Lets give it up for the hammer

[solidus12]

king of culver = juha?

[king of culver]

Originally Posted by solidus12

king of culver = juha?

whittey whiting boby berry tommy williams

[schpiv]

O.K., let's get real honest in this post shall we..............Maybe Schultz's longevity comes from the fact that when someone else began to get the upper hand on Schultz, he ALWAYS got rescued either by teammates or the officials...(See the Cashman fight)

Also, look at his fight card, yes there are toughguys on that card but arguably, out of the 193 NHL fights only 42 of them would be considered legit tough guys (How we judge tough guys) And O'rielly and Howatt acount for 17 of those 42 fights.....

With 151 of those fights coming against lesser tier guys, I can see that being a huge factor in longevity...............

And before I get crucified by the heavyweights on the board, I am not saying the other guys on his card were not capable of dropping the gloves, they really are not on the same level as the other guys I include in the 42 (Orielly,Johnathan, Wilson, Maloney, Gillies, etc)

Also there are way too many fights that we really do not know if he won or lost.....maybe he got better age who knows....

As far as him having no peers for his antics, I digress........ Picard, and the Plagers were doing this stuff long before Schultz entered the NHL, yeah, Schultz gets the credit, but the Blues actually were doing this well before Dave........

[mikebflorida]

Originally Posted by schpiv

O.K., let's get real honest in this post shall we..............Maybe Schultz's longevity comes from the fact that when someone else began to get the upper hand on Schultz, he ALWAYS got rescued either by teammates or the officials...(See the Cashman fight)

Also, look at his fight card, yes there are toughguys on that card but arguably, out of the 193 NHL fights only 42 of them would be considered legit tough guys (How we judge tough guys) And O'rielly and Howatt acount for 17 of those 42 fights.....

With 151 of those fights coming against lesser tier guys, I can see that being a huge factor in longevity...............

And before I get crucified by the heavyweights on the board, I am not saying the other guys on his card were not capable of dropping the gloves, they really are not on the same level as the other guys I include in the 42 (Orielly,Johnathan, Wilson, Maloney, Gillies, etc)

Also there are way too many fights that we really do not know if he won or lost.....maybe he got better age who knows....

As far as him having no peers for his antics, I digress........ Picard, and the Plagers were doing this stuff long before Schultz entered the NHL, yeah, Schultz gets the credit, but the Blues actually were doing this well before Dave........

Schultz fought pretty much every legit tough guy of his era so I'm not sure what you're getting at. He was an enforcer and agitator and fighter of the highest caliber.

No, he didn't win every single fight, I'm still waiting for the name of the guy who DID win every single fight in the NHL but nobody ever has it. Funny.

And yeah, there were other goons in hockey, he wasn't the only one or the first one but he took it to another level. Picard and the Plagers didn't have 472 penalty minutes in a season COMBINED I don't think!

The Hammer spit, elbowed, punched, kneed, and kicked his way to arguably the greatest single season in NHL history, compiling a still record 472 penalty minutes in the regular season and another 83 in 17 playoff games as the Flyers also won the Stanley cup. He also had 9 goals and 17 assists in the regular season and 5 points in the playoffs proving that he wasn't just a goon but rather that he was THE goon who could also play a little hockey when he wasn't in the penalty box. He spent 1/10th of every game in the penalty box on average, almost 6 minutes per game. Wow!

I know not everyone likes the guy but he paved the way for the fight filled 70's, 80's, and 90's and was the key instigator on a very tough Flyers team that bullied its way to 2 cups and ushered in a whole new era of intimidating hockey. You have to admire him for that, he was more than willing to accept the job that Fred Shero gave him and went after it with a gusto never seen before. Sure, there were tough players like Ferguson, Cashman, Kurtenbach, and some others like the Plagers but they didn't do what Dave did, not even close.

[bigjack]

Originally Posted by Flyer_Frank

As a player, I think the one 20 goal year and 2 cups have gotten Schultz a little overrated in that department. His skating was OK for his day. His size was good and he did finish his checks, played hard, his hands were so-so. There were a lot of tough players in the league then who were much better players and Dave Schultz could only have had a career like Tiger, Cashman, O'Reilly in his dreams. Jack makes a fair point about Schultz getting full of himself and his act did wear thin, but I think he's overrating Schultz' skills. I don't think Schultz was overrated as a fighter though. He was one of the top guys in the league.

Dave "The Hammer" Schultz vs. Norm Macdonald - YouTube

Schultz averaged 30 points a year over 80 games with 343 penalty minutes over his career. I wrote that I feel he could of been a 40-50 point player and I wrote that for a few reasons:
One is I find it amazing that he could average 30 points a season and remember that average was lowered by his last full year where he only scored 18 points and his 1 point in 13 meaningless games playing for Scotty Bowman in 1979/80!
Schultz from 1973-78 averaged 35 points in 80 games over 5 seasons with 381 penalty minutes!
So I have no issues in writing that Schultz was basically a 35 point player with a ridiculous amount of penalty minutes. If he lowered the penalty minutes to say 200 minutes and stopped with all the misconduct penalties that caused him to sit in the penalty box with wasted minutes and focused more on hockey, I feel very comfortable writing that he could of been a 40-50 point man!
The other thing is that Hound Kelly showed us all what ice time and playing hockey could do for a guy with some hockey skills!
Remember that Fog Shero always said if Hound Kelly was scoring 20 goals then Shero was doing a poor job in using him! In other words don't play Kelly a regular shift but use him to rev up the team and the crowd in the proper moments having him run around banging guys and bouncing off them like a pinball!
In 1980/81, Hound Kelly was 31 years old and was dealt to the Capitals and played a regular shift and guess what he scored?

26 goals, 62 points with a rugged but not crazy 157 penalty minutes!

Schultz was a player like Kelly in terms of skills and with some icetime and focus on hockey playing, Hound Kelly at age 31 scored 26 goals and 62 points!

I think it is reasonable to think that Schultz could of been a 40-50 point man like a Bobby Nystrom was or Dan Maloney was!

[bigjack]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

Lot's of good points brought up by posters and some that are NOT so good.

Schultz was unique in what he did, he was bold, intimidating and at times, uncontrolable. He fought alot of tough guys in the NHL but he also JUMPED many Non-fighters as well (Dale Rolfe, Rick Middleton etc).

But as we all know, this was a part of his game, INTIMIDATION.

Could he fight? Absolutely and he was very good at it.

Could he play hockey? Yes at a respectable level.

But make no mistake about it, he was in a Flyer uniform to INTIMIDATE first and foremost. IMO, without the fear factor of his tactics, his ability to produce points would have been greatly reduced and saying that he could have been on a "power forward" level would be dramatically overstated.

I don't believe he had the skill level of some of the other guys mentioned in this thread. Certainly not in skating ability.

A sign of his impact on the times is that when you beat Dave Schultz, you almost had an instant reputation around the league.

Many of his loses have already been mentioned:

Pierre Bouchard (Second Fight, Loss), I believe they fought three times.
J.Bob Kelly (Two Fights when he was with St.Louis, both Loses)
Larry Robinson (Big National TV Loss)
Clark Gillies(Big Loss in Second fight, SAVED by Andre Dupont-Third Man)

In the marathon brawl with Harold Snepts, which was actual three separate fights, I have to give it to Snepts as he handled Schultz very well-TWICE.
He knocked him down the first time with Schultz on his back and skates in the air, he threw him down a second time before they went at it a third time, a short, non eventful bout, as they were both gased.

One fight that was NOT mentioned, however, is Schultz's loss to young Paul Holmgren when he first came back to the Spectrum. It was a beating he talked about in an interview later on. Schultz had called him out during a scrum. That decision was not a good one for Schultz.

The great toe to toe fight with Stan Jonathan was a VERY CLOSE fight and Jonathan did very well, landing some great shots on Schultz.

The fight with Behn Wilson, was a DRAW, IMO. Both tied up very well and neither landed anything major as Wilson stepped in for Andre Dupont, who later fought Schultz, I believe in the same game.

In these three fights against Holmgren, Jonathan and Wilson, as was stated earlier, it was later on in Schultz's career BUT on the other side of the coin, it was Holmgren's, Jonathan's and Wilson's "ROOKIE" NHL seasons as well.

Relevant?

IMO, the more you fight TOP FLIGHT competition at the NHL level, the better you get. (Examples: Stu Grimson, Rob Ray etc.) That's why I take a guys experience level as a key element in the big picture of the fight.

Schultz definitely made a statement in the 70's and showed a side of hockey that would entertain us for 40 years to come. For that, he will always have a place in any conversations relating to hockey fights on this site!

I hated Schultz for jumping a guy from behind like a Rick Middleton, going after a non-fighter like Rolfe, spitting on Brad Park, and yet running away from Fotiu one night at MSG as a Penguin when Nicky ran him a bunch of times and Schultz took it and did squat but as my comments show, I am being very fair and objective with Schultz! When he played hockey was a pretty good player and very good passer. Not the best finisher but he passed the puck very well and received passes very well!

[bigjack]

Originally Posted by mikebflorida

I love Dave Schultz for a lot of reasons, he took his job very seriously and made a good career for himself.

He wasn't the best fighter of his generation but he was damn good, I have him in the top 25 all time because he WAS a very good fighter, not just a mean one but he threw fast, hard, and could take a punch, he had good balance, and was one of the most intimidating players ever.

He could lose but it wasn't often and he has some of the most memorable video of any fighter, you have to admit, he certainly wasn't boring!

Wilson, Brown, and Berube rank ahead of him on the all time list for Flyer fighters but he still makes my top 25, around 22nd I think.

As for him losing to Peter Worrel, that's just a stupid argument that I get really sick of people saying, that so and so would lose to so and so because so and so was smaller and so and so was bigger and took more vitamins and didn't smoke or drink beer. Fiddlestix. A hockey fight is the same during Peter Worrel's playing days as it was during Dave Schultz's playing days, they grab on and throw punches and sure, Peter might win but certainly Schultz might win too, Worrel lost plenty of fights, so did Twist, so did Boogaard, huge guys, much bigger than Schultz in his playing days but if you could magically time warp Schultz into Worrel's era, he'd probably be a much different guy, bigger, stronger, and more level headed.

I hate those arguments. You think Nystrom wouldn't fare well in the 90's? How about Behn Wilson? Or Clark Gillies? Or Dave Schultz?

They'd be just fine. I'd love nothing more than to see Stan Jonathan whip Peter Worrel's big, dumb a$$ at 5'8 175 pounds.

I agree about yesterday's fighters and all of that! If guys like Tie Domi and Darren Langdon did fine, so would the 1970's guys who could fight! Langdon was basically the same size as Bobby Nystrom and Domi was like five feet ten for chrissakes!
George McPhee showed that if a guy can fight, he would hold his own most of the time! Some of it is matchups and styles and size but generally a guy who can throw the dukes would survive and be just fine!

[cookie monster]

Originally Posted by king of culver

its a very wide descripution hockey agitators but if the discription would be something like caused chaos every time on the ice i would agree with you on schultz and would add these players i have seen for best of each decade

50's dicky duff...ok i was 4 years old end of that decade but i rember him being nothing but trouble in rare telavised games i would see

60's eddie shack..his brief time with kings somebody was always trying to kill him..then when traded dan maloney tried to kill him

70's schultzy

80's tiger williams..captain chaos for sure

90's claude emieux..dirty but a winner

00- avery..maybe most annoying since annoying been a word

10 gravey butaplenty ..future resident of hockey hell

who the **** is gravey butaplenty?

[cookie monster]

Originally Posted by bigjack

....yet running away from Fotiu one night at MSG as a Penguin when Nicky ran him a bunch of times and Schultz took it and did squat but as my comments show, I am being very fair and objective with Schultz!

Lol....

[Flyer_Frank]

Originally Posted by bigjack

Schultz averaged 30 points a year over 80 games with 343 penalty minutes over his career. I wrote that I feel he could of been a 40-50 point player and I wrote that for a few reasons:
One is I find it amazing that he could average 30 points a season and remember that average was lowered by his last full year where he only scored 18 points and his 1 point in 13 meaningless games playing for Scotty Bowman in 1979/80!
Schultz from 1973-78 averaged 35 points in 80 games over 5 seasons with 381 penalty minutes!
So I have no issues in writing that Schultz was basically a 35 point player with a ridiculous amount of penalty minutes. If he lowered the penalty minutes to say 200 minutes and stopped with all the misconduct penalties that caused him to sit in the penalty box with wasted minutes and focused more on hockey, I feel very comfortable writing that he could of been a 40-50 point man!
The other thing is that Hound Kelly showed us all what ice time and playing hockey could do for a guy with some hockey skills!
Remember that Fog Shero always said if Hound Kelly was scoring 20 goals then Shero was doing a poor job in using him! In other words don't play Kelly a regular shift but use him to rev up the team and the crowd in the proper moments having him run around banging guys and bouncing off them like a pinball!
In 1980/81, Hound Kelly was 31 years old and was dealt to the Capitals and played a regular shift and guess what he scored?

26 goals, 62 points with a rugged but not crazy 157 penalty minutes!

Schultz was a player like Kelly in terms of skills and with some icetime and focus on hockey playing, Hound Kelly at age 31 scored 26 goals and 62 points!

I think it is reasonable to think that Schultz could of been a 40-50 point man like a Bobby Nystrom was or Dan Maloney was!

Hahaha, I think you're backpedaling a little there Jack. Nystrom averaged 23 goals over nine seasons and was almost a PPG guy in the Isles first cup run, including the cup winner. O'Reilly scored 77 and 90 points in his best back-to-back years. Cashman is a borderline HOFer in my book. Hound was definitely a better skater than Schultz and obviously had a career year when he got a regular shift in DC. Kelly's skating was pretty good for the time. His role in Philly was much more 4th line energy guy and step up when Schultz was in the box or kicked out.

I respect your opinion but Schultz was a great role player with adequate skills, at best, for his day. He probably didn't fulfill his potential as a player due to his shenanigans but we obviously have different opinions on where that upside topped out.

[GOON 21]

Originally Posted by cookie monster

Lol....

I dont want this to turn into another Fotiu thread (enough of them lol) but i have Shultz book (The Hammer) and he freely admits he wasnt fond of fighting Nick, im not sure if he was afraid but he wasnt in a hurry


Shultz was a good fighter and helped start the wick/long fuse for the game that would explode in the next coming years. He wasnt the best fighter, but he was capable of beating heavies and played a regular shift and actually sored points and contributed regularly to the team, he would get 35 or so points a season


He was a cult hero in Philly and a legend, i dont see how you can really knock the guy (think its kinda misguided) im not saying he was the best fighter but he was pretty damn good scrapper

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by bigjack

I hated Schultz for jumping a guy from behind like a Rick Middleton, going after a non-fighter like Rolfe, spitting on Brad Park, and yet running away from Fotiu one night at MSG as a Penguin when Nicky ran him a bunch of times and Schultz took it and did squat but as my comments show, I am being very fair and objective with Schultz! When he played hockey was a pretty good player and very good passer. Not the best finisher but he passed the puck very well and received passes very well!

Shultz was a TERRORIST, attacking clean, non-aggressive, good players was part of his game. NO ONE WAS SAFE ON THE ICE. That was the image he wanted to present.

It was for this reason, that EVERY TEAM needed a policeman to protect their players. A feature in the game that we hockey fight fans have enjoyed for over 40 years there after.

The thing that "disgusted" me most about the incident with Rolfe was not what Schultz did, IT WAS WHAT THE RANGERS DIDN'T DO.

They all stood by while Rolfe was beaten to a pulp by Schultz. That should never ever happen to a teamate! That is why Nick Fotiu was brought in by the Rangers!

And that is why I love the "true" enforcers there after like Bob Probert, Dave Brown, Terry O'Reilly, Nick Fotiu, Clark Gillies etc. These are the guys riding in on the white horses to protect their teamates from impending danger and allowing them to produce results for their prospective teams!!!

Schultz was smart as a fox. He knew where and when to do things and when it would be an advantage to his team. He has been called a great AGITATOR by Flyer Frank earlier in this thread and he is 100% correct. No one did it like Dave Schultz, back then or to this day.

Another point you made was about Schultz reducing his penalty minutes to be on the ice more for increased scoring opportunities.

I disagree that he would have scored more because had he "toned" down his act, he would not have received the "extra space" he was getting because of his perceived "loose canon" routine.

Yes Schultz was decent passer but he was not a great skater. Many of the guys you mentioned, including Bob Kelly, were far superior skaters.

If you look at the whole picture, Schultz did not need to be a big scorer like some of the others mentioned. He added another dimension to the Flyers and indirectly to rest of hockey for years to come!!!

[battleship25]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

Shultz was a TERRORIST, attacking clean, non-aggressive, good players was part of his game. NO ONE WAS SAFE ON THE ICE. That was the image he wanted to present.

It was for this reason, that EVERY TEAM needed a policeman to protect their players. A feature in the game that we hockey fight fans have enjoyed for over 40 years there after.

The thing that "disgusted" me most about the incident with Rolfe was not what Schultz did, IT WAS WHAT THE RANGERS DIDN'T DO.

They all stood by while Rolfe was beaten to a pulp by Schultz. That should never ever happen to a teamate! That is why Nick Fotiu was brought in by the Rangers!

And that is why I love the "true" enforcers there after like Bob Probert, Dave Brown, Terry O'Reilly, Nick Fotiu, Clark Gillies etc. These are the guys riding in on the white horses to protect their teamates from impending danger and allowing them to produce results for their prospective teams!!!

Schultz was smart as a fox. He knew where and when to do things and when it would be an advantage to his team. He has been called a great AGITATOR by Flyer Frank earlier in this thread and he is 100% correct. No one did it like Dave Schultz, back then or to this day.

Another point you made was about Schultz reducing his penalty minutes to be on the ice more for increased scoring opportunities.

I disagree that he would have scored more because had he "toned" down his act, he would not have received the "extra space" he was getting because of his perceived "loose canon" routine.

Yes Schultz was decent passer but he was not a great skater. Many of the guys you mentioned, including Bob Kelly, were far superior skaters.

If you look at the whole picture, Schultz did not need to be a big scorer like some of the others mentioned. He added another dimension to the Flyers and indirectly to rest of hockey for years to come!!!

Great post Spider' , but I know I'm splitting hairs , but Dave Brown and Bob Probert were hardly "white horse" good guys . Especially Brown, he bullied and intimidated smaller players ( not as bad as Schultz) at will. Probie as well had so many runs at the goalie, knocking around guys like Ciccarrelli, with Probert - he didn't seem to care who it was, he was a s**t disturber -that's why he had sooo many fights. But yes he did stick up for teammates and was great at that. But usually he started it with a smaller player..I remember him going after Denis Savard, Ciccarelli(pita), and dozens of other small players.... like Schultz it was part of his game INTIMIDATION. He got Savard to retaliate and high stick Probert (getting a 5 min penalty)...make no mistake Probie was gonna get in his head. Brown pretty much a goon, worthless player, instigator and was one of the best of all time.
Fotiu on occasion was a bully , he hit defenseless goalies, knocked out mild mannered vcr Kevin McCrathy ...don't get me wrong I have no problem with any of this ...I just think the only guy on the list that was a true "white horse guy" was Gillies. Almost to a fault, he was very clean and was respected for his clean play ( one of the major reasons for his low fight totals) and also if enraged he could kill you. But he rarely started stuff. Every coach told their players "leave Gillies alone" when he's mellow he's not nearly as valuable as when he was fired up.
O'Reilly is tough , mostly white hat but saw him too many times bully smaller guys ...but it wasn't because they were smaller...he treated everyone the same..wasn't really dirty but did cause an awful lot of trouble ( reason for his high fight totals). Like SAID , SPLITTING HAIRS !!

[bigjack]

Originally Posted by Flyer_Frank

Hahaha, I think you're backpedaling a little there Jack. Nystrom averaged 23 goals over nine seasons and was almost a PPG guy in the Isles first cup run, including the cup winner. O'Reilly scored 77 and 90 points in his best back-to-back years. Cashman is a borderline HOFer in my book. Hound was definitely a better skater than Schultz and obviously had a career year when he got a regular shift in DC. Kelly's skating was pretty good for the time. His role in Philly was much more 4th line energy guy and step up when Schultz was in the box or kicked out.

I respect your opinion but Schultz was a great role player with adequate skills, at best, for his day. He probably didn't fulfill his potential as a player due to his shenanigans but we obviously have different opinions on where that upside topped out.

I don't understand the backpeddling quote. I'm not changing my mind at all and am showing why my comments make alot of sense!
Nystrom was not a better skater than Schultz was and scored 39, 39, 44, 47, and 30 points between 1978 to 1983 when the league scoring really opened up and had penalty minute totals of 113, 94, 145, 103, and 98 so he was taking a regular shift and not spending over 380 minutes a year in the box like Schultz did from 1973 to 1978.
Nystrom averaged 40 points over those 5 years in a much more wideopen NHL and in the tighter checking NHL Schultz averaged 35 points with a ridiculous amount of penalty minutes!
O'Reilly did have 2 great years as you point out but basically was a 45 point scorer over his other eight full seasons!
Schultz was remarkably consistent and never had a 50 to 60 point year to make his average appear higher! His totally excessive penalty totals hurt his production in a big way because instead of playing hockey, he was wasting his time sitting out 10 minute misconduct penalties!
Schultz was the King of the misconduct penalty!
Like I wrote, I'm not saying anything crazy about Schultz like he would be a 55-80 point man but 40 to 50 points is fair and reasonable!

[bigjack]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

Shultz was a TERRORIST, attacking clean, non-aggressive, good players was part of his game. NO ONE WAS SAFE ON THE ICE. That was the image he wanted to present.

It was for this reason, that EVERY TEAM needed a policeman to protect their players. A feature in the game that we hockey fight fans have enjoyed for over 40 years there after.

The thing that "disgusted" me most about the incident with Rolfe was not what Schultz did, IT WAS WHAT THE RANGERS DIDN'T DO.

They all stood by while Rolfe was beaten to a pulp by Schultz. That should never ever happen to a teamate! That is why Nick Fotiu was brought in by the Rangers!

And that is why I love the "true" enforcers there after like Bob Probert, Dave Brown, Terry O'Reilly, Nick Fotiu, Clark Gillies etc. These are the guys riding in on the white horses to protect their teamates from impending danger and allowing them to produce results for their prospective teams!!!

Schultz was smart as a fox. He knew where and when to do things and when it would be an advantage to his team. He has been called a great AGITATOR by Flyer Frank earlier in this thread and he is 100% correct. No one did it like Dave Schultz, back then or to this day.

Another point you made was about Schultz reducing his penalty minutes to be on the ice more for increased scoring opportunities.

I disagree that he would have scored more because had he "toned" down his act, he would not have received the "extra space" he was getting because of his perceived "loose canon" routine.

Yes Schultz was decent passer but he was not a great skater. Many of the guys you mentioned, including Bob Kelly, were far superior skaters.

If you look at the whole picture, Schultz did not need to be a big scorer like some of the others mentioned. He added another dimension to the Flyers and indirectly to rest of hockey for years to come!!!

Schultz could of still played very tough and mean and yet smart like a Clark Gillies did. Schultz would of scored alot more if he wasn't wasting his playing time sitting out wasted meaningless 10 minute misconduct penalties for his antics that delayed the game for like 10 minutes!
Nystrom was plenty tough getting around 100 minutes a season and Gordie Howe used to get tons of room on the ice and he wasn't a fighter and didn't spend 380 minutes a year in the box!
Scott Stevens as a Devil really cut down his stupid penalties and yet was really mean and intimidating and a huge force on the ice! He was a 200+ penalty minute guy as a Capital and yet in his last 10 years as a Devil only went over 100 minutes twice with 100 and 103 and yet was one rat bastard SOB to play against! He wasn't more mellow, he was just very smart and kept his emotions under control and his ass out of the penalty box!