Greatest team ever @ HMS?

dpkimmel2001

dpkimmel2001

Team Owner
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
36,192
Points
1,033
Location
Western PA
Good debate going on NASCAR Radio today. Which team is/was the greatest team ever @ HMS? Gordon/Evernham or Johnson/Knaus? How many of you were around to witness the dominance of the Gordon/Evernham combo? You have to wonder what may have been had Gordon/Evernham stuck together.
 
I'm gonna have to go Knauss/Johnson. There's been several great combos over there over the years. I wish Evernham would have stuck with Gordon, at least a while anyway. Really the move had great impacts on both and depending on your point of view, they weren't really good impacts. I'm sounding more like a Johnson fan everyday but you have to respect what he's done in the time frame he's done it. 56 wins, 5 straight championships, Daytona 500 (not with Chad though!) a couple brickyards, Coke 600's, and other crown jewel races. Let's face it, he's accomplished more in 10 seasons then some drivers have in 20+ years. I just don't think they get the credit they deserve. They've dominated a sport where dominating gets harder and harder. If they stick together, they'll be rewriting the record books soon. (IMO!)
 
This was on the radio? They were saying one of these two are the greatest ever? Sorry but I find that hard to believe. Dale Innman and Richard Petty, 192 wins!
Nuf said
 
Good question. I'll have to go with Ray and Jeff, because they dominated wins while winning 3 championships. I don't put a whole lot of stock on the 'in a row' thing. It took a lot of luck to keep the streak going in 2008 and 2010. It becomes a numbers game, but Chad and JJ are the best ever at points racing.

In the first 223 races for Jeff and Ray, they won 49 races for an amazing win percentage of 22%. That's winning more than 1 out of 5 races.

In the first 223 races for JJ and Chad, they won 30 races for an amazing win percentage of 15%, so they won about 1 out of 6.7.

Two amazing driver / CC combinations.

There's a lot of ways to look at this, so there is no right answer.
 
I gotta go with Knauss/Johnson, and an incredible honourable mention for Evernham/Gordon and I do feel what FFlash is saying about Hyde/Richmond.


The Johnson/Knauss string or five time deal just doesn't get enough credit nor does Johnson's driving ability. The guy is boring for sure, but he does get the job done. It also difficult to stay focused and hungry after you have been on top so long.


But every season and the drivers battles are different. Gordon is one of the all time greats, I do think his legacy suffers some when compared to Johnson's recent domination. Gordon also enjoyed his prime in the late 90s, and you cant do a straight apple to apples comparison so this is all impossible to prove. I also wonder about the health of Gordon's back in recent years, maybe as a professional he quit talking about it, and some problems linger.


The nervous system is effected by back problems as well as some reflexes. Again I think he is one of the greats and I am not trying to post a criticism. But just maybe the wonder boy of old no longer exist to battle Johnson like he could have in the 90s?



FlFlash and the Hyde?Richmond post. If anybody was around in 86 you would just had to have been anti Richmond not to enjoy that run. The reason they lost the title was because they sucked for the first 10 races. After the memorial day 600 they were about 25th in the points, I want to say that with confidence because I do remember making a mental note at the time, but I am saying about, because it was about 26 years ago.


They got hot and I think they had the biggest single season turn around in Nascar history. Sucking at the start was also was with a start up team.
Richmond was the ultimate Hot Dog, Ham, Entertainer, Show Man, Hollywood was the word. He was also born with money, and a hater could go off on his persona if they didn't want to see his brilliance


But the raw talent was real, he was gifted and his car control may have been the best ever, I cant think of anyone better.


A side story in 85, GPS who had a midweek benefit for the injured Butch Lindley, injuries that eventually proved fatal. Allison, Bonnet, and Richmond was there. A stunt driver was there doing bootleg slides, and other stuff. He offered the car to Richmond and he nailed the bootleg slides on the first attempt, man that was fun to watch. Maybe that does sound like much, you really had the to be there to appreciate. My favorite Richmond moment, the good times, I miss them and him,
 
I didn't get to see Tim race, but I've seen some clips. I love the one where he's racing Sr on a road course (I think) and he's REAL fast. He pulls within 6 inches of Dale's bumper and stays there until Sr waves him by. Intimidating the intimidator.
 
