Sell Bobby Clarke to me.

[BraveCanadian]

I realize that, that's why I said "as often as possible" - I am sure it was the same for any similar player who was often matcehd against top lines while being the best offensive player - Messier, Gilmour, Yzerman, Trottier all come to mind. To my knowledge, none of them had a season like Clarke defensively.

Point still stands - if BC wants to act like it's not impressive for Clarke to have numbers like he did those two seasons, then he has to continue to try to explain away Clarke's dominance of his own team from a GA standpoint.

I never said it wasn't impressive. In fact I said quite the opposite. And I said repeatedly that Clarke could very well be the best defensive forward ever. Especially when you keep in mind the amount of offense he was generating at the same time. Care to move the goal posts some more?

My problem is you trying to use a tidbit trivia statistic which reflects a collective effort as the reason he was better defensively than players in different positions and different situations.

The Flyers those two years as a team were outstanding at even strength with Clarke on the ice and when he wasn't. I certainly believe that Bobby Clarke contributed to that team effort AND benefited from it. Which I know is a fact that the hockey historians here seem to push back against.. that superstars also benefit from their teammates and I'll never understand why.. after all most of the time teams are actually built to complement and enhance their best parts.

It's an interesting statistic but hardly anything definitive or we could say that Reggie Leach is one of the all time great defensive forwards by only allowing 22 even strength goals in 75 too.

Of course we know it isn't true for other reasons which just proves that context matters, a lot.

 

[seventieslord]

It's an interesting statistic but hardly anything definitive or we could say that Reggie Leach is one of the all time great defensive forwards by only allowing 22 even strength goals in 75 too.

Of course we know it isn't true for other reasons which just proves that context matters, a lot.

Uh, yeah... because we know he played with Clarke, and didn't do as well without him, while Clarke did just as well eithout Leach.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Uh, yeah... because we know he played with Clarke, and didn't do as well without him, while Clarke did just as well eithout Leach.

You're getting really good at proving my points.

 

[Dark Shadows]

You're getting really good at proving my points.

How so? The argument is usually that the best of the best elite players could do what they did no matter who they played with. Clarke is certainly among the best of the best elite, while Leach is not.

 

[Hardyvan123]

How so? The argument is usually that the best of the best elite players could do what they did no matter who they played with. Clarke is certainly among the best of the best elite, while Leach is not.

Clarke actually didn't do quite as well without Leach, and not as well in other years than in those 2 top years either.

Although Clarke was one the best defensive forward in his time I'm not sure we can really use ESGA stats as an true indicator when comparing players.

Like Brave Canadian stated context is everything.

For the record Gainey was on for 649 ESGA in 1160 games and Clarke for 629 in 1144 games.

Craig Ramsay, on weaker overall teams the Clarke or Gainey was on for 567 in 1070 games.

Doug Jarvis, another top defensive forward was on for 446 in 964 games.

Not sure that if we are going to use this statistic that is really shows Clarke being the best defensive forward of all time.

 

[Sens Rule]

Clarke actually didn't do quite as well without Leach, and not as well in other years than in those 2 top years either.

Although Clarke was one the best defensive forward in his time I'm not sure we can really use ESGA stats as an true indicator when comparing players.

Like Brave Canadian stated context is everything.

For the record Gainey was on for 649 ESGA in 1160 games and Clarke for 629 in 1144 games.

Craig Ramsay, on weaker overall teams the Clarke or Gainey was on for 567 in 1070 games.

Doug Jarvis, another top defensive forward was on for 446 in 964 games.

Not sure that if we are going to use this statistic that is really shows Clarke being the best defensive forward of all time.

I am with Seventies on this. The ESGA stats for Clarke for those 2 seasons are among the most mindboggling stats that I have ever come across. Like 50 goals in 39 games and 500+ Straight starts for Hall. It just seems unbelievable.

Let's look at the above career stats or take any year. Clarke almost certainly played more minutes than the other 3 at even strength. Career or single season. I don't know the numbers and Clarke would have got PP time but it just stands to reason that Clarke is playing more minutes a game than the others. He was the defacto best player on the Flyers for most of his career. As good as Gainey was he was not getting 24 or 25 minutes a night on a deep Montreal team and even if Clarke was playing a lot of PP time he still was the 1st line forward, there is no way Jarvis and Gainey on the Habs are getting more than .7 or .8 as much ice time at ES as Clarke was. Ramsey likely got more ice time than Jarvis or Gainey but not as much as Clarke. So the stats read more in Clarke's favour if we believe that he was playing MORE ES minutes and ALLOWING less goals as well.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I am with Seventies on this. The ESGA stats for Clarke for those 2 seasons are among the most mindboggling stats that I have ever come across. Like 50 goals in 39 games and 500+ Straight starts for Hall. It just seems unbelievable.

Let's look at the above career stats or take any year. Clarke almost certainly played more minutes than the other 3 at even strength. Career or single season. I don't know the numbers and Clarke would have got PP time but it just stands to reason that Clarke is playing more minutes a game than the others. He was the defacto best player on the Flyers for most of his career. As good as Gainey was he was not getting 24 or 25 minutes a night on a deep Montreal team and even if Clarke was playing a lot of PP time he still was the 1st line forward, there is no way Jarvis and Gainey on the Habs are getting more than .7 or .8 as much ice time at ES as Clarke was. Ramsey likely got more ice time than Jarvis or Gainey but not as much as Clarke. So the stats read more in Clarke's favour if we believe that he was playing MORE ES minutes and ALLOWING less goals as well.

Was all of the above actually happening?

Maybe Gainey was only playing as a checker against the other teams best players. Maybe the same for Ramsey and Jarvis.

I doubt that Clarke had a huge % of Even Strength time over the other guys listed, if anything his overall time was probably higher due to PP time.

Look Clarke was one of the best defensive forwards of his time but I think his reputation is actually bigger than his real edge, if any, defensively over the small number of forwards playing defensive hockey back in the 70's.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Clarke actually didn't do quite as well without Leach, and not as well in other years than in those 2 top years either.

Although Clarke was one the best defensive forward in his time I'm not sure we can really use ESGA stats as an true indicator when comparing players.

Like Brave Canadian stated context is everything.

For the record Gainey was on for 649 ESGA in 1160 games and Clarke for 629 in 1144 games.

Craig Ramsay, on weaker overall teams the Clarke or Gainey was on for 567 in 1070 games.

Doug Jarvis, another top defensive forward was on for 446 in 964 games.

Not sure that if we are going to use this statistic that is really shows Clarke being the best defensive forward of all time.

I agree.

No stat can really measure defensive ability. Playing on a team with great goaltending or great coaching or playing with other great defensive players makes for a huge advantage. One guy screws up on D and everyone gets that minus. On offensive, if the team scores everyone will get a plus, but only those involved get points and that is measurable.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree.

No stat can really measure defensive ability. Playing on a team with great goaltending or great coaching or playing with other great defensive players makes for a huge advantage. One guy screws up on D and everyone gets that minus. On offensive, if the team scores everyone will get a plus, but only those involved get points and that is measurable.

Yes, but if you outperform everyone else on your team, then you are the one making them better, not the other way around.

I had this same argument with someone else about 4 years ago when I explained Bryan Berard was the worst defensive defenseman in the NHL because he had the worst ESGA/min and they said maybe other players dragged him down. Logically, it doesn't make sense.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Yes, but if you outperform everyone else on your team, then you are the one making them better, not the other way around.

Yeah, similarly when Jari Kurri scored 68 goals to lead the league in 85-86 he was making Gretzky and the other Oilers better.. not the other way around.

Or are you prepared to concede that hockey is in fact a team sport?

Last I checked there were 5 guys defending at even strength, not just Clarke.

 

[JackSlater]

Yeah, similarly when Jari Kurri scored 68 goals to lead the league in 85-86 he was making Gretzky and the other Oilers better.. not the other way around.

Or are you prepared to concede that hockey is in fact a team sport?

Last I checked there were 5 guys defending at even strength, not just Clarke.

Unless you are suggesting that Kurri outperformed Gretzky offensively in 1985-86then you have done nothing to disprove his point.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Unless you are suggesting that Kurri outperformed Gretzky offensively in 1985-86then you have done nothing to disprove his point.

LOL, seriously. I see Brave Canadian's main point - goals against is a team stat. Anecdotally, we know that Clarke was a huge factor (definitely the most important non-goalie), and if everyone from the time says that Clarke was the main factor (which they do), it is a huge feather in his cap. But I don't think you can determine anything conclusively from a difference of say, 10 goals against between players from different teams.

But suggesting Kurri helped Gretzky more than the other way around is.... strange to say the least.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yes, but if you outperform everyone else on your team, then you are the one making them better, not the other way around.

I had this same argument with someone else about 4 years ago when I explained Bryan Berard was the worst defensive defenseman in the NHL because he had the worst ESGA/min and they said maybe other players dragged him down. Logically, it doesn't make sense.

Well, you may be right about that. If he played a season for your favorite team you would know that without the numbers.

 

[seventieslord]

Well, you may be right about that. If he played a season for your favorite team you would know that without the numbers.

They can look that way and you can have a hunch but the numbers can often confirm it.

Another example, I remember noting in 2005 how dion phaneuf missed the net an awfully lot. I figured he had to be among the leaders. But how would I know for sure, I don't watch every game by every team... the stats confirmed I was right.

 

[BraveCanadian]

LOL, seriously. I see Brave Canadian's main point - goals against is a team stat. Anecdotally, we know that Clarke was a huge factor (definitely the most important non-goalie), and if everyone from the time says that Clarke was the main factor (which they do), it is a huge feather in his cap. But I don't think you can determine anything conclusively from a difference of say, 10 goals against between players from different teams.

But suggesting Kurri helped Gretzky more than the other way around is.... strange to say the least.

I wasn't being too serious trying to say Kurri was better then Gretzky.. don't worry. I was just pointing out how quickly the player outperforming his team and being the one making them better and not the other way around falls apart. It is a team sport and even if a star player is the major factor.. give the teammates a little credit!

I think that teammates, even average ones, really get discredited on this board a lot. We give the impression sometimes that the star players are literally dragging the others along but it is a collective effort. In this case especially no one can cover the whole ice and no one can outrun the puck so its kind of ludicrous to say it was all Clarke.

For sure that is an outstanding sign of how great Clarke was defensively but if Reggie Leach had 22 esga one of those two seasons I'm gonna have to go with the fact that the team was collectively a defensive powerhouse.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Unless you are suggesting that Kurri outperformed Gretzky offensively in 1985-86then you have done nothing to disprove his point.

Yeah actually that was kind of my point. Kurri didn't outperform him by a mile except in the statistic I chose.

The fact that I could pick an offensive stat that Kurri led the entire league in, let alone his team.. and still he was vastly outperformed offensively on his team sort of does mean I disproved his point that if you outperform your teammates in a statistic then you're the one making them better and not the other way around.

Even with the best player and the worst player playing together it is still a two-way street. Even moreso for an inherently collaborative stat like ESGA.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

They can look that way and you can have a hunch but the numbers can often confirm it.

Another example, I remember noting in 2005 how dion phaneuf missed the net an awfully lot. I figured he had to be among the leaders. But how would I know for sure, I don't watch every game by every team... the stats confirmed I was right.

But again, that's a clearly measurable stat. He shoots the puck, he either misses the net or he doesn't.

Not so with ESGA.

 

[JackSlater]

Yeah actually that was kind of my point. Kurri didn't outperform him by a mile except in the statistic I chose.

The fact that I could pick an offensive stat that Kurri led the entire league in, let alone his team.. and still he was vastly outperformed offensively on his team sort of does mean I disproved his point that if you outperform your teammates in a statistic then you're the one making them better and not the other way around.

Even with the best player and the worst player playing together it is still a two-way street. Even moreso for an inherently collaborative stat like ESGA.

The stats aren't really comparable. The esga stat basically measures defensive contributions at the most basic level, particularly when comparing players on the same team. Goals measures goals, but does not convey offensive contribution to the level that a stat like points does, and obviously when you look at the more descriptive statistic it is clear that Gretzky was outperforming Kurri.

 

[FiveForDrawingBlood]

Because frankly, I don't see how he's so high on the all time list. Is there something I am missing?

100 points, tough as nails with the heart of a lion. For a 3-4 seasons in the mid-70s he was the caliber of any center to play the game. I am a Habs fan and hated Clarke except when he played for Team Canada or against the Bruins in '74 Finals. But I would have loved to see him playing for Montreal during the '70s.

 

[seventieslord]

The stats aren't really comparable. The esga stat basically measures defensive contributions at the most basic level, particularly when comparing players on the same team. Goals measures goals, but does not convey offensive contribution to the level that a stat like points does, and obviously when you look at the more descriptive statistic it is clear that Gretzky was outperforming Kurri.

Exactly.

 

[BraveCanadian]

The stats aren't really comparable. The esga stat basically measures defensive contributions at the most basic level, particularly when comparing players on the same team. Goals measures goals, but does not convey offensive contribution to the level that a stat like points does, and obviously when you look at the more descriptive statistic it is clear that Gretzky was outperforming Kurri.

It is a good analogy.

In fact it is even stronger because picking a stat like goals Kurri is even more personally responsible than Clarke is for a 5 man stat like ESGA. And it still doesn't make sense to say that its a one way relationship ie. The guy with the leading stat making his teammates better and not the other way around at all.

Or are we really going to use ESGA as the holy grail and proclaim Reggie Leach the second best defensive forward ever? Yeah. I didn't think so.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

It is a good analogy.

In fact it is even stronger because picking a stat like goals Kurri is even more personally responsible than Clarke is for a 5 man stat like ESGA. And it still doesn't make sense to say that its a one way relationship ie. The guy with the leading stat making his teammates better and not the other way around at all.

Or are we really going to use ESGA as the holy grail and proclaim Reggie Leach the second best defensive forward ever? Yeah. I didn't think so.

Not really. ESGA tries to estimate a player's contribution to preventing goals. It isn't perfect, but that's what it tries to do. "Goals" doesn't do much to estimate a player's contribution to creating goals. That's what "points" is for.

I don't like the Reggie Leach example you used either. It's a combination of ESGA plus the observations of everyone that watched the Flyers who say that Clarke was the driving force being the defensive ability of that line.

Anyway, I do get your point though. If a player gets a goal or an assist, it means he did something personally. Unfortunately there is no real stat for "goal prevented."

 

[Hardyvan123]

I didn't have time to look this up yet but maybe with the Broad street Bullies taking so many penalties that it would contribute to the lower amount of even strength goals against.

Something I will look into, if I ever have the time for it.

 

[seventieslord]

I didn't have time to look this up yet but maybe with the Broad street Bullies taking so many penalties that it would contribute to the lower amount of even strength goals against.

Something I will look into, if I ever have the time for it.

already addressed in this thread:

When you compare PPOA to the average, yes, there can be variances of up to 100%. but that is a small fraction of the game compared to ES:

League stats say they had 466 PPOA in 1975. So that is an average of 5.8 per game. At two full minutes each, that's 11.6 minutes on the PK per game. However, in all likelihood, PPGA shortened that by about a minute a game (as they allowed about one per game) and then you have situations where you take a penalty on the PK, or vice versa, that likely brings it down another 90 seconds per game. I would bet that the Flyers spent about 9 minutes per game on the PK in 1975.

By the same logic, they had 258 PPO, so using the same math and logic they likely spent 5 minutes per game on the PP. Leaving 46 even strength minutes.

A team that had the "average", 316 PPO and 316 PPOA would therefore spend about 6.1 minutes on each special team in a game, leaving 48 even strength minutes.

So, the Flyers would have had about 4% less even strength time to work with. In 4% more even strength time, they'd have had about 4% more even strength goals against. So instead of Clarke allowing 41 in two seasons, perhaps he allows 43. Like you said, still impressive, but maybe (very) less so when you take that into consideration.

In addition, the Flyers had the 2nd-best PK in the league and Clarke was their leading PK forward, by far.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=28140124&postcount=63