View Single Post
02-20-2013, 08:57 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kresnik View Post
If i played hockey i would easily be a defensman, i mean how can it be that US best five are basically all defenders just for the exception of Modano. I think this board has in some way got dillusional by the fact that it's a lot easier to become a elite defensman, i mean for Mike Modano to be equal to let's say Chelios, must he win art ross and be top 5 multiple times? Isn't that to much to ask, i think Modano is equal to Chelios
And your credibility score hits zero. Chelios when Modano entered the league was an elite defenseman and one of the league's best players. Which is also what he was during Modano's peak.

and thanks to the more competative position he is playing he hasen't had the career of Chelios. I mean let's look at todays player, is Weber really that much better than Zetterberg, Toews etc? By HFboards standard Weber is probably twice as good as Toews etc.
Chelios was named the best player at his position three times ahead of a prime Ray Bourque and was a dominant force for two-plus decades.

Modano was never named the best player at his position, and only was named second once. He had a decent peak, a short prime, and never seriously challenged for the title of "best center in the NHL". Even in 99-00, when he was named to the second team, he only was able to achieve that because Joe Sakic missed 22 games (Sakic scored 81 points in 60 games and tied Modano (77GP) to finish 8th overall and lead all centers, while runaway Selke winner Yzerman scored 79 in 78 to finish 10th. Interestingly, Sakic also beat Modano in Selke voting; Modano literally was named purely because Sakic missed games.

This is like arguing that Alexei Zhamnov has had a better career than Scott Stevens. It's an insane argument to start with. The easy counterpoint to "Modano is better than Chelios" is "Robocop and Chuck Norris riding unicorns in formation."

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote