Trevor Linden or Kirk Muller?

[DitchMarner]

Two good old Canadian boys who were number two overall picks. Both were good but not great offensively in their primes and then became solid bottom six contributors. Both were known for having leadership qualities and not shying away from the dirty or tough areas. Muller had a big playoff run in 1993; Linden had one the next year.


Who was the better player?

Click to read more...

 

[The Panther]

It's crazy how suddenly Linden's point production dropped off during 1996-97, and then by 1997-98 he thereafter produced like a third liner. A big body guy, he would seem to be tailor-made for the DPE, but he fell off a cliff scoring-wise when he was only about 26.

At almost exactly the same age (maybe a year older), Kirk Muller also fell off the cliff scoring-wise. He had probably had slightly higher peaks, though, with two 94-point seasons and an 86-point season.

On balance, I would say Linden's 1994 playoffs is more impressive than Muller's 1993. (By the time Muller went to the Finals again in 2000 with Dallas, he was a 22-point-per-year role player.)

Anyway, as Muller had one or two more highly-productive seasons than Linden, and indeed was a bit better offensively, I think this comes down to how much you rate the "intangibles" of each. Linden had plenty of intangibles, to be sure, but Muller was always noted as a great team leader, as well. If we called the intangibles a draw, then I'd probably give Muller the edge here as he was a bit better offensively.

(One thing about Muller, though -- for a supposedly solid two-way player, his career plus/minus results are quite bad. Sure, you give him a pass for the early years in Jersey, but he didn't do a lot better after that, either. Not to put too fine a point on it because plus/minus, but his career -147 does stand out.)

 

[Gorskyontario]

Muller, but both were good players. Either as scorers or later in their careers as 3rd liners. Linden was bigger and probably more physical. Both clean players, and tough. Both good in the playoffs. Mullers numbers look worse because of long playoff runs with the Stars at the end. I think anyone would be happy with either player, but IMO at their best, Muller was more valuable.

I don't think either of them wanted to be islanders.

 

[Stephen]

(One thing about Muller, though -- for a supposedly solid two-way player, his career plus/minus results are quite bad. Sure, you give him a pass for the early years in Jersey, but he didn't do a lot better after that, either. Not to put too fine a point on it because plus/minus, but his career -147 does stand out.)

Yeah, that's crossed my mind before. Kirk Muller has a real two way center reputation but I always wonder if that was just a euphemism for middling offense, with adjacencies to Guy Carbonneau (in Montreal) and Doug Gilmour (Good Kingston Boys) blurring the picture a little bit.

 

[JianYang]

It's crazy how suddenly Linden's point production dropped off during 1996-97, and then by 1997-98 he thereafter produced like a third liner. A big body guy, he would seem to be tailor-made for the DPE, but he fell off a cliff scoring-wise when he was only about 26.

At almost exactly the same age (maybe a year older), Kirk Muller also fell off the cliff scoring-wise. He had probably had slightly higher peaks, though, with two 94-point seasons and an 86-point season.

On balance, I would say Linden's 1994 playoffs is more impressive than Muller's 1993. (By the time Muller went to the Finals again in 2000 with Dallas, he was a 22-point-per-year role player.)

Anyway, as Muller had one or two more highly-productive seasons than Linden, and indeed was a bit better offensively, I think this comes down to how much you rate the "intangibles" of each. Linden had plenty of intangibles, to be sure, but Muller was always noted as a great team leader, as well. If we called the intangibles a draw, then I'd probably give Muller the edge here as he was a bit better offensively.

(One thing about Muller, though -- for a supposedly solid two-way player, his career plus/minus results are quite bad. Sure, you give him a pass for the early years in Jersey, but he didn't do a lot better after that, either. Not to put too fine a point on it because plus/minus, but his career -147 does stand out.)

One of the lesser known things about kirk Muller in 1993 was that he tore the cartilage off his collarbone early in round 1.

I suppose he kept freezing it through the playoffs but it sounds painful as hell. It didn't look like he missed a beat that playoff though.

I think Linden was perhaps more dynamic. He could beat you with speed but he had the size to go along with it. Sometimes he was knocked for not using it enough, but I always found him to be a gamer when the chips were down. I recall Linden was the nhl Ironman, and when that streak ended, it sort of coincided with the erosion of his offensive production. I have wondered if perhaps he shortened his offensive peak by carrying on that streak.

Muller's bread and butter was not his speed. He lived in the rough areas around the net and he was money there. His last goal in that final was kind of symbolic of the kind of player he was. He's the type of guy you loved to have in games where real estate was at a premium because he just seemed to excel in high traffic.

Tough call. I'm biased but I'll take Muller simply because I'm not sure the Habs win the cup in 93 if you swap out Muller and put in Linden.

 

[sr edler]

Linden was not dynamic. He was cut from the grainy Albertan prairie, much like his older nemesis Messier. He had that NHLPA 93 video game slapper down the right wing, and some nice physical tools (that diminished with wear and tear).

 

[The Panther]

Linden was not dynamic. He was cut from the grainy Albertan prairie, much like his older nemesis Messier.

Messier was not Linden's nemesis, despite the good vs. evil fantasy some Canuck fans would like to construct.

 

[VanIslander]

Messier was not Linden's nemesis,...

It was Keenan in the end.

He was the GM to trade him away.

 

[JianYang]

Linden was not dynamic. He was cut from the grainy Albertan prairie, much like his older nemesis Messier. He had that NHLPA 93 video game slapper down the right wing, and some nice physical tools (that diminished with wear and tear).

It is in relation to Muller. Linden was bigger and had more speed to his game if I'm comparing their best years.

 

[MadLuke]

It's crazy how suddenly Linden's point production dropped off during 1996-97, and then by 1997-98 he thereafter produced like a third liner. A big body guy, he would seem to be tailor-made for the DPE, but he fell off a cliff scoring-wise when he was only about 26.

I wonder how much was reputation and being a impressionable kid, but Linden even if the puck did not end in the net when was on the ice, felt like a very still useful NHLER with Montreal.

Could have been just the size and strength (among a team of dwarf) and winning 55% of faceoff that gave that impression

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'd take Kirk Muller because he's just a little better at almost everything than Linden for me...I actually like Muller's skating more, I think his small-area footwork and quickness are notably better than Linden's. I think Muller is more dynamic with the puck. Better distributor. Linden might be a better shooter. Both were capable defensively, both could probably do more if their role was just to play defense. If someone said, "You need to pick one of these guys to be a defensive fourth line center" - I think I'd take Muller because he's a little more agile and might have been a bit smarter.

 

[seventieslord]

My immediate answer is Muller, but the more I reflect, the closer I think it is. How the heck did Linden end up with 30 more points in three fewer playoff games? My god...

 

[JianYang]

I wonder how much was reputation and being a impressionable kid, but Linden even if the puck did not end in the net when was on the ice, felt like a very still useful NHLER with Montreal.

Could have been just the size and strength (among a team of dwarf) and winning 55% of faceoff that gave that impression

I seem to recall actually that Linden played on a line with zubrus and Stevenson in that year where they set the record for injuries. Lots of beef there.

The Habs certainly got smaller in the following years.

 

[MadLuke]

Even in a before turning 30 way, if we say Muller played more game has an old men.

Muller: 55 pts in 77 games, -13 in the playoff
Linden: 80 pts in 79 games, +12

And they both only have one great run.

MTL keep Muller in 1993, Canucks in 1994 and team Canada keep Linden instead would be my feeling, which does not answer the question fully but in part.

 

[MadLuke]

I seem to recall actually that Linden played on a line with zubrus and Stevenson in that year where they set the record for injuries. Lots of beef there.

The Habs certainly got smaller in the following years.

in the 2000 and 2001 season Montreal forward with the most minutes:

Rucinsky, Darby (!?), Petrov, Zubrus, Linden, Savage, Poulin, Zholtok, Koivu, Brunet, Corson, Stevenson, Kilger, Asham

That good size it is true, Rucinsky-Koivu-Petrov-Brunet marking the mind but a minority.

Darby the center with the most ice time on that team, does not even have a picture on nhl.com, score 45 points combined those 2 seasons with all that ice time (and was not playing a lot of minutes per games, it was just constant injury for everyone else), and did not play much nhl hockey before or after.

It was a special level of dark time (time when it was a big deal when a player like Benoit Brunet was injured....with how little talent there was, and he always was).

 

[JianYang]

in the 2000 and 2001 season Montreal forward with the most minutes:

Rucinsky, Darby (!?), Petrov, Zubrus, Linden, Savage, Poulin, Zholtok, Koivu, Bruten, Corson, Stevenson, Kilger, Asham

That good size it is true, Rucinsky-Koivu-Petrov-Brunet marking the mind but a minority.

Darby the center with the most ice time on that team, does not even have a picture on nhl.com, score 45 points with all of them (and was not playing a lot of minutes per games, it was just constant injury for everyone else), and did not play much nhl hockey before or after.

It was a special level of dark time.

I dont remember darby doing much but the one I remember is zholtok who ended up scoring something like 26 goals in the year. He vaulted into a big role by default because the top 2 centers in koivu and Linden were injured for much of the year.


I guess veigneault did take a liking to darby though because they seemed to be connected to each other afterwards in different organizations

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm sorry, this is just for me...but I read the name "Darby" and my mind immediately went to Darby Hendrickson...and I wondered why all the players were listed by last name except for Darby. Maybe he's some fan favorite or something...somehow.

Turns out Darby Hendrickson and Craig Darby are allegedly different players...Americans, born days apart in 1972, who played in the NHL from 1995 to 2004......has anyone ever seen them in the same room? Anyway, this person (or perhaps, "these people") had an incredible 2001 and it evidently wore them out thereafter...

