View Single Post
Old
04-02-2013, 06:33 PM
  #674
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 27,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
How on Earth can you stand by your belief that Selanne's "drop to a 32 point player over 70+ games was equal parts having been robbed of his special skills AND not being able to rekindle any kind of "real" chemistry with Kariya"?

Equal Parts?

Selanne was on a line with his two best friends in the NHL: Joe Sakic and Paul Kariya, two players who perfectly compliment a healthy Selanne's game. Any lack of chemistry is a direct product of being injured. You can't go from arguing that Kariya inflates Selanne's production in 2000 to arguing that Kariya is 50% responsible for Selanne's decrease in production in 2004.
Selanne was healthy, but didn't work as well as he used to. That's different from actually being injured, imo, but you're certainly free to adopt a differing opinion where every player with a serious injury gets to claim it as an excuse in perpetuity. Kariya, at his peak, did "inflate" Selanne's scoring at one point back when. Post lock-out differences from the DPE and possibly the most offensively deep generation of the Ducks have been 'inflating" his (and everyone else) ever since, too, on top of a boost from a sufficient recovery time after successful surgery, but it's all about understanding the differences in degree from situation to situation, season to season, environment to environment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Selanne's injury perfectly overlaps with the timeline of his decreased production. Trying to hang even half of it on his chemistry with Kariya and Sakic (because that's somehow a worse set of linemates for him than Kariya/Rucchin and McDonald/Kunitz and Koivu/Blake) is absolute trash.
Well what can I tell you? TSN listed the Kariya/Selanne FA signings in Colorado among their top 25 free agent busts of all time (here's a link to the thread on the Avs' board from the time, haven't turned up a TSN link yet). Last year, Brad Kutzberg from from Bleacher Report listed Selanne, specifically his FA acquisition by the Avs, as the 14th worst FA signing ever (link). Kind of interestingly, two years earlier, different contributor, same site: "After a brief and overall regrettable stop with Western Conference rival San Jose, Selanne rejoined his ex-teammate Paul Kariya in Colorado. His play and numbers continued to decline as the once promising pair failed to recapture their previous magic."

It was waaay less "boo hoo" about Selanne and his prolonged "injured" status than you think it should have been. But I don't think anyone is even arguing that Selanne was "better" than Fedorov during any point in the period we're even talking about, so no need to belabor the point beyond maybe asking you to control yourself a bit on labeling this dissenting opinion or that counter-point as "trash" when you're clearly no more of an authority on the subject than anyone else offering serious discussion here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Oh, and go ahead and make an argument for Fedorov's second-best year (1996) against Selanne's second-best year (1999). And keep going down the line. Tell me when Fedorov starts to have the better season over Selanne again.

Face-to-face meetings in the playoffs? Which one was matched up against Nicklas Lidstrom again? Who was Fedorov skating against? Darren Van Impe? I'm shocked (shocked) that Detroit advanced.
They played together in the same league, and against each other internationally, for many, many years. At which points along the line do you think anyone would have gladly given up Fedorov to get Selanne ("in a vacuum", to emphasize skill/impact/value and eliminate team "need" diversions)? Obviously I see the pitfalls of diving down the rabbit hole of arguing against any inconsistencies I find in your reckoning "system" along the way WHILE also providing substance for/against either guy. I don't get tunnel vision on the offensive stats of one team's first line of offense when the contribution of another guy is largely responsible for securing 100+ point seasons in the standings and multiple championships.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Oh, because Patrick Roy was a one-hit wonder in the regular season?
"One-hit wonder in the regular season" says it all, really. I mean, I'd argue he was clearly better in all of '93/94, '94/95, and '95/96, and that doesn't even get us to those 100/110 point often division leading seasons (despite competing with the Sakic/Forsberg Avs), even when Yzerman
was playing on what I'd consider even less of a knee than Selanne at his worst. Those don't get chalked up to some combination of magic and Lidstrom to you?

But why try to steer this away from the original point about how you agree that players who display particular excellence in the playoffs deserve a "boost" in "overall" reckoning, even against someone who might have a more sparkling regular season record but not have had relatively as many chances to build a playoff resume?

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Laughable comparison. Fedorov is a one-time All-Star (albeit at a tough position) getting compared to Selanne, a four-time All-Star (same position as Jagr and Bure, no big deal). Roy and Hasek were both six-time All-Stars, with one having Gretzky-esque playoffs.

Where is your parallel between Sergei Fedorov and Patrick Roy? What has Fedorov done in the regular season that is comparable to being top-ten in save percentage 15 times, or being named an All-Star/Vezina nominee eight times? In Fedorov's second-best season (1996) he was, what, the fifth or sixth best skater, depending on where you rank Joe Sakic?
Are you even serious? I thought my wording in the original suggestion was quite clear. Is it your contention that Fedorov isn't one of the best forwards in the "modern era" of the NHL playoffs? 3 Cup rings, only player in history besides Trottier and Bossy with the 4 consecutive 20 point post seasons, 3rd behind only Sakic and Jagr with post season points between the entire stretch between his first season '91 and retirement in '09, multiple times emerged as the team's leading scorer in the playoffs (often with a higher PPG than the regular season) after being found behind Yzerman in the regular scoring lists, the added dimension of elite shutdown skills, his regular season production/results while "taking it easy" still measuring well (even if necessarily not topping) an "elite" player like Selanne at his "peak"... etc.

Basically, or essentially, the Fedorov version of what I believe is pretty similar to the meat and potatoes of what you (pretty sure it was you) thought one of the strongest cases for Roy over Hasek was: repeated post season success (team and indiv.), more post season success (team and indiv.), championships to prove it, statistical improvement over the regular season, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
EDIT: I'll just remove my retort and let the counterpoints do the talking.
Probably saved me even more typing, so... thanks?

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote