View Single Post
02-18-2013, 11:59 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,268
vCash: 500
I voted Sakic. The margin is so close between the two players it's like looking under a microscope to see a hairline difference. I think you could argue either side effectively.

I didn't look at the stats so much as my memory of the two players. It seemed like Yzerman was a high scorer in the earlier part of his game and as widely reported worked on all aspects of his game to become a better player. Sakic was a complete player as well but had some real high quality seasons as a mature player. I'm specifically reminded of the year or so when Canada won the Gold, Colorado won the Cup, and Sakic won the Hart all within about a 12 month (give or take) time. At that time I would put him at his best, and I would put that as better than Yzerman's best which you could argue 1988 or 1998 among other years.

One issue I always have with these types of questions is how you are defining the better player. It was a simple pick 'em. I think you could arrive at different answers for various different subquestions. Who had the better peak? Who was the more consistent player? Who was a better leader? Who made his teammates better? Who had the most success? Etc. People often use their own criteria to judge a situation and it might not be equal for everyone if we are all judging based on something different.

Guest is offline   Reply With Quote