Man as big as Ken Dryden was he looks small in those old school pads compared to today's goalies.
Closest thing to Larry Robinson
- Thread starter BenchBrawl
- Start date
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,183
No way is Robinson that low, nor should he be on ANYONE's list. Top 10 for sure for me. Up until a couple seasons ago he was right there with Lidstrom. Now of course it would be difficult to build a case for him in that situation now.
But Big Bird was healthy, Pronger wasn't and hasn't been. I defy anyone to mention how Robinson's best season (let's say 1977) is worse than Pronger's (2000). No offense to Pronger, but maybe without the injuries this is a closer match.
And who was the one who said he wasn't mean enough? The guy is most responsible for taming the Broad Street Bullies. He was 6'4" at a time when most players weren't. He was a lot like Howe back in the day. His prescence on the ice or just skating up to a scrum was enough to settle it down.
Closest to Robinson? Yeah Blake and Pronger aren't bad choices. Neither were as good but most weren't and they are the best players with the closest type of style to him. Ask Gary Doernhoffer.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Hitting.Larry Robinson had it all over Blake and Pronger:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKd4HJNSbQg
Notice the proper body position of a hockey hit not a football style hit.
Scoring. Blake and Robinson could not come close to the following.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9rp-ewJ8mI&p=4CB98E76295E2EDA&playnext=1&index=6
Robinson was a forward until his last year of junior.
Discipline. On ice he was one of the most disciplined players ever. Never any Chris Pronger irrationality.
Neither Blake or Pronger are close.
LeBlondeDemon10
Registered User
Why would you take Pronger over Robinson? He doesn't score as much as Robinson, doesn't pass the puck nearly as well, doesn't have the moves or rushing ability and as far as I'm concerned his so called mythical status is based on his ability to take cheap shots and maim people. I don't call that being mean. Larry was honest and mean. Pronger is a coward.
Pronger's been on a number of lousy teams too so I don't buy that crap either. The Flyers have a great group of young players that can perform.
Pronger's been on a number of lousy teams too so I don't buy that crap either. The Flyers have a great group of young players that can perform.
bleeney
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2008
- 1,834
- 0
Robinson and Pronger are both great defensemen; big, tough, two-way defenders.
As much as I love the way Pronger plays, I've gotta give the edge to Robinson. Robinson was a better skater and had more offensive skill. Pronger didn't do stuff like this:
And although Pronger is mean and nasty, Robinson was tougher. Pronger picks his spots. Look at his fight card and you'll see that he doesn't take on the real tough guys.
Robinson on the other hand, took on Howatt, Schultz, Saleski, Irvine, Hodge, Jonathon, Hutchison, Milbury, Paiement, Sleigher and Cronin. His only two losses according to dropyourgloves were a narrow loss against Cronin, when Robinson was 42 years old, and a loss to Paiement, in a fight where Robinson had the upper hand until Wilf landed a solid punch. Other than that, he was undefeated.
As much as I love the way Pronger plays, I've gotta give the edge to Robinson. Robinson was a better skater and had more offensive skill. Pronger didn't do stuff like this:
And although Pronger is mean and nasty, Robinson was tougher. Pronger picks his spots. Look at his fight card and you'll see that he doesn't take on the real tough guys.
Robinson on the other hand, took on Howatt, Schultz, Saleski, Irvine, Hodge, Jonathon, Hutchison, Milbury, Paiement, Sleigher and Cronin. His only two losses according to dropyourgloves were a narrow loss against Cronin, when Robinson was 42 years old, and a loss to Paiement, in a fight where Robinson had the upper hand until Wilf landed a solid punch. Other than that, he was undefeated.
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,183
Agree with this here. Georges Laraque would have been a modern comparison to Schultz and I have never seen Pronger take a guy like him on (Chara has however).
Robinson never backed down against those who were brave enough to fight him.
Agreed. Some idiot writer from New York listed him 100th among the all time greats!
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
At his best, Pronger was never as good as Robinson in 1976-77, IMO the best season I've ever witnessed by a defenseman. IMO Robinson, not Lafleur, was the Habs MVP that season. 85pts, great defense, physicality and the 2nd best +/- ever recorded, +120.
Coach Craig
Passion for coaching
- Jan 13, 2010
- 406
- 0
Absolutely correct. And whoever said Robinson didn't have Pronger's mean streak is out to lunch. Robinson had so much respect because 99% of the league feared him. Nobody was bigger and stronger and a competent player than Robinson in his career. Nobody. He is responsible for ending the Flyers reign of terror.
TheStranger
Registered User
OT: My mom went to school with Larry Robinson, and his brother Moe, though Moe only played 1 game in the NHL.
My parents were on Larry's boat/yacht in Prescott, Ontario a couple weeks back.
My parents were on Larry's boat/yacht in Prescott, Ontario a couple weeks back.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
wasn't that book from around 1980, though? Robinson's resume was still incomplete.
Agreed that Robinson was a hitter but guys feared Pronger because he was a bit of a wing nut out there and in the dead-puck era (which should really be called the clutch and grab era since nothing was different about the puck). Robinson was very celan and solid when he hit.
I'm too young to have watched Robinson play, but I think I would probably fear pronger more. Robinson may have hit harder, but he seems like he didn't run around elbowing people in the head.
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
Meh, I have no doubt that Pronger playing in a non-instigator rule NHL wouldn't of been as tough or been as much as a loose cannon.
Sorry but over the years I have rarely seen Pronger take liberties or do crazy things to players that could actually take him on.
Robinson on the other hand, it didn't matter how big or how small you were, he treated them all the same.
Look at the SCF this year, I'm sorry but big Buff owned Pronger and he wasn't about to get all crazy on him, no chance.
Again, no one owned Robinson like that ever!
Sorry but over the years I have rarely seen Pronger take liberties or do crazy things to players that could actually take him on.
Robinson on the other hand, it didn't matter how big or how small you were, he treated them all the same.
Look at the SCF this year, I'm sorry but big Buff owned Pronger and he wasn't about to get all crazy on him, no chance.
Again, no one owned Robinson like that ever!
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Also lets not forget that Robinson was quite big in a time when there weren't a ton of big players.
You might have no doubt about Pronger in different times and some guys might say the same about Robinson now. I have no idea one way or the other as their are so many variables involved.
I'm sure he would be a big steady Dman with less offensive flair if he played today due to the changes and nature of the game in the NHL but quite the presence on the back end all the same.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,973
- 18,727
If anything, the better Big Bird "emulator" was Blake.
Lesser player than Robinson in every possible category, but he was the one who TRIED to play the game in the most Robinson-like fashion.
I might seem a little naive, but I had some hops Jack Johnson would turn out like Big Bird (without the comparative size advantage).
Lesser player than Robinson in every possible category, but he was the one who TRIED to play the game in the most Robinson-like fashion.
I might seem a little naive, but I had some hops Jack Johnson would turn out like Big Bird (without the comparative size advantage).
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
Guessing you didn't watch too much of the finals.
Games 1-4 ... Buff didn't have a point and was a (-3). The Buff-Toews-Kane line was a complete and utter non-factor
Quenville broke the line up for the final two games, to get them away from Pronger.
Game 5 .. Buff had two assists with Pronger on the ice. One power play goal, with Pronger off the ice. One empty net goal.
Game 6 .. Buff had a power play goal, Pronger wasn't on the ice.
Proner was the best player in the playoffs for the 3rd time since the lockout.
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,183
Really? I'm not taking anything away from him at all because he was very good but he was not the best player in the playoffs. I watched the final with a friend of mine who is also a big Flyers fan like yourself. He swore by Pronger. He hated when I pointed out the obvious to him that Keith clearly outplayed him in the final. I would assume you might hate it as well but I am not partial to either team and this is what I saw. Keith was the best player in the finals no doubt.
Other than that, Pronger is no better than 4th overall in the playoffs this year. Keith, Toews and Kane all had better postseasons.
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,183
Robinson was 6'4" when the average player size was 5'11" or 6'0" at best. Pronger is 6'6" when the average size of a player is about 6'1" and 210lbs. or so. There isn't a lot of difference. Both players were towers of power compared to the rest of the NHL. Pronger is big today as well and you can see it just by watching the game on the ice and seeing how much taller he is.
Robinson, like any other all-time great, would be fine in today's game and would adjust perfectly. If a peak Robinson is in the NHL right now he'd have won the Norris Trophy.
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
You could argue that Keith was better in the finals, but the Conn Smythe isn't just a finals award.
Toews was essentially a complete non-factor in the finals, his Conn Smythe was a joke. 0 goals 3 assists and a (-5).
Going into the Finals it was Towes for the Hawks and Pronger for the Flyers.
Conn Smythe should have gone to Keith with the Hawks winning and Pronger if the Flyers won.
Hossa was the best Hawks forward in the Finals, Briere was the best forward for either team in the finals.
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 28,834
- 19,601
to my eyes, pronger was the best player in the finals until game 5. keith may have been better over the whole series, but i would argue that if you look at the hawks' entire run, seabrook may have been had the better playoffs, beginning to end.
rounds 1-4, i thought pronger had the best playoffs. didn't the hawks only score one goal with pronger on the ice, ES or PP, for the first four games of the finals? obviously game 5 did not make him look good, but take away pronger and put in, say, markov and i think it's a chicago sweep. game 5 aside, his +/- i comparison to the rest of the team looks like mark howe on the 80s flyers.
that said, i am okay with pronger not getting the conn smythe because, not only did he have that terrible game 5, but the series was tied up to that point and that game was pivotal to the hawks winning the series. but then i think you have to give it to either keith or seabrook. i was not impressed by toews in the finals (pronger owned him), and kane was very good at important times but not game-in, game-out. also, in the finals games that mattered the most (1, 5, 6), bolland was the hawks' most important forward at even-strength.
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
I agree with you for the first 3 1/2 games but I think you have your homer goggles on a lil too tight for the last 2 1/2 games.
It wasn't about how many points Buff had vs Pronger, it was about how Buff decided about halfway through game 4, that he was going to make Pronger his B**** and proceeded to do so in short order for the rest of the series.
Unless of course you see the following happen often...
Hey, I like Pronger, I also think he gets overrated but I still like him but once Buff decided that Pronger wasn't going to be a factor, he wasn't.
