Serge Savard vs. Guy Lapointe

Who is the better player, Serge Savard or Guy Lapointe? Here's my analysis.

Offense. Lapointe is clearly the better offensive player (especially goal-scoring); he was a catalyst on the Habs' powerplay and had one of the best slapshots in the league. Both had good breakout passes; Lapointe was a much better rusher. Savard scored more than 50 points in a season once (career high 60 pts); Lapointe scored more than 50 pts six times (career high 76 pts). Lapointe scored 0.70 ppg versus 0.42 ppg for Savard. Lapointe also has a higher ppg in the playoffs (though by a smaller margin).

Defense. Savard was one of the smartest positional defenders in the league. He was steady, disciplined, and seldom out of position. Savard was huge for his day; while he wasn't an aggressive hitter, he used his strength to neutralize his opponents. Lapointe wasn't quite as strong positionally but was an aggressive checker. He was a tough, fearless hitter who used a combination of sound positioning and intimidation to shut down opponents. Savard generally got a bit more ice time on the PK. Savard is 6th all-time in plus/minus, while Lapointe is 19th. In the eleven years they were teammates, Savard had the higher plus/minus 8 times and they were tied once.

Awards. Guy Lapointe was a Norris candidate six times (1973, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979); in 1973 he was second only to Bobby Orr. Serge Savard was a Norris candidate four times (1975, 1976, 1977, 1979). Lapointe was ranked higher in three of the four years in which they were both Norris candidates. Lapointe earned a spot on four all-star teams (1 first team, three second teams). Savard earned a spot on one all-star team (1 second team).

Playoffs. Savard is one of only seven defensemen to win the Conn Smythe; he finished 9th in scoring as the Canadiens went 12-2 to win the Cup in 1969. Savard has slightly more experience (130 games vs 123 games) and was on more Cup-winning teams (8 vs 6). Lapointe scored more playoff points and has a higher points-per-game. In the eleven years they played together, Lapointe scored 68 pts in 112 PO games while Savard scored 56 points in 103 games.

It's a tough decision. It's very hard to overlook Savard's Conn Smythe, but Lapointe is more physical, consistently did better in Norris/all-star voting, and is better offensively. I'd take Lapointe by a very small margin.

What's your opinion?

I'd agree with what you said, Lapointe by a hair. Granted I haven't seen a ton of them (pretty much limited to the Summit Series and select old Canadiens games), Lapointe always impressed me more with his play.

Pretty close. You have to wonder how good Serge would have been if he hadn't broken his leg so badly.

Correction: Lapointe was only three times a 2nd team all-star('75, '76, '77). He was never a first all-star in '73, only Orr and Park were.

Its a pretty good choice though. If I'm down a goal I want Lapointe. If I'm up a goal and need to protect a lead I want Savard. In conclusion while Lapointe's offensive output is better Savard just never seemed to play bad. Is it a coincidence that the Canada never lost when Savard was in the lineup in '72? Scotty Bowman used to say Savard played pretty much errorless defense. Its true. He wasnt going to score 80-90 points a year but he had an enourmous +/-. He was solid, steady and dependable. Savard by a hair for me.

Serge Savard got his jersey retired first, probably because he was at his best earlier, getting a Conn Smythe (1969) well before the dynasty years and a Masterton trophy afterwards.

Savard scored more than Lapointe in three of the four playoffs of the 4-cup Canadiens dynasty. But the difference is negligible.

1976: Savard 9 pts in 13 games; Lapointe 6 pts in 13 games.
1977: Savard 9 pts in 14 games; Lapointe 12 pts in 12 games.
1978: Savard 8 pts in 15 games; Lapointe 7 pts in 14 games.
1979: Savard 9 pts in 16 games; Lapointe 8 pts in 10 games.

"Serge was probably one of the most underrated players I ever had play for me on any of my teams," Scotty Bowman said Thursday.

Consider where that statement is coming from, hockey's all-time winningest coach who had superstars with him in Montreal, Buffalo, Pittsburgh and Detroit.

"Serge played with Larry Robinson (on the '70s Habs) and I think that was probably the best tandem I ever saw in my history," said Bowman.

"I don't hardly ever remember Serge getting caught up the ice."
http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061116.wsptserge15/GSStory/GlobeSportsHockey/home

Savard weighed 25 lbs more and had 3 inches on Lapointe.

As Savard himself likes to say with a smile: he played in 5 of the Summit Series games and Canada lost none of them (4-0-1). (He got a broken ankle in the series) Savard was -1 and Lapointe -3 in the series (Henderson +6, Park +4). Savard had 2 assists in 5 games; Lapointe only 1 assist in 7 games. Savard was in his prime, Lapointe was young. Savard had only 3 shots on goal; Lapointe had 15 shots however.

Overall, Savard was better than Lapointe, but not by much. The Big Three was The Big Three. And the only sure thing is that Orr, Park and Potvin were better.

Correction: Lapointe was only three times a 2nd team all-star('75, '76, '77). He was never a first all-star in '73, only Orr and Park were.

Lapointe was a 1st team all-star in 72-73. Park was 2nd team that year. HO's list was years were he received votes for the Norris, not just made the all-star teams.

Having been a fan of those particular teams, I'd say Savard without a second thought. He was really something special in his own end, very Lidstrom/Niedermayer-like. Lapointe was a very good d-man, but I don't think he was as critical to his team's success as The Senator was.

..and don't forget the Savardian "Spin-o-rama"

A little trivia question. Back in 1972 a team of Canadian NHL all-stars are playing a hockey game against the reigning World Champions. It comes down to the last minute of play and Canada is desparately trying to score.

Who scored and how much time was left?

too easy. henderson, 32 seconds or so left.

better questions: who got the equalizer, who assisted on those two goals, and whose goal started the 3 goal canadian rally ftw?

too easy. henderson, 32 seconds or so left.

better questions: who got the equalizer, who assisted on those two goals, and whose goal started the 3 goal canadian rally ftw?

This thread isn't about Henderson though, is it? (that's a hint)

Also 34 seconds on the Henderson Goal.

Savard without a second thought.

Lapointe did better in Norris voting because offensive d-men during that era tended to do better in award voting, but if I could have only one of them, Savard would be the guy I'd want on my team. If the Habs didn't have Lapointe, they likely would have kept the offensively talented Van Boxmeer who may have been able to replace his points in the dynasty years. I don't see anyone, until Langway and Englom showed up who could replace Savard's brilliant defense. Savard might be the best defensive d-man, career wise, I have ever seen.

I'd say Savard without a second thought.

Savard without a second thought.

It should be mentioned that neither Psycho Papa Joe or I like to think more than once about anything.

It should be mentioned that neither Psycho Papa Joe or I like to think more than once about anything.

Ungreat minds think alike.

I'd take Savard. Lapointe was an outstanding player, very competitive and gifted with the puck, but Savard could control a lot of things defensively. He was (as mentioned above) just an outstanding positional player who made the right decision with ridiculous consistency.

Savard because he was a more complete player, no disrespect meant to Lapointe.

I'd take Savard as well. That's no slight to Lapointe. Head to head with Savard there aren't many players who come out ahead of him.
He had the ability to, at times, control the pace of a game. Other than Larry Robinson I don't know that I've seen a better defensive player. He'd play guys perfectly. Offensively he wasn't outstanding but he did have the knack for great breakout passes that were almost always tape to tape. The way he used the spin-o-rama was icing...

Sometimes one outshone the other, but Serge, as far as i'm concerned, is still the best defensive D man the past 35 years.As great as Potvin was , Serge was better in his own end, and he made it look easy.He was an economical talent along with being able to join the rush when needed, and was also a great passer.

Lapointe was more exciting to watch, and quite often he was superior to Robinson.

Serge, as far as i'm concerned, is still the best defensive D man the past 35 years.
Rod Langway. Not even close.

edit: I see many think it's close.

Rod Langway. Not even close.

But if you're speaking of just the Habs team, then yeah.

Not even close are u kidding me ? I agree that Langway was A BIT better defensively but this is CLOSE.

Langway played for the Habs.

Serge was better in his own end, and that's just my opinion.

Rod Langway. Not even close.

But if you're speaking of just the Habs team, then yeah.


For his career, Savard was the better defensive defenseman. Langway might have been better his two peak years, although I doubt he was ever as good as Savard was in his 60pt year, but he most certainly didn't have a better career.

As an aside, Langway's two Norris trophies were highway robbery. Potvin, Bourque, Robinson (in 1983), and even Coffey (in 1984) would have been far better choices. The NHL was being criticized for always picking defenseman who could score alot of points, and the result of the backlash was they gave it to a purely one-dimensional defensive d-man. But contrary to popular belief of the time, most of these d-men who were winning Norris trophies and scoring alot of points, were also great defensive d-men.

A little trivia question. Back in 1972 a team of Canadian NHL all-stars are playing a hockey game against the reigning World Champions. It comes down to the last minute of play and Canada is desparately trying to score.

Who scored and how much time was left?

OK times up, it was Savard with 4 seconds left. He tied the game against Czechoslovakia.

As an aside, Langway's two Norris trophies were highway robbery. Potvin, Bourque, Robinson (in 1983), and even Coffey (in 1984) would have been far better choices. The NHL was being criticized for always picking defenseman who could score alot of points, and the result of the backlash was they gave it to a purely one-dimensional defensive d-man. But contrary to popular belief of the time, most of these d-men who were winning Norris trophies and scoring alot of points, were also great defensive d-men.

Most, but Coffey wasn't one of them. Was he even a defenseman? :sarcasm:

During Savard's prime, it was easy to overlook him at times, as he wasn't as spectacular as Robinson, nor as physical as Lapointe. He controlled the play without a whole lot of wasted movement. You wouldn't leave the Forum talking about him, but watch some old film. A lot of big goals were scored when Serge made a simple pass at the right time.

Rod Langway. Not even close.

edit: I see many think it's close.

I'll disagree with that. I would take a number of defenseman before I would take Langway.

I'll disagree with that. I would take a number of defenseman before I would take Langway.
he said Savard was the best defensive defenseman

of course I'd take a number of d-men before Langway, all of them with more offensive ability

geez

he said Savard was the best defensive defenseman

of course I'd take a number of d-men before Langway, all of them with more offensive ability

geez

I'm talking about defensively.

Sorry, I never saw Shore, Harvey, Kelly.

But in the last 30 years of watching hockey I haven't witnessed a defenseman play in his own zone the way Langway can. Made me into a Capitals fan the moment he went there.

Sorry, I never saw Shore, Harvey, Kelly.

But in the last 30 years of watching hockey I've never seen a defenseman play in his own zone the way Langway can. Made me into a Capitals fan the moment he went there.

He was never able to raise his game come playoff time. Stevens as a Devil was better than Langway as a Cap. I would also take Orr, Bourque, Chelios, and Potvin as better than Langway defensively.

Stevens as a Devil was better than Langway as a Cap. I would also take Orr, Bourque, Chelios, and Potvin as better than Langway defensively.
:huh: In other words, he didn't knock your socks off or you didn't watch him much.

:huh: In other words, he didn't knock your socks off or you didn't watch him much.

As a Flyers fan and season ticket holder I saw the Caps all the time.

I also saw them fail to get out of the Patick Division during Langway's prime. Those Caps teams certainly weren't devoid of talent either, at times dressing 4 Hall of Famers: (Langway, Stevens, Murphy and Gartner).

Guy Lapointe was the better player than Serge Savard.

Most, but Coffey wasn't one of them. Was he even a defenseman? :sarcasm:


Having watched Coffey and Langway in 1984, these are my conclusions. Coffey's offense was more impressive than Langway's defense, and Coffey's defense was more impressive than Langway's offense. I never saw Orr at his peak, so in my lifetime, no d-man was more spectacular offensively than Coffey, but I've seen quite a few guys defensively in Langway's league. Both great players, but Coffey did more than Langway and if I'm a GM in 1984 I would rather have Coffey patrol my blueline. Although in 1984, both Bourque and Potvin were better than either Coffey and Langway though. I really don't know why the voters started to sour on Potvin in the 80's. The guy played all round defense on a completely different level than anybody in the NHL during the Isles dynasty years.

Having watched Coffey and Langway in 1984, these are my conclusions. Coffey's offense was more impressive than Langway's defense, and Coffey's defense was more impressive than Langway's offense. I never saw Orr at his peak, so in my lifetime, no d-man was more spectacular offensively than Coffey, but I've seen quite a few guys defensively in Langway's league. Both great players, but Coffey did more than Langway and if I'm a GM in 1984 I would rather have Coffey patrol my blueline.

Without question.

Coffey was clearly the superior player that year.

Coffey finshed 2nd in the NHL in both points and assists. He finished with 93 points more than Langway. For Langway tobe better than Cofey, while scoring 93 less points the differences defensively would have had to be beyond gargantuan.

Thnk Scott Stevens vs. Andy Delmore


Quick check of everyone's favorite stat - +/-

Capitals finished the season scoring 82 more goals than they allowed

Scott Stevens +26
Dave Shand +23
Timo Blomqvist +17
Rod Langway +14
Larry Murphy +12
Darren Veitch E

Oilers finished the season scoring 132 more goals than they allowed

Paul Coffey +52
Charlie Huddy +50
Dr. Randy Gregg +40
Kevin Lowe +37
Lee Fogolin +33
Don Jackson +28

As an aside, Langway's two Norris trophies were highway robbery. Potvin, Bourque, Robinson (in 1983), and even Coffey (in 1984) would have been far better choices. The NHL was being criticized for always picking defenseman who could score alot of points, and the result of the backlash was they gave it to a purely one-dimensional defensive d-man.

Backlash? Over who, Wilson and Carlyle? I wouldn't call it highway robbery to award the best defenseman trophy to a very, very good defensive defenseman.

Without question.

Coffey was clearly the superior player that year.

Coffey finshed 2nd in the NHL in both points and assists. He finished with 93 points more than Langway. For Langway tobe better than Cofey, while scoring 93 less points the differences defensively would have had to be beyond gargantuan.

Thnk Scott Stevens vs. Andy Delmore


Quick check of everyone's favorite stat - +/-

Capitals finished the season scoring 82 more goals than they allowed

Scott Stevens +26
Dave Shand +23
Timo Blomqvist +17
Rod Langway +14
Larry Murphy +12
Darren Veitch E

Oilers finished the season scoring 132 more goals than they allowed

Paul Coffey +52
Charlie Huddy +50
Dr. Randy Gregg +40
Kevin Lowe +37
Lee Fogolin +33
Don Jackson +28

We're a little off the beaten path here now but...

Coffey was clearly the better player? That depends on what you value and what your team needs.
I don't care much about the stats. But since you quoted some here is another. In his first three seasons with Pittsburgh he scored 283 points and was a -35. So his +/- on the Oilers dynasty doesn't mean a whole lot.
I do however know what I saw and that was Langway playing virtually flawless defense game in game out. I saw Coffey trying to be Orr and failing miserably on the defensive side.
In my opinion it's a travesty that Coffey has even one Norris. Mark Howe, Bourque or even Potvin were better choices in 85 and 86. They were all better at being defenseman than Coffey.
:cheers:

We're a little off the beaten path here now but...

Coffey was clearly the better player? That depends on what you value and what your team needs.
I don't care much about the stats. But since you quoted some here is another. In his first three seasons with Pittsburgh he scored 283 points and was a -35. So his +/- on the Oilers dynasty doesn't mean a whole lot.
I do however know what I saw and that was Langway playing virtually flawless defense game in game out. I saw Coffey trying to be Orr and failing miserably on the defensive side.
In my opinion it's a travesty that Coffey has even one Norris. Mark Howe, Bourque or even Potvin were better choices in 85 and 86. They were all better at being defenseman than Coffey.
:cheers:


What he did on the Penguins has no bearing on who should have won the Norris in 1983-84. Coffey was clearly the better player.

What he did on the Penguins has no bearing on who should have won the Norris in 1983-84. Coffey was clearly the better player.

You're right it doesn't. I wasn't trying to say it did. I was trying to get across the fact that his plus minus on the Oilers is not worth much.

Clearly the better player? Clearly the pundits that voted thought otherwise.

Without question.

Coffey was clearly the superior player that year.

Coffey finshed 2nd in the NHL in both points and assists. He finished with 93 points more than Langway. For Langway tobe better than Cofey, while scoring 93 less points the differences defensively would have had to be beyond gargantuan.

Thnk Scott Stevens vs. Andy Delmore


Quick check of everyone's favorite stat - +/-

Capitals finished the season scoring 82 more goals than they allowed

Scott Stevens +26
Dave Shand +23
Timo Blomqvist +17
Rod Langway +14
Larry Murphy +12
Darren Veitch E

Oilers finished the season scoring 132 more goals than they allowed

Paul Coffey +52
Charlie Huddy +50
Dr. Randy Gregg +40
Kevin Lowe +37
Lee Fogolin +33
Don Jackson +28

Remember that +/- doesn't include PP goals for or against. When those are taken out of the equation, Washington only scored 44 more goals than they allowed while Edmonton scored 128 more goals than they gave up. That's a huge difference, so you would expect the Oiler players to have better +/- marks.

Here's the way I feel they should be judged. Edmonton had 119 points. Washington had 101. So you would have to figure out how many of Edmonton's 119 were because of Coffey, and how many of Washington's 101 were because of Langway. Whoever has the higher total wins. How to figure that out is a complex puzzle which hasn't been statistically proven yet, but let me make the case for Langway.

Washington was 5th overall, one of the best teams in the league. They were 10th in offense and 1st in defense, so obviously the defence was the main reason for their success. Was it because of team defence or because of goaltending? Their two goalies that year, Al Jensen and Pat Riggin were capable, but hardly great. Neither were in the top five in save%. However, the Capitals defence allowed less shots than any other team in the league. So it would stand to reason that the biggest reason for Washington's success was their team defence.

Which players get the most credit for that? There's no perfect stat to measure defence, but logically it would be a) the players with the most icetime and b) those players who are getting the icetime because of their defence. Estimated icetime for `84 shows Langway logging the highest marks on the Caps, and he sure wasn't there for his offence. It should also be noted that Washington had the best PK that year by a wide margin that year. Who led them in SH icetime? Langway. So it can be assumed that Langway deserves credit for the highest "share" of the Caps record that year.

Edmonton had a better record that year, and Coffey was a huge part of it, but we all know he wasn't the biggest part.

Not saying that Langway deserved it over Coffey, just that I don't think you can say that Coffey was clearly superior. The sad part of that season was that Ray Bourque had his best season to date in `84, but his excellent play both offensively and defensively was forgotten by Norris voters as they became fixated on a two-horse race between the all-offence/no-defence Coffey, and the all-defence/no-offence Langway.

a distinction between offensive defenseman, defensive defenseman and all-around defenseman would be helpful here: they really make different decisions on the ice based on their priorities

Not saying that Langway deserved it over Coffey, just that I don't think you can say that Coffey was clearly superior. The sad part of that season was that Ray Bourque had his best season to date in `84, but his excellent play both offensively and defensively was forgotten by Norris voters as they became fixated on a two-horse race between the all-offence/no-defence Coffey, and the all-defence/no-offence Langway.

And Potvin was better than all three IMO. 85 points, great defense, physicallity and a touch of mean that the other three just didn't have.

Looking back, I would have rated them in the following order that season:

Potvin
Bourque
Coffey
Langway

nice to see a bunch of us old fogies are joining the discussion

not just the young revisionists

actually having watched them for years is entirely different than citing stats

Remember that +/- doesn't include PP goals for or against. When those are taken out of the equation, Washington only scored 44 more goals than they allowed while Edmonton scored 128 more goals than they gave up. That's a huge difference, so you would expect the Oiler players to have better +/- marks.

Here's the way I feel they should be judged. Edmonton had 119 points. Washington had 101. So you would have to figure out how many of Edmonton's 119 were because of Coffey, and how many of Washington's 101 were because of Langway. Whoever has the higher total wins. How to figure that out is a complex puzzle which hasn't been statistically proven yet, but let me make the case for Langway.

Washington was 5th overall, one of the best teams in the league. They were 10th in offense and 1st in defense, so obviously the defence was the main reason for their success. Was it because of team defence or because of goaltending? Their two goalies that year, Al Jensen and Pat Riggin were capable, but hardly great. Neither were in the top five in save%. However, the Capitals defence allowed less shots than any other team in the league. So it would stand to reason that the biggest reason for Washington's success was their team defence.

Which players get the most credit for that? There's no perfect stat to measure defence, but logically it would be a) the players with the most icetime and b) those players who are getting the icetime because of their defence. Estimated icetime for `84 shows Langway logging the highest marks on the Caps, and he sure wasn't there for his offence. It should also be noted that Washington had the best PK that year by a wide margin that year. Who led them in SH icetime? Langway. So it can be assumed that Langway deserves credit for the highest "share" of the Caps record that year.

Edmonton had a better record that year, and Coffey was a huge part of it, but we all know he wasn't the biggest part.

Not saying that Langway deserved it over Coffey, just that I don't think you can say that Coffey was clearly superior. The sad part of that season was that Ray Bourque had his best season to date in `84, but his excellent play both offensively and defensively was forgotten by Norris voters as they became fixated on a two-horse race between the all-offence/no-defence Coffey, and the all-defence/no-offence Langway.

Great post but I have a problem with the bolded part.
The point of defense is to help prevent goals against. Shouldn't you then also try and figure out how many scoring chances were broken up and shots prevented as this is the main concern for a defenseman? It's at least as important, if not more important than point production for their position.

You're right it doesn't. I wasn't trying to say it did. I was trying to get across the fact that his plus minus on the Oilers is not worth much.

Clearly the better player? Clearly the pundits that voted thought otherwise.

Don't compare Coffey's +/- to Langway's ... but if you notice Coffey had he best mark of any Oilers defenseman .... Langway on the other hand did not for the Caps.

For the Langway lovers out there:

Can you name me the big postseason he had where he shutdown a Bossy or Kerr, and propelled the Caps to a long playoff run ??

Personally Langway was never the best defenseman in the Patrick Division in a given year.

And Potvin was better than all three IMO. 85 points, great defense, physicallity and a touch of mean that the other three just didn't have.

Looking back, I would have rated them in the following order that season:

Potvin
Bourque
Coffey
Langway

No love for Howe? The guy was fantastic!

Don't compare Coffey's +/- to Langway's ... but if you notice Coffey had he best mark of any Oilers defenseman .... Langway on the other hand did not for the Caps.

You're not really going to argue the plus/minus thing are you?

Don't compare Coffey's +/- to Langway's ... but if you notice Coffey had he best mark of any Oilers defenseman .... Langway on the other hand did not for the Caps.

I didn't compare them. :teach:

You're not really going to argue the plus/minus thing are you?

Like I said, i wasn't trying to say that because Coffey had the better +/- than Langway he had a better season. The point was to show how they related to the rest of their teams.



As for Howe, 85-86 was his best chance, but he picked th eyear Coffey scored 48 goals as the one to have his best season.

That being said Howe was a better overall player than Langway.

No love for Howe? The guy was fantastic!

Yes he was, but in 1984, the year in question, he wasn't one of the best. Probably top 10, but not top 4.

Yes he was, but in 1984, the year in question, he wasn't one of the best. Probably top 10, but not top 4.

Agreed.

Howe took the jump to top 3/4 defenseman the following year.