What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Russell Jaslow said:
It still to this day makes me sick whenever I see Brad Park in a Bruins uniform. Even though he played a heck of a lot of years in Boston.
Click to expand...

And continues to. Still plays in alumni games.;)

When Ratelle's number was retired by the Rangers, I looked up the Rangers' retired numbers and didn't see Park. What's with that? Did I miss something?
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

CLS said:
Yup. Don't mean to set you off but ....

Brady and the Patriots.

I'd also add Russell and the Celtics, but that's from a different era.
Click to expand...

I think it's easier in basketball for one player to make a huge impact. How deep off the bench do teams typically go? 2-3 at most as far as impact is concerned?

In hockey, even if you shorten the bench, you still need to roll at least three lines and two sets of defensemen. And of course, football heavily relies on completely different set of players for offense and defense as well as special teams. So, players there only have a chance to impact one side of the ball, and if the other side sucks, it doesn't matter how great that one player is.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

CLS said:
When Ratelle's number was retired by the Rangers, I looked up the Rangers' retired numbers and didn't see Park. What's with that? Did I miss something?
Click to expand...

I've always wondered about that. And if you're going to retire Ratelle's number for being on the GAG line, why isn't Vic Hadfield's number retired? Heck, he was only the sixth player at the time to score 50 goals in a season.

Wait a second. I just read that Hadfield's number is going to be retired next season. Hadfield was my favorite player when I was young, so now I'm happy.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

CLS said:
Yup. Don't mean to set you off but ....

Brady and the Patriots.

I'd also add Russell and the Celtics, but that's from a different era.
Click to expand...

I guess with Brady and LeBron we'll need to wait to see if after they retire their teams turn back into sh-t.

Here's hoping.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Kepler said:
That's a good question. Is Michael Jordan the single most important player to any franchise in its history?

Can anybody think of someone comparable? Am I missing somebody obvious? LeBron and Cleveland?
Click to expand...

Ruth. The Yankees might not become the Yankees without him. It may have been the Red Sox that become the Yankees.

It’s possible a modern day player will have that effect, but we won’t know for 30 years.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Russell Jaslow said:
I think it's easier in basketball for one player to make a huge impact. How deep off the bench do teams typically go? 2-3 at most as far as impact is concerned?

In hockey, even if you shorten the bench, you still need to roll at least three lines and two sets of defensemen. And of course, football heavily relies on completely different set of players for offense and defense as well as special teams. So, players there only have a chance to impact one side of the ball, and if the other side sucks, it doesn't matter how great that one player is.
Click to expand...

Yup, agree completely. Many more examples in basketball than any other sport, even on the college level.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

dxmnkd316 said:
Ruth. The Yankees might not become the Yankees without him.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean but that's not what I mean. I mean the player who is over all time the greatest contributor to that franchise. Not The Founder or The Inspiration. Not Ruth or Russell or Seaver or Unitas or Jim Brown.

Well, maybe Jim Brown. Haven't all the other Browns sucked?
 
Last edited:
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Kepler said:
I know what you mean but that's not what I mean. I mean the player who is over all time the greatest contributor to that franchise. Not The Founder or The Inspiration. Not Ruth or Russell or Seaver or Unitas or Jim Brown.

Well, maybe Jim Brown. Haven't all the other Browns sucked?
Click to expand...
I mean the player who is over all time the greatest contributor to that franchise.
Click to expand...
For the Boston Bruins franchise it'd be Bobby Orr.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

IMHO, basketball is almost the in-between of a team sport and as opposed to an individual sport, especially in today's NBA. Then again, Jordan didn't start winning championships until Scottie Pippen developed the skills to assist Jordan. Prior to this Jordan would try and beat teams by himself, he almost did that in one playoff game against the '86 Celtics. In the 1 3/4 seasons in between the three-peats where Jordan was "retired", the Bulls went from champions to good (not great).

LeBron? I feel is similar on a smaller scale, he won one championship for Cleveland, a city that is championship starved.

Brady? As a Jets fan, I will begrudge that he is a special player, but I feel for NFL teams, coaches deserve more credit. As I will remind Patriot fans, they still won 11 games with Matt Cassel as quarterback when Brady was injured. Even if Brady retires, the Patriots won't return to crap until Belichick retires.

