Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

52177Re: Plante & Parent 1971

Expand Messages
  • nybos1974
    Aug 8, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks Lloyd, that explains a lot. The New York papers didn't delve
      into this much and it was hard to know if it was a controversial
      decision or not at the time. It may have been more controversial in
      Toronto, obviously.

      As for the defencemen, I thought Jim Dorey was playing well then and
      hadn't heard any complaints about him.

      Jay

      --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, Lloyd Davis <ldaviseditor@...> wrote:
      >
      > In the Toronto Star on April 14, Jim Proudfoot wrote that the
      Rangers
      > had been targeting Bob Baun, who had missed the last six games of
      the
      > 1970-71 season due to neck and back injuries. He quoted Ted Irvine
      as
      > saying "I think we're finally getting to Bobby Baun just a little
      > bit," and "He's the guy we've got to go after, because he's the
      key
      > to their defence." Bear in mind, the rest of the Leafs defence
      were
      > fairly green.
      >
      > In the same day's Star, Red Burnett commented, "In the past, when
      > Leafs faced a win-or-else obstacle, coach John McLellan called on
      > goalie Jacques Plante, veteran miracle worker, to pull the team
      out
      > of the skid.
      >
      > "On those occasions, however, Plante was replacing a shaky Bruce
      > Gamble, now with Philadelphia Flyers. This time, he will be called
      on
      > to improve on a brilliant Parent. And, goal was the one place
      Leafs
      > looked respectable last night."
      >
      > "However, Plante has the knack of settling down Leafs' young
      > defencemen. And, for this reason, one has to figure the veteran
      will
      > get the assignment in this win-or-pack-up contest."
      >
      > In game 5, Ted Irvine scored 34 seconds into the first period. He
      was
      > on the checking line, which Emile Francis started to neutralize
      the
      > Henderson-Ullman-Ellis line. "[Parent] made three saves before
      Irvine
      > sank his own rebound."
      >
      > Burnett wrote that the Rangers defence "played solid, clever
      hockey.
      > They either sent their forwards away with quick, smooth passes or
      > lugged the puck out of danger. By comparison, the Leaf defenders,
      > with the exception of Baun, were guilty of too much stickhandling
      > near their goal crease. This created havoc for Parent and anchored
      > the forwards."
      >
      > The next day, Milt Dunnell of the Star wrote: "So what does
      McLellan
      > hope to gain by making a change? It's strictly a psychological
      thing,
      > professor. Now that the Rangers are congratulating themselves on
      > getting rid of the Parent hex, which was a hangover from his days
      in
      > Philadelphia, maybe Plante will throw them out of gear.
      >
      > "There is also the possibility that McLellan might be thinking of
      > next season. He wouldn't want to send Jacques into summer quarters
      > suffering from a suspicion that his services no longer are
      > appreciated in these parts. ..."
      >
      > So we have a few possibilities which are not mutually exclusive:
      1)
      > that McLellan just wanted to throw something different at the
      > Rangers; 2) that McLellan had a habit of turning to Plante in big
      > games; 3) that Plante had a positive effect on a disorganized
      defence
      > corps (a role Baun also played), and with him in net the Rangers
      > might not get fourth chances the way they had against Parent in
      game 5.
      >
      >
      > Lloyd Davis
      > ldaviseditor@...
      > --
      >
    • Show all 10 messages in this topic