UND's best all time line?

[SiouxScore!]

Siouxnami, I'm with you. It's been a few years ago as we all know, but can you imagine the speed and then the added size that line would have brought..... It just wasn't meant to be.

[Sioux_Hab-it]

Just as in the Pros it is very difficult to say one line was better than another when comparing different eras. NCAA goaltending has improved immensely and there is much more lineup parity across the board. You don't see very many 10-1 blowouts of pylons anymore and the top talent bolts early, so of course today's lines won't rack up the same number of points as the lines of 20-30 years ago. I have followed the WCHA for a very long time and I am convinced that, despite some of the earlier talent that wore the Kelly Green, the most talented and complete Sioux forwards I have witnessed to date have been Parise and Toews. As an aside Patrick still gets my vote as the greatest blueliner of all time so you can't blame my choices on a failing memory.

[The Whistler]

Hrkac line was the best, without question. I am frustrated in that I do not remember the 3rd person from that line. I know it was Hrkac and Joyce, but wasn't Steve Johnson on that line too or was it Scott Dub? I have not lived in ND since high school - 1986 - and I have not had the benefit of following Sioux hockey as closely as I would have liked for many years. I did not see it on the board but I presume the "money line" was Parise, Bochenski, Stafford? The Hrkac line beat on every line, including the Millen line from Minnesota. Unbelievable line from what I can remember.

It was Brent Bobyk 5 on 5 and Steve Johnson on the Powerplay.

The rest of the power play was Ian Kidd and Mickey Krampotich. I likely spelled Kidd wrong.

Brent Bobyk was a Freshman. What he added was speed and a reckless disregard of his body. He'd be out there flying creating Havoc leaving Hrkac and Joyce to set up the plays.

[The Sicatoka]

They played tried mainly Johnson or Bobyck with Hrkac and Joyce. They even ran Mal Parks with them for a couple games.

To me it is the Hrkac line that's the best ever because you could have put PCM out there with Tony and Bob and still lit people up.

[PCM]

To me it is the Hrkac line that's the best ever because you could have put PCM out there with Tony and Bob and still lit people up.

I coulda won the Hoboy playing with those guys!

[The Whistler]

They played tried mainly Johnson or Bobyck with Hrkac and Joyce. They even ran Mal Parks with them for a couple games.

To me it is the Hrkac line that's the best ever because you could have put PCM out there with Tony and Bob and still lit people up.

But running up to the playoffs the line was set with Bobyck on the line. At the start of the season it was Johnson on the line, but the Chemistry didn't quite work out for some reason. Plus it solidifiied the second line which I think was Johnson, Krampotich and Nakonechny. (am I right)

[The Whistler]

I coulda won the Hoboy playing with those guys!

If only....

[Walsh Hall]

For best checking line it has to be Henderson-Ulmer-Calder. If I remember correctly they finished the season going like 14 games with holding the oppositions top line scoreless even strength. And having Calder following and talking trash to goldie before the start of the overtime at the final five was classic. They were lights out.

How about top five man powerplay unit. - Joyce - Hrkac - Johnson - Kidd - Benson/Parent

- Bo - Parise - Stafford - Fuher - ?

DOT + Chorney - Lee/Bina

Skyes - Murray - Eades - Patrick - Ludwig

[Sioux-per Villain]

No question the DOT line is a great line, but I doubt if it would even make top five of the all-time best UND line combinations. We've had some really potent lines over the last 25 years. Winning #8 will undoubtedly move them up in my book though........

[hrkac]

For best checking line it has to be Henderson-Ulmer-Calder. If I remember correctly they finished the season going like 14 games with holding the oppositions top line scoreless even strength. And having Calder following and talking trash to goldie before the start of the overtime at the final five was classic. They were lights out.

How about top five man powerplay unit. - Joyce - Hrkac - Johnson - Kidd - Benson/Parent

- Bo - Parise - Stafford - Fuher - ?

DOT + Chorney - Lee/Bina

Skyes - Murray - Eades - Patrick - Ludwig

Sykes-Murray-Eades-Patrick-Ludwig -- you can't get any better than that!

[riders06]

Why has nobody mentioned the "Dakota Connection" of Dean Barsness, Steve Palmiscno, and Brian Williams?

[Snake]

I hate rain on everybody's parade but there is no comparison between the players of today and the players from 20 or 30 years ago. The DOT line is hands down more talented than any of the previously mentioned lines. Players are stronger, faster, shoot harder, better coached, better conditioned, etc, etc, etc. The old boys scored a lot of goals because the goaltending was basically terrible compared to today's goalies and there was really no organized defence to speak of. Some of the aforementioned players would have a very difficult time even cracking a modern WCHA lineup. And if you don't believe me, than ask one of these old guys. I'm sure they would tell you the same thing.

Not sure why my post got singled out in a rant about players 20 or 30 years ago, but oh well!

Sure, we can't draw 1 to 1 comparisons of players 20 & 30 years ago to players today, but that's not necessarily the point. To many on this board, "Best Line of All Time" probably means the line that outclassed its competition DURING THE ERA IN WHICH IT WAS PLAYING. It's a clear distinction from the theoretical 1:1 comparisons between eras.

[Sioux-per Villain]

I hate rain on everybody's parade but there is no comparison between the players of today and the players from 20 or 30 years ago. The DOT line is hands down more talented than any of the previously mentioned lines. Players are stronger, faster, shoot harder, better coached, better conditioned, etc, etc, etc. The old boys scored a lot of goals because the goaltending was basically terrible compared to today's goalies and there was really no organized defence to speak of. Some of the aforementioned players would have a very difficult time even cracking a modern WCHA lineup. And if you don't believe me, than ask one of these old guys. I'm sure they would tell you the same thing.

You're right, Gretzky couldn't hold Crosby's jockstrap.

[squirtcoach]

Thanks, I couldn't remember if it was Smail or Taylor on that line. I remember all of the shorties Smail used to get. Amazing.

Edit: Sorry, I misread your response. Weren't Sykes and Eades on a line together or was that after Smail and Taylor left?

See how bad my memory has gotten, I would have sworn Eades, Taylor and Smail were the first line for the Sioux in 1980. Have to ask Carey...

[yzerman19]

Wasn't Murray Baron on the PP on that 86-87 team?

Hrkac circus was the greatest line ever in college hockey. The Broten Broten Erickson Rams in the old John was probably second all time.

I'd be curious to see the greatest Sioux line in history in terms of +/-

Did Troy Murray play with Sykes and Eades?...I was pre-kindergarten in those days.

Ykes, Smail and taylor were great

How about the power line in coach Hakstol's days: Greg Johnson with Russ Romaniuk and Dixon Ward?

Hrkac Circus was unstoppable

[Sodbuster]

Of all the teams I've watched in person for the Sioux, nobody did the things I saw the Hrkac line do together.

[grandforks]

I hate rain on everybody's parade but there is no comparison between the players of today and the players from 20 or 30 years ago. The DOT line is hands down more talented than any of the previously mentioned lines. Players are stronger, faster, shoot harder, better coached, better conditioned, etc, etc, etc. The old boys scored a lot of goals because the goaltending was basically terrible compared to today's goalies and there was really no organized defence to speak of. Some of the aforementioned players would have a very difficult time even cracking a modern WCHA lineup. And if you don't believe me, than ask one of these old guys. I'm sure they would tell you the same thing.

These types of statements get very tiresome. Athletes do have more avenues to high-tech training today than they did in past years, but does that necessarily make them better? Some people like to point to how track times are much better today than in years past. Conditioning may be part of it, but most experts will tell you that the biggest reasons for better track times are better running surfaces and better shoes. What baseball player has hit the most HRs that traveled over 450 feet? Some steroid-inflated tree from the current era? No. A player that retired over 70 years ago. Babe Ruth hit 245 of those massive shots -- more than twice as much as anyone else in baseball history.

Go ahead and ask some of those "old guys" and I'm pretty sure that they would tell you that Tony Hrkac would have little trouble dominating college hockey today. He would have been a great NHL player if he had drank a little less. I'm also pretty sure that "old-time" players like Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemeuix would have little trouble dominating today. Today's goaltenders are not some evolved group of super freaks compared to those "old" goaltenders, but they do have a lot more padding to help block shots. And there was organized defense back then. There are even rumors that players knew how to read and write back then.

Here is an answer to an earlier question -- the BC Connection was from the 1978-79 season. Kevin Maxwell was the center, Cary Eades was the RW, and Mark Taylor was the LW (he moved to C the following year).

The DOT line has been pretty exciting, and I can think of about five other lines that would be near the top, but the Hrkac Circus tops the list.

[Diggler]

You're right, Gretsky couldn't hold Crosby's jockstrap.

And neither could Gretzky! Especially if we're talking about Brent.

[82SiouxGuy]

These types of statements get very tiresome. Athletes do have more avenues to high-tech training today than they did in past years, but does that necessarily make them better? Some people like to point to how track times are much better today than in years past. Conditioning may be part of it, but most experts will tell you that the biggest reasons for better track times are better running surfaces and better shoes. What baseball player has hit the most HRs that traveled over 450 feet? Some steroid-inflated tree from the current era? No. A player that retired over 70 years ago. Babe Ruth hit 245 of those massive shots -- more than twice as much as anyone else in baseball history.

Go ahead and ask some of those "old guys" and I'm pretty sure that they would tell you that Tony Hrkac would have little trouble dominating college hockey today. He would have been a great NHL player if he had drank a little less. I'm also pretty sure that "old-time" players like Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemeuix would have little trouble dominating today. Today's goaltenders are not some evolved group of super freaks compared to those "old" goaltenders, but they do have a lot more padding to help block shots. And there was organized defense back then. There are even rumors that players knew how to read and write back then.

I agree with you about comparing athletes of different eras. Another thing to think about is how much better past athletes would have been if they had todays high tech training and tools. Would Hrkac and the other guys been even faster and stronger if they had todays training programs? How many points would Hrkac have scored with those advantages? How many home runs would Babe Ruth have hit if he kept in good physical shape through strength and flexibility training? He may have hit over 900 home runs in his career. The only fair way to compare athletes of different eras is to look at how they compared to others from their own era.

[SiouxWac]

It may not have the complete line in but what amazed me about the Hrkac Circus was they were as likely to score short handed as the other team was to score a power play goal!

[Vegas]

I agree with you about comparing athletes of different eras. Another thing to think about is how much better past athletes would have been if they had todays high tech training and tools. Would Hrkac and the other guys been even faster and stronger if they had todays training programs? How many points would Hrkac have scored with those advantages? How many home runs would Babe Ruth have hit if he kept in good physical shape through strength and flexibility training? He may have hit over 900 home runs in his career. The only fair way to compare athletes of different eras is to look at how they compared to others from their own era.

1st, 3rd, 7th and 20th picks from last year's draft played in the WCHA this year. All of these guys are expected to be first liners and leaders on their respective teams. Hrkac, Smail, Eaves etc, where all utility players at the NHL level. Why was that? You can make all the excuses you want for them but the simple fact is that they played in a league that doesn't compare to today's WCHA. This league is at another level.

An old NHL goalie told me that he doesn't teach the position the way he played. It simply wouldn't work. He has to teach a completely different style. Sccoring on goalies who learned the position in the 70's and 80's is a heck of a lot easier than scoring on a butterfly goalie that knows how to move along the ice. There is no comparison. The equipment is only one aspect of it, knowing how to use that equipment is the key.

And finally, what was the speed of those pitches that the old Babe was hitting 400+ feet out of the park. Where they coming in at 100 mph. I'm going to guess that they weren't.

[petey23]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. slow down. It is a different NHL today too. And while Hrkac had decent NHL stats and fantastic AHL(IHL) numbers, if he was coming out of college today with the way the NHL is officiated now, he would be an absolute superstar.

[Lives-to-play-hockey-06]

1st, 3rd, 7th and 20th picks from last year's draft played in the WCHA this year. All of these guys are expected to be first liners and leaders on their respective teams. Hrkac, Smail, Eaves etc, where all utility players at the NHL level. Why was that? You can make all the excuses you want for them but the simple fact is that they played in a league that doesn't compare to today's WCHA. This league is at another level.

An old NHL goalie told me that he doesn't teach the position the way he played. It simply wouldn't work. He has to teach a completely different style. Sccoring on goalies who learned the position in the 70's and 80's is a heck of a lot easier than scoring on a butterfly goalie that knows how to move along the ice. There is no comparison. The equipment is only one aspect of it, knowing how to use that equipment is the key.

And finally, what was the speed of those pitches that the old Babe was hitting 400+ feet out of the park. Where they coming in at 100 mph. I'm going to guess that they weren't.

Well, actually Walter Johnson / Cy Young were said to have extremely high velocity on their pitches. Older historians say upper 90's would be a good estimate. Cy was before Ruth's time, and Johnson was shutting it down while Babe was still pitching.

You can also make arguements that the Wcha was very strong in those years, look at the NHL all stars that played college hockey in the 80's era. Brett Hull (UMD), Ed Belfour (UND), John Casey (UND), Chris Chelios (WISC), Neal Broten (Minn). These are only a few that I could think of off the top of my head.

[82SiouxGuy]

1st, 3rd, 7th and 20th picks from last year's draft played in the WCHA this year. All of these guys are expected to be first liners and leaders on their respective teams. Hrkac, Smail, Eaves etc, where all utility players at the NHL level. Why was that? You can make all the excuses you want for them but the simple fact is that they played in a league that doesn't compare to today's WCHA. This league is at another level.

An old NHL goalie told me that he doesn't teach the position the way he played. It simply wouldn't work. He has to teach a completely different style. Sccoring on goalies who learned the position in the 70's and 80's is a heck of a lot easier than scoring on a butterfly goalie that knows how to move along the ice. There is no comparison. The equipment is only one aspect of it, knowing how to use that equipment is the key.

And finally, what was the speed of those pitches that the old Babe was hitting 400+ feet out of the park. Where they coming in at 100 mph. I'm going to guess that they weren't.

It has only been in recent years that NHL executives have even given college players strong considerations in the draft. Before that they automatically thought that college players were inferior to players coming out of Canada, and then Europe. So a lot of college players were probably drafted lower than they should have been. Also, how many teams were added to the NHL in the past 15 years. That has added a lot of jobs that were not available to players coming out of college in the 60's, 70's or 80's. There are probably more top end players in college now because it is more acceptable for top players to go from college to the NHL. But the top end players of all eras would still be able to play at a high level.

Your example of the goalie fits with my point about training. They train differently and teach differently, goalies, forwards and defensemen. It doesn't mean that current players automatically have any more talent. Hrkac would not have 116 points in current college hockey. Scoring is down all over college hockey because of the styles that are being played. But I bet that he would be one of the leading scorers if we could bring that 86-87 player to play in the 06-07 WCHA. Especially if he had a year or 2 working with the current training staff.

And you are wrong about Babe not facing anyone throwing 100 miles an hour. There have been guys that can throw that fast in all eras. Plus, they could legally throw the spit ball when Babe played, current players don't have to face spit ballers on a regular basis. But it is very difficult to compare the eras of baseball because of 2 major factors, segregation and expansion. Babe only played against white players. But then again, there are approximately twice as many major league baseball teams now as in Babe's era. So there are a lot of players in the majors now that would have been lucky to even see AAA baseball if we had fewer teams. Does that balance out some of the differences? We will never know because it is impossible to accurately compare players or teams from different eras. But superstars, like Babe Ruth, would be successful in any era.

[grandforks]