Fedorov vs. Selanne
View Single Post
03-28-2013, 01:12 PM
Join Date: Mar 2011
Originally Posted by
Considering one guy was a 1st line winger beside Kariya, and the other was a second line centre, well, without Kariya, that's not a huge gap. Especially since, in any given year, it's up to Selanne to produce enough offense to make us forget about Fedorov's all-round game in any given year, correct?
That's kind of the main purpose, and I even elaborated on this specific aspect in my last post.
Well the "anti-Fedorov" contingent LOVES to paint Fedorov's 60 point campaigns as some kind of fail, and more specifically demonstrative of a level of offense that is insufficient to be considered a "great" player at the time - unable to compare to Selanne "overall" at the time, even. Well, a second line centre who managed 17 multi-point games out of 68 played, and was one of the game's 3 stars in at least 20 of those 68 games (I may have under-counted, and two game sheets weren't working on NHL.com), and was furthermore the best player on his team through two rounds of the playoffs, compares quite favourably to a one-way winger who barely managed more multi-point games (barely managed a better PPG, too, for that matter) or 3 star nominations next to an offensive dynamo on his team's first line, while playing 11 more games, who also missed the playoffs. IMO, of course
I don't really have anything against you post except for the bolded part.
Basically Fedorov was not a 2nd line center. He was 1b center. The PPG difference is not small, it is almost 0.2 which is pretty significant in the DPE. Selanne was 5th in points which is elite offense, in my mind. Fedorov might have been the better player when he was on ice, which i would disagree with, but the thing is that he was on ice significantly less games.
Even in the eyes of the most biased Red Wing fan Selanne had to be close to Fedorov that year when they were both performing on the ice. Now factor in the difference in games played and I see no problem when claiming Selanne as the better player that year.
That multi point game fact is, at best, amusing. I really can't see how it proves Fedorov better in any way. If you play the idea other way around Fedorov must have been held pointless in many games since he was not even PPG player that year.
I am getting the feeling that I am either thinking this too simply, or you are thinking this too complex. I am starting to think that the truth is somewhere on the middle.
Which is probably why this thread has managed to go for 25 pages.
Last edited by TAnnala: 03-28-2013 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by TAnnala