. I think there's an argument to be made he was the best player in hockey around 75/76.

 

 The fact he played for the hated Flyers didn't help him win any popularity contests. Orr wasn't at his healthiest when Clarke was in his prime either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flyercanuck Veteran

flyercanuck

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Hockey Junkie said:

I realize how important he was.  But from a pure skill standpoint and not a toughness standpoint, I rate the others above him. But he is next on the list 

 

The topic isn't most skilled Flyer...it's best Flyer. You're the only person I've ever heard of say Barber and Leach were better than Clarke. Clarke lead the team in scoring I think 8 times. Barber did it once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JR Ewing Grand Master

JR Ewing

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

 

Clarke did manage to win the Hart Trophy 3 times during Orrs career...which is as many as Orr won. He also placed 2nd another year, 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th. I think there's an argument to be made he was the best player in hockey around 75/76.

 

 The fact he played for the hated Flyers didn't help him win any popularity contests. Orr wasn't at his healthiest when Clarke was in his prime either. 

 

I absolutely think there's an argument in Clarke's favor in those years. I was tripping over whether he was commonly/generally regarded as the best player in hockey, and I felt a little bit silly going over that wording in my head. I honestly think he's one of the greatest players in hockey history, and has become underrated and under-appreciated the further we get from his playing days.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...