HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   Brett Hull vs. Mike Modano (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1522477)

Hawkey Town 18 10-23-2013 05:34 PM

Brett Hull vs. Mike Modano
 
Who do you rank higher all-time?

thom 10-23-2013 05:40 PM

Some of you will say Brett Hull because of his 3 70 goal season including an incredible 86goals but for me its Modano thers more to hockey than goals.Mike is an essential part of long term success and stanley cup.Edge goes to Mike its close.I could go into detail why i think Mike is ahead but Ill leave it to others

tjcurrie 10-23-2013 06:08 PM

Tough one for me, Modano being my favorite of all-time but I'm also a huge Brett Hull supporter. I appreciate immensely what both players brought. Hull goes down as one of the greatest few goal scorers of all-time and essentially the point of hockey is to put the puck in the nest. Modano on the other hand after his first few years became an elite two-way center and matched right up head-to-head with the likes of Joe Sakic, Steve Yerman, Peter Forsberg, etc etc. I'm sure he could have put up more points somewhere else, he certainly had the talent.

To me they're so different yet both great at what they did that its tough to choose.

struckbyaparkedcar 10-23-2013 06:18 PM

I'd say Hull was better but Modano was more crucial to the Cup run and prolly should have won the Smythe over Nieuwendyk.

tjcurrie 10-23-2013 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar (Post 73116859)
I'd say Hull was better but Modano was more crucial to the Cup run and prolly should have won the Smythe over Nieuwendyk.

It's certainly arguable. I think it's a year where it could have gone to any of 3 or 4 guys, including Belfour and probably Hatcher. It's a good example though of how just a few guys voting opinions on one day can change the way people view a player forever. They're doing the top centers list as we speak and with that on his resume he'd be ranked much higher. The fact that he certainly did enough to get it goes unnoticed, had he been awarded it his rep around here would be bolstered immensely.

Dissonance 10-23-2013 07:10 PM

Hard to compare the two. If I was starting a team from scratch, I'd probably choose Modano. Center is arguably a more important position and Modano in his prime was everything you could possibly want in a first line center.

But on the all-time list? I'd go with Hull. What he accomplished over his career was simply ludicrous. That 1990-91 season is still, to me, the greatest goal-scoring season of all time.

bester vaive 10-23-2013 07:26 PM

Both great players, but Hull had a premium skill (goal scoring.) Hence, advantage Brett.

Devo1212 10-23-2013 08:41 PM

were both very great players were amazing and very talented.

Killion 10-23-2013 10:21 PM

As prolific a goal scorer as he was & entertaining to boot on & off the ice, Id go with Mike Modano on this one. More erudite, brought a lot of intangibles to the rink in terms of playmaking ability, general hockey IQ, to the dressing room itself. Very classy player, individual.

Bure All Day 10-23-2013 11:30 PM

Brett Hull, but I'm super biased

TheDevilMadeMe 10-23-2013 11:46 PM

What did Modano do to overcome Hull's 3 consecutive seasons of 70+ goals?

I'm all for two-way players, and I do think Hull is ranked too high on the HOH Top 100 list, but this is Mike Modano we are talking about, not Steve Yzerman.

I agree that Modano was more important than Hull for the 1999 Cup win, but Hull was Dallas' leading Conn Smythe candidate heading into the 2000 finals.

King Forsberg 10-24-2013 12:27 AM

While Modano was a solid franchise player for Dallas, Hull was a superstar in the league for a couple of years. Hull wasn't as good as Modano in 99 but the rest of his career is easily above Modano.

ot92s 10-24-2013 09:09 AM

modano was very good but hull is an ALL TIME PINNACLE sniper. there's been, like, 5 of them in the entire history of the game. i'll take mr. 78 adjusted goals...

Fred Taylor 10-24-2013 10:24 AM

Brett Hull. His two 70+ and 86 goal seasons are too much to ignore in comparison to Modano.

Darth Yoda 10-24-2013 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Taylor (Post 73147115)
Brett Hull. His two 70+ and 86 goal seasons are too much to ignore in comparison to Modano.

You think Hull gained as much from playing with Modano as he did from Adam Oates? For sure Modano was better defensively as opposed to that overrated, although obviously very clutch, Hull.

weaponomega 10-24-2013 01:32 PM

I think their longevity and consistency is comparable, but Hull's peak seasons put him over Modano for me.

Big Phil 10-24-2013 07:49 PM

Hull, easily for me. His goal scoring prowess is too hard to ignore. Not to mention it was Hull who put the Stars over the top in 1999, and helped to do the same to the Wings in 2002.

Throw in the fact that Hull is by a noticeable margin the better playoff performer and I can't see how anyone picks Modano here.

tjcurrie 10-24-2013 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil (Post 73175373)
Hull, easily for me. His goal scoring prowess is too hard to ignore. Not to mention it was Hull who put the Stars over the top in 1999, and helped to do the same to the Wings in 2002.

Throw in the fact that Hull is by a noticeable margin the better playoff performer and I can't see how anyone picks Modano here.

While that may be somewhat true (I'd say the addition of Belfour the season prior was bigger), if you were to take Modano away they'd be less of a team than they would have been without Hull. Hull was a final piece, but that doesn't mean he was the biggest.

No trying to take anything away from him, I love the guy.

Sentinel 10-24-2013 09:40 PM

I love them both, and they complimented each other perfectly. Modano was a superb two-way player, but at the end of the day, Hull was just greater.

chaosrevolver 10-24-2013 10:00 PM

Modano is great and all, but like stated before, he just simply wasn't as good as Brett Hull. Modano may have been a more all-around player, but Hull was simply an all-world sniper and one of the better ones in the last twenty or so years.

Psycho Papa Joe 10-24-2013 11:15 PM

I'd take modano in every facet of the game except goal scoring. But Hull has such a big edge there, it's beyond ludicrous.

Voted Hull. Unfortunately, IMO Gainey and Hitchcock had a leash on modano. Made him a terrific all round center, but IMO on a more wide open team he could have been way more special.

the edler 10-25-2013 07:40 AM

Modano was Toews before Toews. No crazy amounts of points but he'll give you them intangibles. ;)

Sentinel 10-25-2013 08:42 AM

Modano >> Toews

Darth Yoda 10-25-2013 08:44 AM

Okey then, Hull was a great scorer. Not as great as some like to think simply becouse Adam Oates was a better playmaker than Hull was a scorer, but he did had a Steven Stamkos quality to him. As i usually do not hold Modano as high as some others do, i can certainly live with people thinking Hull was better. What i end up with is simply that none of them was the best american ever, wether it's Chelios, Brimsek, or even Howe or Leetch is up for debate. Hull was not an all-time great player, nor was Modano.

TheDevilMadeMe 10-25-2013 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sentinel (Post 73206047)
Modano >> Toews

Not really. I mean, Modano had a much better career because Toews is still young, but I don't think he was better as a player.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 AM.

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.