A weekly exercise in ranking fighters... This week-Stan Jonathan

[BENNETTWOLF]

Speaking of hypotheticals, Jim Mckenzie vs jonathan would be a phenomenal case of "all things being equal, a good big man beats a good smaller man". Among the cream of the crop at fluidly switching hands.

Personally, i think he's do fine with rob ray. Ray was a wide open, one handed fighter with great heart, chin, stamina and speed but stan was more versatile and could handle ray's power (most likely). Not big enough to outsize stan, i see some great slugfests and a few where ray would have fits trying to fend off jonathan from tying him up and varying his offense.

Hell. jonathan made behn wilson look somewhat awkward

[Johnny Pie]

BW thats what I mean about hypothetical fights. They can be interesting but in my opinion can't be the deciding factor in rankings. You can only rate guys on who they fought and who was available at the time. Hockey fights are not like boxing matches. In a 30 second fight anything can happen between good fighters but logically its hard to say a 5'8 fighter like Jonathan would beat a guy who has him by 7 inches and 45 pounds. In a boxing match no way a 160 pound middle is beating a 200 pound heavy. In hockey a couple of punches and a tumble to the ice and the little guy wins. Anyone thats been in a hockey fight knows one slip or missed punch and you lose. Stan did so many things well that make a good hockey fighter. Switch hands,hard to hit clean, great balance, quick hands ,strong etc. so I can see him winning any fight he is involved in. But it is still hard to say he could definetly handle fighters that much bigger on a regular basis.

[BENNETTWOLF]

More "blurb"

I was wrong about SJ peaking at #2 according to merlin but he did have two seasons at #3.

Yeah, i certainly don't use hypotheticals as a ranking criteria. More like an arcane, hidden formula akin to how the NFL awards compensatory draft picks. I did want to mention those two because they'd be interesting to envision. I actually think jonathan would fare very well vs ray and they'd have a few slam bang rousers like maxwell-jonathan.

Ray, who has grown on me is in my top 35 as well but i have stan actually higher. There's a plethora of interesting arguments there for both men. Ray has a superior card and holds more "big time" wins over notable fighters but a drastically different winning percentage, even discounting his early career. The "chicken or the egg", fight a better class of opponents= less wins. For what it's worth, he also only ranked in the "guide" top 10 here four times.........as did jonathan.

Hey, i like robbie (though i thought him an assclown when he played). A one team guy who fought with all heart, depending on his chin and offense to see him through. Gave up his face and figured he'd either shake you up or outpoint you. Two guys cut from different cloth who had a warrior mentality in common. I think he'd get outtricked, outslicked and, for the most part, outfought.

It's only my opinion but i have SJ still holding the edge among two guys automatically in my top 40 list to whittle down. I hate ragging on anyone but putting stan in the "lower third of the top 100" is an injustice to one of the very best of his era, most unique packages ever and a guy who barely lost any fights.

[edwardraffoni]

[quote=srehm1;2469207][quote]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

First off before anything, I want to say this. I think it does a great dis-service to Stan J if we go on comparing him to Domi, myself included.

For Pete's sake Wendl Clark was the same height and weight as Domi
Domi 5' 10 213 lbs
Clark 5' 11 200



I don't know, bbbb. SJ and domi had similar builds, very short and stocky. Both seemed to have very squat features. Short arms, short legs. Both carried HW/enforcer reputations. Clark was a little taller, leaner. A powerforward who took on all kinds, big or small but not necessarily a designated enforcer type. Jonathan and Domi being short, squat HW's makes the comparison natural to me.

Srehm,allow me to add my two cents. I'd rank Jonathan somewhere between 50-60. He was talented,courageous, and tough. However, I believe Miller, O'Reilly, and Wensink, were bigger and better. I'll take Wensink for my all time best Bruin fighter. He lost very few. He looked and acted like a true warrior.

[GIANTSFAN]

Miller for me will go down as the best fighter the Bruins had. His stamina was incredible, he could take punishment & had decent power in his punch. Also, his fight card is very good.

[edwardraffoni]

Originally Posted by srehm1

When I sat down and ranked the greatest bruins fighters of all-time a few years back, I thought Stan was the best, edging out jay Miller. He was a small fighter- 5'8, 175? That's insane considering the kind of reputation he had. He was sort of a precursor to Tie Domi, very small and seemed to use it to his advantage. Stan had that low center of gravity and could pull bigger fighters into him as he threw punches. He switched hands very well, fluidly in fact. He also had some pop in those punches as well. He had a great chin-I think he was dropped the one time by Clark Gillies. He seemed to relish the open fights where he could really let loose. I remember him battling behn Wilson and he had that smile on his face after the fight was over. he said something to Wilson. i always thought he said something like "Now that's a fight!" he just seemed like the consumate battler, unafraid and always willing.

He had some nice wins during his run with Boston-all the more impressive to me because of his diminutive stature. Of course there was the pierre Bouchard bloodletting, his win over Paul Stewart, andre dupont, Clackson, Nilan, the aformentioned battle with Behn wilson, the playoff fight with dave schultz in his rookie year and that great battle with Brad Maxwell. He had some good battles and vaulted into a few top-10's during his run with boston. I've always considered the Bouchard fight as one of the most memorable fights in bruins history. talk fights with any bruins fan and that fight will get mentioned right away.

Jonathan only had 4,5 losses in his career and he really had only one clear cut loss (Gillies). In about 80 or so fights that's not bad. i think he has about 50 or so fights on tape from what i can recall. that is a small amount of losses in his career and puts him in elite company.

Jonathan had a fairly short career. He played 6 seasons and very small parts of two others. that was it. i have always felt that this costs him somewhat when compared to some of the long term enforcers we would see down the road in the 80's and 90's.

Jonathan also had a habit of body slamming fighters. he was so small, pit bull-like, that he would just go for the slam. I don't really knock him for it too much. I guess being his size, I'm willing to let something like that go but I have heard it brought up plenty in the past as a knock on him. i don't know, I certainly don't think he's in mick vukota territory or anything like that.

At one time, I ranked him in the mid teens but he has since fallen off. He has slipped for me and i sometimes scratch my head when i try to find a spot for him.

So i open this up to the board to see what range he would fall into. Same options as usual:

a)1-5
b)6-10
c)11-15
d)16-20
e)21-25
f)26-30

Thanks, guys.

Srehm, at one time when Cherry was coaching the Bruins, he had four tough guys on his bench, O'Reilly,Jonathan,Secord, and Wensink. This was a strong group of fighters he had at his disposal. I think Cherry,although he loved all four, thought Wensink was his best. At the beginning of certain games, Cherry would start John Wensink at left wing, just to let the other team and not to fool with R,know that any transgressions would be dealt with quickly. He just wanted to let the other team know that Big Bad John was around and not to fool with Raooooool. I know Flaman, O'Reilly,Jay Miller.and a few others were close, but I'll take Wensink. We all have our favorites. He's mine. I think he was probably Don's favorite ,too.

[srehm1]

At their very peaks-Jonathan was the best bruins fighter in my eyes. Better than wensink, better than O'Reilly, better than Miller/Byers etc. None of those guys rated as high as Jonathan as a top-10 fighter (although a few were close). I thought wensink was a mad man. wild and unpredictable. Not a ton of fights to really go on. maybe 25 or so fights as a bruin on tape? jonathan had more. seemed very steady. wensink had 3 real seasons as a Bruin.

I just checked on merlin's top-10 threads and no other bruins fighter rated as high as jonathan for a single season. in fact merlin ranked him #3 for two seasons. wensink rated as high as #4 and then seemed to fade as far as the top-10 goes. O'reilly was kind of a top-6-10 type at his peak, miller cracked a top-5 once.

I'm just going off their absolute peaks. obviously miller and o'reilly's cards are far better but at their best just didn't rank as highly as jonathan. just my opinion.

ed-cherry loved those guys like they were his own sons!

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by GIANTSFAN

Miller for me will go down as the best fighter the Bruins had. His stamina was incredible, he could take punishment & had decent power in his punch. Also, his fight card is very good.

Giantsfan, where would you rank jonathan all-time?

[edwardraffoni]

Originally Posted by edwardraffoni

Srehm, at one time when Cherry was coaching the Bruins, he had four tough guys on his bench, O'Reilly,Jonathan,Secord, and Wensink. This was a strong group of fighters he had at his disposal. I think Cherry,although he loved all four, thought Wensink was his best. At the beginning of certain games, Cherry would start John Wensink at left wing, just to let the other team and not to fool with R,know that any transgressions would be dealt with quickly. He just wanted to let the other team know that Big Bad John was around and not to fool with Raooooool. I know Flaman, O'Reilly,Jay Miller.and a few others were close, but I'll take Wensink. We all have our favorites. He's mine. I think he was probably Don's favorite ,too.

Srehm,being a hockey fight fan, and a life long Bruins fan, I had the oppurtunity to see O'reilly ,Miller, Jonathan, Brian Curran, and John Wensink, among others ,come into the NHL. I had great expectations for all of them, and they didn't disappoint. But to me, none fought better and struck fear into BRUINS opponents better than John Wensink. The guy had quite a presence. Again,just my opinion.

[TheBoogeyman]

Originally Posted by GIANTSFAN

Miller for me will go down as the best fighter the Bruins had. His stamina was incredible, he could take punishment & had decent power in his punch. Also, his fight card is very good.

Miller and punching power? No doubt Miller was a great fighter but I thought he was known as a pillow puncher around the league?

[mikebflorida]

Curious where Shawn Thornton ranks among Bruin tough guys?

[Johnny Pie]

Originally Posted by srehm1

At their very peaks-Jonathan was the best bruins fighter in my eyes. Better than wensink, better than O'Reilly, better than Miller/Byers etc. None of those guys rated as high as Jonathan as a top-10 fighter (although a few were close). I thought wensink was a mad man. wild and unpredictable. Not a ton of fights to really go on. maybe 25 or so fights as a bruin on tape? jonathan had more. seemed very steady. wensink had 3 real seasons as a Bruin.

I just checked on merlin's top-10 threads and no other bruins fighter rated as high as jonathan for a single season. in fact merlin ranked him #3 for two seasons. wensink rated as high as #4 and then seemed to fade as far as the top-10 goes. O'reilly was kind of a top-6-10 type at his peak, miller cracked a top-5 once.

I'm just going off their absolute peaks. obviously miller and o'reilly's cards are far better but at their best just didn't rank as highly as jonathan. just my opinion.

ed-cherry loved those guys like they were his own sons!

Of course this is just my opinion but If you look at Oreilly between the 75-76 and 76-77 seasons he was just about undefeated. In that time he beat Schultz 3x [twice in LA] , Holmgren, Dupont, Howatt, Snepsts twice Draw in toe to toe with Wolfman Jack,Williams, Bert Wilson among others like Anderson, H Bennett. In fact going into the 77 season he had that great preseason game vs the Flyers where he beat Holmgren twice according to the reports. I love Stan but Terry was the number 1 guy on that team. Career wise like you stated Oreilly's card is much better but even at their peaks I believe Terry was tops. Wensink in my opinion is like Fotiu in that their Reps were always more impressive then their actual fights. Of course I couldn't get enough of Wire but he is a little below Taz and Stanley in my opinion. I don't know anything about Merlins rating that you mentioned but Remember back in the early 70's Cashman was said to be NHL champ but I don't think that puts him above Stan or Terry. Stan was a top fighter but even he acknowledged that Terry was the #1 guy. At their peaks it is very close but I still give Taz the nod. Just my opinion.

[BENNETTWOLF]

Yeah, the all time best bruin fighter (of the era we generally cover here) is an interesting debate. Maybe both Terry O and cashman suffer a bit by peaking in the early to mid 70's. I always like jonathan for the exceedingly few losses and in holding his own with Behn Wilson, he indicated just how capable he was.

Wensink's bruin footage is spottier, highlighted by beating a (possibly) fading "battleship" kelly and drawing with underrated toughnut Dave Hoyda who lost very few known fights.

O'reilly had such an outstanding card and holds victories over a lot of the most feared, top guys of his era like schultz, gillies, maloney and others etc. I guess i've always been ultra impressed by jonathan's winning percentage and possibly by the fact i grew up watching the aging terry...........even my tapes cover from the islander series etc. Maybe i'm more influenced by seeing him lose more often on those first (beloved) tapes. The guy i saw at his best is more of from other sites.

Certainly one of the best triumvrates in their late 70's prime and a worthy debate.............mainly for bruin fans

[BENNETTWOLF]

Before i "DYG" it, what were jonathan's "losses" besides gillies, brad maxwell and Jim Nill? Was it Scott Garland that's credited with edging him as well? Annoying that i've watched so many of his fights and can't automatically recall. Was schultz given an edge in that fine bout? It always looked like a possibility but the clip quality has never been quite good enough to not want to cop out and call it a draw.

Just checked; DYG reminded me it wasn't scott garland but Kurt Walker of the leafs whose credited with besting stan. I knew i'd seen both and the "other" loss was by a slim margin as usual. Schultzie is given credit for the win as well.

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by Johnny Pie

I don't know anything about Merlins rating that you mentioned but Remember back in the early 70's Cashman was said to be NHL champ but I don't think that puts him above Stan or Terry.

If you go into the remember when forum there is a sticky thread called 'lineage of the heavyweight championship and top-10 lists'. I find it a very good reference source. It certainly isn't the end all be all of hockey rankings, but it's the only fully thought out and broken down year by year ranking list on the net. I believe it starts with teh 74-75 season. It was also put together by merlin who is a guy who's opinion i hold in high regard. Of course the Ny fighters are ranked way too high. check it out.

Never heard of cashman as champ before.