 

[MadLuke]

I for real thought for a second that the nhl.com website had a mistake on it, how could I not remember instantly the biggest minutes (overall not per game) of 2 seasons of MTL.... took my a while to place him back without the picture.

I remember is zholtok who ended up scoring something like 26 goals in the year.

I remember that line and year yes, Don Cherry said that a center scoring more than twice as many goals than assists... probably a lucky streak unsustainable that would never repeat and to not sign him a big contract because of those 26 goals in just 65 games. Sergei would never score 20 in the nhl again.

 

[VanIslander]

I like the comparison.
Two important leaders.
Epic moments in the clutch.
Character guys who impressed but with a clear ceiling.
Loved them both.

If only Linden had had a 3rd (hat trick) goal in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals (to tie it up, and maybe set up a team OT win scenario), he would have surpassed Captain Kirk's heroics of the year before! *sigh* (Memories of uni)

EDIT: do i have to send proof somewhere that i went to uni before i can talk about it?

 

[Johnny Engine]

I'm sorry, this is just for me...but I read the name "Darby" and my mind immediately went to Darby Hendrickson...and I wondered why all the players were listed by last name except for Darby. Maybe he's some fan favorite or something...somehow.

Turns out Darby Hendrickson and Craig Darby are allegedly different players...Americans, born days apart in 1972, who played in the NHL from 1995 to 2004......has anyone ever seen them in the same room? Anyway, this person (or perhaps, "these people") had an incredible 2001 and it evidently wore them out thereafter...

He's talking about the one who played in Atlantic Canada in 1995.

 

[BLNY]

I take Muller, in part for sentimental reasons. I think there was more natural offense in Kirk's game. He could also move to the wing effectively. No question his game fell off after 93 cup run that saw him play a lot of it on a separated shoulder. It was never the same after that.

 

[The Panther]

I wonder how much was reputation and being a impressionable kid, but Linden even if the puck did not end in the net when was on the ice, felt like a very still useful NHLER with Montreal.

He did score 63 points in 107 games with Montreal, which, given that it's peak DPE, isn't terrible. A 50-point season, basically. And those Montreal clubs were pretty inept, offensively...

 

[Staniowski]

Muller and Linden were both talented players who, if they had played in weaker eras (like the early decades of hockey), would've both been easy hall-of-famers. If you watched these guys at their respective bests, it was very easy to see why they both were drafted 2nd overall.

Both of them, though, had obvious limitations that kept them from being bigger stars than they were.

Starting with Muller, he was somewhat of a phenom when he was young, and I suspect he would have received Exceptional status in the OHL if it had existed when he played. As it was, he was able to play for his hometown team when he was 15, and scored a lot when he was 16 (of course, there was an even bigger phenom down the St. Lawrence in Montreal in the same draft - and one year older - so Muller still would've been overshadowed).

I really liked Muller a lot when he played in Montreal. He was at his best in '93, and often looked like the best Habs forward since Lafleur. His greatest strengths were his general hockey smarts (he was a natural); his positioning in almost all situations; his play in tight areas on the ice; a very good puck carrier; a very good passer; and pretty good defensively (smarts, positioning, and use of stick were all good).

He could quite frequently appear to "outplay" some of the biggest superstars of the League. However, the results in the form of scoring (or preventing scoring) sometimes didn't match how he looked, and sometimes didn't match his obvious effort, which usually was very strong.

I think it comes down to the fact that he wasn't outstanding in any one skill - skating, goal-scoring, passing, puck-carrying, defense. And I think when he started to get some injuries, his lack of virtuoso skills became more apparent.

He was very, very good for the Habs in '93 and I don't think they would've won the Cup without him.

With Linden, early in his career he could often look extremely good: he could skate fast, was all over the ice, he hit, he was involved in lots of scoring chances, he could shoot.

But, ultimately, his puck skills were not great, he was neither a great goal-scorer nor a great playmaker.

[Nice play by McDavid on the 4th goal as I write this].

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

so many parallels

both drafted #2

both came in at 18

linden named co-captain at 20, full captain at 21

muller named captain at 21

both really were wingers but got pushed into the middle because of their skills were better used there

both had their greatest glory as centers (93 and 94 playoffs)

linden inexplicably fell off a cliff at 26

muller inexplicably fell off a cliff at 27

both also were incredibly durable players up to 26/27, so maybe not inexplicable

that said, my gut tells me decisively that muller was the better player, peak and career. but i’ll have to give this some thought before i can justify it.

 

[The Panther]

I really liked Muller a lot when he played in Montreal. He was at his best in '93, and often looked like the best Habs forward since Lafleur.

That's pretty heady praise. For me, Mats Naslund, Stéphane Richer at his best, and Vince Damphousse were all better than Muller. And maybe Bobby Smith for a while, too...