View Single Post
04-03-2013, 10:58 AM
Registered User
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 29,852
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
What a joke. So the circumference of his left leg shrank during that one game off in 2003-04? It was a degenerating problem that happened over several years. The surgery in 2001 removed some of the loose cartilage to lessen the pain for the playoffs; that's it. The surgery in 2004 was to reconstruct the knee - something that requires significantly more down time. Saying that the knee was "fine" in 2001 is pretty naive, and not at all consistent with any account of Selanne's health during the time period. And yet you're the one making accusations of re-writing history?
What's naive is thinking that his knee was nearly as bad when he was playing 160+ straight games as it was after that knee injury in the early '03/04 season that would cause him to finally address the situation in the off season. But again, since no one seems to be claiming Selanne was the better player over the period anyway, it's tangential. Still don't see any articles provided from '01/02, '02/03 talking about the affects of Selanne's lingering condition, though. Everything you provided as "proof" is dated '04, '05 (or later) and refers to "recent" years, without even elaborating on any pattern of degeneration or complications before his next knee injury in '03/04.

Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
I'm not avoiding it; I just didn't address it in my last post because it's still a flawed analogy. Patrick Roy is the best goaltender of all-time because in addition to being a coin-flip contender with Wayne Gretzky for the title of best playoff performer in history, he had one of the highest peaks as a goaltender (below Sawchuk and Hasek, but few others) and a lengthy, consistent, and healthy eighteen year regular season career in the NHL (rivaled by Brodeur, Plante, and few others). It was demonstrated that Patrick Roy could have his career cut in half and make the Hall of Fame twice.

Sergei Fedorov is NOT Patrick Roy.

Scott Stevens has a better playoff record than Chris Chelios, but that doesn't make Scott Stevens the better player overall, because the regular season gap is too large. Just like the regular season gap between Selanne and Fedorov (Selanne's six top-ten finishes in goals spanning 14 years versus Fedorov's one; Selanne's five top-ten finishes in assists spanning 15 years versus Fedorov's one; Selanne's seven top-ten finishes in points spanning 18 years versus Fedorov's two) is too large - and no, there isn't enough value in a defensive forward to overcome (2, 5, 5, 7, 8, 8) versus (9) in points after redundancies, or (1, 1, 1, 2, 10) versus (nothing) in goals after redundancies, or (4, 7, 9, 10) versus (nothing) in assists after redundancies. But the regular season gap between Roy and Hasek isn't large at all.

Save Percentage Finishes (among goalies in the Top-20 GP)
(1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 6, 8)
(1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 8, 8, 8, 14)

So you're steamed about the Roy/Hasek debate: Get over it. Sergei Fedorov is not a comparable player. Even if his four great playoffs (I'm just going to give you the 1995 and 1998 playoffs, because I'm sick of talking about how the majority of his points came from beating up low-seeds like San Jose and Phoenix) translated to regular season numbers, he'd still be a few top-tens shy of being Teemu Selanne, because rather than continuing to perform at an elite level as he did in 1994 and 1996, Fedorov got complacent and turned in offensive numbers more similar to Steve Rucchin than Teemu Selanne.

But I can't even get you to see that a player that everyone acknowledges was injured was - in fact - injured, so why should I expect that you would follow any of that?
Wow. All that typing about the regular season that's supposed to say something about the playoffs?

Fedorov played at a very high level in the regular season. He often played even better in the post season, was consistently one of the most important/skilled players on his team, and has a pattern of consistency and excellence/success when it matters the most. That's exactly how you painted up Roy's advantage over Hasek. I'm not steamed about it, but I do revel in exposing the most elaborate of biases and inconsistencies.

"Beating up on low seeds"... as if Selanne racking up points in '95/96, '96/97 against 40-60 point L.A. and San Jose squads (for example; the two teams Teemu has scored the most against in his career, of course) is more significant than producing against low seeded playoff teams...

Also, 6 Vezinas, 2 Harts/Lindsays >> 3 Vezinas, 0 Harts/Lindsays, speaking of the regular season specifically. Obviously the "compiled" aspect of the resumes of great players in of greater importance to you (when you want it to be) than the "actual" greatness they displayed. The same can't be said for me, that's for sure.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote