Offensively it seems like Dye>Keats>Foyston>MacKay>Hay
Does that sound about right to the group?
Statistically, Dye is the best offensive player in the group... but the qualifier 'statistically' is pulling a lot of weight there. Especially when considering how he was a pure goal scorer, with little inclination for playmaking, in an era where assists were few and far between.
We're talking about a player who doesn't bring anything to the table outside of his shot. Granted, his shot was legendary, both in power and accuracy. But I've really tried to dig up anything on, like, any other part of his game, and it's just not there. And honestly, unless I was just getting really unlucky with which game reports I read, it feels like most of the appreciation of his stick-handling was only from articles written after his career, looking back on him with warm memories. You get token mentions of Dye checking back, sure, but you get those with every player if you search long enough. And that's not to mention his notoriously weak skating!
Here's one small example... this is from Dye's last great season, half a year before he broke his leg in training camp in October 1927. The article directly compares Babe Dye with Didier Pitre. On Pitre, the article says this:
The Windsor Star - 27 January 1927 said:
"Lalonde and Pitre had the same kind of arms which to my mind explains their great offensive ability," continued Muldoon. "I remember a game in 1917 when Pitre played against my Seattle team. He scored six goals from the blue line by drives so swift that they couldn't be stopped. The goaltender didn't see most of them.
"In the next game we instructed our defense men to pile on Pitre before he reached the blue line so that he wouldn't get a clear chance to shoot and also to give the goalie an uninterrupted view. We stopped the Frenchman that time, but he was a wonder. Pitre had speed, brains, skating and stickhandling ability, everything in the hockey repertoire."
And on Dye, it says this:
The Windsor Star - 27 January 1927 said:
To quote Pete, "Dye is a wonderful offensive man because of the power he gets behind his shots. He gets the speed on the puck because of his enormous forearms, which are bigger than his biceps. It's a natural gift which gives him what every great hockey player seeks but can't acquire. When Dye's shot is 'on' the net, it either goes in or gives the goalkeeper a blow he feels, padding or no."
"Dye has always been a wonderful shot. His ability that way was always so marked that although he was not up to much as a skater when he first started to play, he was kept in the game. Jimmy Murphy, the old coach, told me about the first game Dye played for him. The 'Babe' stood by the sideboards and the rest of the team fed him the puck. Occasionally his bullet drives would go in. Now, of course, he has developed into a fair skater, which adds to his ability."
Even in an article lauding Dye's status amongst all-time greats, the only positive they mention is his shot - which Pitre was known for too! Either Dye's shooting was so unbelievably great that it totally overshadowed the rest of his game, or there wasn't much of a 'rest of his game' to begin with.
I've got Pitre behind the three Coast league centres for sure, and I just can't see a good argument for Dye over Pitre, so that sums up where I have him on my ballot as of now. IMO, the 'Babe' can wait until we've added more versatile offensive talents, not all of whom are even up for voting yet.
