What are examples of historical revisionism that you hate the most?

[Peat]

Crosby was pacing for 97 points that year, while McDavid landed on 100 – so saying that he "most likely would have won or been within a point or two" isn't exactly offbase. But Crosby let his foot off the gas toward the end of that year, in advance of yet another Cup run, while McDavid went trophy-hunting (to his own admission) in the last month of the season. You don't think a Crosby who was pacing at nearly the same clip might have gunned for a few more points, if the race were tighter (and with the goal tie-breaker)?

The point is, Crosby was an Art Ross contender beyond 2015. The notion that the monolithic Canadian media collectively joined forces to prop up Crosby's defensive play, because he couldn't compete offensively, is just a wild projection. Besides, no one thought that Kane was better than Crosby, outside of a few people who don't know the difference between the better season and the better player (or that Kane is one of the league's most irresponsible defensive players). No one needed to pump Sid's tires.

Tbf, that race was tight as it was. On the 20th of March, Sid was only two points back with a game in hand. By pace, it was going to be a dead tie because Sid was pacing higher at that point.

For whatever reason or variety of reasons, Sid didn't stay with McDavid. And yeah, it didn't feel like he was trying that hard. There was certainly a sentiment in the air in his comments and in the Pittsburgh media that he didn't really care all that much when there was the chance of a back to back cup on the line. They decreased his ice time a little (not much, but not the action of a team backing a guy in a scoring race). But, lots of other possible reasons (as ever in Pittsburgh, there's injuries involved), and a possibility McDavid might have hit new heights if Sid had stayed with him. Very impressive.

Maybe being ahead would have changed things. By his first twenty game pace, he'd have got 8 points in those six he missed, so that's a possible projection. But maybe not. Again, maybe it motivates McDavid more.

In any case, that's all waffle, and you are utterly correct about the point about Crosby's Art Ross contention window.

 

[wetcoast]

(Slightly Off-Topic)
W/R/T your example, I recently read a book called "The Great Terror", by Robert Conquest. It was genuinely mind-boggling what Stalin & his cronies did to that society. Cannot recommend the book enough if you're into history.



It does, because it was. Orwell actually modeled elements of the State in 1984 off of Stalin's regime

Fair comment but there was this other guy in Europe at the time named Adolph...

 

[ACLEVERNAME]

That the Leafs didn't cheat the cap with the frivolous Matt Murray LITR in 2023-24. Already been swept under the rug and forgotten - just as planned. History will be rewritten by training camp, mark my words.

 

[TheAngryHank]

Yes, the myth of Crosby. Every excuse in the book for why he doesn’t have more than a pair of Art Rosses. I’ve heard them all. Missed games. Pace. Let his foot off the gas. What a crock.

Don't forget the infamous grace period lol

 

[FrankSidebottom]

Crosby's defense is noticeably better than the 3 guys you mention here enough to make a distinction pretty much at every age.

Usually it's non Leaf fans who set up this strawman.

I'm probably one of the guys who ranks him higher than most be I NEVER think of him as elite or generational.

I’m not sure that at his peak Crosby was better than current McDavid purely is terms of two-way abilities. McDavid kills penalties way more frequently and has about the same OZ %. Jagr and Ovechkin were possession monsters and/or more physical. Anyway, the assumed gap is not big enough to mention it so often

 

[UnSandvich]

Fair comment but there was this other guy in Europe at the time named Adolph...

I'm aware, and I didn't say "modeled the entire state" for a reason

 

[Leaf Fans]

Mats Sundin being lionized as elite and generational.

Do habs fans think that? Most Leaf fans don't. Great player though.

 

[glovesave_35]

Recent one but the narrative that Kane was the driving force behind the Hawks Cups

Is this a common thought? That he was the driving force.

He was certainly a very big one. I don't see those teams as having a single driving force.

 

[Leaf Fans]

"Generational" was a hype term invented for Crosby and Ovechkin around 2005 and retroactively applied to Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Howe, etc. to denote some special once in a lifetime type of talent, with a hazy concept of what a generation actually entails.

No one ever applied that generational tag to Mats Sundin in his time, nor after it. I'd suggest your entire post is the definition of revisionism.

Not Leaf fans anyway. I think it is only Plankton.

That the Leafs didn't cheat the cap with the frivolous Matt Murray LITR in 2023-24. Already been swept under the rug and forgotten - just as planned. History will be rewritten by training camp, mark my words.

Lol. That is made up to bash the Leafs. Lol.

 

[Fatass]

When McDavid’s time is done as the best player (and leader) of his team and he hasn’t led that club to a Cup will we revise his level of greatness? Will he be just another great player, who scored massive points, butt is considered lesser in his greatness than other stars who led their clubs to Cups, like Crosby?

 

[Random Comment]

People who put older generation players like Gretzky on a pedestal. He’s not a better player than Mcdavid, and there is no guarantee that if he had modern equipment, training, nutrition, that he would be.

Related to this - the revisionism that the NHL was a competitive league before the 2000s. 3rd and 4th lines were garbage, and the talent pool outside of Canada was very weak.

 

[Byron Bitz]

that goaltenders in the 80s were all terrible

It’s not that they were terrible athletes it’s that goaltending systems were terrible, they stayed on their feet for almost every shot.

 

[Lshap]

The rules didn't say "hey, Canadiens get all the best French players" but they did allow for a system whose true result was the Habs getting *nearly* all of them. Pretty much all of 50s and 60s Cup teams had a core made up of players acquired because of the way the Habs invested in the area.

Just because other teams "could" have invested more in the area doesn't mean they weren't muscled out of it by a competitor with more local resources. Teams could occasionally get good players from the area, but fairly often they were players accurately reading the landscape as being too challenging because of who the Habs already had.

This isn't accurate. Nothing prevented other teams from scouting small-town Quebec and signing the best franco players. Any team could sign any player anywhere at any time (the most famous example being the Bruins signing Bobby Orr as a very young teen). Habs didn't 'muscle' rival scouts; they simply got there first. And – more important – more Montreal scouts spoke French. Obviously, a unilingual French family was much more likely to trust their talented son to a team they could communicate with.

Nothing stopped other teams from sending French-speaking scouts into Quebec to search for talent.

It's true Montreal had a better, stronger infrastructure back then, but that's no different than today. Some of today's teams have superior scouting and development infrastructures. Do we accuse Tampa of having an unfair advantage because they drafted and developed better? Do we accuse New York of unfair advantages because they have the most money and have a more attractive location?

Pre-1960s Habs weren't gifted anything by the league, they just had superior money and vision. Same with a few of today's top teams.

A thing that is getting missed from this is the language/bigot factor.

Beliveau talks about it in his book. He was a unilingual French speaker. The Habs let him live in a French speaking city, speak French to fans/teammates/coaches/managament. It was incredibly attractive.

Couple that with a heavy English only culture in other teams. They would interview 15 year olds that didn't speak English in English. They would venture into small town Quebec in the 50s without a French speaking scout. Yes, Montreal was at an advantage here, but the other 5 teams made very little effort to welcome in anyone besides Anglos.

French Canadian players exploded in the quality in the 40s and 50s. Lots of the old management cultures in other teams was still used to 20s and 30s era culture where you basically only looked for players in Southern Ontario and Ottawa.

The Habs investing in the Regina Pats. That's just good development. Conn Smythe looking down on French Canadian players isn't the fault of the Habs.

Exactly. A majority of franco-players signed with the only team that spoke with them in their language and offered a franco-environment in which to play. It doesn't take a master strategist to figure out why this happened.

Other teams could've easily done more to attract Quebec players. They just didn't. Rather than look for non-existent 'advantages' for Montreal, people should simply recognize that other teams simply dropped the ball.

 

[norrisnick]

When McDavid’s time is done as the best player (and leader) of his team and he hasn’t led that club to a Cup will we revise his level of greatness? Will he be just another great player, who scored massive points, butt is considered lesser in his greatness than other stars who led their clubs to Cups, like Crosby?

He just needs to Ray Bourque his way to a stacked team at the end of his career and all is forgiven.

 

[The90]

Crosby's defense is noticeably better than the 3 guys you mention here enough to make a distinction pretty much at every age.

Usually it's non Leaf fans who set up this strawman.

I'm probably one of the guys who ranks him higher than most be I NEVER think of him as elite or generational.

I don’t think I’ve ever read a leaf fan describe his as either dilute or generational. He would however, have been the best forward the habs have had in the last 40 years, so obviously pretty darn good.

 

[The90]

This isn't accurate. Nothing prevented other teams from scouting small-town Quebec and signing the best franco players. Any team could sign any player anywhere at any time (the most famous example being the Bruins signing Bobby Orr as a very young teen). Habs didn't 'muscle' rival scouts; they simply got there first. And – more important – more Montreal scouts spoke French. Obviously, a unilingual French family was much more likely to trust their talented son to a team they could communicate with.

Nothing stopped other teams from sending French-speaking scouts into Quebec to search for talent.

It's true Montreal had a better, stronger infrastructure back then, but that's no different than today. Some of today's teams have superior scouting and development infrastructures. Do we accuse Tampa of having an unfair advantage because they drafted and developed better? Do we accuse New York of unfair advantages because they have the most money and have a more attractive location?

Pre-1960s Habs weren't gifted anything by the league, they just had superior money and vision. Same with a few of today's top teams.

Exactly. A majority of franco-players signed with the only team that spoke with them in their language and offered a franco-environment in which to play. It doesn't take a master strategist to figure out why this happened.

Other teams could've easily done more to attract Quebec players. They just didn't. Rather than look for non-existent 'advantages' for Montreal, people should simply recognize that other teams simply dropped the ball.

I thought he did a pretty good job outlining that other teams could have, but didn’t do a good job scouting/ recruiting/ accommodating French speaking players. Montreal did that in spades. It’s no fault of their own, partly because their fan base was largely Franco only, and they also did an excellent job recruiting, because they were French which meant every French kid wanted to play there, as well as being a good team.

It started to be a hindrance that French players could only speak French when the league expanded and there was only 1 French team. For that reason all coaching, instruction and team events in the Q are done in English. By the end of it, the boys from Rouyn / Val d’Or etc. are almost completely bilingual and better off for it going forward.

 

[mr figgles]

Mats Sundin being lionized as elite and generational.

I think you’re the one making this revision. Never heard it before. He was rightly a first ballot hall of famer though.

 

[Tawnos]

This isn't accurate. Nothing prevented other teams from scouting small-town Quebec and signing the best franco players. Any team could sign any player anywhere at any time (the most famous example being the Bruins signing Bobby Orr as a very young teen). Habs didn't 'muscle' rival scouts; they simply got there first. And – more important – more Montreal scouts spoke French. Obviously, a unilingual French family was much more likely to trust their talented son to a team they could communicate with.

Nothing stopped other teams from sending French-speaking scouts into Quebec to search for talent.

It's true Montreal had a better, stronger infrastructure back then, but that's no different than today. Some of today's teams have superior scouting and development infrastructures. Do we accuse Tampa of having an unfair advantage because they drafted and developed better? Do we accuse New York of unfair advantages because they have the most money and have a more attractive location?

Pre-1960s Habs weren't gifted anything by the league, they just had superior money and vision. Same with a few of today's top teams.

Exactly. A majority of franco-players signed with the only team that spoke with them in their language and offered a franco-environment in which to play. It doesn't take a master strategist to figure out why this happened.

Other teams could've easily done more to attract Quebec players. They just didn't. Rather than look for non-existent 'advantages' for Montreal, people should simply recognize that other teams simply dropped the ball.

This post is hilarious as an argument against what I was saying, because you just essentially proved what I was saying. "Nothing stopped other teams from sending French-speaking scouts into Quebec to search to talent"... except as you mentioned, the Habs got there first and they hired a lot of French-speaking scouts. Both of those things are the result of geography and money, not being smarter than the other teams. Even if other teams put a bunch of money into French-speaking scouts, they still would have been at a disadvantage to the Canadiens.

The level to which the variation between scouting staff and infrastructure in the modern NHL matters is almost entirely mitigated by the nature of the draft. This has more or less been true for the last 50 years. It's even been observed that you could do pretty well simply drafting off the next player up in the rankings rather than using a scouting staff. No one does this, but it's an illustration of how different of a thing we're talking about. Money is *way* less of a factor than it was in a system where all players got to choose where they'd go. Similarly, it's common for people to accuse NY (attractiveness of market) and TB (state income tax) of having advantages in free agency. And they're absolutely right. I never said the Habs had an unfair advantage. I said they had an advantage.

The Habs didn't have superior vision. They had more money in a system where money was the most important factor and they had a geographical advantage. Speaking the language is *part* of that geographical advantage. Anything else is spin and historical revision designed to mollify Canadiens fans who think that somehow the very real advantages they had and utilized lessen their accomplishments. It doesn't.

 

[Lshap]

I thought he did a pretty good job outlining that other teams could have, but didn’t do a good job scouting/ recruiting/ accommodating French speaking players. Montreal did that in spades. It’s no fault of their own, partly because their fan base was largely Franco only, and they also did an excellent job recruiting, because they were French which meant every French kid wanted to play there, as well as being a good team.

It started to be a hindrance that French players could only speak French when the league expanded and there was only 1 French team. For that reason all coaching, instruction and team events in the Q are done in English. By the end of it, the boys from Rouyn / Val d’Or etc. are almost completely bilingual and better off for it going forward.

This is fair. Certain cities have always had built-in advantages – weather, location, money, taxes, better GMs, scouts & development. That's very different from advantages some still believe were gifted to Montreal by the league.

Back then, Montreal's superior organization and location made it more attractive for French players. Same thing today, as better orgs and locations in Tampa, Florida, Vegas, NY, LA, Dallas, etc. make those franchises more attractive for players.

 

[Legionnaire11]

That Lindros wasn't that talented and was primarily a physical threat, and that he always skated with his head down.

Collectively (I use this term because it captures a broad segment but acknowledges exceptions) as a hockey community we are also hypocrites because if those kinds of hits which knocked him out were laid today against one of the league superstars there would be outrage (minus mostly one fanbase defending the hitter on their team), but we still generally celebrate Stevens and Kasparaitis due to a widespread hatred of Lindros, the Flyers and Philly in general.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Also, that fights after clean hits was always that way.

It has been.

Do habs fans think that? Most Leaf fans don't. Great player though.

No, and I've never heard of anyone say that about him. He was a very good player, but never heard someone call him generational.

That Lindros wasn't that talented and was primarily a physical threat, and that he always skated with his head down.

Collectively (I use this term because it captures a broad segment but acknowledges exceptions) as a hockey community we are also hypocrites because if those kinds of hits which knocked him out were laid today against one of the league superstars there would be outrage (minus mostly one fanbase defending the hitter on their team), but we still generally celebrate Stevens and Kasparaitis due to a widespread hatred of Lindros, the Flyers and Philly in general.

Never heard of Lindros described as "not being that talented" and never heard that "he was only good because he was a physical threat" in a league that would sign 6'6, 250lbs players just to have to fight people and be a physical force, that would likely be able to push back and win against Lindros.


Not just these, but there's a lot I swear people just make up.

 

[Ianturnedbull]

That the Leafs didn't cheat the cap with the frivolous Matt Murray LITR in 2023-24. Already been swept under the rug and forgotten - just as planned. History will be rewritten by training camp, mark my words.

You have a strange way of expressing history.

 

[Stive Morgan]

You have a strange way of expressing history.

I call dibs on Future Revisionism for my new band name.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Never heard of Lindros described as "not being that talented" and never heard that "he was only good because he was a physical threat"

Stick around HF long enough and you'll definitely see it.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Stick around HF long enough and you'll definitely see it.

I've been here awhile, and would not call this an opinion held by a significant part of the clientele here.

I mean, are we going to discuss seriously as a topic the historical revisionism that "PETR PRUCHA IS BETTER THAN SIDNEY CROSBY"? Because someone here believe(d) that.