I think Clarke's desire to win made him a better player - according to various players, he'd carve your eye out with his stick if it meant it would help the team win.
Objectively I would say the balance tips slightly in Clarkes favour.
Offensively he had a similar prime (71-78) vs (77-84), and he was better defensively.
Primes:
Clarke: 540gp, 627 adjusted points: 1.16 adjPPG
Trottier: 532gp, 646 adjusted points: 1.21 adjPPG
Clarke was the best defensive forward of all time, won 3 Harts, 6 points off an art ross, gritty and physical, they don't get more completeClarke might be better defensively but Trottier at his peak was seen as maybe the most complete center of all time. Could do it all and did it with excellence. Trottier for me.
Clarke was the best defensive forward of all time, won 3 Harts, 6 points off an art ross, gritty and physical, they don't get more complete
What about them? Not as goodWhat about Bergeron or Gainey?
Clarke would have won 7 if the award was given during his prime. Your point?Bergeron's won four Selkes.
Says any player or coach that was around in the 70s. Clarke is the best defensive forward everSays the guy from Philly
In Trottier's defense he was competing against Gretzky for awards throughout much of his prime. In '82 for example he finished 2nd in Hart voting behind 99.The numbers are pretty similar all things considered, with probably a bit of an edge to Trottier, but Clarke was better defensively. I don't always put a lot of stock in award voting for players I have seen extensively, but for these two, who I haven't as much, the fact that Clarke won 3 Harts and a Pearson over Orr seems telling.
Says any player or coach that was around in the 70s. Clarke is the best defensive forward ever