Jagr gets knocke down a tier in my book because you just never knew what you were going to get from him. All-star Jagr or mopey, cherry-picker Jagr. He has a lot o warts that the stats tend to gloss over.
Don't get me wrong... An all-time great but for THIS particular poll, I have a hard time ignoring the ups-and-downs of his personality and, as a result, he comes up a little short of Mess, Trottier, Espo and Lafleur.
For all the talk of Jagr's longevity advantage over Lafleur:
Lafleur = 6 X 1st Team All Star; 0 X 2nd Team All-Star
Jagr = 7 X 1st Team All Star; 1 X 2nd Team All-Star
Jagr didn't have that many more elite seasons than Lafleur.
Jagr gets knocked down a tier in my book because you just never knew what you were going to get from him. All-star Jagr or mopey, cherry-picker Jagr. He has a lot o warts that the stats tend to gloss over.
Don't get me wrong... An all-time great but for THIS particular poll, I have a hard time ignoring the ups-and-downs of his personality and, as a result, he comes up a little short of Mess, Trottier, Espo and Lafleur.
Agree to an extent. Jagr is a lot like Malkin today. Malkin has shown some serious glimpses of being the best player in the NHL. Now, Jagr always was the best regardless but there was the odd time he took a game or a shift off.
We know Trottier and Messier didn't have this type of gaffe in their career but does it make up for the obvious talent and overwhelming offensive presence Jagr had on the ice?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math
What happened to Lafleur's voters? Are they on strike or something?
It is getting to the point where it is nearly impossible even for the Lafleur homers to justify how he could be ahead of Jagr. Considering Jagr is pushing 40 and doing just fine on the Flyers then I can't see how Lafleur has a chance against him anymore. If this is 2004 and Jagr's career ends then I say okay. But post lockout he strung together some nice seasons and an MVP caliber one. It is just too hard to cling onto the 6 year period of Lafleur's. I'll give him credit, he was the best player on the best team in the world for a while. His peak beats Jagr's but not by a whole lot. He was more decorated at that time but was there much of a bigger gap between Lafleur and, say Dionne or Clarke or Perreault than Jagr and (pick one) Selanne, Forsberg or Kariya? To me there is one clear thing between the two players, there is separation from the rest of the NHL.
But think of it this way, even if we put Lafleur's peak over Jagr (and you should by a little bit) can we really catapult him ahead of Jagr based on career?
Peak: Lafleur - 1974-'80 > Jagr 1995-'01 (not by much though)
But............
Rest of career Jagr (1990'-95, 2001-'08, '11) > Lafleur (1971-'74, 1980-'84). Not even close by the way.
For all the talk of Jagr's longevity advantage over Lafleur:
Lafleur = 6 X 1st Team All Star; 0 X 2nd Team All-Star
Jagr = 7 X 1st Team All Star; 1 X 2nd Team All-Star
Jagr didn't have that many more elite seasons than Lafleur.
But you have to look at it deeper. Jagr had a 94 and 99 point season prior to his Art Ross run. Neither year he was an all-star but in 1994 with his 99 point year it wouldn't have been criminal.
Then even in 2001-'02 when we thought Jagr was on a slow decline after 4 straight scoring titles he was still 5th in points.
2007 he has a 96 point year, still among the elite. No all-star because Heatley and St. Louis were (barely) the better players that year. Still good in 2008 too. Still good in 2011 by the looks of it. Lafleur has the 6 years and very little else. Jagr doesn't, and his two Cup wins were as a rookie so he's fairly evenly spread out
For all the talk of Jagr's longevity advantage over Lafleur:
Lafleur = 6 X 1st Team All Star; 0 X 2nd Team All-Star
Jagr = 7 X 1st Team All Star; 1 X 2nd Team All-Star
Jagr didn't have that many more elite seasons than Lafleur.
Jagr also had more competition, directly from the Euro influx:
Selanne, Bure, Mogilny, etc.
His longevity advantage is distinct when looking at adjusted goals, assists, points, etc. Even without factoring in 1.5 seasons missed due to lockout and three in the KHL, he obliterates Lafleur's numbers.
First, the 15 players are those I felt most deserved inclusion, but not necessarily the 15 best players.
I felt that to not include either Kurri or Selanne on this list would be a bit of a slap in the face to two great Finns with great careers. Kurri's accomplishments were a bit more unique (playoff goals/points, Cups, etc.) than Selanne's, so I chose to include him, despite Selanne being one of my favorite players.
I'm curious as to who clearly deserves inclusion above Kurri.
This being the History section, I did not include Crosby nor Ovechkin, although they are in that Lindros zone of peak/prime accomplishment. They are included in the Poll section's poll, rather than Dionne and Kurri.
Jagr also had more competition, directly from the Euro influx:
Selanne, Bure, Mogilny, etc.
His longevity advantage is distinct when looking at adjusted goals, assists, points, etc. Even without factoring in 1.5 seasons missed due to lockout and three in the KHL, he obliterates Lafleur's numbers.
Good point about the Euro influx. The counterpoint would be that Lafleur had guys like Mike Bossy and Yvon Cournoyer to compete against, while the quality of Canadian wingers dropped sharply in the mid 80s.
As for the second point, he might obliterate Lafleur in number of "good" seasons, but not in the number of elite seasons.
First, the 15 players are those I felt most deserved inclusion, but not necessarily the 15 best players.
I felt that to not include either Kurri or Selanne on this list would be a bit of a slap in the face to two great Finns with great careers. Kurri's accomplishments were a bit more unique (playoff goals/points, Cups, etc.) than Selanne's, so I chose to include him, despite Selanne being one of my favorite players.
I'm curious as to who clearly deserves inclusion above Kurri.
This being the History section, I did not include Crosby nor Ovechkin, although they are in that Lindros zone of peak/prime accomplishment. They are included in the Poll section's poll, rather than Dionne and Kurri.
Fair enough. Hey I'm a huge Stastny fan myself and I would include him above Kurri, but I'm not sure I would even include him just because I know he wouldnt be beating out guys like Trottier, Messier, and Yzerman. That's why I questioned Kurri's inclusion just because, would he even have a shot ?
Fair enough reply though I guess youre wanting to have a nice list of more than 5 guys or so, and I agree I wouldnt include Crosby or Ovechkin either.
I disagree with this assertion that Lalfuer was significantly better in the playoffs. He played on better teams, which allowed him the opportunity to spend more time in the stanley cup finals. But its not like jagr's game took a massive drop in the playoffs, while lafluer's game sky rocketed above norms. Once this season is over, there will finally be a gap between jagr and lafluer/bossy. I'll take the guy that was productive for 12 seasons over someone that good for 6.
I also disagree with lafluer having the better peak, he only finished top two in scoring 3 times, jagr did it 7 times. He's better offensively by any metric.
We know Trottier and Messier didn't have this type of gaffe in their career but does it make up for the obvious talent and overwhelming offensive presence Jagr had on the ice?
What a list to choose from! Mike Bossy played 10 NHL seasons and scored 50+ goals in his first 9...hard to argue with that consistency. But some of those guys are my fav. players of all time...Yzerman, Messier, Sakic...I would say Bossy, but they were all fun to watch.
I'm surprised Messier got 7 votes. Those who voted Mess care to explain why?
2 Hart trophies and a Mario Lemieux away from a 3rd.
Would have 2 Art Rosses without Gretzky and Lemieux.
The second leading playoff scorer of all time, and almost as far ahead of 3rd place as Gretzky is ahead of him. Yeah, it's totally biased by team and era, etc, but Messier was a fantastic playoff player.
His peak isn't that far off Trottier's (if it's off at all), and his longevity as an elite player is off the chart (Messier's last elite year was at the age of 37).
And here's the kicker: I watched him and Jagr both in their primes, and there is no doubt in my mind I'd rather have Messier on my team if I were trying to win a championship.
Voting for Messier was a bit contrarian to be honest; I could have gone with either him or Jagr, but knew Jagr would have more votes by people just looking at stats.
15 straight 30 + goals seasons (tied for NHL record)
Highest PPG average for any player that has played over 700 games and has not played a single game in the 80's or before.
13 total PPG or better seasons of a total 17 seasons.
5 Art Ross trophies, 7 total top 2 finishes, 9 total top 5 finishes. 11 total top 10 finishes.
Third best playoff PPG of the Dead Puck Era (the other 2 being Forsberg and Sakic who played on the same team).
2nd all-time in game winning goals in the regular season.
tied for 1st in regular season overtime goals.
6x Hart finalist.
2 other 4th place finishes.
4 of top 7 highest point totals since 1995-96.
149 Pts in 1995-96 is second best.
127 Pts in 1998-99 is third best.
123 Pts in 2005-06 is fifth best.
121 Pts in 2000-01 is seventh best.
Since 1995-96 the 1.50 PPG number (60 games or more being the marker) has only been reached by 5 players (Lemieux 2x, Jagr 6x, Thornton 1x, Ovechkin 1x and Crosby 1x).
Jagr put up high numbers in a time where this was not very easy to do.
Outside of Lemieux and Gretzky, Jagr has been by far the most dominant, consistent and productive forward since the expansion.
Then why did his offense take such a massive nosedive in a matter of 3 months from summer of 1975, to fall of that year. Oh yeah, he wasnt playing in the system that suited his style. I have seen plenty of boston bruins games from the early 70's, esposito needed someone to carry the puck up and do all of the work, he didnt have the ability to carry a team and be the offensive juggernaut like a bobby hull or jaromir jagr, he needed a supporting cast.
Then why did his offense take such a massive nosedive in a matter of 3 months from summer of 1975, to fall of that year. Oh yeah, he wasnt playing in the system that suited his style. I have seen plenty of boston bruins games from the early 70's, esposito needed someone to carry the puck up and do all of the work, he didnt have the ability to carry a team and be the offensive juggernaut like a bobby hull or jaromir jagr, he needed a supporting cast.
That is a style argument. Each goal still counts as 1.
Feel free to check the links. In his prime, Espo was scoring a ton no matter who else was aroun him.
