View Single Post
08-07-2008, 09:11 AM
Registered User
JordanStaal#1Fan's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Asbestos, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,793
vCash: 50
Originally Posted by infinitesadd View Post
yea, Mario wasn't healthy either. So I'd probably take Joe Sakic over him.

I'd take Forsberg.
Mario was dominant for a long period of time DESIPITE his injuries and that his why he is so great. If he hadn't been injured/ill he would be considered as the best player ever and there would be virtually no arguments. Forsberg never was dominant during long periods and he never played at the level Mario did. Mario is in a league of his own, Forsberg isn't. Forsberg showed glimpse of brillance and a great peak value but if we're analysing both their peak yes, you could vote for either Sakic or Forsberg, but when you talk about prime, you HAVE to consider injuries and durability. Do comparable talent with such a disparity between their primes' lenght can REALLY be argued about? Especially considering the fact that one could make an argument for either guy when talking about peak value... Sakic longetivity and constance take the cake, IMO.

Oh, and, btw, call me back the day Forsberg scores 160+ points despite missing nearly 20 games...

JordanStaal#1Fan is offline   Reply With Quote