hockey-fights.com
 Page 4 of 20 « First<4567>» Last
Username Post: NHL Top 20 All-time thread        (Topic#303764)
Holmgren
superstar
Total Posts: 3190
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
 
08-11-04 08:39 AM - Post#304813    


    In response to Badduke14

Merlin,

Simon is a hard guy to judge for a top 20 all time guy. Whenever these list are put together there is a general agreement on the top 5 or so guys then it depends on other factors, with some homer picks as well. I watched Simon
I see Blue! . . . He looks glorious!


 
dunlopyousuck
all star
Total Posts: 1136
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 09:15 AM - Post#304853    


    In response to Bridgman

Quote:

Badduke, you mention Langdon's stamina. I like Langdon a lot so my comments aren't a knock on him.

Where did stamina get him in multiple fights with Grimson? Grimson is a throwback to the old time fighters. I know 2 fights at least Grimson owned him and my memory, the Hartford fight is Langdon's biggest loss. I honestly don't see Langdon doing well against a Brown. I see Fotiu actually murdering him and I see him outpunched and outlasted!




To be honest, Langdon always handled himself fairly well against Grimson . . . in Langdon's defense, the time he was dropped by Stu (arguably his worst loss ever), Stu got the jersey over Darren's head and Langer was basically fighting blind . . . to his credit, he didn't turtle like a bitch, but stayed in the fight, allowing Stu to tee off on him . . . in the four fights I've seen between the two, I've got it Grimson with one win and one edge, and Darren with one edge and one draw . . . I definitely think Langdon could hang with anybody in any time, including Dave Brown and Nick Fotiu . . . I certainly would pick Brownie over him head to head, but I doubt he'd demolish Darren - in Langdon's prime (which is just about over), he definitely lost some, but NOBODY demolished him . . . as for Fotiu outlasting him, I would wager my house that he wouldn't . . .
 
merlin401
captain
Total Posts: 834
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 09:15 AM - Post#304854    


    In response to Holmgren

Again, I like Simon and had him in the top 10 this year too. But look at the pluses for a career. Wins against a slightly past prime Probert, a past prime Brown, and a before prime Domi; 3 years of dominance; destruction of a lot of 2nd tier fighters; and a nice rebound year almost a decade later. To me it doesn't add up to top 20.... maybe 30-35.

As for McCarthy. Would anyone care to fix this if I'm making a mistake... But he had 5 years of being great and a champion for at least part of that (in Calgary), and four years of being very good (I'd say he went from being solid top 10er in TB and Philly to a borderline top 10er for a year or two and finally maybe #8 or so in 02-03). Scrap his last two years and thats a great career!
 
merlin401
captain
Total Posts: 834
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 09:19 AM - Post#304863    


    In response to dunlopyousuck

Quote:

Quote:

Badduke, you mention Langdon's stamina. I like Langdon a lot so my comments aren't a knock on him.

Where did stamina get him in multiple fights with Grimson? Grimson is a throwback to the old time fighters. I know 2 fights at least Grimson owned him and my memory, the Hartford fight is Langdon's biggest loss. I honestly don't see Langdon doing well against a Brown. I see Fotiu actually murdering him and I see him outpunched and outlasted!




To be honest, Langdon always handled himself fairly well against Grimson . . . in Langdon's defense, the time he was dropped by Stu (arguably his worst loss ever), Stu got the jersey over Darren's head and Langer was basically fighting blind . . . to his credit, he didn't turtle like a bitch, but stayed in the fight, allowing Stu to tee off on him . . . in the four fights I've seen between the two, I've got it Grimson with one win and one edge, and Darren with one edge and one draw . . . I definitely think Langdon could hang with anybody in any time, including Dave Brown and Nick Fotiu . . . I certainly would pick Brownie over him head to head, but I doubt he'd demolish Darren - in Langdon's prime (which is just about over), he definitely lost some, but NOBODY demolished him . . . as for Fotiu outlasting him, I would wager my house that he wouldn't . . .




Completely agree here. When judging fighting ability how can you bring up the Grimson fight where he had the sweater completely over his head?? Of course he's going to lose that one! Langdon's not as good as many of the all timers but I doubt any of them out beat Langer up unless some freak thing happened (like the jersey in the Grimson fight). That being said, Langdon certainly wouldn't win many against the elite either and probably Brown, Fotiu, etc would all edge him out slightly. (and no way Fotiu outlasts Langdon... I cant see that happening)
 
Johnny_Upton
Moderator
Total Posts: 28827
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 09:59 AM - Post#304899    


    In response to merlin401

1. Probert
2. Wilson
3. Fotiu
4. Brown
5. Gillies
6. McSorley
7. Kocur
8. Carlson
9. Playfair
10. Nystrom
11. Cochrane
12. Semenko
13. Jonathan
14. Holmgren
15. Hunter
16. Grimson
17. Wensink
18. Kelly
19. Maloney
20. Domi

IMO - After the top 5, there seems to be a "drop-off". The balance of fighters can be thrown in a hopper and sorted based on any number of points one beleives to be valid
Dis somanumbatching country was founded so that the liberties of common patriotic citizens like me could not be taken away by a bunch of fargin iceholes... like yourselves.

#Filthystrong


 
the_Bulldog
Member
Total Posts: 4128
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 10:04 AM - Post#304906    


    In response to ILB

hike, as usual, has hit the points in this "yesterday vs today" debate smack on. well done buddy. i've been down this perverbial road of debate many times on this board about "bigger size = better/tougher fighter" and "today's fighters are better conditioned threfore they are better/tougher fighters" blah, blah blah ...... i'm just not in the mood right now to get into another exhaustive debate that usually ends up no further than when we started. i would, however, like to comment on some of badduke's comments, who btw, i think is a good poster and generally knows his shit, but he's wrong about a few things here:

1. you suggest that fear plays no part in this discussion about fighter rankings. i say bullshit to that. in a competitive, physical, highly emotional/adrenalin filled game like hockey, fear and intimidation can be a huge element in an enforcer's repertoire. maybe not today (because most fights lack emotion, intensity and purpose and are generally choreographed and obligatory), but years ago, fear and intimidation is what kept the opposing teams honest and generally respectful of their opponents. the game was played at a high degree of intensity and sometimes things would escalate and get out of hand. that was the opportunity for enforcers to make their case on behalf of their team. if they were successful and made players pay for their actions, word spread around the league quickly that "such and such" was legit and could/would beat the tar out of ya. a great example was jimmy mann. this is a guy that i can tell you for fact that doesn't scare easily. he's a couple of bricks short of a load on his best days and thinks nothing, to this day, about laying the hammer on somebody. he was brought in to winnipeg by john ferguson with the intent purpose of playing the enofcer role for the jets. ferguson knew a thing or two about picking out effective enforcers and good fighters. in mann's first year, he took on as many heavyweights and top level enforcers that he could get his hands on to make his mark. his reputation from the Q in junior hockey was already as good as you could get, but he wanted to try out the best of the best. he got his wish and fought semenko, playfair, plett, secord, jonathan, fraser etc. many of which multiple times - all in his first year. yet he wanted nothing to do with clark gillies and he admitted that. he had heard what gillies had done to 2 very good fighters in hospodar and hoyda and wanted no part of him. mann had also played alongside of hoyda in winnipeg and hoyda, who was a tough dude in every right, and heard first hand how tough clark gillies was. gillies therefore got room for himself and his teammates (because of that rep) from a screwball enforcer that usually would think nothing of taking on jethro. i could go on and on about the effect that gillies rep had on opposing enforcers. those that did fight him in their prime, generally were cautious about the circumstances in which to do so. the message was clear - this is a guy not to fight when he's pissed - he turns it up a huge notch and looks to kill you - and can. in the bruins/islander playoff series of 1980, those fights between gillies and taz were part of a game plan that the islanders had for terry oreilly. john wensink confirmed this in later years when talking to gillies. clark had huge respect for terry as a player and a fighter, and they thought that he was an integral part of how the bruins played on the ice. they felt that if they could bang up terry oreilly, they could demoralize the bruins et al. so, it was clark gillies who was assigned to go after terry (they matched up on the wings as well)- not because he didn't like him and wanted to hurt him, but to try and intimidate the bruins leader. terry was very tough to intimidate. he was a hockey warrior - and would fight for his team regardless of conditions/injury and who the opponent was. clark gillies wasn't truly pissed at oreilly in most of those fights - but he wanted to make a point. terry fought back hard and made his own point with the islanders that he would not be intimidated. as much as i like al secord, especially in his bruin days, secord would not have been able to stand up to gillies like terry did. secord fought gillies once and found out the hard way. both wensink and jonathan, although willing to fight gillies, will openly admit that they were reluctant to do so. therefore, the fear that gillies put into the hearts and minds of even some of the best enforcers and fighters in hockey, made them think twice about their role, and could potentially change the way they would handle a situation. i've given a couple of examples of how fear played a huge part in an enforcers repertoire. it was a reputation that had to be earned and maintained, but once established, it would change the way opposing fighters would play and/or fight in a given game. you have to remember, most top-level hockey enforcers had huge respect for their opposition. they usually played with just enough fear to keep you on edge and alert, but not fearful of turning down a fight when it was needed. however a guy like clark gillies was different to many. he outright scared them if he was to fight mad. that, in my opinion, is a big reason why gillies fight card, in his prime, is nothing earth shattering. he had fewer takers than most, and he had a longer fuse than most. but don't mistake that for him being a less-than capable fighter. you'll have a hard time convincing anybody that played against him that that was the case.

2. "today's players are better conditioned and bigger, therefore better/tougher". i'm paraphrasing here, but once again, i agree on the conditioning aspect, but nothing more. there s no question that if you have 2 fighters of equal skill and character, the guy with the better reach and power will have a decided advantage. that's why there are weight classes in professional and amateur boxing and many MMA tournaments. but what you're missing here is that you are making a huge and erroneous assumption that all bigger guys and better conditioned guys are equal in fighting skill and constitution to the guys who have less reach and pounds behind them. that's just flat out wrong, and has been proven wrong in all forms of fighting, including hockey fights, since anyone can remember. this is a whole other discussion in itself if we need to get into it. all i'm going to say though at this point is that there are a limited few fighters around today that, despite their pumped up size, have what it takes to dust off the guys that you see as being hammered easily. i just don't see it. a behmoth guy like peter worrell has long arms, but he isn't particularly strong, has poor co-ordination from what i've seen of him, doesn't have a particularly heavy punch, and his chin rarely gets tested well enough to see how tough it really is. in fact, it was only a couple of years ago how worrell was routinely criticized for "hugging". since then, he's realized that he's not going to get hurt out there these days - most guys don't want to open up and throw like they mean it. so he uses his reach to hold many smaller guys out, keeping his chin well protected. if he's fighting another "big guy", he's routinely careful not to engage himself in a real fight. he's only in trouble if a guy like langdon knows how to get inside, thwarting his reach advantage, and forcing him to actually fight. if a guy like langdon had a little more power in his punches, worrell would be tasting the ice with regularity. and peter worrell is considered one of the best around today - and i would basically agree that he is. i'm not trying to diss on him purposefully, but i can name many others who typically fall into his category. sure he'd win some fights against some of the guys you say are lunch pails, but against the better fighters from back then, i say he'd be a relatively easy mark. we can take this discussion any way you want to, but if it's anything like what has gone down on this board in the past, nothing gets agreed upon or settled. myself and a few other vets here like hike and durbano etc have one opinion, and then there is the oppositie viewpoint. i'm not looking to "convert" anybody here. just, review the facts as they are as it relates to the science of fighting, especially on skates, and draw your own conclusions ...
"He may have looked like he lost the fight, but he didn't." Diogenes 12/28/2005

"this is classic assholery at it's best". NYRfan 5/27/2008


 
Neely8
hall of famer
Total Posts: 6303
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 10:59 AM - Post#304944    


    In response to the_Bulldog

1. Probert
2. Wilson
3. Fotiu
4. Playfair
5. Nystrom
6. Kocur
7. Hunter
8. Gillies
9. Brown
10. Domi
11. Cochrane
12. Holmgren
13. Maloney
14. Wensink
15. Jonathan
16. McSorley
17. Bridgeman
18. Plett
19. O'Reilly
20. Grimson
 
Boulton
superstar
Total Posts: 3000
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 11:10 AM - Post#304957    


    In response to Neely8

Nice list Neely8!!

Hey guys--I love the heart and soul that Terry O brought to the ice every night, but putting him ahead, or close to, Playfair is ridiculous.

When Neely8, a diehard Bruins fan, has Playfair so far ahead of O'Reilly you have to ask yourself if he knows a thing or two?
"Go fuck yourself, Mr. Cheney! Go fuck yourself, you asshole!" Emergency Room Physican Dr. Ben Marble


 
Posux
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 31637
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 11:38 AM - Post#304975    


    In response to Boulton

Langdon has been dropped by Grimson twice, with his sweater being put over his head both times. Langdon beat Grimson at the Garden and their fourth fight was a draw.


 
GOON 21
superstar
Total Posts: 2779
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 12:13 PM - Post#305007    


    In response to Neely8

Hmmm so subjective but on fighting ability.. These are guys i have seen.

1. B Probert - the champ, probably the best tools/mindset EVER for a enforcer..
2. D Brown - nasty mean 6'5 lefty great in philly..
3. C Gillies - maybe best/most accurate puncher on board, if meaner could be #1
4. B Nystrom - feirce puncher, great W/L %, "hurt* Playfair!
5. S Jonathon - another great W/L %, tuff lil SOB
6. L Playfair - great right hand, tall tuff SOB
7. B Wilson - nasty ornory, great uppercut
8. N Fotiu - brought respect to NY and got respect from ALL philly team!
9. D Semenko - "young" Semenko was scary
10. T Hunter - ive seen him "dismantle" many heavies
11. M McSorley - great fighter, also great "enforcer, marathon fighter
12. T Domi - except for Brown, he beat ALL heavies of his time
13. D Brashear - yea we ALL hate him, but SOB can fight! #1 for 5 years
14. J Kocur - most KO's on board? lethal right hand
15. S Grimson - got better as he got older, top 5 guy for 6-7 yrs
16. W Plett - as youngster he + Gillies battled to draw, LOVED that he walked into Spectrum and got respect!
17. J McKenzie - most underrated fighter on board, top 5-10 guy for 10 yrs, EZ beat some good heavies
18. P Holmgam - replaced Shultz, solid heavy and good fighter
19. C Nilan - GREAT card (best ever?) only Playfair "handled" him
20. G Cochrane - mean, good fighter, but the shirtlessness helped him ALOT!


Honerable mentions - J Wensink, T Oreilly, D Langdon, B Beck, C Simon, E Cairns, G Laraque, T Twist among many!
 
Bridgman
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 9382
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 12:32 PM - Post#305022    


    In response to GOON 21

dunlopyousuck, do you have the rough years of those Grimson fights with Langer. I want to recheck them. I've got them all but tonight want to review them.
My memory has Langon getting beat in two. After that that's all the brain recalls.

Good read guys. Always interested in rankings.

I'll make an addendum to this list. HOW do you guys above formulate your rankings? What's your criteria?

And Badduke, take it as a compliment people want to see your list!


 
Posux
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 31637
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 12:47 PM - Post#305036    


    In response to Bridgman

Grimson and Langdon fought twice in the 96-97 season and twice in the 97-98 season.


 
the hammer
superstar
Total Posts: 3900
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 01:55 PM - Post#305095    


    In response to Posux

Jay Wells handled Nilan and beat him twice.
 
HABSFAN
veteran
Total Posts: 383
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 05:03 PM - Post#305281    


    In response to the hammer

Serge Roberge is my favorite of all time
 
chaser
hall of famer
Total Posts: 8410
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 05:09 PM - Post#305289    


    In response to HABSFAN

Habs, this is not a top 20 fav fighters thread.. It's the top 20 best fighters of all time.
THE ORIGINAL CHASER!!


 
HABSFAN
veteran
Total Posts: 383
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 05:31 PM - Post#305310    


    In response to chaser

roberge was one of the best & I can wright what ever the fuck I want.
 
espo
captain
Total Posts: 996
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 06:29 PM - Post#305345    


    In response to HABSFAN

I knew if I waited, Hike would save me the time of writing all that. So once again... what he said.

What if, just what if, all those stories are true? Since I came from the era when reps and intimidation went hand in hand and little guys had something to fear (they weren
 
JruGordon
superstar
Total Posts: 3949
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 06:32 PM - Post#305349    


    In response to espo

this is pointless, but espo's post in here was number 11000 in this forum

EDIT-let me clarify...this post itself, the one you are reading, is pointless...the thread is a great idea, and so was Espo's post...i apologize if anyone thought i was saying the thread or Espo's post were pointless


 
chaser
hall of famer
Total Posts: 8410
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 07:33 PM - Post#305398    


    In response to HABSFAN

Gordon, why is this "pointless"? This is some of the better debating I have seen on FC in a long time.

Habsfan, it's "write", and yes you can, but don't think you won't get called on it. I was giving you advice. Oh, and you won't fight Roberge in any top 20 list. Sorry..
THE ORIGINAL CHASER!!


 
Posux
Senior Vet
Total Posts: 31637
*
Average Post Ranks%:             
User Rank%:                       
08-11-04 07:36 PM - Post#305401    


    In response to chaser

Damn, you are stupid, Chaser.....he was saying that his statement following was pointless, not the thead!


 
 Page 4 of 20 « First<4567>» Last
Icon Legend Permissions & Sharing Options Topic Options
Print Topic


76613 Views
Follow
84 Online Now
2 viewable users and 0 hidden plus 82 guests are online now.
Ad
Recent Topics
FusionBB™ Version 3.2 | ©2003-2017 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.344 seconds.   Total Queries: 350   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT-5). Current time is 11:22 AM
Top