HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Polls - (hockey-related only) (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=72)
-   -   Sakic or Forsberg? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1305263)

Ceremony 12-08-2012 08:53 AM

Sakic or Forsberg?
 
Assuming both remain healthy and you get a full career out of them, which of these would you have built your team around?

Tomas W 12-08-2012 09:01 AM

Forsberg...im a bit biased though. :) But seriously few players in histroy can mach Peters talent level. He would have score a lot more points if not injured so often.

ottawa 12-08-2012 09:03 AM

Sakic, great player and an even better captain

Jonimaus 12-08-2012 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceremony (Post 56364205)
Assuming both remain healthy and you get a full career out of them, which of these would you have built your team around?

Then Forsberg.

ToddRundgren 12-08-2012 09:36 AM

I like Forsberg more just because of his style, but Joe was putting up lots of points (100 at age 37, I think) so it's hard to go against him. I'm not sure.

RECsGuy* 12-08-2012 11:57 AM

Sakic for career, Forsberg for a single game.

I Hate Chris Butler 12-08-2012 03:17 PM

In the imaginary world where there are no injuries, Sakic.

SillyRabbit 12-08-2012 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ceremony (Post 56364205)
Assuming both remain healthy and you get a full career out of them, which of these would you have built your team around?

Makes it Forsberg no question.

Wrath 12-08-2012 03:33 PM

I think people forget that Sakic was also injured a good number of games in his prime (Dead puck era, between the lockouts). Also some of hie his playoff performances were hindered during that time too.

People always remember Forsberg as the guy plagued with injuries but Sakic had his fair share too.

All said if both are impervious to injury it's pretty close. Forsberg was more physical and dynamic, stronger puck possession game, etc. Sakic was easily the better goal scorer, could be argued to have the higher purely offensive peak (95-96 and 00-01), leadership "intangibles", etc.

Their defensive games were sort of different. Sakic played positional defense quite well by the second half of his career. Forsberg was more physical and all, but mind you neither of them were ever considered shut-down selke-level defensive forwards, even though both garnered second place finishes in selke voting once.

MastuhNinks 12-08-2012 03:41 PM

Sakic

And I hope people don't extrapolate that Forsberg is the better offensive player because he had a slightly higher points per game (although I understand voting for him for comparable offense + everything else he puts to the table). He only had a higher points per game because he didn't really play past the age of 33, and even using points per game is in his favour because he rarely played full seasons. You could speculate that maybe he would've been able to score at that rate or even higher barring injuries, but it's just that, speculation. Which is really what I don't like about the wording of this poll, because the answer depends so much on how you think a healthy Forsberg would fare. Would he have played better without injuries? Are his stats boosted by the fact that he got a lot of rest and rarely played full seasons? Would he have been able to continue scoring at that rate up into his older years? So many questions...

Just in case anyone is wondering, Forsberg from age 22-32 and Sakic from 20-31 both had a points per game of 1.29. The main difference being that in this time frame Sakic played 864 games to Forsberg's 593. Again, whether or not Forsberg can play at this pace for a prolonged time comes into question, and it's really a question that plays a major role in who you pick in this poll. So I can't really blame people for picking Forsberg, I'm just more of a skeptic and I don't like giving guys credit for what they didn't do while they were injured (even though it might go against the nature of the poll).

Benny FTW 12-08-2012 03:41 PM

Sakic, easy choice.

silkyjohnson50 12-08-2012 03:47 PM

As great as Sakic was in the clutch, I'd still rather have Forsberg (assuming good health of course.)

Their peaks may be very close and statistical evidence probably shows that, but Forsberg controlled the game more IMO.

As a Detroit fan who seen the best of these guys throughout the rivalry, I've always described my first hand account of them like this:

Sakic terrified you when Colorado had the puck in the offensive zone, Forsberg terrified you the moment you seen him jump over the boards.

That's not to take anything away from Sakic who obviously has a well rounded game, but that's just the way Forsberg made things seem.

um 12-08-2012 03:48 PM

joke sakic

TrillMike 12-08-2012 04:00 PM

If health isn't an issue, Forsbrg.

Fred Taylor 12-08-2012 04:06 PM

Both players were pretty close during their primes but I just happen to think Forsberg was the better player. If health isn't an issue I'd take Forsberg.

Machinehead 12-08-2012 07:00 PM

Sakic, very easily.

Forget healthy, I don't care if Forsberg is the Wolverine jacked up on senzu beans, the answer is Joe Sakic.

MrFunnyWobbl 12-08-2012 09:17 PM

Forsberg.

ottawa 12-08-2012 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Machinehead (Post 56376729)
Sakic, very easily.

Forget healthy, I don't care if Forsberg is the Wolverine jacked up on senzu beans, the answer is Joe Sakic.

LOOOL :handclap:

Fripp 12-08-2012 11:16 PM

Forsberg is obscenely overrated on this board, so this is going to be closer than it should be.

FoppaForsberg* 12-08-2012 11:32 PM

Healthy Forsberg > healthy Sakic. People saying Forsberg is overrated, typical HF logic hahahaha

nowhereman 12-08-2012 11:53 PM

A healthy Forsberg, without a moment's hesitation. He was a beast.

Jray42 12-09-2012 12:11 AM

Forsberg for me.

Wrath 12-09-2012 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoppaForsberg (Post 56383947)
Healthy Forsberg > healthy Sakic. People saying Forsberg is overrated, typical HF logic hahahaha

On HFboards he is....

That said I can see the arguments for both sides of this poll, hence I am abstaining from voting.

MeowLeafs 12-09-2012 12:53 AM

Personally, I am of the belief that Forsberg's style of play is an important factor in what led to his proneness to injuries. If that's the case, you simply can not have a healthy Forsberg with what everyone expects of him. In other words, if he were to remain healthy, he wouldn't have been as good as we remember him today. Flame away.

TAnnala 12-09-2012 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Hate Jay Feaster (Post 56371661)
In the imaginary world where there are no injuries, Sakic.

This.

If Forsberg would get free pass on all injuries then Sakic would too. Hard to imagine him getting any worse with no injuries, ever.

If Forsberg is given un-natural heath and Sakic not, it gets harder. Just like Lemieux/Gretzky debates. Still think it is Sakic tough.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:13 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.