Is Brashear #1 all-time?

[RetardedChimp]

Originally Posted by Boston Garden

This is a bit off topic and I'm sure it has been brought up before....but when you make out your top 10 lists do you ever think about how Boogaard or MacIntyre could probably beat them all or win a 10 fight series against them?

Now, I'm not suggesting that they get top 10 consideration due to their limited body of work. But does that alone get them some sort of consideration higher than they normally would?

Or do you agree or disagree that they would probably handle those in the top 10 more often than not?

Just curious...

Completely off topic but legitimate question so you may want to start a new thread. It's been asked before but a lot of the old guys are 'untouchable' (to steal BBBB's thing), even though they would most likely lose to someone like Boogaard or MacIntyre more often than not.

[Bob Probert]

answe= no

[flex_buff_chest]

Going over his body of work you can make an argument for Brash to be #1 all time.

Probie nut huggers need to step off.

[Gunslinger]

Uhhh......no.

[flex_buff_chest]

Originally Posted by Gunslinger

Uhhh......no.

Um....yes.

[flex_buff_chest]

People lose their minds if you question Proberts supremacy and they need to stop it.

Brashear was very effective for many years.

Straight out fighting ability you could take Probert for sure. Enforcing ability? I would personally take Brashear over Probert. Why? He had a screw loose...you never know what he'd do.

[mikebflorida]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

People lose their minds if you question Proberts supremacy and they need to stop it.

Brashear was very effective for many years.

Straight out fighting ability you could take Probert for sure. Enforcing ability? I would personally take Brashear over Probert. Why? He had a screw loose...you never know what he'd do.

Probert was effective for many years with Probert fighting to win and Brashear fighting not to lose in many cases. He "won" a lot of fights by hugging and a few noogies to the back of the head followed by falling down or having the zebras come in, so many cheap victories.

And why would you take Brashear over Probert as an enforcer? Probert is without question one of the best in history who also had a screw loose on the ice and he would enforce aggressively and without regard for his own body while Brashear was kooky for sure, I don't see him anywhere near the same league as Probert or Brown for that matter. I'd take Brash over Laraque as an enforcer but not really anyone else in my top 10.

And you said yourself that Probert is the better fighter. Not sure what you're getting at.

You can make a case for Brashear for #1 if you really, really want to, hell, I can make a case for a lot of guys to be number but it aint going to happen because I know Probert, Wilson, Brown, Laraque, McKenzie, and McSorley are already ranked ahead of Brashear so if I ranked Brashear ahead of all of them, it would be because I had some kind of personal bias because his style and record don't equate to him being the best NHL fighter of all time and never will no matter how many videos someone throws up here. It can be shot down so easily.

Brashear had a great career, worthy of the top 10 but that's where it should end and stay, he wasn't the best.

[cookie monster]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

Going over his body of work you can make an argument for Brash to be #1 all time.

Probie nut huggers need to step off.

And Brashear did it without cocaine. Probert was a mediocre fight after he quit cocaine as Ken "glass jaw" Belangers beating proved.

Brashears anger came from a very dark place. Proberts came from straw.

[flex_buff_chest]

Originally Posted by mikebflorida

Probert was effective for many years with Probert fighting to win and Brashear fighting not to lose in many cases. He "won" a lot of fights by hugging and a few noogies to the back of the head followed by falling down or having the zebras come in, so many cheap victories.

And why would you take Brashear over Probert as an enforcer? Probert is without question one of the best in history who also had a screw loose on the ice and he would enforce aggressively and without regard for his own body while Brashear was kooky for sure, I don't see him anywhere near the same league as Probert or Brown for that matter. I'd take Brash over Laraque as an enforcer but not really anyone else in my top 10.

And you said yourself that Probert is the better fighter. Not sure what you're getting at.

You can make a case for Brashear for #1 if you really, really want to, hell, I can make a case for a lot of guys to be number but it aint going to happen because I know Probert, Wilson, Brown, Laraque, McKenzie, and McSorley are already ranked ahead of Brashear so if I ranked Brashear ahead of all of them, it would be because I had some kind of personal bias because his style and record don't equate to him being the best NHL fighter of all time and never will no matter how many videos someone throws up here. It can be shot down so easily.

Brashear had a great career, worthy of the top 10 but that's where it should end and stay, he wasn't the best.

Fighting/Enforcing are often two separate skills. Laraque is one of the greatest FIGHTERS of all time but he lacked the skills to be a proper enforcer.

[mikebflorida]

Originally Posted by cookie monster

And Brashear did it without cocaine. Probert was a mediocre fight after he quit cocaine as Ken "glass jaw" Belangers beating proved.

Brashears anger came from a very dark place. Proberts came from straw.

Really??

That's pretty low.

I guess I could say that Brashear's rage came from steroids? And his stregth and speed? He sure did improve quite quickly after running away from people and losing badly his first few years. Kind of fishy but that's how Twist became champ right and apparently we all accept that?

Cocaine doesn't give you a competitive advantage, it will give you a nice wake up call, the same thing you can get from about a dozen cups of coffee but much faster.

Steroids give you a big advantage and Probie was fighting a lot of guys suspected of juicing and still doing well at an advanced age and he was still kicking butt after he got clean so that's just horse $hit.

[mikebflorida]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

Fighting/Enforcing are often two separate skills. Laraque is one of the greatest FIGHTERS of all time but he lacked the skills to be a proper enforcer.

I mentioned that in my post.

You want to make a separate top whatever list of enforcers, be my guest, I generally believe that when we are in discussion, we are talking about the best FIGHTERS not enforcers.

Jim McKenzie was an outstanding fighter but to me, not a very good enforcer, not mean enough, neither was Laraque.

To me, Dave Brown was the ultimate enforcer or at least the guy I would model one after but Probert played on the top lines so he was on the ice to protect Yzerman and company and he did it as well as anyone.

Brashear was a beer league player playing low minutes who would fight the other team's tough guy because that's what he got paid to do and he did it well but if you had a roster to fill with one spot for an enforcer, you'd be crazy to take Brashear over Probert. You'd be fired as GM.

[rondo]

With all due respect to brashear who had a great and long career the easy answer is no. Most knowledgable have Probert as number #1 and that to me is obvious. Probert is what a champ is all about . His wins, losses and redemption fights are the stuff of legend. His courage and abilities are unquestioned.

If brashear would have fought the first 12 years (not to lose) the way he did the last 2-3 years I may have him ranked higher. I feel brashear opened up his last few seasons and was fighting to win and win big. However he was also tko'd 3 times which leads me to believe brash knew what he was doing those first 11-12 years.

If someone can show me footage (some wars) and convince me otherwise I would be willing to listen but I think I have seen enough to know that he is certainly not #1 but probably top ten.

[Cat Smasher]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

Straight out fighting ability you could take Probert for sure. Enforcing ability? I would personally take Brashear over Probert. Why? He had a screw loose...you never know what he'd do.

I think 99% of the knowledgeable would disagree with you about the enforcing part, not taking anything away from Brash, but I would for sure rather have a prime Probert enforcing for me.

[flex_buff_chest]

Originally Posted by Cat Smasher

I think 99% of the knowledgeable would disagree with you about the enforcing part, not taking anything away from Brash, but I would for sure rather have a prime Probert enforcing for me.

That's totally fair. I'm not here to dispute how great probert was.

[Cat Smasher]

Originally Posted by flex_buff_chest

That's totally fair. I'm not here to dispute how great probert was.

Besides you all are wrong, Wendy is #1.