How good was Steve Larmer? | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

How good was Steve Larmer?

Mike Martin

Registered User
Nov 1, 2013
1,807
5
In terms of scoring was he just an average Offensive threat for his era (1980's/early 1990's)?
 
Yeah, I'd say average to above average. He usually played along side Denis Savard during his prime if I remember correctly. Savard was an excellent play maker. Still Larmer had his best offensive season after Savard left. However, Larmer was an excellent skater and very smooth with the puck. I think he became known for his defensive play as much as his offensive in the second half of his career. He nosedived pretty quick and was out of hockey 3 years after his big season. Can't recall why. Injury?
 
BROOKLYnKNIGHTS said:
Steve Larmer was a very good player. He was above average.
Click to expand...

But as scorers go his name almost never comes up when people talk about the great NHL stars of that era. It seems like he has been forgotten. I wonder if it is because he played in the old Norris Division during the time when that division was maligned by the media as lacking in good teams?
 
I would say he was above average but look at the top stars in that era. Lots of eventual 1,000 point scorers. He was extremely durable though and had a legit crack at Jarvis's ironman record. A contract dispute screwed that up for him though. Patrick Sharp kinda reminds me of him. Damn good player but not a yearly all-star. Put him in that 2nd tier of elite players.
 
In the same mold as John Tonelli or Brian Propp for instance. So he's right at the place he should be. Anyone that saw Larmer knew he was a fine player. About as close to being a HHOFer as possible I suppose. At the end of his career he was still an important player for the 1994 Rangers Cup run. A detailed comparison of him and he's actually pretty close to HHOF status.
 
He was very good. The kind of guy who would win you games with intangibles. Add in a decent offensive game and you had a pretty good player.
 
A very good player maybe borderline hall of famer.One of those players you want on your team was also a hard worker
 
loved Larmer as a Hawk, hated him when he blasted that slapshot through Richter in the 91 Canada Cup.

Larmer was above average and borderline HOF. Dude played a ridiculous amount of games in a row, was a tough competitor who found a knack for scoring goals. He reminded me a lot of Joey Mullen. Guys who made the most out of the sum of their parts. He played with Savard during his peak then Roenick during his peak, lucky dude! Always chewing gum in every damn interview!! must have been a heavy smoker!

great guy, my brother's favorite player, still wears a Larmer 28 jersey
 
LeBlondeDemon10 said:
Yeah, I'd say average to above average. He usually played along side Denis Savard during his prime if I remember correctly. Savard was an excellent play maker. Still Larmer had his best offensive season after Savard left. However, Larmer was an excellent skater and very smooth with the puck. I think he became known for his defensive play as much as his offensive in the second half of his career. He nosedived pretty quick and was out of hockey 3 years after his big season. Can't recall why. Injury?
Click to expand...

I think the best comparison here (at least on the modern day Hawks) would be Toews and Kane. Toews comparable to Larmer (not really, but similar players as Toews is obviously better) and Kane being comparable to Savard....

Larmer was a ppg player offensively but he was also excellent defensively and extremely reliable.

IMO, I think Larmer belongs in the HOF. There are 3 reasons for this - a) Larmer was defensive madman, b) Larmer was a PPG player as well and c) he was an "Iron Man" that didn't miss a game for 11 straight seasons.

IMO, I think "Gramps" is often overlooked and forgotten - especially because he had "intangibles" similar to Toews (Toews is clearly the better offensive player tho)...

I've been arguing that Larmer deserves to be in the HOF for many moons - not based on purely his offensive production but when you mix in "intangibles" and durability Larmer becomes quite the player - a complete player.... Maybe a poor mans Trottier? He also has a cup, Olympic gold x 2 so...

At the very least Gramps deserves to have his number retired by the Hawks....

Also, if it matters - many former NHL players he played with and against are dumbfounded as to why he's not in the HOF. They describe him as one of the more difficult players to play against.

So as Forrest Gump said: "that's all I have to say about that."
 
mrhockey193195 said:
Why did Larmer retire so early? He was only 33, and still fairly productive.
Click to expand...

He was a pretty physical player, and he had all sorts of injuries he played through during his career and those injuries really slowed him down later during the last 3 seasons of his career.

In short I think he just sacrificed his body, and once he won that cup he just wanted to end his career on a high note. He certainly accomplished a lot for such a short career.

Also, there were a couple of season where the Hawks could have won the cup and were contenders, but the Hawks couldn't go all the way - the Oilers in the 80's were certainly a factor there, then the Pens.... If the Hawks won a cup or two between the mid-80's and early 90's I think Larmer would be in the HHOF, and maybe we would be debating Glen Anderson instead of Steve Larmer.
 
