What made Dougy Gilmour such a great player?

[SeanMoneyHands]

For those who saw him in his prime in Calgary and eventually gets traded to Toronto. What was it about him that made him so good?

Click to read more...

 

[Killer Orcas]

Heart lots of players have plenty of skill but lack the drive to play hurt or put themselves in danger. He was a true heart and soul player with drive. He wasn't the biggest but was feisty for sure remember him more during his Leaf time but he was great in earlier years as well.

 

[ozzie]

He was a pitbull on both sides of the puck, but could really shadow and make life hell for other offensive players. It's funny because his defensive game was underrated, but was so much a part of his offense. He also played with some good offesnive teams too, it's peaking with Toronto's resurgence.

He played much bigger than he was, like some of the smaller russians like Larianov. He learned to use the reverse checks and protect the puck extremely well. He played on the edge for sure.

And lets not forget like Kirk Muller, he's a Kingston boy! Something in the water there.

 

[The Panther]

His prime began before Calgary, in St. Louis:

1986 playoffs:
21 points (1st, despite only going to third round)
1986-87:
105 points (5th NHL)

He was also great at the 1987 Canada Cup.

As to what made him great: Probably as with most passers / playmakers, he could "see" the ice well and make players around him more dangerous offensively. Very good stickhandler, forehand and backhand.

I guess he was good-ish defensively, but I never thought he was 'tough' at all. I don't know where that came from. He was Bobby Clarke-ish, in that he would be in scrums to begin but then would skate away and let others deal with it. He did have a great nasty stare-down, though.

 

[seventieslord]

- He was an excellent passer.
- He was fearless.
- He had legendary stamina. He seemed to be able to handle more ice time than other comparable players.

He also played with some good offesnive teams too, it's peaking with Toronto's resurgence.

Not sure if you are calling the Burns/Gilmour Leafs an offensive team, but in case you were: They were actually 16th and 13th in offense in the 1993 and 1994 seasons, and 17th and 14th after that. That's even with Gilmour scoring 343 points in 291 games those 4 years. This team got by on defense (unlike almost every other Leafs team from 1967 until present day)

 

[BraveCanadian]

Endless drive. Tough as hell. Great IQ as a playmaker and defensively.

Best peak of any forward not named Gretzky or Lemieux (or maybe McDavid) in the past 30-40 years. If you didn’t see it then you don’t understand.

 

[JackSlater]

Head & Shoulders.

 

[MadLuke]

Even among elite he probably had above average drive-vision-hockey IQ-stamina.

The 38 years old version in MTL, hard to imagine he was still an actual top player in the league physically if we were running hockey drills, yet he was tie for first on the team in playoff points with 10.... lead all forwards in minutes played at that age and broke the penalty box door glass.

There an * that it was Koivu cancer year (he would have played more that 16 minutes a game otherwise) but still it was a nice last glimspe on what he could do.

 

[NyQuil]

Trying to impress babysitters.

 

[Slats432]

Skill plus tenacity. Great player.

 

[tabness]

part of it definitely Toronto media

 

[Slats432]

part of it definitely Toronto media

I hate the Leafs,(And the Flames for that matter) but I loved Gilmour. Great all around player. That was just 1993.

 

[BraveCanadian]

part of it definitely Toronto media

Center of the universe, baby

But he actually was that good

 

[The Panther]

Best peak of any forward not named Gretzky or Lemieux (or maybe McDavid) in the past 30-40 years. If you didn’t see it then you don’t understand.

I can't see his peak being better than Jagr's or McDavid's or Kucherov's or MacKinnon's. Then, there's Messier, Yzerman...

Gilmour certainly had an outstanding 1992-93 and a very good 1993-94... but these get a little overblown because Toronto. (His scoring finish in 1987 was higher than in 1993.) His ES production in 1992-1994 was about the same as with 1987 St. Louis or c.1989-1991 Calgary, with the difference being overall ice-time and PP time. In Calgary, he'd been effectively used as a second-liner and had to share PP time with Nieuwendyk, etc.

I mean, what is Gilmour's peak anyway? Is it just 1992-93? In 1993-94, he scored 98 points in the final 78 games, which, considering ice-time increase and PP increase, probably puts his production (per-60 or whatever) below 1990-91 Calgary and maybe 1986-87 St. Louis.

1992-93 was a "peak of peaks", I guess, but I'd say his peak is basically spring 1986 to spring 1994. And it would be a hard sell to say that peak is better than the six guys I listed above (not to mention Lindros, Fedorov, Kane, etc., etc...).


Note: I should add that one thing I like about Gilmour is that he really brought it in the playoffs. Good playoff performer, consistently! (We'll overlook his game four vs. L.A. in 1990 and his brutal gaffe in the first period of game 7 vs. the same team in 1993...)

 

[MadLuke]

In 93-94 combined Gilmour was second in the nhl in pts:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

+57,

First in playoff points by a miles, +19...

Could be magnified by Toronto or that a lot of the big 93 players (Lafontaine-Lemieux-Mogilny-Turgeon-Yzerman) got injured or big 1994 did not play much in 93 like Gretzky.

 

[authentic]

Endless drive. Tough as hell. Great IQ as a playmaker and defensively.

Best peak of any forward not named Gretzky or Lemieux (or maybe McDavid) in the past 30-40 years. If you didn’t see it then you don’t understand.

Actually though? This is the first I’ve heard of this, does anyone else agree?

I can't see his peak being better than Jagr's or McDavid's or Kucherov's or MacKinnon's. Then, there's Messier, Yzerman...

Gilmour certainly had an outstanding 1992-93 and a very good 1993-94... but these get a little overblown because Toronto. (His scoring finish in 1987 was higher than in 1993.) His ES production in 1992-1994 was about the same as with 1987 St. Louis or c.1989-1991 Calgary, with the difference being overall ice-time and PP time. In Calgary, he'd been effectively used as a second-liner and had to share PP time with Nieuwendyk, etc.

I mean, what is Gilmour's peak anyway? Is it just 1992-93? In 1993-94, he scored 98 points in the final 78 games, which, considering ice-time increase and PP increase, probably puts his production (per-60 or whatever) below 1990-91 Calgary and maybe 1986-87 St. Louis.

1992-93 was a "peak of peaks", I guess, but I'd say his peak is basically spring 1986 to spring 1994. And it would be a hard sell to say that peak is better than the six guys I listed above (not to mention Lindros, Fedorov, Kane, etc., etc...).


Note: I should add that one thing I like about Gilmour is that he really brought it in the playoffs. Good playoff performer, consistently! (We'll overlook his game four vs. L.A. in 1990 and his brutal gaffe in the first period of game 7 vs. the same team in 1993...)

Or Crosby, Ovechkin, or Forsberg, or Fedorov, or Malkin, or Lindros, etc.

 

[frisco]

Actually though? This is the first I’ve heard of this, does anyone else agree?

Vigorously disagree. If a GM would have offered Mark Messier (Just to pick one non-Gretzky/Lemieux/McDavid player) for Doug Gilmour at any time in their overlapping careers, that GM would have been fired on the spot and never would work in the NHL again.

My Best-Carey