View Single Post
Old
04-14-2013, 11:26 AM
  #6
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfy View Post
The Stamkos to Hull comparison is unfair. Stamkos may not be Bure but hes above average fast in the league and can dangle pretty well. The only comparison is that Stamkos probably has the best one timer in the NHL and so did Hull.

I dont think being explosive plays into this at all really. Stamkos scores goals every way imaginable. His big shot, he'll dangle, he'll put in a few garbage ones. When youre scoring 60 goals in a season it doesnt matter if the other guy was more explosive, youre obviously doing something that is going to scare a goalie out there
Oh I agree, 60 goals is 60 goals no matter how you slice it. However, in 1982 when Denis Maruk got 60 and Mike Bossy had 64 I think we can assume who goalies feared more. Now, before you ask, I am not saying Stamkos is Maruk. He is obviously better. But that is also just an example of how numbers are part of the equation, not the whole equation. Stamkos is dangerous on the ice and is arguably the most dangerous player out there. But in thinking about Bure's career you worried about him every single second he was out on the ice. He would skate like a tiger to get to a loose puck. He did cherry pick, but that also meant he was even more dangerous because he could snap the puck up behind you at your own blue line.

On a breakaway I don't think Stamkos is feared more than Bure. In fact, I know he isn't. Nothing wrong with that, because Bure was damn near automatic on breakaways, it seemed. I would tend to believe Bure would have a far better shootout record than Stamkos does. Also, we know Bure could dangle with speed as good as anyone, but his shot was also lethal too. Yeah, right now Stamkos has a little ways to go in order for me to say he was a more dangerous goal scorer than Bure.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote