What made Mike Walton "Shaky"?
- Thread starter Tarantula
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
I had heard a bit about Punch, seems as though Imlach had a few targets going at any time.
Walton seems to have some real burst and quick hands. He stands out at times breaking into the offensive zone. Seems to have a good shot as well, watched him slap one full stride hitting the blue line. Had no idea he could shoot like that.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Not to derail your thread here, but I've always found the end of Walton's career peculiar.
In 1978, he posts a career-best 66 points for the Vancouver Canucks and is their leading scorer. In the off-season, however, he's traded to the St. Louis Blues for a 4th round draft pick. Why would the Canucks trade their leadings scorer for a 4th round pick?
In St. Louis, Walton continues to perform putting up 18 points in 22 games, but despite being nearly a point-per-game player for the Blues, the team releases him in early December. A few days later he signs with the Bruins who release him after a month of middling production. He then joins his fourth team in less than a year when he signs with Chicago but struggles to produce during a 29-game stint.
In 1978, he posts a career-best 66 points for the Vancouver Canucks and is their leading scorer. In the off-season, however, he's traded to the St. Louis Blues for a 4th round draft pick. Why would the Canucks trade their leadings scorer for a 4th round pick?
In St. Louis, Walton continues to perform putting up 18 points in 22 games, but despite being nearly a point-per-game player for the Blues, the team releases him in early December. A few days later he signs with the Bruins who release him after a month of middling production. He then joins his fourth team in less than a year when he signs with Chicago but struggles to produce during a 29-game stint.
tony d
New poll series coming from me in June
Read some stuff on this guy, seems like he was a decent secondary scorer during his career. So shakey may have been a nickname but doesn't match his career performance.
Robert Gordon Orr
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2009
- 980
- 2,054
To me Walton was a player who had all the makings of a star (talent wise). He was not an easy player to defend against. He was a bit unpredictable and irrational, so the defensemen had a hard time figuring him out. Walton had a pretty heavy shot with a quick release, overwhelming a lot of goaltenders. On top of that he had some wheels and world class first step acceleration.
His dad (the original Shakey Walton) was a fine hockey player in his own right and played briefly in the NHL for Montreal (early 40s), so Mike Walton definitely had that talent in his DNA.
He never lived up to his potential mainly because of his personality. From what I understand he was a well-liked teammate, a lot of fun to be around, but his work ethic, mental health (to some degree) and commitment to the game was just not enough.
Back in those days, you didn’t just mouth off against the GM or the coach, if you did, you got yourself into trouble, big time. Today the spoiled superstar players can get a coach fired overnight. The players today have much more leverage than they had in the 60s and 70s when Walton played.
Walton was somewhat of a rebel with an outgoing personality, liked to talk and had a bit of a laissez-faire attitude. He did things his way, for example using white medical tape for his sticks instead of the traditional black tape. There was a strict rule under Imlach, no long hair, so Walton walked around the dressing room with a ”Beatles wig” just to annoy Imlach.
Just the fact that he could hang around for six seasons with the Maple Leafs was a miracle in itself given some of his ”antics” in the eyes of Imlach. I would think Imlach was unaware of the fact that Walton battled depression and anxiety for long stretches, but I might be wrong.
When Walton was finally traded in 1971, Toronto was a bit in a turmoil. Bassett, Smythe and Ballard had their own little ”war” and Imlach was gone (replaced by Jim Gregory).
While being the GM, Imlach of course recognized that Walton was superbly talented and I also think that Walton being married to the granddaughter of Conn Smythe and niece of Stafford Smythe also had something to do with him not being traded sooner.
Later on Walton had his moments, some that comes to mind:
· Crashing through a plate glass at a hotel during a road game, almost losing his life in the process. He got away with 200+ stitches and a complete blood transfusion.
· Jumping off a diving board into a swimming pool, wearing his full hockey equipment, nearly drowning.
· Being so disgusted with a loss that he just walked out of the arena after the game, got into his car and drove right to the nearest bar, still in his hockey gear pouring down shots at the bar. That must have been a sight to behold.
· Doing TV-interviews while wearing only shaving cream to cover his private parts
· He was deathly afraid of insects, had a real phobia, which of course his teammates used against him whenever they could, resulting in a lot of funny moments
Walton had great skills. He went his own way, was a bit enigmatic, aloof, maybe even lazy to some extent. His non-conformist behavior did not sit well with NHL-management of the 60s and 70s. Still, I think he did quite well, close to 800 NHL/WHA points in almost 870 games is not bad at all.
His dad (the original Shakey Walton) was a fine hockey player in his own right and played briefly in the NHL for Montreal (early 40s), so Mike Walton definitely had that talent in his DNA.
He never lived up to his potential mainly because of his personality. From what I understand he was a well-liked teammate, a lot of fun to be around, but his work ethic, mental health (to some degree) and commitment to the game was just not enough.
Back in those days, you didn’t just mouth off against the GM or the coach, if you did, you got yourself into trouble, big time. Today the spoiled superstar players can get a coach fired overnight. The players today have much more leverage than they had in the 60s and 70s when Walton played.
Walton was somewhat of a rebel with an outgoing personality, liked to talk and had a bit of a laissez-faire attitude. He did things his way, for example using white medical tape for his sticks instead of the traditional black tape. There was a strict rule under Imlach, no long hair, so Walton walked around the dressing room with a ”Beatles wig” just to annoy Imlach.
Just the fact that he could hang around for six seasons with the Maple Leafs was a miracle in itself given some of his ”antics” in the eyes of Imlach. I would think Imlach was unaware of the fact that Walton battled depression and anxiety for long stretches, but I might be wrong.
When Walton was finally traded in 1971, Toronto was a bit in a turmoil. Bassett, Smythe and Ballard had their own little ”war” and Imlach was gone (replaced by Jim Gregory).
While being the GM, Imlach of course recognized that Walton was superbly talented and I also think that Walton being married to the granddaughter of Conn Smythe and niece of Stafford Smythe also had something to do with him not being traded sooner.
Later on Walton had his moments, some that comes to mind:
· Crashing through a plate glass at a hotel during a road game, almost losing his life in the process. He got away with 200+ stitches and a complete blood transfusion.
· Jumping off a diving board into a swimming pool, wearing his full hockey equipment, nearly drowning.
· Being so disgusted with a loss that he just walked out of the arena after the game, got into his car and drove right to the nearest bar, still in his hockey gear pouring down shots at the bar. That must have been a sight to behold.
· Doing TV-interviews while wearing only shaving cream to cover his private parts
· He was deathly afraid of insects, had a real phobia, which of course his teammates used against him whenever they could, resulting in a lot of funny moments
Walton had great skills. He went his own way, was a bit enigmatic, aloof, maybe even lazy to some extent. His non-conformist behavior did not sit well with NHL-management of the 60s and 70s. Still, I think he did quite well, close to 800 NHL/WHA points in almost 870 games is not bad at all.
DannyGallivan
Your world frightens and confuses me
Had some massive WHA seasons. He led the league in scoring once (57 goals and 117 points)... in a league with Hull, Howe and a few other notables.
reckoning
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2005
- 7,122
- 1,519
My favorite Walton story is that during a WHA game he actually got in a fight on the ice with one of his teammates.
Most of what I've seen of him is from the '74 Canada/Russia series and he didn't look impressive in it. He showed little to no effort in backchecking, and took one of the worst penalty shot attempts I've ever seen. He did look dangerous with the puck, but didn't end up producing much offensively in the series.
Most of what I've seen of him is from the '74 Canada/Russia series and he didn't look impressive in it. He showed little to no effort in backchecking, and took one of the worst penalty shot attempts I've ever seen. He did look dangerous with the puck, but didn't end up producing much offensively in the series.
I couldn't find much footage of Walton on youtube. I found a different Walton penalty shot from 1968, which was stopped by Jack Norris of Chicago. Walton looked to be going for the five hole. Interestingly, Walton scored on a penalty shot the night before against Detroit.
David Bruce Banner
Acid Raven Bed Burn
It might have been his personality... and it’s just as likely that it was a product of Vancouver’s horrible asset management at the time. Maybe both.
At that point in his career he was basically an old PP specialist who could produce points that looked good on paper but was a total defensive liability with no interest in backchecking. Late-career Mike Ribeiro might be a decent comparison.
A bad team looking to rebuild didn't need a guy like this who wasn't part of the solution and gave those minutes to good young players like Smyl/Gradin/Fraser the next year.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Would Jagr have won the Art Ross without Lemieux in 1995-96 and 2000-01?
- Latest: Sampe from the 2000s
-
