HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   Eric Lindros vs. Mark Messier - Who was more dominant in his prime? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1310713)

ginopuck 12-21-2012 11:49 PM

Eric Lindros vs. Mark Messier - Who was more dominant in his prime?
 
I'd say it was Lindros, I think during his prime he was the most feared player in the world. Any thoughts?

seventieslord 12-22-2012 12:10 AM

I'm gonna wait to see the cases for each player. This is a tough one. Lindros was an amazing player in his prime, but it's not like Messier didn't win Harts himself.

Darth Yoda 12-22-2012 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seventieslord (Post 56732421)
I'm gonna wait to see the cases for each player. This is a tough one. Lindros was an amazing player in his prime, but it's not like Messier didn't win Harts himself.

You dont need arguments when remembering Erics status in 1996 do you?

seventieslord 12-22-2012 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Yoda (Post 56733297)
You dont need arguments when remembering Erics status in 1996 do you?

of course not! But I am open to being convinced that it was greater than Messier's 1987-1994 status.

Regal 12-22-2012 04:11 AM

I'm not usually a stickler for games played, but the fact that Messier was able to play a similarly nasty game while staying relatively healthy and similarly productive puts him over the top for me

quoipourquoi 12-22-2012 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Yoda (Post 56733297)
You dont need arguments when remembering Erics status in 1996 do you?

What about Mark Messier's status in 1996?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sports Illustrated, February 12, 1996
Messier is leading, the Rangers are following, and everyone else is getting out of the way. Just nine months ago New York looked spent, bullied out of the second round of the playoffs by the younger, tougher Flyers. Messier appeared on the verge of passing the torch as the NHL's best leader to Philadelphia captain Eric Lindros last spring, but before the 22-year-old Lindros dares to claim it, he must recover from second-degree burns this season. In the three Flyers-Rangers matches so far in '95-96, Messier had nine points, Lindros two.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...28/2/index.htm


Lindros' best year in a non-lockout saw him place behind Messier in Hart voting, so imagine if it was 1990 Mark Messier in the running instead. I'd take Lindros in a fist fight or a body-checking contest, but once Messier matured in the mid-1980s, he set a pretty high standard for the next quarter-century. Messier from 1985-86 through 1989-90 was like prime-Lindros with a better head and playoff numbers.

BraveCanadian 12-22-2012 08:11 AM

With all due respect to Messier, who obviously had the greater career and much greater longevity, this is Lindros.

Prime Lindros was one of the most dominant players I have ever seen. Physically imposing all around, an intimidating presence and very talented to boot.

Lindros was pretty much a bigger, stronger, more productive Messier.

It is too bad that a combination of everyone trying to take down the king of the hill as well as his own lack of vision at times led to Lindros' brain getting scrambled.

jkrx 12-22-2012 08:36 AM

Not a big fan of Messier but he was about as a equal when it came to physical dominance. Add to it that he was a much smarter guy on the ice and we have a winner.

Darth Yoda 12-22-2012 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkrx (Post 56736603)
Not a big fan of Messier but he was about as a equal when it came to physical dominance. Add to it that he was a much smarter guy on the ice and we have a winner.

Eh, have you seen the poll?

Clown Baby 12-22-2012 10:26 AM

I feel like the answer is Lindros. He had 3 inches and 30 pounds on Messier, and he played like he knew just how much of an advantage he had over his competition. He was more willing to fight (.062/.026), and when he did it was against skilled fighters.

He wasn't picking spots out there: Messier is to Goberts, McSorely, Hunter, and Otto as Lindros is to Beaukeboom, Stevens, Daneyko, Odelein, Grimson, Simon, Quintal, Pilon, Boughner, Barnaby, Simpson, O'Donnell, and McSorely.

Messier had 7 (of 24) seasons with over 100 pim; Lindros had 8 (of 13). Lindros also holds the distinction of never closing out a season with an PIM/GP less than 1.22. I can't say for certain, but I want to say both have been suspended 3 times (at least). Lindros also led the league in scoring once, which might be tarnished by the lockout. However, it's in the record books all the same.

Darth Yoda 12-22-2012 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clown Baby (Post 56739019)
I feel like the answer is Lindros. He had 3 inches and 30 pounds on Messier, and he played like he knew just how much of an advantage he had over his competition. He was more willing to fight (.062/.026), and when he did it was against skilled fighters.

He wasn't picking spots out there: Messier is to Goberts, McSorely, Hunter, and Otto as Lindros is to Beaukeboom, Stevens, Daneyko, Odelein, Grimson, Simon, Quintal, Pilon, Boughner, Barnaby, Simpson, O'Donnell, and McSorely.

Messier had 7 (of 24) seasons with over 100 pim; Lindros had 8 (of 13). Lindros also holds the distinction of never closing out a season with an PIM/GP less than 1.22. I can't say for certain, but I want to say both have been suspended 3 times (at least). Lindros also led the league in scoring once, which might be tarnished by the lockout. However, it's in the record books all the same.

It's enough to say that Lindros was better offensively, and far more dominant physically. Perhaps Messier was better in the clutch, but that could be becouse of Erics shortened career.

habsfanatics 12-22-2012 11:22 AM

Lindros, and this one is not close.

Hardyvan123 12-22-2012 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BraveCanadian (Post 56736239)
With all due respect to Messier, who obviously had the greater career and much greater longevity, this is Lindros.

Prime Lindros was one of the most dominant players I have ever seen. Physically imposing all around, an intimidating presence and very talented to boot.

Lindros was pretty much a bigger, stronger, more productive Messier.

It is too bad that a combination of everyone trying to take down the king of the hill as well as his own lack of vision at times led to Lindros' brain getting scrambled.

Pretty much this as we are speaking about prime.

vadim sharifijanov 12-22-2012 12:40 PM

when lindros came into the league, a number of defensemen said things like, "i thought mark messier was the strongest player ever, but this kid..."

but being that training and conditioning got so much better in the 90s, the argument can be made that messier was as physically dominant in the 80s and maybe early 90s as lindros was in his prime. the fear factor with messier was very real, and while it may have been a little lower than lindros', i don't think it's closer than a lot of posters here suggest. add the durability (and playing 75+ games a year vs. 65-ish has to count for dominance, even if we're just talking primes), twice as many harts, the demonstrably better playoff prime/peak, and being the undisputed leader and best player on two cup winners, and i have a hard time not going with messier here.

and really, even if we're just talking about a fighting contest, maybe even just a push-ups competition, hell even a body building contest, i don't know that messier wouldn't hold his own.

Puckgenius* 12-22-2012 01:04 PM

Messier but he was dirty.

Descendent* 12-22-2012 01:33 PM

Messier

overpass 12-22-2012 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 56741467)
when lindros came into the league, a number of defensemen said things like, "i thought mark messier was the strongest player ever, but this kid..."

but being that training and conditioning got so much better in the 90s, the argument can be made that messier was as physically dominant in the 80s and maybe early 90s as lindros was in his prime. the fear factor with messier was very real, and while it may have been a little lower than lindros', i don't think it's closer than a lot of posters here suggest. add the durability (and playing 75+ games a year vs. 65-ish has to count for dominance, even if we're just talking primes), twice as many harts, the demonstrably better playoff prime/peak, and being the undisputed leader and best player on two cup winners, and i have a hard time not going with messier here.

and really, even if we're just talking about a fighting contest, maybe even just a push-ups competition, hell even a body building contest, i don't know that messier wouldn't hold his own.

Depends how you define strength. I know Mario Lemieux never touched a weight in his life, but in the late 80s/early 90s I think he was stronger on his skates than Messier. Messier used his physical strength more aggressively, but nobody could move Mario off the puck. At all.

vadim sharifijanov 12-22-2012 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by overpass (Post 56742537)
Depends how you define strength. I know Mario Lemieux never touched a weight in his life, but in the late 80s/early 90s I think he was stronger on his skates than Messier. Messier used his physical strength more aggressively, but nobody could move Mario off the puck. At all.

that's a good point. i guess for the purposes of this thread, physical dominance is probably brute physical strength plus how it's used. mario and jagr had physical strength in spades, and used it extremely well to protect the puck. messier and lindros did that and more.

so it seems the question might be, lindros could hit you harder, even adjusting for era. could messier make up the difference in other ways (cheapness, even more nastiness, etc.)?

LeBlondeDemon10 12-22-2012 01:48 PM

They played two different games so its hard to compare. Messier played more like Gordie Howe, whereas Lindros played like no one before him. He was a wrecking ball with skill and some grace. Messier was mean, but selective and a much better playmaker.

Dark Shadows 12-22-2012 02:02 PM

Assuming we take into account that Lindros' crash and bang style was the reason he missed several games a season even before the concussion problems, and hold those missed games against him.

I vote Messier. I saw an Eric Lindros capable of matching Messier's 1990 season, but unable to sustain it over a full season.

Going strictly by what they were capable of and ignoring Lindros' more fragile stature, then maybe I would vote for him. But I personally feel his style caused the injuries every season, so I do hold it against him. His style made him the feared player he was, yet was responsible for his missing games.

Messier played a similar rough style, but not quite so much, but was far far more durable.

If going by sheer peak, the 1990 season of Messier's was the best of either player.

By prime, Lindros strung together more consecutive seasons where he was in the discussion(Or would have been if not for constantly getting himself injured)

Fred Taylor 12-22-2012 02:51 PM

The answer here is definitely Lindros.

jkrx 12-22-2012 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth Yoda (Post 56737599)
Eh, have you seen the poll?

I should vote for what everyone else thinks? Or what do you mean?

Elever 12-22-2012 05:55 PM

Lindros in his prime imo but I grew up in the 90s so that's why I would say that, he was a bit more impressive and unique to watch. I believe Messier lost his speed a bit after the Rangers cup win.

Anyways this is getting ridiculous, we need a poll section for X vs X in the history forum now or a poll + specific player question section. 10 of the threads on the first page atm are just player vs player or a question about one specific player.

Mike Farkas 12-22-2012 06:28 PM

I like to vote against Messier a lot, but I'm not sure which way to go here really. The short answer is Lindros I think. But then I think back to the playoffs that these guys had...Messier was the bully, regardless of the situation, down 3-0 to the Isles in the '83 Finals, it's Messier that goes out there and just starts mashing faces...whether it was productive or dirty or tone-setting, it happened.

Lindros, I seem to recall getting picked on during the playoffs. Like Joe Thornton. The Lightning using Michel Petit, Igor Ulanov and other hard-hitting annoyances out there against him, they picked on him after the play, away from the play and just kind of threw sticks and stones at him until he crumbled. Darius Kasparaitis and Tomas Sandstrom in Pittsburgh, they picked on him. Not the other way around.

That's the only thing that's really keeping me from voting Lindros. The images in my head of Lindros of being the object bullying in the crunch instead of the bully, like Messier was.

monster_bertuzzi 12-22-2012 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LeBlondeDemon10 (Post 56742851)
They played two different games so its hard to compare. Messier played more like Gordie Howe, whereas Lindros played like no one before him. He was a wrecking ball with skill and some grace. Messier was mean, but selective and a much better playmaker.

He really wasn't, actually.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:04 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.