I really never cared for "Days of Thunder" Cole Trickle aint no Tim Richmond.
 
It's hard to compare Jeff and JJ due to the changing formats. Without the Chase it could be argued that Jeff would have 6 cups right now and JJ 2. Also, JJ didn't have to compete with Dale Earnhardt Sr every week. And Jeff raised the bar at HMS so high that Jimmie walked right into a dream situation where they had the best cars and engines in the business not to mention that JJ got Jeff's entire fleet of Cup winning cars.

But what JJ has done since coming to HMS has been incredible and he deserves tremendous credit for his driving skill, attitude and smoking hot wife.

My opinion is that Jeff's 85 wins and legacy as someone who completely revolutionized the sport (by starting the youth movement) puts him ahead of JJ. He's also won Cups and races under multiple crew chiefs which JJ has not.
 
I never thought about the state of HMS that Jeff walked into and what JJ had to work with. Nice work Matt.
 
Matthew2470 said:
It's hard to compare Jeff and JJ due to the changing formats. Without the Chase it could be argued that Jeff would have 6 cups right now and JJ 2. Also, JJ didn't have to compete with Dale Earnhardt Sr every week. And Jeff raised the bar at HMS so high that Jimmie walked right into a dream situation where they had the best cars and engines in the business not to mention that JJ got Jeff's entire fleet of Cup winning cars.

But what JJ has done since coming to HMS has been incredible and he deserves tremendous credit for his driving skill, attitude and smoking hot wife.

My opinion is that Jeff's 85 wins and legacy as someone who completely revolutionized the sport (by starting the youth movement) puts him ahead of JJ. He's also won Cups and races under multiple crew chiefs which JJ has not.
Click to expand...

That's some pretty fancy posting there. That's why I don't like the Chase, I feel Jeff has been cheated out of a couple cups. That's a good point you bring up, Jeff raced against Dale and things were plenty different. Jeff beat the best of the best. I just feel Chad and Jimmie are the best pair of driver and crew chief. If he asked who the best driver is, my answer would have been different
 
It's always hard to compare eras in sports, and the current era is a far different era than when Richmond raced and when Godon first came into CUP.

I always thought that Tim Richmond was one of the best of his time. When NA$$CAR went to Riverside Raceway and raced that road course he was always one to watch. And Harry Hyde? Brilliant!

Jeff and Ray were a hell of a team and the Rainbow Warriors pit crew was by far the best! Certainly one of the greatest teams in NA$$CAR history - not just HMS history.

But if you are going simply by results, the nod for best-ever HMS team HAS to go to the 48 with Jimmie-Chad. No matter the formula for determining a Champion, they accomplished something that will most likely never be matched in winning 5 straight titles.

Great Question! Great Thread!
 
That 5 in a row was astounding. It's just too bad that so many choose to discredit it.
 
Matthew2470 said:
That 5 in a row was astounding. It's just too bad that so many choose to discredit it.
Click to expand...


I agree with this....it is a shame that so many discount what Jimmie/Chad and the 48 team was able to accomplish. Yes, they walked into a very ideal situation, but winning 5 in a row is not an easy thing to do!

However, I do wish Jeff/Ray would have stayed together for a longer period of time. When they were together, many folks, myself included, thought Jeff would be the next "7 time". However, with the break up of that team, those dreams vanished pretty quickly. I do think HMS is really the "house that Jeff/Ray built" in a lot of ways, I also think that Mr. Hendrick has lost sight of that in many ways as well. I used to be a HUGE HMS fan, but when he cut Kyle Busch to pick up Dale Jr. I lost a lot of respect for him. I know that Kyle is a handful but I still believe he was the future of HMS. I am not bashing Jr., I am just saying that Rick seemed to have his eyes more on dollar signs than racing production with that move....
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
I was around for the Tim Richmond era and even in his best season, he still got beat.
Click to expand...

I watched Tim very closely in 1986 and 1987, yep he got beat butt he was the best driver on the track.

Tim Richmond/Harry Hyde 1986 season:
In 29 races.
8 Poles
15 front row starts
7 Wins
13 Top 5's
17 Top 10's
2 DNF's
Over 1000 laps led.
3rd in Champioship points.

Oh by the way it was his first year with HMS.
 
Matthew2470 said:
That 5 in a row was astounding. It's just too bad that so many choose to discredit it.
Click to expand...

It's a HUGE accomplishment, but nobody can argue the luck factor. He was good enough for 2nd in 2008 and 2010, but his competitors handed the championship to him. If they weren't such huge bonehead moves by Carl and Denny, I would be able to accept them as just racing.
 
FenderBumper said:
It's a HUGE accomplishment, but nobody can argue the luck factor. He was good enough for 2nd in 2008 and 2010, but his competitors handed the championship to him. If they weren't such huge bonehead moves by Carl and Denny, I would be able to accept them as just racing.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as luck. Everything happens for specific reasons. To chalk events up to luck is just lazy.
 
Matthew2470 said:
There is no such thing as luck. Everything happens for specific reasons. To chalk events up to luck is just lazy.
Click to expand...

Then I'll leave it to you, old sage of the oval, to come up with a better term for competitors handing JJ the championship at Talladega and Homestead.
 
Matthew2470 said:
Everything happens for specific reasons.
Click to expand...

I loathe that sediment!

To say that everything happens "for a reason" is such an eighth-grade mentality!

Sh!t happens because it happens. How one chooses to deal with the sh!t that happens is up to each individual that the sh!t happens to.

BTW, I don't believe in luck either...
 
Thegroundpounder99 said:
I'm gonna have to go Knauss/Johnson. There's been several great combos over there over the years. I wish Evernham would have stuck with Gordon, at least a while anyway. Really the move had great impacts on both and depending on your point of view, they weren't really good impacts. I'm sounding more like a Johnson fan everyday but you have to respect what he's done in the time frame he's done it. 56 wins, 5 straight championships, Daytona 500 (not with Chad though!) a couple brickyards, Coke 600's, and other crown jewel races. Let's face it, he's accomplished more in 10 seasons then some drivers have in 20+ years. I just don't think they get the credit they deserve. They've dominated a sport where dominating gets harder and harder. If they stick together, they'll be rewriting the record books soon. (IMO!)
Click to expand...

:beerbang::beerbang::beerbang::beerbang::beerbang:
 
FenderBumper said:
Then I'll leave it to you, old sage of the oval, to come up with a better term for competitors handing JJ the championship at Talladega and Homestead.
Click to expand...


I dont blame Jimmie for laying back at Talladega, plate racing is a crap shoot, everybody had the same facts entering the event, and they planned accordingly. Hamlin was faster than JJ a couple of yeaers ago, but imo that may have been JJs best championship run, the one they should not have won.

But that's not his fault, Hamlin and CC Ford played the getting into his head game and then they clearly demonstrated they had their own unmastered mental breakdowns. JJ and CK being better at getting the most of their situation and abilities at the time isnt their fault and needs no apology. Hamlin and Harvick also had their little fued going as well, just another case of Mr Boring also being the most mature and having the big title run.


BTW I would have loved for Harvick to get a title for RCR, but the realities I see understands while Johnson has them and Harvick, Hamlin doesn't.
 
Greg said:
I gotta go with Knauss/Johnson, and an incredible honourable mention for Evernham/Gordon and I do feel what FFlash is saying about Hyde/Richmond.


The Johnson/Knauss string or five time deal just doesn't get enough credit nor does Johnson's driving ability. The guy is boring for sure, but he does get the job done. It also difficult to stay focused and hungry after you have been on top so long.


But every season and the drivers battles are different. Gordon is one of the all time greats, I do think his legacy suffers some when compared to Johnson's recent domination. Gordon also enjoyed his prime in the late 90s, and you cant do a straight apple to apples comparison so this is all impossible to prove. I also wonder about the health of Gordon's back in recent years, maybe as a professional he quit talking about it, and some problems linger.


The nervous system is effected by back problems as well as some reflexes. Again I think he is one of the greats and I am not trying to post a criticism. But just maybe the wonder boy of old no longer exist to battle Johnson like he could have in the 90s?



FlFlash and the Hyde?Richmond post. If anybody was around in 86 you would just had to have been anti Richmond not to enjoy that run. The reason they lost the title was because they sucked for the first 10 races. After the memorial day 600 they were about 25th in the points, I want to say that with confidence because I do remember making a mental note at the time, but I am saying about, because it was about 26 years ago.


They got hot and I think they had the biggest single season turn around in Nascar history. Sucking at the start was also was with a start up team.
Richmond was the ultimate Hot Dog, Ham, Entertainer, Show Man, Hollywood was the word. He was also born with money, and a hater could go off on his persona if they didn't want to see his brilliance


But the raw talent was real, he was gifted and his car control may have been the best ever, I cant think of anyone better.


A side story in 85, GPS who had a midweek benefit for the injured Butch Lindley, injuries that eventually proved fatal. Allison, Bonnet, and Richmond was there. A stunt driver was there doing bootleg slides, and other stuff. He offered the car to Richmond and he nailed the bootleg slides on the first attempt, man that was fun to watch. Maybe that does sound like much, you really had the to be there to appreciate. My favorite Richmond moment, the good times, I miss them and him,
Click to expand...
After reading this Greg I was inspired to look Tim up and came across this tribute Vid that I enjoyed a bunch. I also forgot that he rode on Johncock's car with him to victory lane at Indy on his side pod.

 
robbybee said:
I loathe that sediment!

To say that everything happens "for a reason" is such an eighth-grade mentality!

Sh!t happens because it happens. How one chooses to deal with the sh!t that happens is up to each individual that the sh!t happens to.

BTW, I don't believe in luck either...
Click to expand...

I do not believe that "everything happens for a reason" in the cosmic/hippie sense. That's why I specifically mentioned "specific" reasons. As in there is a logical reason behind everything. As in "cause and effect". Crediting or blaming luck is lazy although I don't have a problem saying "The 24 team has dealt with an uncommon number of unfortunate events this year."
 
Matthew2470 said:
Crediting or blaming luck is lazy although I don't have a problem saying "The 24 team has dealt with an uncommon number of unfortunate events this year."
Click to expand...

LOL! Could we shorten that a little? I suggest 'bad luck' as a more practicle way to say the same thing. You may find this acceptable because you used the word 'unfortunate' in your version.

Unfortunate:
  1. unlucky: never experiencing good luck
  2. involving bad luck: accompanied by or bringing bad luck.
 
Matthew2470 said:
I do not believe that "everything happens for a reason" in the cosmic/hippie sense. That's why I specifically mentioned "specific" reasons. As in there is a logical reason behind everything. As in "cause and effect". Crediting or blaming luck is lazy although I don't have a problem saying "The 24 team has dealt with an uncommon number of unfortunate events this year."
Click to expand...

OK. That's good to know cause I was becoming concerned! LOL And I agree with your clarification! Sorry if I took things out of context, Mang!

FenderBumper said:
LOL! Could we shorten that a little? I suggest 'bad luck' as a more practicle way to say the same thing. You may find this acceptable because you used the word 'unfortunate' in your version.

Unfortunate:
  1. unlucky: never experiencing good luck
  2. involving bad luck: accompanied by or bringing bad luck.
Click to expand...

One must first believe in the existence of "luck" in order to accept your conceptualization of the situation, which I do not. (you can see my opinion on the definition earlier in the thread). But everyone must believe in something. Some believe in heaven, some believe in hell. Some believe in reincarnation and some believe that our current President knows WTF he is doing.

I believe that it's time to reload the bong...
 
FenderBumper said:
LOL! Could we shorten that a little? I suggest 'bad luck' as a more practicle way to say the same thing. You may find this acceptable because you used the word 'unfortunate' in your version.

Unfortunate:
  1. unlucky: never experiencing good luck
  2. involving bad luck: accompanied by or bringing bad luck.
Click to expand...

I don't define "unfortunate" as it's defined above.
 
Racing is a lot of skill and luck. I don't usually care for "luck" excuses and I think things usually balance out, you get a break today, and you dont tommorow. So the advantages belong to the most skilled over the long haul.


But luck is still a factor.
 
When asked what it takes to win races and championships, how many Nascar drivers wont say luck is one the factors? None.
Surely they're not all lying.
 
I ask Matt a question, and robby answers as if I had asked him. o_O I think robbybee and Matt share the same brain......and apparently a bong too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom