Toggle sidebar

Bossy vs Brett Hull

Crosby2010 said:
I mean in all honesty, with all due respect to him, he wasn't the guy that was going to tip the scales. There was a difference even from 1983 to 1984 as far as the quality of postseason from the Islanders. Bossy, Trottier, Potvin and Smith all had worse postseasons than the year before. Gillies surprisingly had a better one. Smith was doing alright until Edmonton in the finals. Potvin had a postseason that was abysmal. 6 points and a -4. If I recall his dad had passed away that spring (or around then). But everyone just seemed gassed on that team, and for good reason. John Tonelli, who never had a Conn Smythe up his sleeve but was always important in the postseason had 4 points that spring. Butch Goring same sort of thing. They just got tired, and worn down, and older.
Click to expand...
No doubt they were close to the end of dominance. Lane was a physical presence
A knock you on your ass in front of the net guy. Part of the Islanders game vs Oilers was intimidation. Without Lane that was gone. Lane made an impact on the backline where Paul Boutilier, well he was a really nice guy!

Your points are valid for sure. That's why I said it might not have mattered anyway

Great post!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crosby2010
Mike C said:
No doubt they were close to the end of dominance. Lane was a physical presence
A knock you on your ass in front of the net guy. Part of the Islanders game vs Oilers was intimidation. Without Lane that was gone. Lane made an impact on the backline where Paul Boutilier, well he was a really nice guy!

Your points are valid for sure. That's why I said it might not have mattered anyway

Great post!
Click to expand...

The Isles were a deceptively tough team. I think they still had their fair share of guys who could intimidate. Potvin, Gillies, Nystrom, etc. I like a quote Al Arbour made in an interview when talking about 1984. He said that before the Messier goal in Game 3 he was hoping the Isles could sort of bluff their way to the Cup. In other words, he knew what the Oilers were capable of doing but he was hoping they hadn't figured it out yet.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Mike C
Crosby2010 said:
The Isles were a deceptively tough team. I think they still had their fair share of guys who could intimidate. Potvin, Gillies, Nystrom, etc. I like a quote Al Arbour made in an interview when talking about 1984. He said that before the Messier goal in Game 3 he was hoping the Isles could sort of bluff their way to the Cup. In other words, he knew what the Oilers were capable of doing but he was hoping they hadn't figured it out yet.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think Arbour was right. After the Islanders swept the Oilers the previous year, and after Game 2 of the '84 series, it looked like the Islanders would pull it off again. It was looking good for the Islanders part way through Game 3. The Oilers desperately needed the big win (scoring a lot of goals) in that game.

The Oilers needed to prove to themselves that they could beat these guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike C
Staniowski said:
Yeah, I think Arbour was right. After the Islanders swept the Oilers the previous year, and after Game 2 of the '84 series, it looked like the Islanders would pull it off again. It was looking good for the Islanders part way through Game 3. The Oilers desperately needed the big win (scoring a lot of goals) in that game.

The Oilers needed to prove to themselves that they could beat these guys.
Click to expand...
They just needed to learn how to win. Isles did too. Trading Harris and Lewis.for Goring was difficult but necessary. Butch was a key missing piece and didn't have the ghosts of season's past. Billy always said Lane was just as important because he added needed toughness on the back line
 
  • Like
Reactions: Staniowski
Mike C said:
They just needed to learn how to win. Isles did too. Trading Harris and Lewis.for Goring was difficult but necessary. Butch was a key missing piece and didn't have the ghosts of season's past. Billy always said Lane was just as important because he added needed toughness on the back line
Click to expand...
They added half their dynasty defense - Morrow, Langevin, Lane - in the '80 season, when they won their first Cup. Plus Goring and Duane Sutter. These guys were crucial. Goring especially.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Mike C
Staniowski said:
Yeah, I think Arbour was right. After the Islanders swept the Oilers the previous year, and after Game 2 of the '84 series, it looked like the Islanders would pull it off again. It was looking good for the Islanders part way through Game 3. The Oilers desperately needed the big win (scoring a lot of goals) in that game.

The Oilers needed to prove to themselves that they could beat these guys.
Click to expand...

It seems like a done deal in retrospect. And even in Game 3 you look and say "Well, they won 7-2 how hard was it?" Plenty, I think. Gretzky wasn't scoring at the beginning of the Cup final in 1984, the series is tied, the Oilers are losing in the 2nd period 2-1. When Messier scores that goal it unleashed the floodgates. Two goals scored at the end of the 2nd. Then three in the 3rd. Same score in Game 4 and the game was over before it started, Edmonton was in complete control. Ditto Game 5 for the most part. So it looks like it was in the bag, but that Game 3..................there was doubt before there wasn't.
 
Crosby2010 said:
It seems like a done deal in retrospect. And even in Game 3 you look and say "Well, they won 7-2 how hard was it?" Plenty, I think. Gretzky wasn't scoring at the beginning of the Cup final in 1984, the series is tied, the Oilers are losing in the 2nd period 2-1. When Messier scores that goal it unleashed the floodgates. Two goals scored at the end of the 2nd. Then three in the 3rd. Same score in Game 4 and the game was over before it started, Edmonton was in complete control. Ditto Game 5 for the most part. So it looks like it was in the bag, but that Game 3..................there was doubt before there wasn't.
Click to expand...
I re-watched Game 3 a few years ago. The Islanders were somewhat in control through a significant part of the game, but they looked vulnerable. The Oilers, I think, just needed a spark...and they got it.

It was one of the great changing-of-the-guard games in NHL history. An important game in hockey history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crosby2010
Staniowski said:
I re-watched Game 3 a few years ago. The Islanders were somewhat in control through a significant part of the game, but they looked vulnerable. The Oilers, I think, just needed a spark...and they got it.

It was one of the great changing-of-the-guard games in NHL history. An important game in hockey history.
Click to expand...

Probably what helped Messier win the Conn Smythe. His two-way play, plus not being too far behind Gretzky in points that it had to be explained why he won (35 to 26 playoff points). Gretzky struggled the first three games of the final, then unleashed and scored 4 goals in the final two games. But it was Messier who scored goals that would be classified as turning points. Gretzky did about as much as you can do without winning the Conn Smythe in 1984 but I am fine with Messier winning it based on the Cup final.
 
Getting off-topic, but I do think Denis Potvin was key --- maybe THE key --- to the Isles' 4-straight Cups. No doubt he was individually outperformed by other skilled players at times, but overall, looking at the bigger picture, he was the guy.

From the Oilers' perspective, Potvin was the guy they feared the most, for sure. Paul Coffey still remembers a play in game one of the 1984 Final (coming into which, the Oilers had lost 10 straight games to the Isles!). It was on the surface a 'nothing' play, wherein Messier went down the wing and pushed the defence back a bit. But what everyone on the Oilers noticed was that it was Denis Potvin whom Messier knocked over in his drive to the net. They had never seen Potvin get his ass handed to him on a rush down the ice before. Coffey described it as a huge 'eureka' moment when the Oilers suddenly realized they could take New York, even physically.

Potvin was off in the '84 playoffs, and I think that was the #1 reason the Isles couldn't complete the "Drive for Five". Not saying they would have beat '84 Edmonton, but I think it would have been a lot closer in the end if Potvin was in his c.1979 form.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel and ThreeLeftSkates
The Panther said:
Getting off-topic, but I do think Denis Potvin was key --- maybe THE key --- to the Isles' 4-straight Cups. No doubt he was individually outperformed by other skilled players at times, but overall, looking at the bigger picture, he was the guy.

From the Oilers' perspective, Potvin was the guy they feared the most, for sure. Paul Coffey still remembers a play in game one of the 1984 Final (coming into which, the Oilers had lost 10 straight games to the Isles!). It was on the surface a 'nothing' play, wherein Messier went down the wing and pushed the defence back a bit. But what everyone on the Oilers noticed was that it was Denis Potvin whom Messier knocked over in his drive to the net. They had never seen Potvin get his ass handed to him on a rush down the ice before. Coffey described it as a huge 'eureka' moment when the Oilers suddenly realized they could take New York, even physically.

Potvin was off in the '84 playoffs, and I think that was the #1 reason the Isles couldn't complete the "Drive for Five". Not saying they would have beat '84 Edmonton, but I think it would have been a lot closer in the end if Potvin was in his c.1979 form.
Click to expand...


Al Arbour thought Trottier(who was also injured in the 84 playoffs) was the driving force behind the isles dynasty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BraveCanadian
Gorskyontario said:
Al Arbour thought Trottier(who was also injured in the 84 playoffs) was the driving force behind the isles dynasty.
Click to expand...
Many people thought that. Trottier was great, you could certainly argue he was the quintessential player of the Islanders. The team, as a whole, played a lot like him.

The islanders were deep, though, and they played a strong team game. So they usually weren't overwhelmingly dependent on any one player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel and Michael Farkas
Staniowski said:
Many people thought that. Trottier was great, you could certainly argue he was the quintessential player of the Islanders. The team, as a whole, played a lot like him.

The islanders were deep, though, and they played a strong team game. So they usually weren't overwhelmingly dependent on any one player.
Click to expand...

That's true, but with both Potvin and Trottier out of sorts they lost to the Oilers. If those two guys had managed to turn back the clock they may have won 5 in a row.
 
To summarize. Here is my Top 10 GOALSCORERS.

1. Ovechkin
2. Gretzky
3. Hull Sr
4. Esposito
5. Richard
6. Lemieux
7. Howe
8. Hull Jr
9. Bossy
10. Bure

Ranking them AS OVERALL PLAYERS would look like this:

Gretzky
Howe
Lemieux
Esposito
Ovechkin
Hull Sr
Richard
Bossy
Hull Jr
Bure
 
Sentinel said:
The more I learn about Bossy, the more I think he is overrated. But let's compare him and Hull Jr. Bossy led the league in goals twice, Hull -- three times. Bossy never touched 70 goals, Hull -- three times, including 86 goals (#1 all time adjusted). Sure, Bossy's nine straight 50+ goal seasons is unsurpassed but Hull had five, then 29 in 48 GP (lockout), which prorates to 50 in 82, and then the DPE began (though 43 in 70 in 95-96 also prorates to 50).

So, peak: Hull >> Bossy
Prime: Hull < Bossy
Consistency: Hull <~ Bossy
Career: Hull by default because every goal he scored after 30 is more than Bossy.
Playoffs: Hull < Bossy (the only area where Bossy is clearly superior, although Hull led both Cup-winning teams in goals and even scored the golden goal in 99).

Teammates: Bossy played on a dynasty. Hull's peak was with Oates. So it's a wash.

As an overall player, Hull won the Hart, while Bossy never rose above a third place in votes.

Overall, I find that Bossy is not even a top 7 goalscorer of all time (Ovechkin, Gretzky, Hull Sr, Esposito, Lemieux, Richard, Howe, Hull Jr).

Now eat me up. :)
Click to expand...
"The more I learn about Bossy"

Therein is your problem....you never saw him play.

Bossy had 9 straight 50+ goal seasons (including a 50 in 50) and would have had a 10th in '86-'87 until back issues became too severe and he had to retire (lol-I blame Tiger Williams for the abuse he gave Bossy in '82 Finals fro his back issues).
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: ThreeLeftSkates and Sentinel
Dale53130 said:
How many shots on net were they taking? Here's Bossy's best nine seasons:

View attachment 985693

Brett Hull by comparison:

View attachment 985694

Shots on Goal (league leaders):

Bossy:

View attachment 985697

Brett Hull:

View attachment 985699

The Islanders scored a lot of goals, sure, but how many shots did they take as a team vs the league?

Islanders SOG:

1977-78: 2490 (4th out of 18 teams) --- Goals For: 334 (2nd of 18)
1978-79: 2301 (9th out of 17 teams) --- Goals For: 358 (1st of 17)
1979-80: 2216 (18th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 281 (12th of 21)
1980-81: 2417 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 355 (1st of 21)
1981-82: 2469 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 385 (2nd of 21)
1982-83: 2429 (11th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 302 (15th of 21)
1983-84: 2422 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 357 (3rd of 21)
1984-85: 2415 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 345 (5th of 21)
1985-86: 2352 (19th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 327 (8th of 21)

Blues SOG:

1988-89: 2327 (15th out of 21 teams) ---- Goals For: 275 (16th of 21)
1989-90: 2333 (15th out of 21 teams) --- Goals For: 295 (8th of 21)
1990-91: 2550 (4th out of 21 teams) ------ Goals For: 310 (4th of 21)
1991-92: 2376 (15th out of 22 teams) ---- Goals For: 279 (12th of 22)
1992-93: 2439 (20th out of 24 teams) ---- Goals For: 282 (18th of 24)
1993-94: 2570 (11th out of 26 teams) ---- Goals For: 270 (17th of 26)
1994-95: 1411 (15th out of 26 teams) ---- Goals For: 178 (4th of 26)
1995-96: 2548 (9th out of 26 teams) ------ Goals For: 219 (24th of 26)
1996-97: 2415 (15th out of 26 teams) ----- Goals For: 236 (14th of 26)

Did Bossy have to score more goals, in order for the Islanders to perform better? Would it have been more beneficial, for him to play closer to 30 minutes per game, rather than the Islanders being a 4-line team?

For all of the talk about the high scoring '80s, the Islanders shot a high percentage, were middle-of-the-pack for shots on net, yet were near the top in goals scored throughout (most of) Bossy's prime.



I mean, Bossy has 18 fewer goals in the playoffs, while playing 73 fewer games. Not to mention 4 cups...

If we're isolating shooting, and the ability to be in the right spot at the right time, coming out of nowhere, these guys are probably #1a and #1b in league history.

Bossy's a better all around player, he should pass more because he could. You don't need to force it every single time (that's not a dig at Hull but guys chasing numbers).

Gretzky left goals on the table - you're aware of this - but throw that logic out with Bossy for some reason. (No, I'm not suggesting that Bossy's on Gretzky's level as a passer.)
Click to expand...
Good stats...for those that didn't watch the Islanders in that era, Coach Arbour preached defense as the basic Core of the team. Thus, O could have scored a bunch more if Coach Arbour had not preached defensive responsibility (including Bossy who over time became a very responsible player)

Islanders could score but they would not have won 19 straight series without Coach Arbours defensive focus along with Billy Smith (including holding the 1982-3 Oilers who scored 424 goals to only 6 goals in a Finals sweep). Data during 7 of Bossy's core years:

1977-78 #3 in Goals Allowed #2 Goals Scored
1978-79 #2 in Goals Allowed #1 Goals Scored
1979-80 #4 in Goals Allowed #13 in Goals Scored.
1980-81 #4 in Goals Allowed #1 in Goals Scored.
1981-82 #2 in Goals Allowed #2 in Goals Scored.
1982-83 #1 in Goals Allowed #15 in Goals Scored.
1983-84. #4 in Goals Allowed #3 in Goals Scored.
 
chaz4hockey said:
"The more I learn about Bossy"

Therein is your problem....you never saw him play.

Bossy had 9 straight 50+ goal seasons (including a 50 in 50) and would have had a 10th in '86-'87 until back issues became too severe and he had to retire (lol-I blame Tiger Williams for the abuse he gave Bossy in '82 Finals fro his back issues).
Click to expand...
So? We routinely evaluate players none of us has ever seen. I saw a few Islanders games. He was a brilliant and an elite player. Just not as good as the other eight that I listed.
 
MadLuke said:
He was just ranking a list 10 players among them (versus each others), it was not a list of the top 10 best players of all time, I think.
Click to expand...
Of course. I specifically said "THEM." Just them. Not all others. Out of these, only 6 would make my Top 10 list.

them.jpg
 
Sentinel said:
So? We routinely evaluate players none of us has ever seen. I saw a few Islanders games. He was a brilliant and an elite player. Just not as good as the other eight that I listed.
Click to expand...
The beauty of social media. Others can disagree, particularly the older folks that saw him play (my window is late 60’s onward) and have seen all the others mentioned in lists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThreeLeftSkates
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom