| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/04/2007 : 17:28:53
I am curious to know what others think of Paul Coffey.
Where would you rank him for all time defencemen and why? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 17:13:51
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4809
Tctitans,
Curious about your take on the +/- issue. What's your view on Robinson then, best +/- player ever at 731. How does he compare to Coffey? Or to anyone else for that matter? Second is Bourque at 528, then Orr and Gretzky, both at 517.
I absolutely love Robinson. He was one of the most complete packages ever - he was even a tough bastard in a fight.
After all the discussions, my stance is firm. VERY Firm... It's almost impossible to declare an opinion on a list of 'best' anything, without first determining the precise criteria. ;) I've never seen the likes of Harvey or Shore play, so I don't have a good frame of reference for them. On the other hand, I was lucky enough to watch Robinson and his greatness.
|
| Guest4809 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 16:49:21
Tctitans,
Curious about your take on the +/- issue. What's your view on Robinson then, best +/- player ever at 731. How does he compare to Coffey? Or to anyone else for that matter? Second is Bourque at 528, then Orr and Gretzky, both at 517.
|
| Guest4809 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 16:37:23
Willus3,
Didin't mean to imply that Orr was "just okay" defensively. I meant to say that Coffey was "just okay" defensively. Although he was not the best defensive dman of his era, (Serge Savard perhaps...) Orr was very good on D, especially on the penalty kill. Interesting question about drafting Orr or Bourque, knowing what we know now. Do you take Bourque's brilliance for 20 years, or Orr's uber-brilliance for 9 years. Over the long haul, I'd take Bourque, but only because of the longevity. But how long could Orr have lasted if he played during the era of arthroscopic knee surgery? |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 14:20:40
quote:
Originally posted by admin
Well written article on the plus/minus stat:
http://www.lcshockey.com/content/072206.asp
Interesting aricle (Thanks Admin), however I think it just points out the obvious that Hockey stats are not an exact science and need to be intrepreted in context. I would accept this as an axiom. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 14:12:08
quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
I think a player should be given a minus if his team is scored on while he is in the penalty box...
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak...
The philosophy of this I agree with.. however it doesnt factor in
1) 'good penalties' : Perhaps he shouldnt get a -1 for taking a good penalty
2) 'baad referees' : Too many horrid and phantom calls these days... |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 14:11:27
quote:
Originally posted by admin
Well written article on the plus/minus stat:
http://www.lcshockey.com/content/072206.asp
It is a very skewed stat in my opinion. First, it is basically a reflection of the skill of the team the player plays for. Secondly, it has to do with the skill level of a players linemates. If a player plays with good players, he has a better chance to have a strong plus minus. The opposite should occur if he plays with crap players. Third, it has to do with the situation the player is given. If you play on the top defensive pairing battling against the oppostiions stars every game, then you are more likely to be a minus player. Fourth, it fails to take into account the powerplay, and since it is such a huge part of today's NHL - that also makes it flawed.
i understand your points, and they are valid (I havent read the article yet, but I will). I agree it is very difficult to compare apples-to-apples with +/-, especially from team to team. Relatively, within a team, it's a little easier, but then the coach must again factor in other things. I still think it is an incredibly important stat that should not be discarded. The same arguments against +/- could be used for all other stats too (G/A/ ..) like how much PP time they get, their linemates, team philosophy (offense vs defense) etc.. Stats in general are not absolute, but they are valuable when analyzed and put into context (still subjective to a degree mind you). |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 13:17:46
I think a player should be given a minus if his team is scored on while he is in the penalty box...
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
| admin |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 12:29:54
Well written article on the plus/minus stat:
http://www.lcshockey.com/content/072206.asp
It is a very skewed stat in my opinion. First, it is basically a reflection of the skill of the team the player plays for. Secondly, it has to do with the skill level of a players linemates. If a player plays with good players, he has a better chance to have a strong plus minus. The opposite should occur if he plays with crap players. Third, it has to do with the situation the player is given. If you play on the top defensive pairing battling against the oppostiions stars every game, then you are more likely to be a minus player. Fourth, it fails to take into account the powerplay, and since it is such a huge part of today's NHL - that also makes it flawed.
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 12:24:42
Not to speak for Admin but i think I know what he means about the +/- stat.
On an individual basis it's subject to outside influences. A player can have a good plus/minus rating on a great team and then be traded to a horrible team and it goes into the toilet. It is very much affected by the players around you. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 12:10:03
I also agree with Admin tha Dmen are very hard to analyze and compare. It all depends on your evaluation criteria for what your top list will look like, and for Dmen, there are quite a number of legitimate criteria sets than can be used.
Depending on what criteria is used, there will be a different top list for each set.
I agree that Coffey had the skill to be a forward, but whether he should be one or not is quite debatable. Don't forget that it's not only the individuals skill, but how they are coached to play. I still believe that Coffey was better defensively that people give him credit for, but he was coached into a different niche roles because of his great offensive skill. In many cases, Coffey played the rover position (a throwback to the NHL days of old), and did in fact, act like a 4th forward. But because he was lightning quick to get back, he was one of the few Dmen that could be used in such a capacity.
The guy was just phenomenal. Even as his career started winding down in Detroit, he had 77, 58, and 74 point seasons (all a +, +28, +18, +19).
That's one thing that I completely disagree with you on Admin, is that I believe the +/- is the most important stat a player can have. You can throw away Goals, Assist, PIM, GAA, SV%, and all other stats. The bottom-line to success is WINS, and only WINS. If your team has a good +/- ratio 5-on-5, then, to me, that goes a looonng way to putting W's in the win column. Sure, special teams will come into play as well, but you get my drift... In my coaching days, I would most certainly reward my + players in many circumstances. (it's a good tool to to help develop 2-way players).
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 10:37:17
Agreed Admin. I am of the same opinion, He should have been a forward. |
| admin |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 10:31:04
This is a tough one because guys like Bourque, Potvin, etc. were the full package. Obviously there are many ways to rate someone as a player. Goals and assists are the most often used for forwards. GAA, wins, Shutouts etc for Goailes. For defensemen it has always been a mix of ability to both score and prevent goals. I wont even mention +/- as that stat is useless anyways.
Although niether are in the same category as anyone listed here, Ed Jovanovski and Willie Mitchell have been compared quite a lot here in the Vancouver Market. The reason being that the Canucks negelected to sign Jovo to $6 million plus, and took the cheaper, safer, less offensively talented guy in Mitchell for $3.5 million. He doesnt score goals, but he is a warrior when in counts. His stick skills and shutdown abilities are worth much more than Jovanovski's ability to QB the PP.
Anyways, that was off topic, but my point is that defensemen are probably the hardest position to rate, or compare. A checking forward is rarley considered great, but a checking defensemen often is.
Paul Coffey should have been a forward. It would make things easier on us. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 09:57:14
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
He has 1531 career points and 1654 even strength goals against.
He's +300 for his career because he played on the high scoring Oilers.
What I'm saying is, is that his offense doesn't overcome his defensive liabilities.
No matter which way you want to spin it... he was on the ice for a lot more goals for,
than against.
I'm not saying that he'd be my 2nd D pick if I was drafting a team, that would depend on what the goal of my team was and what the rest of the team looked like. But Coffey is still a solid #2 in my books for the most skilled D man of all times.
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 09:31:48
Guest 4898 you should become a member. We could use some seasoned knowledge.
I would put Park ahead of Coffey. He was runner up for the Norris 6 times and the only reason he didn't win it was because he was up against Orr and Potvin.
He's very under appreciated.
The offense / defense thing is hardly irrelevant. The primary job of a defenseman is to prevent goals against. If you aren't good at that then you are not a good defenseman. Period. Offense is purely a bonus. The fact that Orr was great defensively and offensively is what made him so special.
And did you just imply that Orr was "just ok" defensively?
Also if you asked Sinden who he would pick in a draft situation between Orr and Bourque, who do you think he would say?  |
| Guest4898 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 08:07:37
The Hockey News poll from the late 90's had Coffey behind Orr, Harvey, Shore, Bourque, Potvin, Kelly, and Robinson, in that order. I never saw Shore play, or Kelly and Harvey during their best years, but from the hockey I've watched since the 60's I'd say the experts at THN had it right, although I think Robinson ( at +731, no other player in history is within +200 of him), should have been fifth. The only change I'd make is adding Lidstrom to those ahead of Coffey, given the Norris winning years he's had since the poll was taken. And maybe, just maybe putting Brad Park ahead of him too.
The offence/defence thing is irrelevant. If you help your team win by scoring at one end or preventing a goal at the other, it works out to the same difference. When Harry Sinden was asked who he'd rather have on the ice, Orr or Bourque, he said Orr if he was a goal behind, and Bourque if he was a goal ahead. The same applies to Coffey. He was defensively just okay, but offensively stellar. Seventh or eighth is about right. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 03/08/2007 : 06:33:06
He has 1531 career points and 1654 even strength goals against.
He's +300 for his career because he played on the high scoring Oilers.
What I'm saying is, is that his offense doesn't overcome his defensive liabilities. |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/07/2007 : 21:13:57
quote:
[Even with all of his points he was a liability on the ice. He has around 100 more even strength goals against than he has total points. I'll say it again. He would have made a fantastic forward.
Let's see.. he was a +300 for his career. That means that he was on the ice for 300 more even strength goals than against (omitting the short-handed goals for or against, for the sake of argument). Your statement "100 more even strength goals against than he has total points" just doesnt compute. He should be a -500 then.
You can certainly have your opinion that he wasnt one of the best to ever lace up the skates, but you don't really have a lot of (accurate) hard data to support that.
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 03/07/2007 : 20:52:43
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Way down!!
I'm a little POed right now cause I wrote a 2 page argument on how you are wrong and it all got deleted somehow. ARG. ;)
Bottom-line is Coffey was great. Top 2 offensive Dmen of all time and he was not nearly as bad defensively as you imply. In fact, I would call him good defensively - but the key to his game was speed and offence. The guy has +50/+60 type seasons for the first half of the 80's (which is better than Bourque's or Potvin's or Chelios' or ..) and he really only had 1 poor +/- season (on an extremely weak and defensiveless penguins team). He was around a +300 (which is about Chelios' as well) for his career which isnt too shabby. If you look at his entire career +/- on a year by year basis, it's actually alarmingly good.
The guy was an effortless speed demon who could do everything at top speed and had a wicked shot. Both Lemieux and Gretzky both proclaimed Coffey as the best passer they have every seen.
Did he play with some great players? Yes he did.. but so did a heckuva lotta other people.
C'mon mang... the guys got 1531 friggin' points in only 1409 games. Almost 400 goals! 8 20+ goal years, 4 30+ goal years, and 2 40+ goal years... as a defenseman!! The guy played at a super elite level and had a 20 year career... give him his kudos!!
Before writing this, off the top of my head, i'd put him in the Top 5 as a no brainer... now after thinking about it a bit more, he's now a solid #2 in my books.
You're PO'd and I can't stop laughing. #2? Really? Set the crack pipe down for a few hours. Coffey isn't better than any one of the ten i listed. Even with all of his points he was a liability on the ice. He has around 100 more even strength goals against than he has total points. I'll say it again. He would have made a fantastic forward. |
| Guest5341 |
Posted - 03/07/2007 : 20:44:03
Paul was the best won't see another like him! |
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/06/2007 : 00:58:05
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
Way down!!
I'm a little POed right now cause I wrote a 2 page argument on how you are wrong and it all got deleted somehow. ARG. ;)
Bottom-line is Coffey was great. Top 2 offensive Dmen of all time and he was not nearly as bad defensively as you imply. In fact, I would call him good defensively - but the key to his game was speed and offence. The guy has +50/+60 type seasons for the first half of the 80's (which is better than Bourque's or Potvin's or Chelios' or ..) and he really only had 1 poor +/- season (on an extremely weak and defensiveless penguins team). He was around a +300 (which is about Chelios' as well) for his career which isnt too shabby. If you look at his entire career +/- on a year by year basis, it's actually alarmingly good.
The guy was an effortless speed demon who could do everything at top speed and had a wicked shot. Both Lemieux and Gretzky both proclaimed Coffey as the best passer they have every seen.
Did he play with some great players? Yes he did.. but so did a heckuva lotta other people.
C'mon mang... the guys got 1531 friggin' points in only 1409 games. Almost 400 goals! 8 20+ goal years, 4 30+ goal years, and 2 40+ goal years... as a defenseman!! The guy played at a super elite level and had a 20 year career... give him his kudos!!
Before writing this, off the top of my head, i'd put him in the Top 5 as a no brainer... now after thinking about it a bit more, he's now a solid #2 in my books. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/26/2007 : 08:10:23
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
2nd Best Offensive Dman ever.
He drops down the list a few if you start rating on overall game.
Way down!! |
| tctitans |
Posted - 02/25/2007 : 23:44:09
2nd Best Offensive Dman ever.
He drops down the list a few if you start rating on overall game.
|
| Guest8640 |
Posted - 02/25/2007 : 21:43:35
Coffey is my favourite player ever. We was a spectacle to watch in his young career (Edmonton, Pittsburgh, LA & Detroit). Then the game changed to clutching and grabbing and Coffey faded very quickly.
If the game had remained wide open, Coffey would be the all-time goal, assist and point leader among dmen. In fact, he would easily be in the top 3 dmen of all time behind only Orr and Bourque. He might even have been considered the best of all time.
Don't believe me? That is fine. But try to catch a full game when Coffey is rolling. You will see, it's amazing how you get to see do his rushed up ice. It's quite something to see.
It's a real shame his career was so terrible after Detroit. Boo to Scotty Bowman! :)
|
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 02/23/2007 : 03:45:46
I have never seen Coffey play, although my dad says he was amazing. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/19/2007 : 20:21:21
No, not too young, but it definitely reinforces my memories. One defensive play in all of those clips seems about right to capture his career in a nutshell. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 02/19/2007 : 19:47:28
A1 play...Did some of us forget or were we to young...
See the video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IWTj398LYA&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORxD2KFQ4oo&mode=related&search=
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/16/2007 : 06:51:16
Ooohh, yeah, sorry about that Puck Nuts.
|
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 20:40:56
Yes we need to throw Borje Salming into the mix...
Light travels faster than sound, this is why some people appear bright, until they speak... |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/15/2007 : 19:46:05
Does this help to make my point about his weak defensive play? 2nd worst all time even strength goals against.
Name Games ESGA GPG
Serge Savard 1038 976 0.94
Larry Murphy 1615 1541 0.95
Guy Lapointe 884 852 0.96
Brad Park 1113 1098 0.99
Brian Leetch 1072 1120 1.04
Doug Wilson 1024 1109 1.08
Al Iafrate 799 884 1.11
Randy Carlyle 1055 1208 1.15
Paul Coffey 1409 1654 1.17
Borje Salming 1148 1356 1.18
Over 100 more ESGA than he has career points. Hmmmmmm....... |
| oil guy |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 12:15:28
the title of the tread is rate paul coffey's play.
not was he the best d man.
if you watched him play you would know he was not out there as a dman.
he was an extra attacker every time he was on the ice.
would he be as good if he played today?
i think so but he would need a good stay at home dman as a partner.
the oil team he played on didnt think defense it was run and gun and as long as you got more goal than the other guys yahoo!
as a dman he maybe should not have been in the big show but as a PLAYER he was great.
the name of the game is goals and he could deliver from one end to the other on his own.
if football was played on ice with skates he would be the best running back(skating back) out there because he hit is stride so fast that he rarely could be caught.
imo
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/06/2007 : 08:00:54
Like I said, you favor defense while I favor offense. Our pairings prove that as well.
|
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 19:46:35
For pairings I'd go:
Orr and Bourque - Pretty hard to top that pair.
Robinson and Potvin - They would be absolutely devastating together. Both HUGE hitters and Potvin would add some offence.
Park and Harvey. Park is generally very under appreciated.
|
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 19:43:14
quote:
Originally posted by willus3
My list would be:
1) Orr
2) Harvey
3) Shore
4) Park
5) Bourque
6) Potvin
7) Robinson
8) Kelly
9) Chelios
10) Lidstrom
Coffey is somewhere in the 15 - 20 range. His defensive liabilities outweigh his offensive prowess by too much for me to put him higher.
I will give Coffey this; he was quite possibly the best skater i have ever seen.
Very smooth and very fast.
dude that would me my list to |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 19:39:45
No need to apologize RYSCHEVY1.
It's all just opinion anyway. Cheers! |
| ryschevy1 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 19:14:24
I apologize to Willus 3 I guess I took that the wrong way. You do have a legit point on Coffeys defensive skills though. I was looking at the scoring side of him.
GO OIL!!! YA!!! |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 19:02:03
Rather than get into another Gretzky/Orr type debate, I will leave this one to "agree to disagree." But I think I have finally figured out our differences. You put more stake in defense and I put more stake in offense. Still enjoy the debate! Here's a different spin on this. Here is my top 6 defensemen in pairings.
Orr - Bourque
Coffey - Robinson
Lidstrom - Harvey
Who are yours?? |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 17:18:12
Here's what Bowman said about Coffey.
''He's not one of my favorites,'' said Bowman, referring to Coffey as a role player. ''A guy that can skate like he can, has all that talent, why can't he play defense?'... He's not as good on the power play as people think. The main thing he can do is carry the puck up the ice, but his work at the point isn't that great.''
That's from the winningest coach of all time.
Just sayin'. |
| willus3 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 16:49:49
Coffey's point production is largely contributed to the fact that he played with the two most prolific point getters of all time. Gretz and Lemieux.
He was a fantastic offensive talent. But as you said yourself Beans, he was not very good defensively and that's precisely what a defenseman is supposed to be good at. Offense is a bonus.
Chelios is a far superior defenseman than Coffey. He's skilled at taking guys out, either with a poke check or a body check. He sees the ice well, makes great breakout passes, and contributes offensively as well. And, especially early in his career, no one liked playing against him.
Lidstom is all around great.
I don't hate the Oilers. They were a fantastic team.
American Idol is gay! |
| devilsjetsfan |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 16:41:56
have any of you guys even seen him play? ive only seen him play once or twice on a NHL classic rerun. but id say hes pretty good, judging on what i saw
Go Devils Go |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/05/2007 : 15:27:11
Coffey between 15-20?? I'm thinking you have something against the former Oiler Greats. To put guys like Chelios and Lidstrom ahead of Coffey is ridiculous. You could have arguments for some of the others. Many of them I did not see play a lot or even at all, so you may be right. Coffey was the second best offensive defenseman in history. Bourque may have had more points, but he also played more games. And play-off wise, he was the most prolific offensive defensemen in history. The only players with more Play-Off points are Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, and Anderson. (Wow, top 5 all Oilers in the 80's, coincidence?? I think not!) To put him out of the top 5 all time I might be able to swallow. But out of the top ten?? C'mon, why are you hatin so much, dog?? (Too much American Idol!!!) |
