Larry Aurie's #6

[betterREDthandead 58]

BetterREDthandead,

Aurie toiled with a miserable Red Wings team for years and lead the organization to its first ever Cup. He was the Wings first All-Star and a total heart and soul type player who was not afraid to drop the gloves (despite being 5'6 and 140 lbs) and lead the Wings forwards both offensively and defensively. If the HHoF was around back then, he would be in it for sure (one of the top forwards of his era, leading the league in goals once and top 5 in points several times, with as many first team all star selections as Yzerman and Fedorov)... just what is it about him that does not make his number retirement worthy?

That's just thing -- Larry Aurie certainly deserved it at the time, and it was never questioned for decades.

It is certainly possible a number of Wings players in the future will eclipse Yzerman's accomplishments, and Yzerman could end up looking just like Aurie right now. I would be pretty pissed if a future owner just decided to take it down.

Breaking it down...

Aurie toiled with a miserable Red Wings team for years and lead the organization to its first ever Cup.

Which are we going to give him credit for, being on a bad team or a good one? A lot of players excelled for bad Red Wings teams, it's nothing special. And by what standard did he lead the organization to the first Cup? He wasn't the captain. He didn't lead the team in scoring that year, nor games played, and was tied for 11th out of 14 in team playoff scoring.

with as many first team all star selections as Yzerman and Fedorov...

The league was barely one-fourth the size and teams were maybe half the size. I'm not really impressed by this stat because of the greatly increased talent pool Yzerman and Fedorov had to contend with. It's an unfair comparison, and incredibly misleading, given that the correct answer for all three is "once." That doesn't make Aurie a pre-eminent forward of his day, since Aurie was competing with probably about 60-80 players and Yzerman and Fedorov with well over 300.

I know Aurie's number's aren't great, but at the time he retired he was the Red Wings franchise leader in games played and goals scored, and he was third in assists and second in points.

(Yes, different poster, I know, but same line of argument.)

This sort of accomplishment did not get Syd Howe's number retired.

one of the top forwards of his era, leading the league in goals once and top 5 in points several times

If by "several" you mean "twice".

just what is it about him that does not make his number retirement worthy?

I'll tell you, then.

He was a good, not great, player of his time. He only truly had four seasons of really notable play, and seven seasons of playing decently but not greatly. He led the Wings in scoring only twice during those four years of good play. Of the Wings of that era I would say he's overshadowed at least by Syd Howe and Ebbie Goodfellow, and he was absolutely nowhere near to being "one of the top forwards of his era," as you claim. Howie Morenz, Bill Cook, Cecil Dillon, Syd Howe, Marty Barry, Dit Clapper, Auriel Joliat, Busher Jackson, Joe Primeau, Marty Conacher, Frank Boucher.....the list goes on. When talking about the best forwards of the era Aurie doesn't at all stack up.

What is it that does not make his number retirement worthy? Because in no way did he stand clearly head and shoulders above his contemporaries. He was one of a parade of good players. Aurie was not Steve Yzerman or even Sergei Fedorov. He was Slava Kozlov with a fighting streak.

[egroen 384]

Which are we going to give him credit for, being on a bad team or a good one? A lot of players excelled for bad Red Wings teams, it's nothing special.

Aurie was the first captain of the "Red Wings", snd every quote I read of him describes him as a leader of the team. Yzerman gets a lot of the credit he gets from toiling with a horrible Wings team and finally leading them to their first Cup in decades. Aurie helped lead the team to their first Stanley Cup ever. Possibly significant? Worthy of merit? Especially considering they were considered huge underdogs at the time. Do you think the Blues will hesitate to put someone up when they finally win a Cup? Believe it or not, that is an important thing to a team.

The league was barely one-fourth the size and teams were maybe half the size. I'm not really impressed by this stat because of the greatly increased talent pool Yzerman and Fedorov had to contend with. It's an unfair comparison, and incredibly misleading, given that the correct answer for all three is "once." That doesn't make Aurie a pre-eminent forward of his day, since Aurie was competing with probably about 60-80 players and Yzerman and Fedorov with well over 300.

Wow, what a sweeping dismissal of the entire Originl 6 era - including 5 out of the 6 numbers currently retired, and 7 out of 11 Stanley Cups. Should those numbers come down as well and should the Stanley Cup banners from those years even be bothered to be hung?

Or do you think it was possible that Aurie was facing the top 60-80 hockey players in the world at the time? Was Yzerman really competing with the Boyd Devereauxs of the NHL, or was he competing with the top 20-30 hockey players in the NHL, year-after-year, just like the Original 6 players were?

Are we going to dismiss Yzerman in 40 years because he was not competing in the globalized NHL, with over 1,500 players from South America to East Asia?

If by "several" you mean "twice".

Either you accept the history and significance of the NHL back to the Originsl 6 or you do not, there is no magical cut-off date when the hockey played in one year or even era is no longer significant and worthy of note. Playing against the top hockey players in the world at the time, Aurie lead the entire league in playoff points one year, lead the league in goals another season, was a runner-up in points and placed in the top 4 in another. .. all while being a top defensive forward and penalty killer. How many Red Wings players can say that? That is more comparable to the Yzermans and Fedorovs than it is the Kozlovs.

Edited October 18, 2008 by egroen

[betterREDthandead 58]

Aurie was the first captain of the "Red Wings", snd every quote I read of him describes him as a leader of the team.

Fine, if we're only going to include "Red Wings" history and not when they were the Falcons or Cougars, then we absolutely should not retire the number of a guy who played only six years for the Wings.

But that's kind of silly, because the Falcons and Cougars are also the Wings the same as the Washington Bullets are the Washington Wizards. So the point you make here is equally useless.

Do you think the Blues will hesitate to put someone up when they finally win a Cup?

Since when are the Blues comparable to the Wings? I'm not at all willing to use other teams' number retirement standards for the Wings.

snd every quote I read of him describes him as a leader of the team. Yzerman gets a lot of the credit he gets from toiling with a horrible Wings team and finally leading them to their first Cup in decades. Aurie helped lead the team to their first Stanley Cup ever.

A leader of the team. Helped lead the team. It's exactly as I said. What did Aurie do to stand out from the crowd, either in the league or on his own team? Doug Young was the captain of the team that won that Cup. Marty Barry led the team in regular season scoring and John Sorrell led the team in the playoffs. Mud Bruneteau scored the famous goal to end the longest playoff game in history, and Ebbie Goodfellow was a second-team All Star, the only Wing representing. What did Aurie do to stand out?

Wow, what a sweeping dismissal of the Originl 6 - including 5 out of the 6 numbers currently retired. Should those numbers come down as well and should the Stanley Cup banners from those years even be bothered to be hung?

What nonsense. You're taking my argument off into the clouds. It is always more impressive to win a competition against large numbers of competitors than small numbers. Think about what you're saying - and if you're going to use a flimsy argument like that, know what you're going against. Sid Abel made four All-Star teams - 2 first teams and 2 seconds. Ted Lindsay made 8 first teams. Gordie Howe made 12. That's dominance. Aurie made 1. That's not dominance. Yzerman and Fedorov made one each, and again, against 25-30 teams worth of players instead of 6 or 8.

Are we going to dismiss Yzerman in 40 years because he was not competing in the globalized NHL, with over 1,500 players from South America to East Asia?

If in 40 years, the NHL is three times the size, with 90 teams and nearly 2000 players, then yes - any player who can maintain dominance against that much larger talent pool would be much more impressive than Yzerman.

Either you accept the history of the NHL back to the Originsl 6 or you do not. Playing against the top hockey players in the world at the time, Aurie lead the entire league in playoff points one year, lead the league in goals one season, was a runner-up in points and placed in the top 4 in another.

First off you listed one season twice. He had one season where he led the league in goals and placed in the top four scoring. In one other season - just one - he was 3rd. Not runner up as you claim. That makes two. That is nothing even close to "top 5 in points several times" as you originally said.

During Aurie's Wings career he was top five in the league in points twice - a claim that 14 other players can make during that exact time period - 7 of whom beat that number.

You can word Aurie's scoring accomplishments however you like, but this can't be escaped: Aurie was nowhere near the pre-eminent scorer even on his own team. Howe, Lewis, Goodfellow (a defenseman), Marty Barry while he was a Wing....quite a number of players better than Aurie at this.

So he had a total of three seasons where he did something noteworthy. Three. You can reword his accomplishments all you want, but you can't reword it so that they stand out above other Wings of the time like Herbie Lewis, Syd Howe, Ebbie Goodfellow. The numbers currently hanging in the rafters were worn by players who stood above the entire league, let alone their own team. They were the preeminent players of their day. Aurie cannot make that claim.

[egroen 384]

Since when are the Blues comparable to the Wings? I'm not at all willing to use other teams' number retirement standards for the Wings.

Since the Blues have not won a Stanley Cup -- in 1936, neither had the Red Wings. Is it fair to say that first one is something special?

What did Aurie do to stand out from the crowd, either in the league or on his own team?

As has been pointed out, when he reitered due to a fractured leg at the age of 32, he lead the franchise in games played and goals scored, and he was third in assists and second in points. Is that good enough for you?

He lead the entire league in the playoffs once (and is actually still one of the best PPG performers in Red Wings history (in a low scoring era no less), and we have now whittled down that he was a league leading goal scorer one year and placed top 4 in points twice. If that is not impressive enough, just why did Norris and Adams decide to retire his jersey? Maybe it was for the intangibles many of us argue Yzerman was greater than his numbers would indicate (Yzerman, who never lead the league in points, assists or goals and was a 1st team all star once) - heart, leadership, defensive play, grit, loyalty, class, etc.... from all accounts Aurrie had it in spades. Jack Adams was once asked how a young Gordie Howe measured up to Larry Aurie - he was the measuring block for the Wings of that time. Thoes are the sort of things you, amongst others, have been pestering me about over why Fedorov should not have his number retired - because Fedorov supposedly lacked some of those qualities - so surely they must count for a lot in your book, right?

If in 40 years, the NHL is three times the size, with 90 teams and nearly 2000 players, then yes - any player who can maintain dominance against that much larger talent pool would be much more impressive than Yzerman.

So you would be fine with them taking down Yzerman's number in that scenario?

What nonsense. You're taking my argument off into the clouds. It is always more impressive to win a competition against large numbers of competitors than small numbers.

Oh please - that is a ridiculous statement; the best are the best and the cream always rises to the top - there were obviously minor leagues at the time of Aurie and only the best players made the NHL. If we lobbed off the bottom 100, or even 200 of the players in the NHL today would that have any bearing on the league leaders? If anything, it would bring the numbers down because every team would be full of nothing but the best talent in the world, just like in the original 6 days. If the league expanded today, and doubled the teams and number of players would it magically make Ovechkin that much better, now that he was playing against a lot more AHLers? To borrow from your avatar, would Michael Phelps' swims be that much more impressive if instead of the top two swimmers from each country being invited to the Olympics, the top 50 were there? How about if we threw in all the swimmers in the lap pools of all the YMCAs to make him look even better?

Ebbie Goodfellow and Larry Aurie are excellent representatives from those early Cup winning teams - I have already stated that. After them you can take a look at Syd Howe, who was also a member of the '43 Cup winning team. Herbie Lewis might be your next bet after Howe, if you wanted to keep going.

Norris and Adams felt so strongly that Aurie exemplified the Red Wings from that era they retired his number - I feel that should be honored.

Edited October 18, 2008 by egroen

[egroen 384]

Ultimately it comes down to this:

Here you have what was the proto-typical Red Wing that set the standard for Wings players to this day: a skilled player who was amongst the best in the league offensively, was more than defensively responsible, worked his ass off, was not afraid to mix it up and get involved physically despite his size limits and by all accounts was a catalyst for making the Red Wings a winning team for the first time ever. His number was officially retired for over 40 years... and you are going to sit there and say his legacy and family does not deserve to see his number in the rafters?

Edited October 18, 2008 by egroen

[betterREDthandead 58]

Since the Blues have not won a Stanley Cup -- in 1936, neither had the Red Wings. Is it fair to say that first one is something special?

As has been pointed out, when he reitered due to a fractured leg at the age of 32, he lead the franchise in games played and goals scored, and he was third in assists and second in points. Is that good enough for you?

No. How many times do I have to say that? What about the guy who was first in points - why not him? What about Syd Howe, who retired as the actual leader in all those categories? You shuffle him off afterwards, "maybe you can take a look at him." Why is it that retiring third in assists and second in points better to you than retiring #1 in each as Howe did?

Or maybe the Senators should retire Radek Bonk's number? What you say here about Aurie, you can say much the same about Bonk when he left the Sens. Franchise leader in games played, etc.

He lead the entire league in the playoffs once (and is actually still one of the best PPG performers in Red Wings history (in a low scoring era no less), and we have now whittled down that he was a league leading goal scorer one year and placed top 4 in points twice.

Why are you so impressed by the achievements of one or two years? When did a couple years become enough to honor a player with the highest of honors? You keep harping on him leading the league in playoff scoring. Once. How many times do I have to tell you this is not impressive?

Thoes are the sort of things you, amongst others, have been pestering me about over why Fedorov should not have his number retired - because Fedorov supposedly lacked some of those qualities - so surely they must count for a lot in your book, right?

Go back and see why I think Fedorov's number should not be retired and see if I ever mentioned "qualities" or any such thing.

Oh please - that is a ridiculous statement; the best are the best and the cream always rises to the top - there were obviously minor leagues at the time of Aurie and only the best players made the NHL.

Do not claim the NHL then is the same quality it is now. Don't even pretend. You yourself said it was a lower-scoring era, did you ever stop to think why that was?

To borrow from your avatar, would Michael Phelps' swims be that much more impressive if instead of the top two swimmers from each country being invited to the Olympics, the top 50 were there?

Ridiculous. Are you claiming that Larry Aurie is the Michael Phelps of swimming? In other words, the best hockey player ever? You once cited the Hockey News top 100 in your case for Red Kelly, so you seem to value their rankings. Where does Aurie stand in the top 100?

heart, leadership, defensive play, grit, loyalty, class, etc.... from all accounts Aurrie had it in spades.

From all accounts Kris Draper has it in spades, too, and he's played more seasons than Aurie did. From all accounts Tomas Holmstrom has it in spades too, and he's played more seasons than Aurie did AND has similar PPG stats, both playoffs and regular season.

and you are going to sit there and say his legacy and family does not deserve to see his number in the rafters?

Precisely.

[egroen 384]

Do not claim the NHL then is the same quality it is now. Don't even pretend. You yourself said it was a lower-scoring era, did you ever stop to think why that was?

Usually the high-scoring eras are due to expansion and a watering down of the league(WW2 and players leaving to the WHA, for example). In the Original 6 days the competitive level of all the players was high, compared to eras immediately following expansion where what had been minor league level players are now making NHL teams and getting significant playing time. This opens it up for the top level of players and gives them room to score even more.

My comparison to Phelps was only that his accomplishments are not lessened because he was swimming against a very small pool of competitors at the Olympics (only two swimmers from each qualifying country are invited to the Olympics). He would not look any better or worse if you invited the top 50 swimmers from each country.

From all accounts Kris Draper has it in spades, too, and he's played more seasons than Aurie did. From all accounts Tomas Holmstrom has it in spades too, and he's played more seasons than Aurie did AND has similar PPG stats, both playoffs and regular season.

That's an excellent point and I should have brought it up before. There are a lot of Wings fans who think Draper and Holmstrom have already earned their numbers hanging in the rafters. They have those qualities Aurie did that earned him the recognition of the coach and owner of the time and the honor of having his number retired. Now imagine if Draper with his heart, leadership, loyalty, defensive play and grit actually lead the league in points in the playoffs one year. Let's say he also won the Rocket Richard trophy another year and finished top 4 in points twice out of the entire league. We would be in almost 100% agreement Draper should have his jersey retired! That was Aurie.

I also asked a very specific question about Yzerman and I would be curious what your answer is.

Edited October 20, 2008 by egroen

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

This is what I have learned, through research done twelve years ago, about the case of Lawrence Henry Aurie.

The Retiring of Aurie’s “#6”

On March 20, 1938, the Red Wings held “Larry Aurie Night”. There was tremendous speculation regarding the night, as rumors were swirling about what was going to be announced; a job as a Scout or maybe a Coaching position with their Pittsburgh farm club in the IAHL lay ahead for Aurie, who had already announced his retirement at seasons end. The Club themselves said something big was going to happen. During their game with the New York Rangers, the following took place, as printed in the March 21, 1938 edition of the Detroit “News”:

“Before the second period both teams filed out to the blue lines while Harry Kendall, representing a committee of fans, presented the veteran with a silver tea service. Baskets of flowers were the gift of the Olympia Ushers’ Club and Frankie Boucher, who has been more accustomed to trying to flatten Aurie than congratulating him, skated over to shake his hand and present a testimonial letter from the Rangers.

After the game Adams announced that the big, block “6” Aurie carried through so many campaigns never again would be worn by a Red Wing. ‘It wouldn’t seen right for any one else to wear it”, he explained as Larry’s teammates nodded agreement.’”

The First Un-retiring of Aurie’s “#6”

Aurie was down in Pittsburgh, where he was Player-Coach of the Hornets. Sometime before the game of January 10, 1939, Coach and General Manager “Jack“ Adams phoned Aurie, asking for any kind of help he could send to the parent club. At the time, Detroit’s record, after 25 games was 7W-14L-4T. Adams was thinking in terms of prospects being loaned the the parent club; Aurie had other ideas. The day of the game, he arrived with his skates and two sticks, ready to play. He dressed for the game and scored the first goal in a 3-0 win over Montreal Canadiens. He retired for a second, and last, time from the NHL following this game.

The Killing off of Old Traditions

In the “Red Wing Book”, by Andrew Podnicks, he has chapter entitled “Detroit Red Wings Trophies”. It deals with six trophies that used to be awarded annually to different players. One of them was last awarded in 1976-77, while the other five were last awarded in 1980-81. Bruce A. Norris sold the Club in 1982. The awarding of these trophies stopped with the Norris ownership, but could easily have been continued by Mr. Ilitch, but he chose not to for whatever reasons. So the stopping of old traditions started before the present ownership and didn’t start with the Aurie story. But it is another example of how, one by one, any remote connection with the early years of the Club (unless it was “big name”) has been severed. In the eyes of current ownership, Aurie was not “big name”. However, in the history of the Club, and especially with the maintaining of its tradition, he is big name and should be so honoured. He was the first player honoured by the Detroit Hockey Club and that honour should remain and be made official.

[egroen 384]

Thanks for the post!

I'm actually curious which 6 trophies were awarded by the team. I wonder if there is a record of the recipients somewhere? Does the book actually list them?

Edited January 13, 2009 by egroen

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

Thanks for the post!

I'm actually curious which 6 trophies were awarded by the team. I wonder if there is a record of the recipients somewhere? Does the book actually list them?

Thank you very much. Since you asked...

From "The Red Wings Book" by Andrew Podnieks, 1996, pp 425 - 427:

Frank J. Murphy Memorial Trophy

Awarded annually to the player scoring the most goals during the regular season. It was first presented in 1944-45 by Mrs. Constance Murphy in memory of her husband, former Lieutenant-Governor of the State of Michigan. It was later re-named the James D. Norris Trophy, but was retired after 1981 the the Norris family sold the club.

Harry A. Gormley Trophy

Presented annually to the player leading the team in point scoring for the season. First presented in 1941-42 by the heirs of the late Harry Gormely. It was later re-named the Bruce A. Norris Trophy but was retired after 1981 the the Norris family sold the club.

Hockey Writer's Trophy

Presented to the club's most valuable player as selected by the Writer's Association, originally donated by the late Harry Jacobson in 1941-42. When he passed away, the writers adopted it.

Stu Evans Trophy

Emblematic of the most sportsmanlike Red Wing. First awarded in 1942-43.

George Vandervreken Memorial (For 'em) Trophy

In recognition of the team's unsung hero. First presented in 1950-51.

Detroit Sports Broadcasters Association Plaque

To the player adjudged to be the finest rookie on the team. First presented in 1948-49.

[egroen 384]

I would assume most teams have awards like this they hand out each year - but the Wings no longer do?

Don't they have a "hard hat" award they give to a player after each game -- I know a few teams have that, and thought the Red Wings did for a while, if they still do not.

[hockeytown9321 0]

I would assume most teams have awards like this they hand out each year - but the Wings no longer do?

Don't they have a "hard hat" award they give to a player after each game -- I know a few teams have that, and thought the Red Wings did for a while, if they still do not.

The Detroit broadcasters and sportswriters still name a rookie of the year. I don't know if there's an actualy trophy for it or not though.

[uk_redwing 495]

the number of total retired jersey numbers went from 2 to 6, an increase of 4

And I thought my maths skills were good...