MXD
Partying Hard
- Oct 27, 2005
- 51,742
- 17,652
Yes, it's in that book, but it doesn't tell who claimed it.
Well, that would require possessing a physical copy of the book, or some way to access it online.
Yes, it's in that book, but it doesn't tell who claimed it.
I had Moose Johnson on my submitted list.
That seems a bit wrong to me. There were players who played somewhat similar to Shore before him; in fact, by all descriptions, Eddie Shore is basically a better, saner Sprague Cleghorn. But after him? Well... straight to Bobby Orr, more than 25 years later. One could argue that it's a thing of skill : someone like, I dunno, Ken Reardon maybe, could've been Eddie Shore had he been more skilled. But Kelly and Harvey definitely HAD skill... but didn't play like Shore at all.
Oh? Perhaps you should do some further digging & research. If you dig down below the surface a bit, all the wild tales, ultra violence, you'll find quite the creative player indeed. Real force out there who could just as easily let his play, skating, stickhandling, his shot, whole big bag of tricks do the talking beyond his body, fists. He was fearless of course, jumped into, would lead rushes, rag the puck in killing off penalties, was given a bigger birth, more room than Gordie Howe. Single handedly could totally dominate a game, speed it up or it slow it down.
Total package...channeled Freddy Kreuger when required. Not always voluntarily of course.
I'm not saying he wasn't : he was absolutely creative. My point was mostly that :
- There were players who played like Eddie Shore before Eddie Shore (they were just not as good as him)
- It went a long time before a player whose game was anywhere alike Eddie Shore (in fact... straight to Bobby Orr).
Right. So how is it that you would dismiss his influence & importance to the development of not just how Defense could be played, how he played it, indeed, how he approached the game influencing play offensively as well as defensively (?). In the entire Pantheon of Greatest Players to some of us Shores star still shines as brightly as that of Harveys', Orr's, Mikitas' and many others. Hence the high ranking, ratings. Hugely influential player.
We're then left with something of a metaphysical question : Can a player be influential if whatever he did is imitated by absolutely no one afterwards?
Again, you seem to be focused entirely on the Ultra Violence, his various transgressions which of course make for great reading but do little to give him a fair hearing. Shore was playing the angles as a Defenceman before anyone had fully figured that out. Economy of motion & expenditure of energy. Zone coverage. Folding isosceles trapezoid angulation. Size of the player did not matter if you had that dialed in. He saw grids, thought mathematically. Way ahead of his time. Used his speed & acceleration to speed things up, slow them down. An opportunist who in studying his opponents & finding the weaknesses through the neutral zone would lead or jump into a rush and often with no thought of scoring himself but in thinking 3 moves ahead whereby in doing so it would leave a Winger or his Center wide open unchallenged in front of the net. Tic tac toe.... But I get it. He's been painted a Psychopath. Thats what sells. Unfortunate as under far closer scrutiny & objective study beyond the gory tales.... well. I'd urge anyone / everyone to look this guy up.
I'm more focused on puckrushing than on violence.
We're then left with something of a metaphysical question : Can a player be influential if whatever he did is imitated by absolutely no one afterwards?
... I guess I'll have some reading to doWell, if my read is correct then Shore's rushing was copied by multiple teams - with varying success and with the effect that large parts of the game turned into prolonged scrambles on both ends of the rink. Which in turn prompted the introduction of the red line and the abolishment of the defensive blue line offside.
Thus the center line was basically introduced because of Eddie Shore. That's pretty influential, isn't it?
But seriously, @Bear of Bad News , @Theokritos ... Do you really want this to be the "standard" ? Honest question... Because, from where I'm standing from, it does appear we're asking (of Claude Pepe Lemieux) to meet a standard that absolutely no one else is asked to meet, and that doesn't seem quite right to me.
- Kennedy, Ryan, ed. (2010), "Blood Feuds: Hockey's Best-Ever Rivalries", The Hockey News, Transcontinental Books, ISBN 978-0-9813938-1-0
... I guess I'll have some reading to do
Origins and Development of Hockey
- Evolution of the Power Play
Traces "power play" back to the 1930s NHL tactic of pressure hockey/ganging attacks prior to the introduction of the center line.
The rule I expect everyone to follow here is "treat one another with respect and don't be a dick."
.... alrighty then.
Yeah. To paraphrase Jeff Foxworthy, you might have a shed under-the-bridge if your posts are willfully irritating.The rule I expect everyone to follow here is "treat one another with respect and don't be a dick."
This is exactly why it’s sonetimes hard to take hockey from that era seriouslyShore got a severed ear because the foolish young 24 year old tried to show up the 34 year old tough veteran who was the new guy on the team in training camp.
Shore took a run at Billy Coutu, who was the Habs captain the year before and Sprague Cleghorn's partner in violent crime on the ice in Montreal for several years where they had been Stanley Cup champions. Coutu raised his stick instinctively and the two crashed into the boards, Shore getting the worst of it.
Later that season, in the Stanley Cup Finals, coach Art Ross said openly in the dressing room between periods that he would pay a bounty if someone would hit the ref. The coach was frustrated with some of the penalty calls in their series against the mighty Ottawa dynasty club. Loyal footsoldier Coutu went out and did the deed and was banned for life. Players objected and cited the fact that Ross had specified a dollar amount and actually had paid it afterwards. The NHL eventually overturned the lifetime ban a couple of years later when it all came out, but by then old Coutu had moved on in his life and never played again.
It still doesn’t locate a specific source there, just through books which claims "some accounts" or the like.
Agreed.Back to the source issue. Deep minor trivia, raised in the context of between period banter at the local arena over a beer should simply be recognized as such and left alone.
If you want to do some extra reading on players that came before Eddie Shore and helped revolutionize the position, a good place to start is Moose Johnson.
It's a minor factor IMO. He needs more "prime" seasons I think - which for the record I think he still has the gas left in his tank to do.I'd like to think that Crosby still has a chance to move up the list (when it is inevitably redone 5 - 7 years from now) even if he doesn't win another Stanley Cup. Point per game seasons with some decent playoff performances should be enough imo...it shows longevity which should be factored in.
It's a minor factor IMO. He needs more "prime" seasons I think - which for the record I think he still has the gas left in his tank to do.