Forsberg, Joe or Sundin - Who would you take in their prime!?
View Single Post
08-12-2008, 12:30 PM
Join Date: Jun 2007
Originally Posted by
Forsberg had less icetime, since he gave more when he was on the ice.
Just like Lidström isn't as physical and gritty as alot of other defenders, which gives him more juice to play those extra minutes and be on top at the latter stages of his career. If he had a game with more focus on physique (IE hitting and getting in peoples faces) he wouldn't play 30 min/game at age 38-39, more like 22-23.
Sure he would. Bourque was averaging 28 minutes a game at age 38-41 and he played a much grittier game than Lidstrom. All the same
Originally Posted by
Look at the guys who played that game to its limit, Forsberg and Lindros.
One is retired, the other is but a shell of his former self. BUT, when they played and was at the top of their games, they brought everything and dominated every shift they made, Sakic never did.
Uh, Forsberg and Lindros are far from the only two guys who played a physical gritty forecheck game. In the late 99 era maybe.
And Sakic did bring it every game, and play hard every shift and yes, dominated. He simply played a different less physical style, and that style was, well, more effective. He scored more points for his team, helped his linemates and was slightly better defensively over Forsberg for 5 of the 9 years they played together, and this carried over to the playoffs(Conn Smythe winner ((almost twice)))
But then there's the question; would you rather take Lindros & Foppa playing a softer game, having less of an importance to their team, but at the same time having a longer healthier career? I don't think that was ever the choice with those guys since they had that mentality, they were both all heart. Yeah, anyone who says Lindros played with no heart don't know their elbow from their @ss.
Sakic was just as important to the Avs than Forsberg, if not more. Lindros played excellently, and would have longer if he unlearned his silly habit of skating with his head down.
Which would you take.
Lidström & Sakic playing at 95% for 18 years
Forsberg & Lindros playing at 100% for 5 years
I'd take Sakic and Lidström, but for those 5 years, Forsberg & Lindros dominated the game in a way neither of the other two was capable of. And dominance can't be measured simply with stats.
Sakic always gave 100% and never took a shift off. I would say the same about Lidstrom. They just have a different style that isn't as flashy as the above mentioned players, yet just as dominant.
And what I meant about Bure vs Sakic, was that Bure was more noticeable.
Anyone disputing that?
Ofcourse Sakic was the better over all player...
Bure was flashier. Sakic still was an equal or better scorer than Bure strictly offensively speaking. When the other aspects of the game came in, Bure fell off the map.
View Public Profile
Dark Shadows's albums
Visit Dark Shadows's homepage!
Find More Posts by Dark Shadows