View Single Post
10-27-2013, 12:04 PM
[email protected]
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
This was my thought exactly after reading through the last few pages. Defensive play tends to get fetishized a bit around here but, at the end of the day, a player should be judged on whether or not they contributed to wins. Not how sexy an excel spreasheet their career creates.

Knocking a 2PPG+ Mario Lemieux for not backchecking is like criticizing Usain Bolt for not tying his shoes properly.
Well square this circle for me then, in 95 without Mario the Pens have a .635 winning %, in 96 with his Hart 161 point season it's .622%.

I'm not saying that Mario didn't have a very good season but in terms of "dominance" his 96 season is really over rated here.

To categorize Mario as a dominant player for his entire career is simply not supported by the facts, unless one is only talking exclusively of offense and not the overall impact. And it's overall impact that really should matter here when evaluating Mario right?

From 86-93 one can say Mario was a 2 PPG player whose offense was enough to overcome his lack of defense.

That's over a period of 504 games, outside of that time period his overall impact, in your terms of making a difference in winning games, wasn't elite.

Last edited by Hardyvan123: 10-27-2013 at 12:10 PM.
Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote