In case anyone thought that old-timey reports were too kind to players, I just came across what reads like a hit piece on Hod Stuart (and Ed Hogan). From the Ottawa Journal, 11 December 1906 (page 2)
"Hod is a Marvel?
The Pittsburg Sun gets off something like this: Hod Stuart has long enjoyed the distinction of being the greatest hockey player the game has produced. It is generally conceded that Pittsburg's wonderful cover point is the equal of three ordinary men. His brilliant dashes down the ice furnish a spectacular feature in every game in which he takes part.
And also this: Hogan handles himself in a manner which shows that too much has not been claimed for him. He was universally regarded the most desirable player in the Dominion and most hockey players doubted that the local management would be able to land him.
When eastern hockey followers read the above it will be a case of 'It is to laugh'.
Imagine Hod Stuart as the greatest product of hockey! Stuart is a big, husky boy, with a slashing mow-'em down style, but lacks the finesse that marks the great player. He is not to be compared for a moment with Harvey Pulford, or Pete Charlton, of to-day, or Magnus Flett and the only Mike Grant of the past. This quartet includes the four greatest defense players the game has produced to date. And a for forward work, how about Frank McGee, Harry Trihey, Russell Bowie, Tom Phillips, Alf. Smith, Harry Westwick, Fred Scanlan, Bob McDougall, Shirley Davidson, Dan Bain, Tony Gingras? Any one of this bunch could play rings around Mr. Stuart.
And as for Mr. Hogan, if he is the gentleman one time of Quebec, Pittsburg has been handed a gold brick. In Montreal or Ottawa, and intermediate team would be about his size"
...wow, right? There's a lot to unpack in this one. First of all, it's the opinion of one person at one moment in time. I'm big and stacking one-person, one-moment-in-time quotes on top of each other to build a picture of what the prevailing opinions of the day were, so I don't want to discount this one out of hand, but I will say that this is very much a minority opinion on Stuart.
That said-, minority opinion or not, the author does at least generally seem to have the "right" names when it comes to historically great examples... as far as I have been able to pull together from various sources/contemporary opinions. More so his forward list, haha. I'll start there.
Frank McGee, Russell Bowie, and Tom Phillips were easily the most decorated/celebrated forwards of the 1881-1909 time period. Good, he has them. Alf Smith and Harry 'Rat' Westwick were long time high-caliber players who had been in the game for about a decade at this point, and Ottawa HC was probably the best team around at the time this article was written. They make sense. Then we get into the older players- Harry Trihey was a very popular player and stayed involved in the game. Dan Bain also had a ton of star power. Bob McDougall and Shirley Davidson were also quite celebrated. That leaves Fred Scanlan and Tony Gingras, who, while I think they fall a little lower on the pecking order, their names don't seem too crazy here.
The author's selection of examples for defense is... interesting, to say the least. Harvey Pulford was undoubtedly great, but I am pretty shocked to read criticism of Stuart's finesse then immediately see praise of Harvey Pulford. I mean...Pulford filled his role well, but I don't see anything in the game reports to suggest that finesse was involved in his role. Pete Charlton is an interesting name. Good defender for a long time, mostly in the OHA. Magnus Flett had his fans, but this is the most effusive praise that I've seen (though I'll readily admit I don't have great visibility on what was happening in Manitoba, at least not in comparison to the AHAC/CAHL/ECAHA). Mike Grant tracks, though.
Actually, looking back, all these guys were winners. McGee, Smith, Pulford, and Westwick on Ottawa. McDougall, Davidson, and Grant with the Montreal Victorias. Harry Trihey with the Montreal Shamrocks. Dan Bain and Tony Gingras with the Winnipeg Victorias. Fred Scanlan with the Montreal Shamrocks and the Winnipeg Victorias. Tom Phillips won pretty much everywhere he went. Pete Charlton, as mentioned, did a lot of winning in the OHA. It looks like the author may value playing a prominent role on a dynasty/near dynasty highly... but it's not like Hod Stuart did do his share of winning, too.
Ah, yes, Eddie Hogan- I think describing him as "universally regarded the most desirable player in the Dominion" as the Pittsburg Sun reportedly did is quite an exaggeration (again, based on what I've put together from various sources), but I think he was also much better than an intermediate team player as the author of this article submits. He had some strong seasons in the CAHL and ECAHA with Quebec HC (though clearly, in my opinion, below Paddy Moran, Herb Jordan, and Joe Power in terms of importance to the team), and was sought after by teams in the IPHL and then signed with the powerhouse Renfrew Creamery Kings of the FHL in 1909 (I believe he led the 1909 FHL in scoring, though 5 of the top 6 scorers were Renfrew- Eddie Hogan, Steve Vair, Bobby Rowe, Didier Pitre, and Ernie Liffiton- some very big names at the time).
Basically my take is that the article is interesting and not something we should just discard/ignore... but I also don't think we need to be rushing off to destroy Hod Stuart's (or Eddie Hogan's) reputation and standing around these parts.
That said, since I'm "dishing the dirt" on Stuart, there is also this article from the Pittsburgh Post, 20 March 1904 (page 18)
"A laughable story appeared in one of the local papers, wherein Stuart laid claim to the fact that it was he who had started Arthur Sixsmith on the road to glory. The wise ones are aware of the fact that Hode was never able to secure a place on the champions Ottawas, but was considered fortunate to secure an engagement with the tail-enders in Quebec, on his brother's reputation. Hode did not shine here until after being transferred from wing position to cover point to make room for Charley Liffiton, a local player. Doc Phymeister took him in charge, under whose tutelage Hode became a good defensive man"
I don't know if the motivations/reasonings from the article are accurate, but some of the facts do track. I've mentioned before on the boards that Stuart never really stood out until he left the CAHL. And it is true that he went from Ottawa to Quebec in 1901... and Ottawa HC won the CAHL championship in 1901. Not a great look, though I believe (and I can't find the quote right now) that the Stuart brothers went to Quebec because their father had jobs for them there. So whether or not they couldn't hang in Ottawa is debatable in my opinion. And for what it is worth, in 1902 Bruce returned to Ottawa while Hod stayed with Quebec. Again, though, I don't know if we'll ever really understand the reasonings behind some of these moves. Bruce Stuart did have a big year in 1900, for what it is worth, so maybe there is some credence to the idea that Bruce was the superior Stuart at that point.
Some of the details about Hod Stuart's time in the WPHL are also accurate. Stuart started off at rover and center for the first part of the 1902-03 WPHL season with the Bankers, and wasn't terribly impressive. After Liffiton joined the team they really took off. Continuing the Bruce/Hod comparison, Bruce crushed Hod in terms of production (21 points vs 10.5) and praise (with one game summary calling Bruce "the big dog in the puddle").
