View Single Post
Old
01-04-2013, 02:51 AM
  #62
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
re: Sundin vs. Bure being like Gartner vs. Lindros:

The point being made, obviously, is that the longevity edge that Sundin and Gartner have is easily outweighed by the fact that Bure and Lindros have much better peaks.

The problem is, while this is obviously true in the Gartner/Lindros example, it is not obviously true in the Sundin/Bure example.

From a point production standpoint, Bure didn't really distinguish himself from Sundin that drastically to pass this off as a simple "obvious peak over obvious longevity" case.

Best 8 seasons, percentage system:

Lindros: 100 100 87 87 81 80 78 63
Gartner: 81 76 72 71 70 68 67 64

Bure: 100 99 96 96 77 77 61 56
Sundin: 95 89 86 81 80 78 78 77

Sundin overtakes Bure by the time we're looking at 5th best seasons, and Bure is only 11% ahead based on 4 best seasons.

In the Lindros/Gartner example, Gartner finally overtakes Lindros in his 8th best season, and Lindros was 21% ahead in their best 7 seasons.

apples and oranges.

In the Sundin example, it's quite easily arguable Sundin comes out ahead after considering longevity. (even his 16th best season is a 67%, that is incredible)
obviously it's not as night and day as lindros vs. gartner, but wouldn't it be fair to say that bure had four seasons in the ballpark of sundin's best season? i mean, that's pretty drastic, and that's being very kind to sundin to count his best adjusted season as in the same conversation as bure's three rocket richard years.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote