Let's Talk about... Larry Murphy

[The Panther]

What does the board think of Larry Murphy? I think he was really great, and I think he is one of the more under-celebrated great players in the history of the modern NHL.

Larry scored 76 points as a 19-year-old rookie in L.A. (he lost the Calder to Peter Stastny, who was 24 years old).

After just over three seasons in Los Angeles in which he scored 204 points in 236 games (he was +6, even though the team was 16 games under .500 during his tenure), he went to Washington, a more defensive-minded team.

He established himself in Washington, even though the fans there were booing him towards the end of his tenure. He spent a similar amount of time in Pittsburgh and in Detroit, and two less-remembered stints in Minnesota (1.5 seasons) and Toronto (less than 2 seasons).

Murphy scored a staggering 1216 points in his (regular season) career -- 14 times he scored 50+ points, and twice over 80. He made the playoffs 20 times in 22 seasons, scoring an impressive 152 points (in 215 games). Of course, he won the Stanley Cup 4 times -- twice with the Pens, twice with Detroit. In the first Cup-run in 1991 with Pittsburgh, Murphy was a tower of power, with 23 points in 23 games and a League-best +17.

Murphy played for Canada in the Canada Cup in 1987 and 1991, winning in both. He was a 2nd-team All Star three times. Seven times he was in the top 10 for Norris voting, but no higher than 3rd (in '87 and '93).


I remember Murphy as a well-balanced offensive defenceman, by which I mean he was smart about when to pinch and rush, and when not to. He didn't seem caught out of position too often, despite his offensive flair.

One thing that some fans disliked was that he wasn't very physical, even though he was 6'-2'', and 210 pounds (that was BIG in the early 80s). But I don't think he avoided physical contact either, and he threw his share of big hits. He just wasn't a punishing-type of defenceman.


Thoughts on Murphy...?

 

[Sadekuuro]

He was the final piece for the '97 Red Wings. Couldn't skate, but his mind was sharp. Great partner for an emerging Lidstrom.

Larry scored 76 points as a 19-year-old rookie in L.A.

Is this the record for a rookie defenseman?

 

[Hardyvan123]

He was the final piece for the '97 Red Wings. Couldn't skate, but his mind was sharp. Great partner for an emerging Lidstrom.

Great fit is the better way to put it, Larry had an extremely fortunate career where he was with some really good players and situation that make his stats and legacy HHOF worthy.

Stops in Pittsburg and Detroit really changed his legacy alot.

Is this the record for a rookie defenseman?

I'm pretty sure it is but doubt that Murphy is even in the top 10 for rookie Dman seasons or heck even top 20 for that matter.

He was having a very Phil Housley type of career before the move to Pittsburgh.

 

[JSmith81x]

Is this the record for a rookie defenseman?

Mark Howe had 80 in his first NHL season, but he had six seasons in the WHA, so -- like Gretzky -- he wasn't counted as a real rookie.

 

[toob]

He was the final piece for the '97 Red Wings. Couldn't skate, but his mind was sharp. Great partner for an emerging Lidstrom.

Is this the record for a rookie defenseman?

Yup Shanahan gets a lot of credit and rightfully so but underrated Murphy was a great compliment to Lidstrom. Apparently he used to be a good skater when he was younger but in his time in Detroit slow as molasses and had to adapt his game, which was definitely made easier for him due to the team D.

 

[Big Phil]

Great fit is the better way to put it, Larry had an extremely fortunate career where he was with some really good players and situation that make his stats and legacy HHOF worthy.

Stops in Pittsburg and Detroit really changed his legacy alot.

"Stops" in Pittsburgh and Detroit? Hardy, you make it sound like he just stumbled upon a championship team. Instead I look at Murphy as a guy who is a player to play on the last two back to back Cup winners in the NHL. Is this an accident? I don't think it is. He joins Pittsburgh a season after they miss the postseason. He is a #1 defenseman on back to back Cup wins (Coffey was just there for the first one). He is treated horribly in Toronto, something I still cringe at as a Leaf fan because I thought he was still good and valuable to a team. And he was. He's traded to Detroit and despite Shanahan getting a lot of credit as a "final piece" I think Murphy is every bit as important. He racks up 11 and 15 points in back to back Cup runs there while providing steady defense.

Yes, Murphy wasn't in the Bourque/Coffey/Leetch/MacInnis/Stevens/Chelios group. But he was still ahead of Housley and still makes the HHOF quite easily in my mind. He wasn't a sieve defensively. He was just very smart with his hockey sense and not being in the wrong spot. He always seem to be able to retrieve the puck and start a rush the other way with a nice pass. Had a better all around game than Housley and this is before his Pittsburgh career.

Not to mention, he was the greatest decoy in hockey history on the last big play in the 1987 Canada Cup.

 

[Moose Head]

Lemieux - 3" puck into a 4" hole or pass to Murphy with a wide open net?

 

[Hardyvan123]

"Stops" in Pittsburgh and Detroit? Hardy, you make it sound like he just stumbled upon a championship team. Instead I look at Murphy as a guy who is a player to play on the last two back to back Cup winners in the NHL. Is this an accident? I don't think it is. He joins Pittsburgh a season after they miss the postseason.

It's hardly like he was the missing piece for the Pens, a guy like Francis you can make a case but not for Murphy. dido Detroit as well, a good player who could fit in with the right support and put up great stats but eh needed that team support.

He is a #1 defenseman on back to back Cup wins (Coffey was just there for the first one).

really this kind of suggests he is in rare territory as a key part of that team, you know the team with Mario on it.

Yes his scoring explodes in the playoffs those 2 years, 1st year partly because Coffey was limited in action but it's definitely more the case of Pens propping Murphy up moire than Murphy being the missing piece, dido with Detroit.

I changed my mind on Murphy thinking he wasn't hHOF worthy, and probably without the stops in Detroit and Pittsburgh he wouldn't be but he was awfully fortunate in those 2 stops, which really helped his case which wasn't even on target before the trade to the Pens.

He is treated horribly in Toronto, something I still cringe at as a Leaf fan because I thought he was still good and valuable to a team. And he was.

But he was exposed without the support group he had in Pittsburgh.

True he was 34 and 35 but that didn't hurt hum yet again when he joined the Red Wings.

He's traded to Detroit and despite Shanahan getting a lot of credit as a "final piece" I think Murphy is every bit as important. He racks up 11 and 15 points in back to back Cup runs there while providing steady defense.

Seriously you think Murphy was really that important to that Detroit team?

Not only was the team stacked playing with Lidstrom sure didn't hurt either.

Yes, Murphy wasn't in the Bourque/Coffey/Leetch/MacInnis/Stevens/Chelios group. But he was still ahead of Housley and still makes the HHOF quite easily in my mind. He wasn't a sieve defensively. He was just very smart with his hockey sense and not being in the wrong spot. He always seem to be able to retrieve the puck and start a rush the other way with a nice pass.

Playoffs Murphy does better, almost all of the difference to Housley is with his Detroit and Pittsburgh situations, were both teams gave up very little for him, in fact Murphy was traded 5 times in his career and never fro very much in return.

like I said he was a good player and had great health and deserves to be in the HHOF but so does Housley as they are on the same level overall IMO, jsut one guy ahd great circumstances the otehr guy not so much.

Had a better all around game than Housley and this is before his Pittsburgh career.

This is how they stack up when both are in the league and including Murhpy's 44 games with the Pens in 91 and Larry is aged 21-29 over the time frame.

Housley is aged 18-26.

Murphy despite being older and playing in 701 games has 530 points, Phil has a 686-634 line. Hosuley keeps this edge career wsie as well.

Murhpy over that time periods has a 3rd in Norris voting and a 2nd team all star both in 87 and an 14th AS finish in one other year.

Housley has a 5,5, 9 in Norris and a 5,5,8,10,18 in all star votign voer teh same period.

Sure Murphy wasn't as bad defensively but voters weren't very impressed either.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Even in the playoffs Murphy is less than average until he hits the big time and getting prime PP time and first unit duty with the high flying Pens and then later the Red Wings.

Not to mention, he was the greatest decoy in hockey history on the last big play in the 1987 Canada Cup.

Okay sure but Housley also played in 4 best on best tournament, although Murphy probably does better on this metric but it's so hard to gauge as being on the ice with Wayne and Mario for the above goals means......well probably not much.

 

[Passchendaele]

Mark Howe had 80 in his first NHL season, but he had six seasons in the WHA, so -- like Gretzky -- he wasn't counted as a real rookie.

I'm pretty sure Howe played as a forward too that year.

 

[Copmuter*]

Lemieux - 3" puck into a 4" hole or pass to Murphy with a wide open net?

You're talking about the '87 Canada Cup...

Every time I watch that highlight I see Murphy wide open and wonder what Lemieux was thinking


That may have been the last time Murphy decided to skate fast for anything

 

[Pominville Knows]

You're talking about the '87 Canada Cup...

Every time I watch that highlight I see Murphy wide open and wonder what Lemieux was thinking

He was thinking that he knows how to thread the needle. He had had 10 goals in the tournament before that, it was in the upstart of his emergance as the best player in the world.

 

[JSmith81x]

I'm pretty sure Howe played as a forward too that year.

I know in Hartford he switched back and forth, but he got Norris votes in his first year -- although the voters aren't always the best at knowing someone's position (Ovechkin LW/RW).

 

[tarheelhockey]

As much play as Lidstrom gets for shutting down the Legion of Doom in the '97 Finals, Murphy should get credit for it as well.

 

[Big Phil]

It's hardly like he was the missing piece for the Pens, a guy like Francis you can make a case but not for Murphy. dido Detroit as well, a good player who could fit in with the right support and put up great stats but eh needed that team support.

I'll give you Francis over Murphy here fine. Maybe Shanahan over him in 1997 too. However, there is no doubt the caliber he played on those teams affected the outcome. In 1991, 1997 and 1998 he led the playoffs in +/-. That's a factor regardless of what you think about that stat. He scored 23 points in the 1991 Cup win. Here's the kicker. He struggled a bit earlier in the postseason. But he got 8 points in that tough series against Boston and 10 in the Cup final against Minnesota. So in the last two rounds he gets 18 points and he is just "fortunate" to be there? Hmmm. This coincides with Coffey's injury which makes it look even better because Murphy really stepped up his game.

Let's just look at things for a minute here. He's traded midseason both times. The team that was struggling before to find its way all of the sudden wins two Cups in a row both times right after he arrives. No, it wasn't all Murphy, but the guy certainly was an important piece of all 4 Cup wins. He aged incredibly well too. 152 playoff points in 215 is spectacular for a defenseman in my mind.

Seriously you think Murphy was really that important to that Detroit team?

Not only was the team stacked playing with Lidstrom sure didn't hurt either.

Ask Eric Lindros that question. Both of them were on him like a dirty shirt. The result? A sweep. You think stopping a guy who was taking the mantle of the game from Mario a bad thing? Murphy played fine that spring.

Playoffs Murphy does better, almost all of the difference to Housley is with his Detroit and Pittsburgh situations, were both teams gave up very little for him, in fact Murphy was traded 5 times in his career and never fro very much in return.

like I said he was a good player and had great health and deserves to be in the HHOF but so does Housley as they are on the same level overall IMO, jsut one guy ahd great circumstances the otehr guy not so much.

Alright look, you have to stop giving hypothetical situations to other players on what they MAY have done. Murphy did it. Housley did not. Housley showed zero evidence that he would be a major player for a team deep in the playoffs. Actually that's a lie. Housley did show he was not incredibly important in 1998 when Washington made the final. 4 assists in 18 games. Not good. This is a guy who is all about offense too. Yes Housley was older at that time, but still younger than the guy on the other side of him in 1998, Murphy. One player aged much better than the other, had a better all around game and was sought after by teams that won 4 Cups with him combined.

A team could win with Murphy at their best defenseman. It happened. Could it happen with Housley? It didn't. With Murphy's proven playoff track record, his Norris voting record which is passable and his longevity I can't imagine anyone thinking he is anything but a HHOFer and much higher regarded than Housley was.

 

[Sentinel]

Murphy was CRUCIAL to DRW. Absolutely every least bit as important as Shanahan. I remember that team vividly. He was a perfect compliment to Lidstrom. They were the most intelligent pairing in the NHL. Great success against Forsberg and Lindros.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i think murphy should be the cut off line for hhof d-men. a very high standard, to be sure.

re: murphy vs. housley, by the late 80s the book on murphy was that he was never going to become a mark howe/ray bourque franchise d-man. he could play all situations and be a good number one, but he wasn't going to dominate all of them. whereas the book on housley was that he was never going to develop into an all-round number one d-man. he was a valuable guy in terms of moving the puck and running a pp -- arguably better than murphy, if only slightly -- but you could never give him number one minutes without regretting it. both fell short of expectations, and both therefore got moved around, but let's be real here: they were very different expectations.

