Who is the 5th best NHL player of all time?
View Single Post
02-26-2013, 01:38 AM
Join Date: Feb 2010
Originally Posted by
What am I even reading....
So you're basically saying that:
-Fuhr is trash without Gretzky, hall of fame goalie is not even close to touching a vezina without Gretzky....
Fuhr doesn't win the 1988 Vezina without 40 wins. He's 13th in save percentage among goalies who played 40+ games. He tied for the league lead in shutouts (the other big "award winner") with Glen Hanlon and Clint Malarchuk, both of whom had better sv%. Actually, GP is probably more accurate than wins; gathering wins is simply a byproduct of having played many games. Fuhr never played more than 48 until 87-88, then he plays 75 (Moog is gone) and suddenly he's a Vezina winner? No.
-Messier who wins an art ross, is known as the #1 of the Oilers (since y'know, no shadow of Gretzky to hide behind since Gretzky doesn't exist), and the one to lead the Oilers to the cup would lose to Yzerman based on reputation points?
You must think little of Gretzky if you think the Oilers are still winning those cups without him. And the 90 Cup happened due to Mess, but also due to key contributions from Joe Murphy, Petr Klima, and Adam Graves. That was the return for Jimmy Carson at the beginning of the season. And Carson, of course, was Gretzky's ransom. No Cups in Edmonton without Gretzky. Philly would have been the 80s dynasty if there was one.
By that standard Crosby should have beaten Henrik Sedin for the hart a little while ago, but he didn't. We're also assuming that Bourque didn't have a career year (and this is Raymond Bourque, top 5 defenseman all time).
Did you miss the part where I said "finalist"?
-We assume that the absence of Lemieux and the dropping in standings of Recchi magically propels Yzerman above three completely unrelated players, including an
. Also you're saying that Yzerman wins an undeserved Hart on the basis that Hull and Oates split votes (but... they would be splitting 1st and 2nd place votes, and the third place (lets assume Sakic doesn't exist for now
) votes would go to Yzerman....).
-In 93, we're giving the Hart to yzerman on blind luck and reputation again...
No, I figured that of the top three non-Lemieux offensive forwards he had the best all-around game and the weakest linemates. Against Gilmour, it's basically a matter of do you want a little more offense or a little more defense?
So basically what you're saying is that if Yzerman gets a crapton of lucky breaks and "reputation wins" then he wins 5 total hart trophies. Also we're saying that competing voters will somehow degrade hart voting for each player in a duo (Hull and Oates), even though such things as 1st and 2nd place votes exist...
I said two wins, possibly three.
Where is the Hart reputation win coming from anyways? Crosby has only one Hart, and he has lost to the likes of Henrik Sedin.... even though everybody fawns over him as the best player. Gretzky and Mario both dominated in terms of points every year they won the Hart.
If an award choice comes down to two players and is very close, voters will often "pick the winner" if they don't have a strong preference. It's also true that voters tend to tire of voting for the same person/people for the same awards every year. This may explain why Gretzky won the Art Ross in 1993-94 and received zero Hart votes. Reputation plays a factor.
Crosby, despite the love he gets on HF, has never established himself as the undisputed best player. And he certainly hadn't done that by 2010, when he lost the Hart to Sedin. He tied Ovechkin in points and scored one more goal, but played nine more games. All of this Crosby loving is based on half-seasons at paces he hasn't even come CLOSE to sustaining in a full year.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by pdd