HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Selšnne vs Modano

View Poll Results: Choose a player (all-time):
Teemu Ilmari Selšnne 136 89.47%
Michael Thomas Modano, Jr. 14 9.21%
I'm sorry I can't, they are way too close 2 1.32%
Voters: 152. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-09-2010, 06:21 AM
  #26
The Saw Is the Law
Registered User
 
The Saw Is the Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,836
vCash: 500
Selšnne.

Teemu is still good TOP4 winger. Without injuries he would be still awesome.

Modano is good third line center no doubt. But far away Selšnne.

The Saw Is the Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 05:46 PM
  #27
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ghana Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I don't think Modano had 10 though. When I say elite I'm thinking more along the lines of a consensus top 10 player in the game that year. Modano probably had to wait until no sooner than 1997 to be considered a potential top 10 player. Then there would be no more than 4-5 years where he was ARGUABLY a top 10 player.

Selanne was elite right from the get go. He would be classified as a top 10 player in 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000. Then he had a few years of indifferent play couple with injuries. Post lockout he made up a lot of ground with some fine seasons and good postseason play. The guy also led the NHL in goals three times and his placement in the scoring race is peerless compared to Modano. The question is, does Modano's all around game make up for the bigger spikes in offense from Selanne? My answer is no. You get the idea that we saw the best we possibly could have from Selanne. Not so from Modano, you still feel as if we could have seen a better version of him.

Selanne for me, prime and career value
I don't think Selanne was a consensus top-10 player in the game outside of maybe three seasons. I'd agree he was likely a top-10 forward in those seasons you list.

For me it's simply a case of remembering what I saw, and I remember Mike Modano being a more valuable player. A strong two-way center who you could play against the other teams' top line in all situations.

Scoring placements and Hart voting don't tell the whole story. Selanne was a demon on the powerplay with Kariya, and also in his second Ducks stint. He got loads of powerplay minutes because his teams usually had no other options. (This isn't a knock on Selanne, it's a credit to him that he used those minutes so effectively.) Modano wasn't nearly as central to the Dallas PP with Joe Nieuwendyk as the primary option at center, and Hull as the trigger man. Modano's biggest output goal-wise was in 1993-94, when as the lone wolf more or less, he cashed in big time on the PP. When the Stars got stronger, Hitchcock wasn't going to overplay Modano on the PP when he didn't need to.

With Hart voting, Modano wasn't quite good enough to get much consideration for the award with the supporting cast he had. Selanne being a star and one of the league's premier snipers, helping (along with Kariya) what was an otherwise terrible Ducks squad to respectability. Often the Hart is more of a "best player" award than the true "most valuable to his team", but when you have two guys that are close to equal like Modano and Selanne, the "value to team" component is going to help the guy on the weak team.

I'm suprised that Modano left you wanting more. He was the best player on a Cup champion. He could have provided a little more offense in a different situation, but wouldn't have been as effective overall. I think Modano's biggest criticism is the apparent lack of leadership he showed in Dallas once all the old veterans moved on and retired. Not everyone is captain material, but it's generally expected out of the face of a franchise, and Modano fell short in that regard IMO.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 07:47 PM
  #28
reckoning
Registered User
 
reckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I don't think Modano had 10 though. When I say elite I'm thinking more along the lines of a consensus top 10 player in the game that year. Modano probably had to wait until no sooner than 1997 to be considered a potential top 10 player. Then there would be no more than 4-5 years where he was ARGUABLY a top 10 player.

Selanne was elite right from the get go. He would be classified as a top 10 player in 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000.
I think some people are forgetting just how good Modano was during the years Dallas was a powerhouse. I don't see any argument for Selanne being better in the late-90s unless you're only looking at points. Even then the teams they played for have to be taken into account. You weren't going to win any scoring titles playing under Ken Hitchcock's system. The offence Modano did produce, while becoming a force defensively, was extraordinary.

Now this may not be the best source, but going through THN's Top 50 list for the years I have the data for:

1998: Modano-8th, Selanne-12th
1999: Modano-6th, Selanne-9th
2000: Modano-5th, Selanne-14th
2001: ?????????
2002: Modano-15th, Selanne (not on list)
2003: Modano-7th, Selanne (not on list)
2004: Modano-23rd, Selanne (not on list)

Teemu obviously has the edge in the early years and post-lockout, but Modano was better for a significant stretch in between.

It's a tough call to pick one. I'm surprised that it's so one-sided and that some people think AINEC.

reckoning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 08:14 PM
  #29
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Regal View Post
I'd say Selanne was only really a top 10 player in 92-93, then 95-96 to 99-00, which is 6 seasons in total. Modano's prime was basically 96-97 to 02-03, which is 7 seasons, and it's debatable where he slots in with the top players in each of those. Still, I don't think their primes are really too different.

To me, this is an interesting comparison because the stats and Hart voting basically say this is Selanne in a walk, and in the all-time sense I suppose he would be considered the better player. However, if I could choose one in their prime, I think I would rather build my team around Modano and his excellent all-around game. To me it's a little like comparing Ilya Kovalchuk to a healthier Henrik Zetterberg. Despite his lack of top 10 finishes, Zetterberg frequently makes people's top 10 player lists due to his two way abilities and playoff numbers, whereas Kovalchuk is repeatedly criticized for being only a scorer and having no playoff success. While Kovalchuk with most likely go down as the better player all-time, a lot of people would take Zetterberg over him.
Hmmm, interesting points. Personally I like Zetterberg as well and in all honesty it's a laugh when you compare his playoffs to Kovalchuk's. That being said I think Selanne was personally a better package than Kovalchuk. He was a much better playmaker and at least as good of a goal scorer to start. So I'm not sure the Kovalchuk comparison is quite the same, but I certainly get your point. I know Modano's all around game was quite nice, but to be honest if this is 1997 or 1998 I don't think there would be a lot of people that would want Modano on their team over Teemu. Have we forgotten so soon just how dominant the Finnish Flash was in his prime?

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 08:36 PM
  #30
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning View Post
I think some people are forgetting just how good Modano was during the years Dallas was a powerhouse. I don't see any argument for Selanne being better in the late-90s unless you're only looking at points. Even then the teams they played for have to be taken into account. You weren't going to win any scoring titles playing under Ken Hitchcock's system. The offence Modano did produce, while becoming a force defensively, was extraordinary.

Now this may not be the best source, but going through THN's Top 50 list for the years I have the data for:

1998: Modano-8th, Selanne-12th
1999: Modano-6th, Selanne-9th
2000: Modano-5th, Selanne-14th
2001: ?????????
2002: Modano-15th, Selanne (not on list)
2003: Modano-7th, Selanne (not on list)
2004: Modano-23rd, Selanne (not on list)

Teemu obviously has the edge in the early years and post-lockout, but Modano was better for a significant stretch in between.

It's a tough call to pick one. I'm surprised that it's so one-sided and that some people think AINEC.
In 1999 Selanne outscored him by 26 points. No amount of defense from modano is going to make up for that. This is modano we are talking about, not the defense of trottier or clarke.

I grew up during that 1995-2000 era, and selanne was always seen as the better player. Maybe around 2000 modano started getting the egde, but 95-99 was all selanne.

Like I said before, Modano didn't play no defense from 1990-1996, where were his offensive numbers then?

Clearly the hockey news showed a bias because modano was the posterboy for american hockey. How can you be top 10 when you only put up 59 points in 1998.


Last edited by ushvinder: 08-09-2010 at 08:44 PM.
ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 08:37 PM
  #31
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
I don't think Selanne was a consensus top-10 player in the game outside of maybe three seasons. I'd agree he was likely a top-10 forward in those seasons you list.
Well fair enough. But let's examine things for a second. 1993, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000. That's got to be 5 seasons minimum that I would like to see someone try and find 10 players better than Selanne. Throw in the possibility of 1996 and we have as high as 6 seasons for sure. But those first 5 I'm not sure anyone can make a case with that. Modano just didn't have that sustained elite level. It was eerily similar to Sundin in the way that they were just always steady 80 point men who rarely moved from that type of production.

Quote:
I'm suprised that Modano left you wanting more. He was the best player on a Cup champion. He could have provided a little more offense in a different situation, but wouldn't have been as effective overall. I think Modano's biggest criticism is the apparent lack of leadership he showed in Dallas once all the old veterans moved on and retired. Not everyone is captain material, but it's generally expected out of the face of a franchise, and Modano fell short in that regard IMO.
Yeah I hear ya, but I still fall into the category that Modano kind of left me thirsting for more. Like my above post he was similar to Sundin who irritated Leafs fans to no end by how much more he COULD have done in our minds. Modano to his credit did come up big in the playoffs but you always got the feeling that he could have used his laser shot more to his advantage. Or that he could have been more physical with his large size. Or that he could have skated the length of the ice more often since we all know what a lovely skater he was. That's just the knocks I have on the guy even if I agree he'll be a HHOFer. I just don't have the same complaints about Teemu that he didn't hit his potential.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 08:43 PM
  #32
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Well fair enough. But let's examine things for a second. 1993, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000. That's got to be 5 seasons minimum that I would like to see someone try and find 10 players better than Selanne. Throw in the possibility of 1996 and we have as high as 6 seasons for sure. But those first 5 I'm not sure anyone can make a case with that. Modano just didn't have that sustained elite level. It was eerily similar to Sundin in the way that they were just always steady 80 point men who rarely moved from that type of production.



Yeah I hear ya, but I still fall into the category that Modano kind of left me thirsting for more. Like my above post he was similar to Sundin who irritated Leafs fans to no end by how much more he COULD have done in our minds. Modano to his credit did come up big in the playoffs but you always got the feeling that he could have used his laser shot more to his advantage. Or that he could have been more physical with his large size. Or that he could have skated the length of the ice more often since we all know what a lovely skater he was. That's just the knocks I have on the guy even if I agree he'll be a HHOFer. I just don't have the same complaints about Teemu that he didn't hit his potential.
Well in 2000 we have: Jagr, Bure, Recci, Kariya, Yzerman, Modano, Sakic, Nolan was a beast that year. Throw in goalies like kolzig and belfour and defensemen like pronger and lidstrom, then no selanne really isn't top 10. Besides tony amonte, selanne was prolly the second least effective player to crack the top 10 that year.

1997, 1998 and 1999 are the only years where i would say he was top 5. In 1993 and 1996 he was at the bottom of the top 10.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 08:43 PM
  #33
GCM
Stork
 
GCM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,022
vCash: 500
I pick the flash.

606 career goals... 20 goals this season and he passes Joe Sakic in Goals Scored....

And he looks like he can pot 30.

GCM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:13 PM
  #34
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ghana Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
In 1999 Selanne outscored him by 26 points. No amount of defense from modano is going to make up for that. This is modano we are talking about, not the defense of trottier or clarke.

I grew up during that 1995-2000 era, and selanne was always seen as the better player. Maybe around 2000 modano started getting the egde, but 95-99 was all selanne.

Like I said before, Modano didn't play no defense from 1990-1996, where were his offensive numbers then?
Interesting to note that Modano, despite being more playmaker than goal-scorer, outscored Selanne at even strength, 24 goals to 22 in the 1999 season. This is a classic case of very different situations making a statistical comparison inaccurate without context.

Selanne was in a situation where he was getting virtually every second of available offensive and powerplay minutes. Him and Kariya completely carried that team, which was garbage beyond their first line. When the coach sends you over the boards with the sole objective of scoring for well over 20 minutes a night, and gives you Paul Kariya to do it with to boot, you're going to rack up points.

Modano led the Stars in scoring by a large margin, and played a lot more non-offensive minutes than Selanne. He was used often on the PP as well, but shared minutes with a few other players. He was also a primary penalty killer, and could be used in situations where a lead was being defended. Modano was arguably Dallas' most reliable defensive player as well based ice time and ES goals against numbers.

Oh, Modano also led Stars forwards in ice-time by a large margin and was their leading scorer as they won the Stanley Cup. No big deal.

And I don't see why what Modano did from 1990-96 (outside his prime) is such an issue with you. He was better than a point-per-game player several times despite breaking into the league as a 19-year old. How is this at all a negative? It's much better than what Selanne was doing from 2000-2004 for whatever that's worth, but I'm not really interested in using Selanne's down years against him. Both players gave us a large sample size of what they could do in their prime years.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:19 PM
  #35
reckoning
Registered User
 
reckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
How can you be top 10 when you only put up 59 points in 1998.
59 points in only 52 games and a legitimate MVP candidate before his injury.

If we're not looking at games played, then Selanne really had a bad year in '94 with only 54 points.

Quote:
Like I said before, Modano didn't play no defense from 1990-1996, where were his offensive numbers then?
Better than Selanne's from 2000-2004. How any of this matters when assessing their other seasons is beyond me.

Just curious, who do you think has been the better playoff performer?

reckoning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:26 PM
  #36
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Interesting to note that Modano, despite being more playmaker than goal-scorer, outscored Selanne at even strength, 24 goals to 22 in the 1999 season. This is a classic case of very different situations making a statistical comparison inaccurate without context.

Selanne was in a situation where he was getting virtually every second of available offensive and powerplay minutes. Him and Kariya completely carried that team, which was garbage beyond their first line. When the coach sends you over the boards with the sole objective of scoring for well over 20 minutes a night, and gives you Paul Kariya to do it with to boot, you're going to rack up points.

Modano led the Stars in scoring by a large margin, and played a lot more non-offensive minutes than Selanne. He was used often on the PP as well, but shared minutes with a few other players. He was also a primary penalty killer, and could be used in situations where a lead was being defended. Modano was arguably Dallas' most reliable defensive player as well based ice time and ES goals against numbers.

Oh, Modano also led Stars forwards in ice-time by a large margin and was their leading scorer as they won the Stanley Cup. No big deal.

And I don't see why what Modano did from 1990-96 (outside his prime) is such an issue with you. He was better than a point-per-game player several times despite breaking into the league as a 19-year old. How is this at all a negative? It's much better than what Selanne was doing from 2000-2004 for whatever that's worth, but I'm not really interested in using Selanne's down years against him. Both players gave us a large sample size of what they could do in their prime years.
Really, so now even strength goals are the main criteria here? Hart Voting in 1999 clearly indicates who was seen as the better player. I would rather finish second in scoring, than put up 80 points and be solid defensively. The dallas stars of 1999 were a stacked team full of great players, him winning a cup is great but nothing to bow down too.

Joe Sakic and Forsberg were better defensively than Modano and they still outpointed him by a large margin in 1999.

You can make any excuse you want, selanne showed that he had the ability to crack a top 5 scoring list. Modano never came close to doing this even when he was a one dimensional player that didnt focus on defense at all. Selanne cracked the top 5 as a rookie, the same year modano was at the bottom end of the top 30.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:30 PM
  #37
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning View Post
59 points in only 52 games and a legitimate MVP candidate before his injury.

If we're not looking at games played, then Selanne really had a bad year in '94 with only 54 points.


Better than Selanne's from 2000-2004. How any of this matters when assessing their other seasons is beyond me.

Just curious, who do you think has been the better playoff performer?
Are you really trying to suggest that from 1993-1998 Modano had a better body of work than Selanne and deserved to be ranked higher in THN magazines, that would be a serious troll job if thats what you are indicating.

I remember those 1997-1999 years like they were yesterday. After jagr, the conversation for the next best players was always between forsberg, selanne, kariya and whenever lindros was healthy. Modano wasn't even in the discussion.

It really doesn't matter to me if Modano has the better playoff numbers. He was given an opportunity to play on strong teams and he ran with it. Selanne clearly has the better hart voting record and better top 10 finishes. He's the better player and thats why this poll is lopsided in Teemu's favour.

Modano was young and injury free from 1990-96, Selanne was getting old and had bad wheels from 2002-2004, stupid comparison. Especially when you consider the fact that modano also sucked in 2004.

If Modano was capable of being an elite scorer, he would have done so by his 4th, 5th or 6th year. The fact that it took him 10 years to finally crack the bottom end of the top 10 shows that he was never going to be an elite scorer like selanne was.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:43 PM
  #38
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ghana Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Well fair enough. But let's examine things for a second. 1993, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000. That's got to be 5 seasons minimum that I would like to see someone try and find 10 players better than Selanne. Throw in the possibility of 1996 and we have as high as 6 seasons for sure. But those first 5 I'm not sure anyone can make a case with that.
I think there's too much statistical navel-gazing going on here. While Selanne was certainly considered one of the game's best forwards, he wasn't regarded quite as highly as the stats would have you believe. Reckoning's THN rankings, while hardly the gospel, serve to reinforce this point.

Quote:
Modano just didn't have that sustained elite level. It was eerily similar to Sundin in the way that they were just always steady 80 point men who rarely moved from that type of production.
Modano is only similar to Sundin on the stats page. Based on watching a great many games that both of them played, it's a no-brainer to me that Modano was better. Sundin was a better goal-scorer in tight...and that's really about the only thing he did better than Modano in any area of the ice.

Quote:
Yeah I hear ya, but I still fall into the category that Modano kind of left me thirsting for more. Like my above post he was similar to Sundin who irritated Leafs fans to no end by how much more he COULD have done in our minds. Modano to his credit did come up big in the playoffs but you always got the feeling that he could have used his laser shot more to his advantage. Or that he could have been more physical with his large size. Or that he could have skated the length of the ice more often since we all know what a lovely skater he was. That's just the knocks I have on the guy even if I agree he'll be a HHOFer. I just don't have the same complaints about Teemu that he didn't hit his potential.
A lot of these complaints seem to be aesthetic. Modano was really good at picking his spots, as in knowing when to shoot and when to pass. I don't think shooting more would have really been beneficial overall. Modano was tall, not really what I'd consider a "big" player though in the sense that it's usually referred to. Being sound positionally was probably more effective than being a bruiser in his case. And I must say, you're the first person I've heard claim he should have skated more. The Stars' system was not free-flowing and conducive to rink-long rushes in any case.

So I guess we can agree to disgree. While I consider Modano the better of the two, it's by no means a landslide, they are a close comparison. (Or at least I thought so, though the poll is surprisingly one-sided.)

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:47 PM
  #39
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,625
vCash: 500
When I was "growing up" (meaning the last half of grade school, first half of the 90s) and watching/playing an intense amount of hockey, I never considered Selanne to be "better" than Modano. Not even that close, really. I think I may have been biased towards centres, or something, because I think I always considered Yzerman, Sakic, and Modano to be above Mogilny, Selanne, and perhaps even Bure.

Having seen all the break-downs of these guys here on HoH and around the boards a few times now, though, I'm convinced that it's much closer than I thought back then (and maybe Selanne DOES even come out on top, I don't know). Close enough that I'm either clicking too close to call or sitting back to see if something decidedly sways me one way or the other. I don't think simple production, or notions of peak/career values are going to suffice, either. Roles and team philosophies certainly come into this, as does the previously expressed notion that Modano DID sometimes leave you expecting just a little bit more from him (totally agree with the Sundin parallel here).

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:55 PM
  #40
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ghana Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Really, so now even strength goals are the main criteria here? Hart Voting in 1999 clearly indicates who was seen as the better player. I would rather finish second in scoring, than put up 80 points and be solid defensively. The dallas stars of 1999 were a stacked team full of great players, him winning a cup is great but nothing to bow down too.
Good for you. The coaches and GM's of Stanley Cup-winning teams would be in strict disagreement however. Go ask Stan Bowman if he'd rather have Henrik Sedin than Jonathan Toews.

Quote:
Joe Sakic and Forsberg were better defensively than Modano and they still outpointed him by a large margin in 1999.
And yet who triumphed when they went to seven games with a berth in the SC Final on the line? I'd definitely dispute that they were better defensively as well.

Quote:
I remember those 1997-1999 years like they were yesterday. After jagr, the conversation for the next best players was always between forsberg, selanne, kariya and whenever lindros was healthy. Modano wasn't even in the discussion.
Amongst your elementary school chums, I wouldn't have expected him to be.

Quote:
You can make any excuse you want, selanne showed that he had the ability to crack a top 5 scoring list. Modano never came close to doing this even when he was a one dimensional player that didnt focus on defense at all. Selanne cracked the top 5 as a rookie, the same year modano was at the bottom end of the top 30.
Keep blowing that statistical smoke of yours. Most of the posters that have been in here for several years (as in, you) have come to appreciate the non-offensive aspects of the game, if they didn't already. I guess there's always late bloomers...

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 09:58 PM
  #41
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,353
vCash: 500
I'd argue that Modano was better than Selanne between 1993 (Selanne's rookie season) and 2004 (last season before the lockout).

Selanne outscored Modano by an average of just 5.1 points per year during that period (link). They played roughly the same number of games (actually Selanne played in slightly more but the difference is minor). In fairness to Selanne, he usually played on weaker teams than the Stars. In fairness to Modano, he played in one of the most stifling defensive systems in the league which clearly reduced his personal stats for the greater good of the team. Offensively, Selanne gets the edge but it's quite a bit smaller than I would have expected.

Looking at factors beyond offense, Modano was one of the best two-way forwards in the NHL starting in the mid-nineties (and even when he was a one-dimensional forward, he wasn't any worse than Selanne). The difference in terms of penalty killing ice time is particularly striking. Modano also has a superior playoff resume (capped with two consecutive Conn Smythe worthy playoffs - I realize Selanne never had as much of a chance to play as Modano, but the Star definitely deserves credit for making the most of his opportunities).

Selanne finishes well ahead of Modano in terms of Hart voting. That's certainly a point in his favour (he probably had the higher peak) but given how close they are between 1993 and 2004, it also shows Selanne's inconsistencies (he had a lot of bad years to offset the seasons where he was top five in scoring). I know that this is largely due to injuries, but you don't win hockey games with your best player on the bench.

From a franchise building perspective, I'd take Modano's incredible consistency (scoring 75+ points 12 times in his first 16 years, coupled with excellent two-way play for more than half of those seasons). You knew what you were getting almost every year from him and, like Yzerman, sacrificed personal statistics to buy into a team system.

That being said, Selanne's excellent international career and post-lockout resurgence pushes him ahead of Modano on my all-time list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
And yet who triumphed when they went to seven games with a berth in the SC Final on the line? I'd definitely dispute that they were better defensively as well.
Agreed - I think Modano in his prime was better defensively than both Sakic and Forsberg.

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 10:07 PM
  #42
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Good for you. The coaches and GM's of Stanley Cup-winning teams would be in strict disagreement however. Go ask Stan Bowman if he'd rather have Henrik Sedin than Jonathan Toews.



And yet who triumphed when they went to seven games with a berth in the SC Final on the line? I'd definitely dispute that they were better defensively as well.



Amongst your elementary school chums, I wouldn't have expected him to be.



Keep blowing that statistical smoke of yours. Most of the posters that have been in here for several years (as in, you) have come to appreciate the non-offensive aspects of the game, if they didn't already. I guess there's always late bloomers...
Henrik Sedin is hardly a one dimensional cherry picker, that's okay I dont think Vancouver will be trading him for Toews anytime soon. I mean Jonathan Toews defense is so great, that it overcomes the fact that Sedin put up 44 more points right?

I don't need to use stats, Modano was just good defensively. He was never on the level of fedorov, clarke, trottier or zetterberg when it comes to shuttig down opponents. Modano was basically an 80 point player with good defense. What happened when ken hitchkock left dallas, Modano's 2 way game seemed to disappear didn't it? He was no where near a selke caliber player from 2006-2009, and that's why the stars dont want him anymore, while the ducks still see use in Selanne.

Hell in 2000, which is supposed to be Modano at his absolute peak, Oates finished ahead of him in selke voting.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 10:20 PM
  #43
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ghana Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Henrik Sedin is hardly a one dimensional cherry picker, that's okay I dont think Vancouver will be trading him for Toews anytime soon. I mean Jonathan Toews defense is so great, that it overcomes the fact that Sedin put up 44 more points right?
Well, I watched the Stanley Cup playoffs. And every single second of the Chicago-Vancouver series. I'll just let the results speak for themselves.

Quote:
I don't need to use stats, Modano was just good defensively. He was never on the level of fedorov, clarke, trottier or zetterberg when it comes to shuttig down opponents. Modano was basically an 80 point player with good defense. What happened when ken hitchkock left dallas, Modano's 2 way game seemed to disappear didn't it? He was no where near a selke caliber player from 2006-2009, and that's why the stars dont want him anymore, while the ducks still see use in Selanne.
Yep, lets pile on Modano for what he was doing in seasons 16-20 of his career. (And conveniently brush Selanne's Shark and Avalnche stints under the rug while we're at it).

Quote:
Hell in 2000, which is supposed to be Modano at his absolute peak, Oates finished ahead of him in selke voting.
And in 2009, which is supposed to be Roberto Luongo at his absolute peak, Tim Thomas beat him out for the Vezina.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 10:23 PM
  #44
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Well, I watched the Stanley Cup playoffs. And every single second of the Chicago-Vancouver series. I'll just let the results speak for themselves.



Yep, lets pile on Modano for what he was doing in seasons 16-20 of his career. (And conveniently brush Selanne's Shark and Avalnche stints under the rug while we're at it).



And in 2009, which is supposed to be Roberto Luongo at his absolute peak, Tim Thomas beat him out for the Vezina.
Oh yeah the results of chicago vs vancouver is based on Toews being better than Henrik. Damn I guess the hart trophy voters are a bunch of dummies.

By your logic, Marcel Dionne would be terrible.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 10:27 PM
  #45
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Modano is only similar to Sundin on the stats page. Based on watching a great many games that both of them played, it's a no-brainer to me that Modano was better. Sundin was a better goal-scorer in tight...and that's really about the only thing he did better than Modano in any area of the ice.
i totally agree with this. modano brought a lot more to the table than sundin did. he was almost the epitome of what we call a complete player, and he was the best player on a team that won a stanley cup and was a year-in, year-out contender for a stretch in the late 90s/early 00s.

but you look at modano's skill set and size and you wonder why he wasn't fedorov. i mean, fedorov at his most committed best was what modano was projected to be when he was drafted #1 and considered arguably the most highly regarded prospect since lemieux.

it turned out modano never had the offensive gear that fedorov, sakic, forsberg, even roenick had. if hitchcock hadn't pushed him to transform his game, he might have flirted 100 once or twice, but he was a 90 point scorer, not a 100+ scorer. his increasingly well-rounded game in the second half of the 90s made up for his sub-elite offensive game to the point where he was significantly more valuable than some guys who put up 50 goals and 100 points. we often talk about ron francis as a great all-round center; modano was a legitimate alpha dog, best player on a stanley cup winner version of francis.

comparing him to selanne is tough because they were such different players. career, i'd have to go with selanne. he had more elite years, hit elite status earlier, and aged better. but peak vs. peak, it's really tough. at his peak, selanne was one of the best offensive players in the game, a guy who proved he didn't need kariya and could win a scoring championship playing with bure in florida-level linemates. modano in his peak was a totally different kind of player, a guy you could build a winning team around. i'd probably take peak modano by a hair because he could impact the game in more ways, excel in a wider variety of situations, and just plain play more minutes, similar to why i would take doughty over stamkos.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 10:37 PM
  #46
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ghana Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Oh yeah the results of chicago vs vancouver is based on Toews being better than Henrik. Damn I guess the hart trophy voters are a bunch of dummies.

By your logic, Marcel Dionne would be terrible.
Sorry, I wasn't aware that the Hart Trophy included the playoffs. I don't want to steer this discussion off topic, however, so I've said I'll I'm going to say on Toews vs Sedin in this thread.

Kyle McMahon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 11:05 PM
  #47
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
I think there's too much statistical navel-gazing going on here. While Selanne was certainly considered one of the game's best forwards, he wasn't regarded quite as highly as the stats would have you believe. Reckoning's THN rankings, while hardly the gospel, serve to reinforce this point.
THN also had a cover story in 1998 asking who was better: Jagr or Selanne.


quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2010, 11:35 PM
  #48
vofty
Registered User
 
vofty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: TX
Posts: 3,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle McMahon View Post
Interesting to note that Modano, despite being more playmaker than goal-scorer, outscored Selanne at even strength, 24 goals to 22 in the 1999 season. This is a classic case of very different situations making a statistical comparison inaccurate without context.

Selanne was in a situation where he was getting virtually every second of available offensive and powerplay minutes. Him and Kariya completely carried that team, which was garbage beyond their first line. When the coach sends you over the boards with the sole objective of scoring for well over 20 minutes a night, and gives you Paul Kariya to do it with to boot, you're going to rack up points.

Modano led the Stars in scoring by a large margin, and played a lot more non-offensive minutes than Selanne. He was used often on the PP as well, but shared minutes with a few other players. He was also a primary penalty killer, and could be used in situations where a lead was being defended. Modano was arguably Dallas' most reliable defensive player as well based ice time and ES goals against numbers.

Oh, Modano also led Stars forwards in ice-time by a large margin and was their leading scorer as they won the Stanley Cup. No big deal.

And I don't see why what Modano did from 1990-96 (outside his prime) is such an issue with you. He was better than a point-per-game player several times despite breaking into the league as a 19-year old. How is this at all a negative? It's much better than what Selanne was doing from 2000-2004 for whatever that's worth, but I'm not really interested in using Selanne's down years against him. Both players gave us a large sample size of what they could do in their prime years.
Jere Lehtinen and his 3 Selke trophies would disagree with you.

vofty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2010, 02:30 AM
  #49
FinnGoalie
Registered User
 
FinnGoalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesURchickenFLY View Post
Jere Lehtinen and his 3 Selke trophies would disagree with you.
Exactly, and interestingly, Lehtinen has some relevant history with both of the players in question.

Jere Lehtinen did exactly the same in the Hull-Modano line than he has done in the Selanne-Koivu line internationally. Lehtinen is so underrated (or at least forgotten) and he makes the line around him better and way more reliable in two-way play. Just go and read Stars coaches' or his fellow team mates' comments on prime Jere Lehtinen, you'll understand.

While I think Modano deserves all the credit and respect, Selanne gets his dominant role in the super-bad Ducks team held against him way too often. Yes, he and Kariya carried the team by themselves, but so what. Modano had a superstar sniper (remember the Selanne vs. Hull debate here?) and the best defensive forvard of the era on his side on a very deep Stars team. He HAD to succeed, and he did. Especially in the post-season.

FinnGoalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2010, 08:46 AM
  #50
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Really, so now even strength goals are the main criteria here? Hart Voting in 1999 clearly indicates who was seen as the better player. I would rather finish second in scoring, than put up 80 points and be solid defensively. The dallas stars of 1999 were a stacked team full of great players, him winning a cup is great but nothing to bow down too.

Joe Sakic and Forsberg were better defensively than Modano and they still outpointed him by a large margin in 1999.

You can make any excuse you want, selanne showed that he had the ability to crack a top 5 scoring list. Modano never came close to doing this even when he was a one dimensional player that didnt focus on defense at all. Selanne cracked the top 5 as a rookie, the same year modano was at the bottom end of the top 30.
Mike Modano was at least as good defensively as Joe Sakic and definitely better than Peter Forsberg. You really have a lot of confidence in making statements about players you barely remember.

I voted Selanne for this one, but I can certainly see the argument for Modano, at least based on primes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
I remember those 1997-1999 years like they were yesterday. After jagr, the conversation for the next best players was always between forsberg, selanne, kariya and whenever lindros was healthy. Modano wasn't even in the discussion.
Weren't you 7 years old in 1997? I'm more than 10 years older than you and I'm not going to pretend that I have clear memories of hockey before 1993 or so.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-10-2010 at 08:55 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.