 

[Boom Boom Bear]

I know in Hartford he switched back and forth, but he got Norris votes in his first year -- although the voters aren't always the best at knowing someone's position (Ovechkin LW/RW).

i thought he didn't switch to D full time until Don Blackburn was fired & Larry Pleau took over, how i recall it

 

[Hardyvan123]

i think murphy should be the cut off line for hhof d-men. a very high standard, to be sure.

re: murphy vs. housley, by the late 80s the book on murphy was that he was never going to become a mark howe/ray bourque franchise d-man. he could play all situations and be a good number one, but he wasn't going to dominate all of them. whereas the book on housley was that he was never going to develop into an all-round number one d-man. he was a valuable guy in terms of moving the puck and running a pp -- arguably better than murphy, if only slightly -- but you could never give him number one minutes without regretting it. both fell short of expectations, and both therefore got moved around, but let's be real here: they were very different expectations.

Agree pretty much with this, except Housley was quite a bit better offensively in the 80's as was stated up post and it showed in all star voting.

Was Housley a better all around Dman that Murphy up to that point, probably not but really in terms of overall value or worth as players they were considered in the same breath.

 

[Big Phil]

Agree pretty much with this, except Housley was quite a bit better offensively in the 80's as was stated up post and it showed in all star voting.

Was Housley a better all around Dman that Murphy up to that point, probably not but really in terms of overall value or worth as players they were considered in the same breath.

The risk was a lot lower with Murphy and the return was better. I am not trying to downgrade Housley as much as re-introduce the idea that during his playing days he had a lot of warts. However, in the 1990s Murphy blows Housley out of the water and this is truly when the two of their legacies and career value started to separate in my opinion.

 

[The Panther]

It seems to me that the difference here is that Murphy is the kind of player coaches want on the ice with 1-minute left in a game 7 when your team is up by a goal; whereas Housley is not that kind of player.

Housley was very much a power-play specialist -- in that narrow category, he's probably one of the top-10 D-men all time. But 5 on 5, defensively, physically, killing penalties, and in clutch situations, he's not even top 100.

Murphy was well-rounded, could do it all.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Murphy wouldn't get a lot of praise from fans because the technical ability wasn't as high as it was for some other d-men. But Murph was extremely smart, detail-oriented. He always made the right play, he handled the puck in a very smart fashion (his famous Murphy Dumps are legendary among Penguins fans). He was a thinking man's hockey player. Superbly important to the Pens Cups in 1991 and 1992.

From a little project I did a couple years ago on Larry Murphy's time as a Penguin...just as a Penguin...

Larry Murphy

Position: Defense
6'2" / 210 lbs.
Shoots: Right

As a Penguin (Dec. 1990 - 1995): 336 GP 78 goals, 223 assists, 301 points - playoffs: 74 GP 15 goals, 57 assists, 72 points

Four full seasons + one partial season = 5 seasons

2x Stanley Cup Champion (1991, 1992)

---
Norris: 3rd, 4th, 5th, t-7th^

All-Star Defense Voting: 3rd*, 4th*, 5th, 8th
* - Second-Team All-Star (x2)
^ - one vote

1x NHL All-Star
---

Scoring finishes vs. league defensemen: (partial season ignored)
1991-92: t-3rd in goals, 7th in assists, t-4th in points, t-4th in +/-
1992-93: 5th in goals, 3rd in assists, 3rd in points, 1st in +/-
1993-94: 8th in goals, t-6th in assists, 7th in points
1994-95: 2nd in goals, 12th in assists, t-5th in points, t-18th in +/-

Scoring finishes vs. teammates: (partial season ignored)
1991-92: 1st among d-men (by 20.3%), 4th overall
1992-93: 1st among d-men (by 193.1%), 6th overall
1993-94: 1st among d-men (by 151.7%), 4th overall
1994-95: 1st among d-men (by 137.5%), 5th overall

The usually dubious plus/minus stat vs. teammates: (partial season ignored)
1991-92: 1st among d-men (and overall)
1992-93: 1st among d-men
1993-94: 3rd among d-men
1994-95: 1st among d-men

- From 1991-95: Murphy was a plus-100! Second among all defensemen in that span to Nicklas Lidstrom (plus-101).

- Murphy is the all-time Pens leader among defensemen in plus/minus (+102) and is third overall to Jaromir Jagr and Mario Lemieux.

---

Approximate Ice Time as a Penguin
1990-91: #2/3 defenseman, 3rd in overall ATOI
1991-92: #2 defenseman*, 2nd in overall ATOI*
1992-93: #1 defenseman (by nearly 3 minutes!), 1st in overall ATOI (by over 5 minutes!)^
1993-94: #1 defenseman, 1st in overall ATOI
1994-95: #1 defenseman, 1st in overall ATOI

* - Until Coffey was traded, then Murphy took over the reigns.
^ - Projected to have played the most ATOI in the entire NHL by minutes - with an 's'

---

'Quiet, thoughtful, methodical,' wrote the National Post, summarizing the outstanding career of Larry Murphy.

...

The story of Larry Murphy is one of perseverance and longevity. Quietly yet efficiently, Murphy has delivered one of the most productive careers of any blueliner in NHL history.

...

Murphy's slick playmaking and good slap shot helped Pittsburgh win their first Stanley Cup. Murphy played a huge role in that initial Cup victory, scoring 23 points in 23 games.

...

Murphy was more of a passer than a rusher, preferring to pinch into the offensive zone while expertly manning the point. He was one of the best I have ever seen at holding the blue line, almost always blocking bad clearing attempts by desperate defensive teams. He was a great skater in his younger days, and possessed an excellent collection of shots.

Though he had good size, he never really played a physical game. He would bump his check off the puck rather than make strong takeouts. He relied on an heady stick checking defensive game that he excelled at due to his great hockey sense, ability to read the oncoming attack, and his flawless positioning.

Murphy was a smart, studious player. It was his understanding of what he could do that made him special. He formed a great partnership in Pittsburgh with XXX XXXXXXXXXX.

He was good because he read the plays so well. He never got flustered.

He's the smartest player I've ever seen.

Larry Murphy is traded for a defenseman who makes about one-third as much money and has been about one-third the player.

 

[Dark Shadows]

really this kind of suggests he is in rare territory as a key part of that team, you know the team with Mario on it.

Yes his scoring explodes in the playoffs those 2 years, 1st year partly because Coffey was limited in action but it's definitely more the case of Pens propping Murphy up moire than Murphy being the missing piece, dido with Detroit.

I changed my mind on Murphy thinking he wasn't hHOF worthy, and probably without the stops in Detroit and Pittsburgh he wouldn't be but he was awfully fortunate in those 2 stops, which really helped his case which wasn't even on target before the trade to the Pens.

But he was exposed without the support group he had in Pittsburgh.
True he was 34 and 35 but that didn't hurt hum yet again when he joined the Red Wings.
Seriously you think Murphy was really that important to that Detroit team?
Not only was the team stacked playing with Lidstrom sure didn't hurt either.

Good grief.
Murphy's style was EXACTLY the type they wanted in Detroit. The man played a Lidstrom like game stylewise. Yes, his skill level was well below Lidstrom's. But he had a sober understanding of his own strengths and weaknesses and used them to peak efficiency, especially with the wings. Having a support group like that to use his puck moving skills and hockey sense with is what the doctor ordered. A lot of defensemen would have seen better numbers with that forward group full of two way Selke candidates that let them play a less risky style.

 

[The Panther]

Yes, his skill level was well below Lidstrom's.

I liked your post, but I'm not even sure about this point.

I kind of rate Lidstrom and Murphy about equal in terms of on-ice skills.

Career points-per-game (RS):
Lidstrom = 0.73
Murphy = 0.75

Career points-per-game (Playoffs):
Lidstrom = 0.70
Murphy = 0.71

Actually their games-played, goals, assists, points, shots-on-goal, etc., in playoffs and regular season are about equal. They both won 4 Cups. (In terms of offensive stats, you'd have to give Lidstrom the edge though, since he played much of his career in the 'dead-puck era'.)

Lidstrom played for one ("original six") franchise his whole career, and he was a leader on that team. Murphy played for five teams, including a few that can't get no respect, and he wasn't a very vocal or charismatic individual. Naturally, the media narrative favors Lidstrom in this sort of comparison.

Lidstrom was overall the better player, but while I think Murphy has been somewhat under-rated I also think Lidstrom is slightly over-rated.

(runs and hides head)

 

[Dark Shadows]

I liked your post, but I'm not even sure about this point.

I kind of rate Lidstrom and Murphy about equal in terms of on-ice skills.

Career points-per-game (RS):
Lidstrom = 0.73
Murphy = 0.75

Career points-per-game (Playoffs):
Lidstrom = 0.70
Murphy = 0.71

Actually their games-played, goals, assists, points, shots-on-goal, etc., in playoffs and regular season are about equal. They both won 4 Cups. (In terms of offensive stats, you'd have to give Lidstrom the edge though, since he played much of his career in the 'dead-puck era'.)

Lidstrom played for one ("original six") franchise his whole career, and he was a leader on that team. Murphy played for five teams, including a few that can't get no respect, and he wasn't a very vocal or charismatic individual. Naturally, the media narrative favors Lidstrom in this sort of comparison.

Lidstrom was overall the better player, but while I think Murphy has been somewhat under-rated I also think Lidstrom is slightly over-rated.

(runs and hides head)

If you were to ask me who had a better shot from the point? Crisper accurate pillow soft tape to tape pass, skating, I would vote Lidstrom.

However, Murphy had a good understanding of his strengths and weaknesses and played exactly the same sort of smart game in Detroit. The people you are passing to matter a lot in the transition game and that style was perfect for Detroit and its loaded two way forwards.

If he is going to downgrade Murphy's performance because of how stacked the team was, then he has to apply the same measure to Lidstrom. Time and time again, he has detracted from Ray Bourque, who often lead his team in scoring, in favor of Lidstrom and refused to knowledge supporting cast played a role in Lidstrom's supporting offense game. Yet when Murphy comes up(Who played the same type of game), it is the first thing he does?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Agree pretty much with this, except Housley was quite a bit better offensively in the 80's as was stated up post and it showed in all star voting.

Was Housley a better all around Dman that Murphy up to that point, probably not but really in terms of overall value or worth as players they were considered in the same breath.

that's actually pretty eye opening. if you'd asked me before i looked at the stats, i'd have told you that murphy put up 65+ points every year in the 80s (which, funnily enough, is exactly what housley did).

here are murphy's scoring finishes from his rookie year up to the year he was traded to pittsburgh (for comparison's sake, housley's finishes in parentheses)--

2
8
12 (8)
20 (4)
15 (5)
11 (13)
2 (5)
9 (6)
22 (6)
7 (4)

i think housley playing wing at times might account for some of that differential, but not all of it. murphy had some big down years in the 80s that frankly i don't think many of us remember. on the other hand, murphy was outscoring his worst 80s years as a 36 and 37 year old in the DPE, so i don't know how much a lousy first and last year in washington should really tar his legacy.

but good point also about murphy being traded for almost nothing four times, and probably being the throw-in in the gartner/ciccarelli trade.

what is interesting about this to me is that murphy is a guy who teams flat out gave away. it maybe says something about him that five teams didn't want him, and all five teams didn't get back nearly what housley fetched when he was traded in his prime. but even though i never liked murphy and always thought he was extremely overrated (more of a rich man's james patrick than a poor man's al macinnis, if you ask me), i'm not particularly interested in taking him down a notch (his current notch being borderline HHOF dman) or raising housley up to his level. what i am interested in is the parallel between him winning those four cups, and the post-2005 lockout champions.

so we currently are watching a league where star players being acquired for little or nothing, by teams that don't need them, are swinging championships. the kings especially, with the deadline pickups of carter their first cup year, and now gaborik. and i think the way we were groaning "ugh, the last thing this team needs is to add marian gaborik for nothing," can you imagine a team with two of the top five scorers in the league (neither of which was mario), plus of course mario coming back, and paul coffey on the blueline still putting up 100 points a year adding larry murphy? or adding two-time cup champ larry murphy to a team with lidstrom and vlady leading the blueline, and fetisov and rouse already there for veteran support and leadership? embarrassment of riches.

which is all to say, no larry murphy wasn't the sum of his numbers, but yes he was an important player on four stanley cup winners. yes, he was lousier, or at least more inconsistent, in the 80s than i think most of us remember, but no he wasn't at housley's level. the best comparison may be the defenseman version of marian hossa. excellent player on the cusp of but never being truly elite, who took on lesser roles on stacked teams and won a bunch of cups. when all is said and done, you look at the career numbers (i guarantee this will happen when hossa retires) and be extremely surprised at how high they are. and you feel weird about him being in the hall of fame because larry murphy was never al macinnis, and hossa was never iginla, even though the stats suggest they were similar, the abilities and even body types suggest they were similar, and the team accomplishments are very compelling.