View Single Post
Old
11-20-2011, 12:10 PM
  #61
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Kaiser View Post
It's not unreasonable that some of e.g. Petrov, Mikhailov, Maltsev, Kharlamov, Yakushev, Balderis, Martinec or Nedomansky would place on these lists. Perreault's era was probably the strongest era of European hockey in relation to the NHL.
No it isn't unreasonable. However my chart showed one thing, that despite the Russians not in the NHL at the time, Perreault had just as much - if not more - top end talent to compete against for major awards and the scoring race. He just fared better than Alfredsson in that department, clearly. So bringing up the "Russians weren't there yet" argument is void. Perreault had plenty of elite competition to face.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
So looking better is preferable to playing better?
No, that isn't what the eye test is all about. A player will never lose marks for style points, but on a personal level I would take Alfredsson over Bure. Why is that? Alfredsson was more effective as a player although less flashy. When you saw Bure you were amazed by his talent but he wasn't the entire package offensively. He would cherrypick. Perreault was a player you would notice on the ice more often, the feel you would get watching the game is that he was a more all around dangerous player than Bure. He was a wonderful playmaker and goal scorer. Bure was not both.

You would have more difficulty maintaining Perreault than Bure. When you watch a game you can see this for sure. So for me, the eye test is how they PLAY the game vs. their contemporaries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
That you've spent this much time on this shows you've missed the point. I'm not even here arguing that Alfredsson is better, I have simply demonstrated that it is not an absurd notion for people like you to scoff at. There is merit to it.

Briefly:

- It's widely acknowledged that the weak 1970s, when rapid expansion, the WHA and the lack of European stars conspired against the NHL, is the weakest period the league has seen, probably since the years immediately following WW2.

- the percentage of the league that was Canadian in 1989 compared to now, should give you a good idea of what pre-1989 scoring finishes need to be multiplied by in order to be more comparable to post-1993 finishes. (It's somewhere between 1.5 and 2 most likely.)

- What were Perreault's selke finishes? (you don't have to answer that)

- Your clinginess with the whole "rankings" thing is amateurish. There's more to it than just that. I think you know that but it's convenient for you to ignore it right now.

- Can you please explain how, with both players playing 1100-1200 games as first line scorers and the catalysts of their respective lines, Alfredsson earned a much better GF/GA ratio (1.26 to 1.08) despite having a worse team on average (his teams were 1.04 with him off the ice, Perreault's 1.12 without him)

- For emphasis. Yes, I did just say that Perreault's Sabres' goal differential got worse when he was not on the ice. How many post-expansion 800+ point scorers show up worse here?

- Garry Unger, Ivan Boldirev. Both known to be poor defensively.
- Trevor Linden, Butch Goring, Rod Brind'Amour, Kirk Muller. Played defensive roles often.
- That's all.
I do understand some of your points, I am glad however that you do not seem to want to rank Alfredsson over Perreault. I am not here to "scoff" at it, but with all we know about hockey on these boards we should probably come to a pretty clean consensus that Alfredsson was definitely a notch below Perreault.

Season in and season out for close to a decade Alfredsson was a very good player. At the end of the day you have to start examining his HHOF worth because he gradually put up numbers that gave him notice but he didn't have that "wow" season either. Perreault had those seasons and Alfredsson can't match him for that. If this is 1976 you would think you are witnessing a future HHOFer in Perreault. If this is 2004, you probably don't think that about Alfredsson. He has gradually gotten to that level. Nothing wrong with that, but I still know who I want on my team.

Wer have both thrown stats each other's way until the cows come home but I'll ask you a simple question here that I hope you answer. If you had a choice between Perreault or Alfredsson who do you take on your team?

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote