Talk:Ron Hextall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Ron Hextall has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.


I kinda feel like "perfected" is a strong word to use to describe Rick DiPietro..., anyone else think that just Brodeur can suffice? -Benthorot

→I agree, that sentence sounds like it was written by an islander's fan. No hockey expert (however defined) would say that DiPietro has "perfected" any aspect of the game. -Chiefhoser


Hextall was also known for being a little hot under the collar, not only in roughing it up with some opposing players but also for badgering officials and complaining about inference. I'm not really sure how to add this regarding NPOV, but I think you'll find this fairly well-documented elsewhere. Maybe noting his PIMs would be a place to start. Wencer 05:12, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

No own goal[edit]

This is an ENCYCLOPEDIA... not every reader will know that hockey stat keeping is not the same as say football. A non fan may reasonably analogize. It is important to actually spell out that Hextall shot the puck directly into the net unimpeded, while Smith's goal was the act of the opposing team. That is niot vandaslism. that FACT that the scoring rules is silly is also a fact Bona Fides 14:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think I fully explained the silly hockey scoring rule without being excessive. Football has an own goal so that a player's goal stats would not be inflated. It's like the error system of baseball scoring. Bona Fides 14:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

No, saying "this is a silly and stupid quirk of hockey statistics" is an opinion and subject to WP:POV. ccwaters 15:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
It is quirky if other sports don't do this... unless football is out of the pattern and say baseball assigns offensive credit to opponents error. The question should always be, what would a general non fan of this sport expect if you don't actually spell out the fact that we have a unique scoring rule. Bona Fides 16:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC) It would be stupid if the rule is so counter intuitive from analozing from otter sports that non fans would be prone to error. It is smart to choose obvious scoring systems. Bona Fides 16:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I just clicked on your POV link... I never thought that a scoring rule for stats would be controversial Bona Fides 16:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC) I don't think that it is.
Maybe the error is the assumption that if a "friendly" player is the last person to touch the ball/puck before it goes into the net then it is inherently that player's blame. Maybe it he was playing his role perfectly and it just bounced of him. The scoring concepts are just different. Hextall's article isn't the venue to compare or evaluate their merits. ccwaters 18:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hall of Famer?[edit]

Does Ron Hextall deserve to be in the Hall of Fame? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC).


Can someone try to make a stats table? The stats now look unorganized and indefinitely hard to follow. I could if I have time, but it will take a while. Hasek is the best 16:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Acctually, I'll make a chart. Hasek is the best 17:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
There you go. I updated it a bit to fit into the hockey stat standard. --Djsasso 21:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The Goal[edit]

This section talks more about Smith's goal than Hextall's. Can we get more information on his goal? It makes it sound like Hextall's goal was exactly the same as Smith's, but also says that it was different for some reason. I'm confused. Wrad (talk) 23:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that it should be mentionned that he actually scored 2 goals, Ron Hextall and Martin Brodeur are the only NHL goalies to be credited with two career goals (each scoring once in the regular season and once in the playoffs), though only Hextall has scored two goals by shooting the puck into an empty net. I also think the 2 first times a goalie scrored a goal in the NHL this way (by shooting it directly in the net) it was him too, but that im not sure.

Maine Mariners?[edit]

So, the Flyers added Hextall to their hall of fame tonight and comcast sportsnet ran a bunch of montages throughout the telecast. What stuck me a odd was one of the very first shots was a still of young Hextall clearly in a Maine Mariners jersey. The mariners were the Flyer affiliate until 1983 while Hextall was still in the major juniors. Could this be a training camp pic and if so why would they showcase it so prominently in this montage? ccwaters (talk) 02:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Playing style[edit]

I got my hands on a book that discusses Hexy's style of play a bit, and I was wondering if there would be any objection to me fiddling with the entire article to concentrate the commentary on his style from the Career section into the Playing style section. I'm asking because I'm not a primary editor and I would probably end up introducing significant changes to the article. Maxim(talk) 21:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Definitely feel free to add to the playing style, but perhaps try to avoid cutting too much away from the career section? But to be honest, do what works best for you, and I can always fiddle things back in if I think you've gone too far: then we can argue a little and eventually compromise on something! Harrias talk 21:22, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ron Hextall/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Concerned about some weasel words in the "Playing style" section:
  • (Rogie Vachon's) view was shared by many, leading Hextall to be tagged as one of the most "revered and reviled" players in the league.

There is a citation at the end of the sentence, but it's not clear that the fact that Vachon's view of Hextall was shared by lots of people. The beginning of this sentence could use rephrasing. (Addressed.)

Usage of en dashes for scores and playing seasons appears to be correct and consistent.

2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Not very familiar with the guide to layout, so I'll let someone with more experience tackle this one.
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines. Some statements in the beginning of the "Playing style" section appear to be unreferenced, specifically:
  • He distinguished himself by using his stick as a defenceman would... (Addressed)
2c. it contains no original research. One statement in the beginning of "Playing style" sounds like OR:
  • Hextall's puck-handling ability meant that it was inadvisable...because Hextall would invariable (sic) get to the puck first and clear it out of his zone towards a waiting player in the neutral zone. (Addressed)
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Hextall's career is covered extensively. He is most obviously well-known for his career with the Flyers (and this is reflected in the content), but his careers with other teams in the IHL, WHL, and AHL are also covered. There is also a section devoted to general commentary and notes on his general playing style, which is an excellent touch.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). No obvious need for any splitting of information. However, the "first three seasons" section runs a little long. Could it be feasibly shortened? Here are a few suggestions:
  • Ken Wregget replaced him, and was described as remarkable during the team's 4–1 victory, which meant that they progressed to the Conference final, to face the Montreal Canadiens...The Flyers won the following game to extend the series to six games, but lost the next game 4–2, and were eliminated. -- Although relevant to the games after Hextall was replaced after his injuries, this has more to do with the Flyers performance in general in the series, rather than Hextall.
  • Just over a month later, Hextall became the first goaltender to shoot at goal and score in the NHL when he scored an empty net goal with 72 seconds left of the game against the Boston Bruins.[note 1] The Flyers were leading the game 4–2, prompting the Bruins to pull their goaltender in favour of an extra attacker. The puck had been dumped into the Philadelphia zone by the Bruins, and Hextall picked it up without any players near him. He lined up the shot and fired it into the air; it bounced near Boston's blue line and rolled into the net.[36] Hextall had targeted becoming the "first NHL goaltender to score a true goal" over a year earlier,[17] and, speaking after the game, commented that: "I knew I could do it. It was a matter of when." -- I the general point of him making an empty net goal can is worth keeping, but this could be trimmed. For instance, I think the circumstances of the score, the time left, and the events leading up to the goal could be left out or more briefly summarized.
  • The scores of individual games are brought up when they do not appear necessary (e.g. At the conclusion of a 4–3 victory for the Devils... when referring to a Devils game where Hextall got into a fight, but Hextall's performance is not commented on). The same goes for Win/Loss records (e.g. The Oilers won the final game of the series 3–1, ensuring that they won the Stanley Cup with a 4–3 series victory). Is it important to include this information when it is indirectly related to Hextall's performance?


4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Good use of quotes and phrasing when describing Hextall's fights or penalties. This may have been the most iffy:
Hextall sought revenge, aiming a savage slash at the back of Nilsson's knees. After the game Hextall betrayed no remorse for the action, only for striking the wrong player...

Maybe "savage" is a bit too strong, but based on the quotes from Hextall and the circumstances, I think this description of the event is fair. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 20:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. No obvious signs of recent edit warring. Player is retired, and unlikely to have produced much controversy lately, anyhow.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content. Current images follow image guidelines. Both are licensed under Creative Commons.
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Really? No free images of Hextall? It would definitely be preferable to have one considering there are other pictures on the page, especially one of Broddeur! The best I could find is this vector art, which is under a Creative Commons license.
(Addressed--none were found)
7. Overall assessment. Looks good!

Reviewer: I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 07:20, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Just a quick note; I'm getting married tomorrow (30 July), and will then be away on honeymoon for two weeks, so I'm not really going to be able to respond that well to this review. I'll be able to get online from time to time on honeymoon: but let's face it, that's not why I'm there! I'd suggest maybe contacting User:Maxim and seeing if they can look over the review: otherwise I'd ask if you can be patient and allow me those two weeks? Harrias talk 13:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Back from honeymoon now: I'm going to be a bit busy catching up with life, but I'll try to get started on these points over the next few days, thank you for your patience. Harrias talk 07:31, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Addressing concerns
  • Right, starting to slowly look over this. With your 1b point, I can see the argument for what you are saying; but I would argue that the article itself says "A seemingly perfect complement to his teammates, the once and future Broad Street Bullies, he is at once revered and reviled." Personally, I read this as the article author stating a well-held viewpoint; but if you feel it is the journalist simply reflecting the comments of Rogie Vachon and Bryan Murray then I can understand that, and can work on toning the language down.
Well, considering the view appears to be held by numerous commentators, I can accept the current wording. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 20:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
  • The two unreferenced sentences are, I think, things that User:Maxim added to the article, although I will double-check that. I am unsure if they are supported by his offline source: Maxim is currently on a wikibreak, so if I can't find anything backing the statements up, and he doesn't come back by the time I've had a good look around, I'll move them out of the article at least until his return. Other than these few points, is there anything in the article I need to look at reworking, or are you otherwise happy with it? Harrias talk 19:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
If they can be sources statements, they can be reinstated. I've added in a length concern for the "first three seasons" section and wanted to know if a free picture can be found for Hextall. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 20:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Looking at these again, I am 90% sure that they are supported by the offline source: however, I have found and added a reference for the second quote, about playing dump and chase, and am still looking around for one on the first. Harrias talk 14:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comments so far: no luck with those sources yet, but I'll keep hunting around. With regards to free images, I've scoured everywhere I can think of without anything cropping up so far. I really want to find something. I don't think that image you found as suitable, as while it has a CC license, it is a noncommercial one, which I'm pretty sure Wikipedia doesn't allow (WP:NONCOM). I appreciate your length concerns, and will have a look at trimming some of the superfluous information away, though I think that some of the context of how the Flyers did in general while he was there is relevant, so some of it is worth keeping. Harrias talk 21:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
    • I've trimmed the article a little, I am wary about taking too much about for the reason I've given above. Not sure about the goal: I understand what you are saying, but on the other hand, it is one of the key things he is known for, so I think the description is justified. Harrias talk 14:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Looks good, excellent work. I'm trying to seek a second opinion before this gets approved, mostly because I am not experienced with WP:MOS and that this was my first GA review. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 15:30, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The only MoS issue I noticed is that reference titles aren't supposed to be in all-caps, so things like "SPORTS PEOPLE: PRO HOCKEY" need to be changed to "Sports People: Pro Hockey". Besides that it looks fine, and the reviewer can pass this once that's fixed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 02:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the second pair of eyes: I've now corrected the offending titles. Harrias talk 12:13, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Informal review[edit]

I'm going through and copy-editing where I can. Anything I'm not sure about is here, and please revert if I make a mess or change anything.

  • "He is currently the Vice President and Assistant General Manager...": Needs "as of 2011" somewhere according to WP:DATED. A few other issues like this in the lead.
  • I've no problem; maybe see what others think? --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  • "Despite the Flyers' loss to the Edmonton Oilers in seven games...": My ignorance of North American sport rears its ugly head here, but does this mean they lost seven games or was it a seven game "series" (for want of a better word!)?
  • It was a best of seven series: so first to four wins. Presumably this needs clarifying: would a note suffice, or should I try and write it inline (so to speak)? Harrias talk 18:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  • I always prefer a good note! --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  • "recording goals against averages below 3.00..." Ignorance again, but should this be capitalised or in some way pointed out as a statistic? When I first looked at it (ignorance again) I didn't realise it was a statistical term.
  • Would simply putting (GAA) after the term be sufficient?
  • Yes, but I still wonder should it be Goals Against Averages instead of goals against averages.--Sarastro1 (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Junior hockey
  • It may be useful to give a brief suggestion as to the level of the leagues he played in; i.e. how many rungs down the ladder?
  • Things don't tend to be quite so clear cut in this regard; I'll see if I can find anything quantifying them, but it might be difficult.
  • "Flyer's scout Jerry Melnyk said he could understand why many teams did not rate Hextall: "There were teams who thought he was loony."" I'm not sure this adds much and may be better cut.
  • "Hextall set a record for the most penalty minutes accumulated by a goaltender, being assessed for 117 minutes during the regular season.": Jargony? I'm not sure of the significance here and it should be spelt out.

Professional hockey
  • "...who won the championship 4–2...": Was this the result in the final, or a series of games?
  • Rephrased to "who won the championship by four games to two." for clarity: is that any better?

More to follow over the next few days. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

First three seasons
  • "...Hextall was invited to the Flyers' training camp as a long-shot...": I don't like this too much as it is a little too sporting-journalese, but I don't know a better way to put it without sounding too pompous.
  • "conceded a goal from the first shot he faced in the game, but allowed no further shots past him": Repetition of shots; again my hockey-knowledge does not suggest a better word.
  • Would "no further goals past him" work do you think? I'm not sure if it really means the same thing. Harrias talk 18:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  • "...commenting that, "I realize that I've subjected both myself and Ron to criticism by going with him, but it's a decision that we feel very comfortable with."": Does this quote add much to what is already said?
  • Any retribution (official or otherwise) from swinging his stick?
  • The second paragraph of this section has a few too many "games" and "Oilers" and may need looking at a bit more.
  • Possibly a few too many quotes here as well about how great he is; I think one or two give the general idea.
  • "Speaking on behalf of the NHL, Brian O'Neill said that: "There is no justification for any player to swing his stick in retaliation and this is especially the case for a goaltender whose stick, because of its weight, can cause serious injury."": Again, I'm not sure this is necessary as the point is already made.
  • I've tweaked the goal description, but put anything back you think should be there.
  • Is it Flyers XXXman or Flyers' XXXman; I think there is some discrepancy (unless my eyes are going!).
  • Is there a link for period?

More to follow. --Sarastro1 (talk) 13:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Contract rebel and injury troubles
  • I've re-worded the part about the "rehabilitation assignment" to make it sound less jargon. Can you check I haven't changed the meaning?
  • Seems good to me. Harrias talk 21:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Preseason or pre-season?
  • CBC and TSN (Canadian broadcasters) use pre-season, I'll switch to that. Harrias talk 21:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Quebec Nordiques
  • "During the ten days between the trades being made and the arbitrator's ruling, there was a lot of speculation about which Flyers' and Rangers' players were involved in the potential trades.": Is this necessary as it disrupts the flow slightly. Possibly modify the next sentence to say :"Hextall was unhappy to be among players suggested as a potential trade."
  • " along with Peter Forsberg, Chris Simon, Mike Ricci, Kerry Huffman, Steve Duchesne, a first round selection (Jocelyn Thibault) in 1993, a first round selection (later traded to the Toronto Maple Leafs, later traded to the Washington Capitals - Nolan Baumgartner) in 1994, and $15,000,000 cash for Lindros.": This is a bit of a mess and very hard to follow which description belongs to which player. I would suggest merely saying "along with 6 [or is it 7?] other players."
  • Tidied this up a little, hopefully it reads better now? Harrias talk 21:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
New York Islanders
  • "...the two teams also traded first round draft picks (the Nordiques gained the 14th pick in place of the 23rd)": Too much again?
  • "Steve Thomas suggested that Hextall was "one of the best goalies in the league, easily in the top five or 10," while coach Al Arbour dismissed dropping Hextall, saying that "We're not playing well in front of the goaltender and he can only be as good as the guys in front of him."": Again, a little too much in my view, but not a big deal if it stays.
  • Link shutout?
Return to Philadelphia
  • "We Want Hex-tall": Why is it hyphenated?
  • Presumably to show the manner in which it was chanted: I was a bit dubious about the inclusion of this quote at all to be honest. Harrias talk 21:26, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

More to follow. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Playing style
  • This section is slightly messy and I would suggest a little reorganisation; what about a paragraph on his goaltending (there is not much about he actual ability to stop shots) and unusual style, then about his aggression, then the judgements that he was a bit of a psycho. Some overall career judgements would be quite good too, placing him somewhere in the grand scheme of things, and maybe something on his legacy if it exists.
  • Ouch. First paragraph is a bit of a mess. There are a few typos, but more to the point it is quite ponderous. It is hard to follow the descriptions of play which are rather laboured and do not really make it clear what is going on. I would imagine that a rough paraphrase of this paragraph would be: "Other goaltenders could not play the puck well technically and possessed a crude technique. Hextall, in contrast, played more like a defenseman and was technically skilled with the stick. Consequently, opposing teams could not pursue their usual methods of hitting the puck into their offensive zone as Hextall was able to return possession to his team." Maybe something like this, with the examples and descriptions removed would be more effective?
  • "...continued to move the puck" Is there a better way of saying this? Pass? There must be a technical term that sounds more elegant!
  • I've reworked the "soft goals" part, but I'm not sure it still reflects the source as I've said the tendency lasted through his career.
  • "Martin Brodeur modelled his own play on that of Hextall, saying "I love the fact that he was playing the puck. He was one of the first goalies that came out and played the puck. He was a little rough for my liking, but it was entertaining. The playing of the puck was the big thing."": Is this necessary? I think the point is already made.
  • "when killing a penalty they would frequently pass the puck back to him, relieving some of the pressure on his team": jargon. What is killing a penalty? And could it be expanded how this relieved pressure? Again, I imagine a paraphrase would be: "the team were able to use him as an outlet as defencemen could relieve pressure by passing the puck back to him".
  • "In addition, Hextall also serves..." WP:DATED.
  • Could this section be combined with personal life to bulk them out a little.
  • Ref for the statistics section?
  • Is the records section a little too much like trivia? I would suggest incorporating it in the main text.
  • I think that's everything, but I have this watchlisted.
  • Looks pretty good overall. I have not checked sourcing at all, and watch out that I haven't changed anything to UK English or made it sound too pompous.
  • Seems fairly comprehensive and gives a good picture of the guy. I can't see too many problems at FAC, but it needs non-sporting eyes to make sure for jargon. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ron Hextall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:01, 1 April 2016 (UTC)