Messier? the Oilers still won the Cup in 1990, what made the Edmonton run special was that Messier would be the top star on any team except his own until Gretzky got traded.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

SonofSouthie said:
For the Boston Bruins franchise it'd be Bobby Orr.
Click to expand...

He's the Inspiration, sure. But in terms of the all-time MVP, the Bruins have so many outstanding players that Orr is pretty low. Bourque alone probably steals about a third of his weight. It's the Ruth problem. Any given Yankee has a negligible overall score precisely because they have such a rich history.

The thing that's amazing about Jordan is that the Bulls are not a young franchise. It's easy to be a dominant all-time MVP of a 7-year old expansion team. But you need not only to be great but also to have played on a historically sh-tty team to be a true heavyweight. There just aren't that many.

Since the NBA is probably where the single most dominant alltime MVP is found, here is a list of each team's greatest. I have no idea whether the list is any good -- it's the internet so I'm guessing... no.

Top 10:

1. Jordan, Chi
2. James, Mia
3. James, Clv
4. Kareem, Mil
5. Shaq, Orl
6. Duncan, SA
7. Magic, LA (is that even right?)
8. Russell, Bos
9. Wilt, GS
10. Olajuwon, Hou

James' problem is right there -- split between two teams. Kareem and Shaq and Wilt have the same issue. Duncan or Olajuwon? Maybe Dominique Wilkins for the Hawks? I just don't know enough basketball. LA and Bos have the Ruth problem.

God, the Knicks are ripe for somebody coming in and just ripping down the house. Maybe around the year 2060.
 
Last edited:
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

CommAvHusky said:
...

Brady? As a Jets fan, I will begrudge that he is a special player, but I feel for NFL teams, coaches deserve more credit. As I will remind Patriot fans, they still won 11 games with Matt Cassel as quarterback when Brady was injured. Even if Brady retires, the Patriots won't return to crap until Belichick retires.
Click to expand...

Fair argument CAH, and until this year I'd agree with you. But that 11-win season was against a pathetic schedule -- a perfect storm of a weak AFC division and NFC division on their schedule (sorry, don't remember specifics). The whole AFC East, crapshow that it is, had a good year; the 11 wins wasn't even good enough for the Pats to make the playoffs that year. While we'll never know for sure, I think that the Pats would have won 14 or 15 that year with Brady.

Also, it's fair to say that the first few wins were as much the defense as the offense.

But it's also fair to argue that the Pats should have won this years SB with better coaching.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

For bouncyball, BOS and LA in their many heydays had more than one superstar. They were LOADED with talent, dare I say each top starting lineup were insanely good. There weren't just 1-2 guys that made a difference, like Shaq or Jordan or LeBron. This may sound blasphemous, but Jordan (while being the GOAT) still had Pippen, who would have been the superstar on most any other team.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

But in terms of the all-time MVP, the Bruins have so many outstanding players that Orr is pretty low.
Click to expand...
Considering Bobby Orr revolutionized the defenceman position and the argument of greatest hockey player of all time has come down to him and Gretzky, you're out of your mind.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

SonofSouthie said:
Considering Bobby Orr revolutionized the defenceman position and the argument of greatest hockey player of all time has come down to him and Gretzky, you're out of your mind.
Click to expand...

You don't understand the question.

It's not the tallest building, it's the tallest building relative to the rest of the skyline.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Please don't make this a Boston d-ck measuring contest. Let them have their bank shill house pet.

The point is NOT, for once, that Boston sucks. It's that Boston hasn't sucked -- they have other greats so while Orr is one of them he doesn't tower the way Jordan does.
 
Re: 122 Franchises Ranked Bottom to Top:

Brenthoven said:
For bouncyball, BOS and LA in their many heydays had more than one superstar. They were LOADED with talent, dare I say each top starting lineup were insanely good. There weren't just 1-2 guys that made a difference, like Shaq or Jordan or LeBron. This may sound blasphemous, but Jordan (while being the GOAT) still had Pippen, who would have been the superstar on most any other team.
Click to expand...

I have rarely followed the NBA for quite some time now (as far as I care, the best TEAM basketball and championships were won by the Knicks), but I always saw Pippen as the quintessential support player. I never saw him as able to be the leading star on a team. Nothing wrong with that. He played his role extremely well, was the key final piece to the Bulls' dynasty, and got paid handsomely for it. Now, if only we can get North Korea to keep him...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top