Maurice "Rocket" Richard or Guy "The Flower" Lafleur?
Maurice Richard or Guy Lafleur?
Tough pick eh?
As the Centennial celebrations for the Montreal Canadiens continue during the 2008-09 season, the question comes to you, the sports fan.
Who would you rather have on the wing lighting up the score sheet?
The man who brought the Canadiens to fame in the 1940s and 50s?
Or the all-time leading scorer in Montreal Canadiens history in the 1970s and 80s?
Maurice Richard's story is legendary and goes down as one of the most well-known and possibly most awe-inspiring stories. Richard's determination and his will to succeed no matter the cost helped raise the game of hockey and the NHL out of the gutter in the 1940s.
With Richard at the helm, the Canadiens would win eight Stanley Cups, including five straight from 1956-1960. Richard's 50 goals in 50 games was a first in the NHL and his 544 goal stood as the benchmark for all players to beat and has since then been surpassed many times.
Not only was Richard one of the greatest Canadiens of all-time, he was an icon for all of French Canada. His play willed those in future generations such as Jean Beliveau, Guy Lafleur, and others to play and succeed all while wearing the beloved CH.
Guy Lafleur played fourteen seasons in a Montreal uniform before partially retiring and coming back later with the rival New York Rangers and Quebec Nordiques. But Lafleur is known for his scoring prowess during the 1970s.
Lafleur would capture five Stanley Cups in his career, along with three Art Ross Trophies as leading NHL scorer, two Hart Memorial Trophies and three Lester B. Pearson Awards. He also took home the 1977 Conn Smythe Trophy.
Number ten goes down as the leading point producer in a Canadiens jersey with 1,246. He would later have partial successful seasons in New York and Quebec.
Richard and Lafleur's numbers hang in the Bell Centre today.
So BR creatures, who would you pick to have on your wing?
Richard or Lafleur? And why?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?