Hawksfan2828 said:
I think the best comparison here (at least on the modern day Hawks) would be Toews and Kane. Toews comparable to Larmer (not really, but similar players as Toews is obviously better) and Kane being comparable to Savard....

Larmer was a ppg player offensively but he was also excellent defensively and extremely reliable.

IMO, I think Larmer belongs in the HOF. There are 3 reasons for this - a) Larmer was defensive madman, b) Larmer was a PPG player as well and c) he was an "Iron Man" that didn't miss a game for 11 straight seasons.

His best season with the Hawks he had 46g. He had 28, 29 and all other (8) years he scored 30 plus. pretty impressive

IMO, I think "Gramps" is often overlooked and forgotten - especially because he had "intangibles" similar to Toews (Toews is clearly the better offensive player tho)...

I've been arguing that Larmer deserves to be in the HOF for many moons - not based on purely his offensive production but when you mix in "intangibles" and durability Larmer becomes quite the player - a complete player.... Maybe a poor mans Trottier? He also has a cup, Olympic gold x 2 so...

At the very least Gramps deserves to have his number retired by the Hawks....

Also, if it matters - many former NHL players he played with and against are dumbfounded as to why he's not in the HOF. They describe him as one of the more difficult players to play against.

So as Forrest Gump said: "that's all I have to say about that."
Click to expand...

I rate him a ten. Iron man and a complete player. Much like Danny Gare only bigger. He made it happen. If not a HOFamer, then tear down the Hall. Tretiak's in there and he never played an NHL game in his life.

Larmer had 8 seasons in which he potted 30 plus goals for the Hawks, and his best was 46g. 2 other years he had 28 and 29. That's awesome!

Chicago wasn't exactly a powerhouse team back then, either
 
Last edited:
Highstyx said:
I rate him a ten. Iron man and a complete player. Much like Danny Gare only bigger. He made it happen. If not a HOFamer, then tear down the Hall. Tretiak's in there and he never played an NHL game in his life.
Click to expand...

It's not the NHLHOF it's the HHOF. Tretiak was the best goalie ever to not play in the NHL.
 
Highstyx said:
I rate him a ten. Iron man and a complete player. Much like Danny Gare only bigger. He made it happen. If not a HOFamer, then tear down the Hall. Tretiak's in there and he never played an NHL game in his life.

Larmer had 8 seasons in which he potted 30 plus goals for the Hawks, and his best was 46g. 2 other years he had 28 and 29. That's awesome!
Click to expand...

I agree.

Also, another asset Larmer had was when he went to the corners or along the boards in general, he would come out with the puck 7/10 times much like Toews or Hossa does, because in his era he was a Toews/Hossa type player.....

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/l/larmest01.html

His stats are pretty impressive, especially his +204 and his 15.7 shooting percentage...

If you really dig into the stats - the guy is a lot better in many "intangible" categories than half of the guys currently in the HHOF.

Not bad for a 6th round pick (120 overall)...

I suppose as a true hockey fan it upsets me that some only look at offensive production when the game is so much more than that.
 
Mike Martin said:
In terms of scoring was he just an average Offensive threat for his era (1980's/early 1990's)?
Click to expand...

Larmer was certainly "above average" as an offensive threat....

As a matter of fact I think if he wasn't so defensive minded and was more "selfish" he would have scored a lot more. Larmer had a role - he knew what his role was and played it to a T....

IMO, Larmers offensive production was just a virtue of his game.
 
mrhockey193195 said:
Why did Larmer retire so early? He was only 33, and still fairly productive.
Click to expand...

He played 13 seasons. It isn't 20, but it's still a decent time. Someone mentioned that winning the Cup in 1994 was the topper and I agree. I think he did everything he wanted. He did last one more year though. With Larmer I think it was just wear and tear.
 
Larmer was a exceptionally cerebral hockey player who i felt should have garnered more Selke consideration than he did. He had a lethal shot with accuracy, was excellent along the boards and cycling the pucks, and he was a very underrated leader.

He was just tired, I guess. The ironman streak and 140 playoff games took its toll i guess.
 
Who do you think would be a good comparison for today? Maybe Jason Pominville? Loui Eriksson from a couple seasons ago?
 
when i hear the name Larmer,the first thing i think of:

1983/84 OPC Hockey Cards

One of the most famous hockey card mistakes of all time occurred. O-Pee-Chee issued each player's rookie card, but mixed up the photos. Ludzik's rookie hockey card depicted Larmer, while Larmer's depicted Ludzik.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom