By Alex Nicolo

Recently, ISW got a chance to chat through email with world renowned hockey trivia expert Liam Maguire – Canada’s answer to ‘Stump the Schwab’ for hockey. Liam was gracious and kind of enough to answer our questions.  We’re proud to consider him a friend to our site. Combined with his relentless and endless passion for the game, there are very few people in the entire hockey world who knows more about the history of the game.

1) There’s a debate raging in the hockey world concerning fighting and its place in the game. Fans and media pundits alike seem to be divided on the issue. Where do you stand on it and can you shed some light on the notion that “fighting has always been part of the game?”

I’m a big time supporter of fighting in hockey. I feel that the detractors fall into two categories: Media and those who never played. The overwhelming majority of the dissenters are in one of those categories. Anybody who played competitively beyond the age of twelve fully grasps and understands the reason behind dropping the gloves. In terms of it always being a part of the game, there’s no disputing that. There have been hundreds of brawls since hockey was first played in Canada. In fact, it’s on record that the first game played with rules at McGill University in 1875 was halted due to on ice fighting.

It’s comical to listen to people with their own agenda try and describe why it should be taken out of the sport. First of all, it will never, ever be taken out completely. All the detractors can hope to accomplish is a great reduction (in fighting).

The Ottawa Sun, in their expose on fighting in hockey, did just that and had quotes from a few current Senators who all agreed with having fighting in hockey. I’ll debate anybody any place on this topic. I’m of the belief that – on top the terrible tragedy that befell Don Sanderson – most fans who are against it just can’t stand the staged fights between two guys playing three or four minutes a night.

I feel that if you wanted to eliminate gratuitous fighting, do the following: 1) remove the instigator 2) reduce the roster by one spot 3) call the cheap shots and head shots more stringently 4) suspend back stabbing cowards who perpetrate these acts.

If this was done fighting would drop substantially and all we’d be left with are the spontaneous fights that have been a part of the game for more than 100 years.

2) One of my favorite hockey books is The Hockey Compendium by Klein and Reif. So, let’s talk stats. What is hockey’s most obscure stat – past or present? Which do you think is under rated and which are over rated? What stat would like to see compiled? I would like to see points per ice-time. Let’s bring some SABRmetrics to hockey!

The stat I would love to see game in and game out is power play time and penalty kill time. We get the PP and PK stats all the time but it does not reflect the actual time a team was on the power play or penalty kill. I feel that would be a truer reflection of a team’s ability – not to suggest it would change their rankings dramatically but it’s something I’d personally like to see. Occasionally, I track it myself during games. It’s done for individual players so why not for teams?

In terms of what is obscure at the moment, well, the Elias Sports Bureau are spitting out stats that certainly were never part of the game years ago. However, I have to say I enjoy reading all of the material. For example, when Ryan Smith and Milan Hejduk each scored career goal number 300 in the same game recently Elias released the stat that the only other time two teammates did this happened in 1983 when Danny Gare and Ivan Boldirev accomplished the feat for the Detroit Red Wings. Now that was cool.

As for overrated, I don’t do cart wheels over the +/- . I feel it’s a reflection more of the season and sometimes players can take too much heat for a minus mark. It’s an okay stat, I just don’t get all worked up about it.

3) Along your journey into hockey’s soul, what are some of the most interesting things you’ve come across?

In terms of interesting things I’ve come across, there’s probably a book in that answer. I’m 49 years old. I’ve been watching the game since the 1965 finals as a six year-old. I visited the Montreal Forum 344 times, 78 of those were playoff games including the greatest game Guy Lafleur ever played: Thursday, May 10, 1979 Montreal-Boston game seven semi-finals. I would say the Montreal Forum is the single greatest thing I came across in my life time so far.

When I spoke at Yvan Cournoyer’s golf tournament last summer I read a passage in French. I don’t speak French but given the crowd and it’s always a “who’s who”, I felt it incumbent of me to do so. Luckily, I have a French back ground. My mother is from a small town north of Quebec City and she translated a few paragraphs I wrote. In that brief transcript I told the story of going to the Forum as a teenager in 1975-76 and wanting to bring a sleeping bag to sleep in the building until practice the next day. I wanted to just basically live there.

I tried to convey that thought as best I could. I guess it went okay for after I read it because I got a standing ovation from Cournoyer, Beliveau, Lafleur, Moore and a dozen other greats plus guys like Ron Ellis and Dennis Hull. It was quite the moment for me personally.

Next on the list would be my memory of Paul Henderson’s goal- more on him later.

That goal is the greatest impact goal ever scored in the history of the sport. Name one bigger. Mike Eruzione’s goal for Team USA in 1980 is probably number two but the Olympics come every four years. Besides, the American win in Squaw Valley in 1960 was every bit as stunning. Another huge (shoot out) goal was Peter Forsberg against Team Canada to win gold for Sweden in 1994. Certainly Darryl Sittler in 1976 and Mario Lemieux in 1987 at the Canada Cup were massive as was Brett Hull for the Americans in 1996 at the inaugural World Cup of hockey. There were a few other biggies but there is nothing even remotely close in terms of impact than Henderson’s goal.

I was 13 that day: Thursday, September 28, 1972, 2:30pm EST at the 19:26 mark of the third period. I’ll never forget it.

Paul is a good friend of mine now. I met him on Monday December 4, 1995 when we were guests on the Pamela Wallin Show. I was brought on about half way through. During the commercial break as I took the stage, I reached across to shake his hand and thank him what he had done for Canada. I looked at the time in the studio – it was 9:31pm. Later that night I found out that my father had finally lost his battle to cancer. It wasn’t until I returned home the next day and was talking with one of my brothers when I was told that he passed away at precisely 9:31pm: The exact moment that I shook Paul’s hand for the first time; my two biggest heroes. I feel that’s quite something.

Bottom line, hockey has been my life in some way, shape or form for close to 44 years.

4) There was a discussion on one of our threads where one reader felt Steve Yzerman is a top 10 player all-time – even ranking him ahead of Gordie Howe. Care to offer your expertise in this debate? What criteria do you use to quantify and qualify a player? Who’s in your top 10 or 15?

With all due respect to Steve Yzerman, ranking him ahead of Gordie Howe is asinine. Gordie Howe was in the top five in scoring, not just the top ten, but the top five for twenty consecutive seasons, primarily in the 0-6 era where you had to fight tooth and nail for every inch against the likes of Richard, Hull, Beliveau and so many more. I would say Steve was a better skater, and when at his best was probably a better shot than Gordie – although his wrist shot was great.

Still, Steve’s shot might have been a bit better. Other than that, hockey sense, passing, instinct, toughness, I’d have to give Gordie the edge over Steve in all of those categories. Howe performed at a higher level for a longer period of time and could do more different things than Yzerman could. I truly think it’s crazy to suggest Yzerman was a better hockey player than Gordie Howe. Steve would be monumentally embarrassed if that was ever mentioned to him.

My top fifteen of all time are 1) Bobby Orr 2) Wayne Gretzky 3) Gordie Howe 4) Mario Lemieux 5) Maurice Richard 6) Bobby Hull 7) Jean Beliveau Patrick Roy 9) Mark Messier 10) Doug Harvey 11) Terry Sawchuk 12) Denis Potvin 13) Eddie Shore 14) Joe Malone 15) Jacques Plante.

My criteria includes, longevity, playing at a high level for a significant period of time – which fits everybody except Orr – character, ability to lead a team to victory, physical or mental toughness and of course, skill. My favourite guy in the game today is Jarome Iginla.

5) We know where Gary Bettman stands on the health of hockey in the United States. Do you agree with him? If not, what would you do to grow the game in the U.S.? Does the NHL do a good job of marketing its product? Does it matter?

In terms of the game in the US, I believe we’ve seen the peak of exposure and success the NHL is ever going to have. The peak began, August 9th, 1988 – the date of the momentous Wayne Gretzky trade – and ran through to 1994 when the Rangers won the Cup.

That six year run saw unprecedented coverage of the sport of hockey in the U.S. It was the forerunner to the expansion in the 1990′s – especially in to the southern markets which has been marginally successful, if at all.

Nonetheless, you’d have to give some credit for success given the back-to-back cup triumphs of Tampa Bay and Carolina. That six year window was systematically destroyed by the first lockout and subsequent brand of hockey that emerged from that: the smothering and boring defensive style which led to teams trapping to death.

Hockey in the States will never emerge beyond regional status in terms of success.

I don’t think the marketing has been totally flawed. We all know that Gary Bettman paints an inaccurate picture but I don’t get why people are all over him for that. I suppose he could state the absolute truth. Notably, that there are five or six franchises in trouble and two or three in real trouble.

Does he need to say that to be more credible or to be thought of as a guy doing a better job or do people just want to hear the reality so they can say, ‘I knew it, I told you so, he’s brutal, he has ruined the league?”

What difference does it make if he continues to paint a rosy picture albeit an inaccurate one? What will be, will be. If Phoenix is unable to resolve their situation or get another owner then they’ll probably have to be relocated. The last relocation came 12 years ago despite all the doom and gloom. Somehow the league has gone a dozen years without relocation. .

6) Is there something in contemporary hockey vernacular that’s overused or become an article of faith even though it may be inaccurate? For example, aren’t statements like “chemistry in the dressing room” and “he makes the save at the right time” really perceptions passing as fact?

I think there are two examples, in the vernacular, as you state, I feel apply to the game today. Chemistry in the room is certainly affected in a number of different ways. If anything the play of the Senators while Emery was here in the latter stages and the play of the Habs this year as things began to unwind speak to a lot of off-ice trouble which can be attributed to chemistry in my view.

Making a save at the right time, maybe you could look at that one as “hindsight” than something you can look at ahead of time and say “we need that key save.” You need any save in a tight game and any save in a tight game is a save at the right time.

7) We often hear about how hockey was “better” in a different era. My grandfather is convinced the last great age was pre-1967 because “you had to be good” to crack a line-up in a six team league. Of course, the talent pool wasn’t as deep as it is today. Does a “Golden Age” of hockey exist?

I think there are several candidates. The best way to approach this is to look at the bad eras. The decade between the two lockouts – worst ever. The War years, second worst ever, 1939-1945. Pre 1929-30, you couldn’t even pass the puck forward, the first few years of the modern expansion era in 1967-1969 and 1970, and finally this decade so far, it’s been good, not great in my view but pretty good.

So for references to a golden era, that leaves post Second World War or more commonly referred to as the Original Six era, the 1970′s, the 1980′s and into the 1990′s as the best we’ve seen in the NHL. My personal preference, I grew up with those 1970 Habs teams, Team Canada 1972 and the 1976 Canada Cup. Tough to beat any of that for me.

In your mind, which are the top five franchises presently and which ones historically? Is number of Cups and cup finals the only real measure?

There’s no question, regardless of how bad they are playing, you can’t discount 100 years and 24 Stanley Cups. There is no substitute for that. The Montreal Canadiens are at the pinnacle.

Despite the fact the Toronto Maple Leafs haven’t won since 1967, you can’t discount their history either.

The resurgence in Detroit has put the Red Wings at the top currently and near the top historically. Over roughly the last 15 years, the New Jersey Devils would be my number two pick.

Philadelhphia Flyers, Edmonton Oilers and Boston Bruins should also be included.

In terms of talent and promise, Pittsburgh and Washington may have a shot at making noise in the near term.

9) I know you’re passionate about getting Paul Henderson into the Hall. Campaign for him here in a couple of lines.

He scored the biggest goal in the history of the sport. Case closed. If for no other reason, he should be in. All international hockey as we know it was born out of that series and you could even go so far as to say those early international events eventually spawned pros playing in the Olympics. They also gave way to Western and Eastern Europeans playing in the NHL.

All of that came after 1972; without Canada winning in a tight series, I truly think things would have unfolded differently. It whetted everyone’s appetite for more and we all know the rest of the story.

To not singularly honour this man for what he accomplished while year after year we continue to put in members of the losing Soviet team is an abject farce.

10) Do you have a favorite hockey commentator?

My favourite hockey commentator currently is Dave Schreiber; He mostly covers the Ottawa 67′s radio but also works part time with Ottawa Senators radio.

Bonus: Do you like the shoot-out?

I do like the shootouts, as long as they never, ever, ever grace a playoff game.