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.

Ranking the Sedins

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-16-2012, 01:48 AM
  #101
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Yeah because I need to actually make an argument how the Sedin's don't belong with the likes of Gretzky, Orr, Howe, Richard, Lemieux or Jagr
nobodu said they were. people might just use great differently. you on the other hand said:

Quote:
96/97
1 Mario Lemieux
2 Teemu Selanne
3 Paul Kariya
4 John LeClair
4 Wayne Gretzky
6 Jaromir Jagr
7 Mats Sundin

Are you honestly trying to tell us that either one of the Sedin's would of been in that top 7?
Head shake time my friend, head shake time!
do you honestly think Henriks 112 point season in 09/10 has no possibillity to translate into a 98 point seson to beat John LeClair in 96/97?
this is why people disagree with you, because you speak hyperbole.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 04:00 AM
  #102
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
do you honestly think Henriks 112 point season in 09/10 has no possibillity to translate into a 98 point seson to beat John LeClair in 96/97?
this is why people disagree with you, because you speak hyperbole.
96/97 LeClair adjusted 101 points
09/10 Henrik 119 points

On the other hand, Sedins would be plastered on the boards during their first shift in the dead puck era. They couldnt stand up against dwarf Marchand, what would they do against DPE defensmen?
The fact is, both have filled they potential after the lockout. They werent so great before. Hossa as a comparable player to Daniel put it togheter before the lockout.

This is more important question than adjusted points.

begbeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 12:26 PM
  #103
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
Your arguments aren't making sense anymore. Winning a scoring title is being great. Finishing top 5 is being great. Sundin was usually around 25th or 30th. Look it up for yourself.
Sundin was not "usually around 25th or 30th"... even if we extend the criteria to include placements within two of that range, he had just 5 such srasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
Thanks for proving my point - Sundin usually finished around 25th. 9 times he was #25 or lower.

Read the thread. When talking about greatness, this is mediocre. If you want to compare to your local beer league then, yes he was a god. Compared to the truly great players in the game - the ones to regularly finish top 10 and get serious Hart consideration - he is mediocre.

I am done here. Either people can't comprehend what they are reading or they just have such a love for Sundin that it blinds their judgement.
OMGZ, 9 times not in the top-24 in an 18-year career! what a bum!

try this: take off Sundin's first season as a 19-year old adjusting to a new environment, and his last half season as a 37-year old. The worst he ever placed in scoring was 39th. Do the same for any other player and show me how many guys can say that their 3rd-worst season was better than 39th. Gretzky's 3rd-worst was 21st. Jagr's was 29th. Anyone else? At all?

Or, do the reverse. Sundin was top-25 in scoring 10 times. Show me all the guys who have done that. There must be like hundreds of them since Sundin is a bum, right? (this is before we even get into the obvious fact that a 25th place is much better in Sundin's time than it was in the 80s and significantly better than it was in the 70s or 60s, but go ahead anyway)

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:04 PM
  #104
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
We are in a league that loves to retire too many numbers and put too many players in the HOF. We use the term "star" or "great" very loosely.

Only the very best in the game deserve to be considered great. Good and very good players are fine but there is a clear distinction between them and great players.

Players who are consistently top 5 scorers and getting a lot of Hart ballots are great. Players who don't get that recognition are not great. It is pretty simple, why try to expand the definition to encompass others? Only the best of the best need apply to my HOF.
Except you look at just scoring in the regular season pretty much. A guy like Doug Gilmour had a few top 10 finishes and good Hart votes in the 93 and 94... but he is so much more than that. He was a freaking force in the playoffs his whole career on both ends of the ice.

Who is higher on your list Ogopogo? Marcus Naslund, The Sedins or Gilmour?

Looking at stats The Pizza Line of Spezza, Heatley and Alfredsson could make it look like Heatley was the best player on that line. But he wasn't... Alfredsson was. Despite higher finishes in assists in the NHL for Spezza and higher goal totals for Heatley. Alfredsson is clearly to anyone that watched that line all those seasons game in and game out... the best player on it. Who scores more points in your statistical scheme for those 3 Senators? I bet it is not Alfredsson.

You can't measure greatness by scoring finishes. A guy that finishes 5th could be less valuable then a guy that finishes 13th... EASILY! They could only be 8 points apart too. You just can't rate guys on straight scoring race finishes. It is something to take into account but it shouldn't be weighted as highly as you weight them.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 01:43 PM
  #105
redbull
BeLIeve in miracles!
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens Rule View Post
Looking at stats The Pizza Line of Spezza, Heatley and Alfredsson could make it look like Heatley was the best player on that line. But he wasn't... Alfredsson was. Despite higher finishes in assists in the NHL for Spezza and higher goal totals for Heatley. Alfredsson is clearly to anyone that watched that line all those seasons game in and game out... the best player on it. Who scores more points in your statistical scheme for those 3 Senators? I bet it is not Alfredsson.

You can't measure greatness by scoring finishes. A guy that finishes 5th could be less valuable then a guy that finishes 13th... EASILY! They could only be 8 points apart too. You just can't rate guys on straight scoring race finishes. It is something to take into account but it shouldn't be weighted as highly as you weight them.
was about to post the same thing.

This board seems to overrate regular season points/game, adjusted by ERA, far too much when evaluating players. Yes, it's a generalization but it seems to be at the crux of a lot of disagreements.

And it makes little sense.

If you're going to adjust for ERA, why not also adjust for linemates? or the quality of the team? Those situational contexts can vary significantly and you run the risk of paying Joffrey Lupul or PA Parenteau a lot of money based on their statistical output - I mean, they are right there with Joe Thornton and Pavel Datsyuk in the scoring race.
(Yes, hyperbole)

The Sedins primary role on that team is to score, to put up points. They are two very skilled offensive players, playing on a really good team that they are KEY contributors to (in terms of team success). They are very good-to-great SCORERS, no doubt about it.

But Sundin is a better hockey player than these two, no doubt about it. I can't quantify it by points/game relative to NHL peers, necessarily, but I do konw that Jonus Hoglund and Alex Ponikarovsky didn't really help Mats up the scoring charts. I know John Tavares creates ALL the offense on that team because I watch all the games. I know that Daniel Alfredsson was the best player on that line, for the same reason.

Matt Moulson has more goals over the past three seasons than Jonathan Toews, Malkin, Kesler, Nash and Eric Staal.

The numbers don't tell the story sometimes.

Taking nothing away from the Sedins because I happen to think they are very good hockey players, not JUST scorers, but evaluating greatness for a hockey player involves a lot more than reg. season points/game.

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 06:07 PM
  #106
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull View Post
was about to post the same thing.

This board seems to overrate regular season points/game, adjusted by ERA, far too much when evaluating players. Yes, it's a generalization but it seems to be at the crux of a lot of disagreements.

And it makes little sense.

If you're going to adjust for ERA, why not also adjust for linemates? or the quality of the team? Those situational contexts can vary significantly and you run the risk of paying Joffrey Lupul or PA Parenteau a lot of money based on their statistical output - I mean, they are right there with Joe Thornton and Pavel Datsyuk in the scoring race.
(Yes, hyperbole)

The Sedins primary role on that team is to score, to put up points. They are two very skilled offensive players, playing on a really good team that they are KEY contributors to (in terms of team success). They are very good-to-great SCORERS, no doubt about it.

But Sundin is a better hockey player than these two, no doubt about it. I can't quantify it by points/game relative to NHL peers, necessarily, but I do konw that Jonus Hoglund and Alex Ponikarovsky didn't really help Mats up the scoring charts. I know John Tavares creates ALL the offense on that team because I watch all the games. I know that Daniel Alfredsson was the best player on that line, for the same reason.

Matt Moulson has more goals over the past three seasons than Jonathan Toews, Malkin, Kesler, Nash and Eric Staal.

The numbers don't tell the story sometimes.

Taking nothing away from the Sedins because I happen to think they are very good hockey players, not JUST scorers, but evaluating greatness for a hockey player involves a lot more than reg. season points/game.
great post, this is what I was thinking when I wrote that the Sedins were compilers (at the top level and it's not a derogatory term IMO) but this isn't fantasy hockey

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 06:21 PM
  #107
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Or, do the reverse. Sundin was top-25 in scoring 10 times. Show me all the guys who have done that. There must be like hundreds of them since Sundin is a bum, right? (this is before we even get into the obvious fact that a 25th place is much better in Sundin's time than it was in the 80s and significantly better than it was in the 70s or 60s, but go ahead anyway)
I ran a report - it's done in Excel and ties are sometimes counted improperly (so a season where somebody was tied for 25th might have been excluded). With that disclaimer in mind, here's a list of all players, post-expansion with 10+ years as a top 25 scorer.

Ten times: Sundin, Perreault, Ratelle, Turgeon, Trottier
Eleven times: Lemieux, Messier, Hull Robitaille, Hawerchuk
Twelve times: Esposito, Oates, Francis
Thirteen times: Yzerman, Jagr
Fourteen times: Sakic
Sixteen times: Dionne
Eighteen times: Gretzky


Last edited by Hockey Outsider: 02-16-2012 at 06:37 PM.
Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 07:00 PM
  #108
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
I ran a report - it's done in Excel and ties are sometimes counted improperly (so a season where somebody was tied for 25th might have been excluded). With that disclaimer in mind, here's a list of all players, post-expansion with 10+ years as a top 25 scorer.

Ten times: Sundin, Perreault, Ratelle, Turgeon, Trottier
Eleven times: Lemieux, Messier, Hull Robitaille, Hawerchuk
Twelve times: Esposito, Oates, Francis
Thirteen times: Yzerman, Jagr
Fourteen times: Sakic
Sixteen times: Dionne
Eighteen times: Gretzky
Pretty good company for such a mediocre/middle of the pack player

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 07:27 PM
  #109
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Pretty good company for such a mediocre/middle of the pack player
did somebody actually call Sundin that (except specifically compared to "great" players, which by your great standards he is)? you are again arguing with statements nobody made.
and could you answer the other question you are avoiding were you also made a strange statement and then lashed out at the people who responded without actually defending the thing they questioned and now again are avoiding. here it is again:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71
Yeah because I need to actually make an argument how the Sedin's don't belong with the likes of Gretzky, Orr, Howe, Richard, Lemieux or Jagr
nobody said they were. people might just use great differently. you on the other hand said:

Quote:
Quote:
96/97
1 Mario Lemieux
2 Teemu Selanne
3 Paul Kariya
4 John LeClair
4 Wayne Gretzky
6 Jaromir Jagr
7 Mats Sundin

Are you honestly trying to tell us that either one of the Sedin's would of been in that top 7?
Head shake time my friend, head shake time!
do you honestly think Henriks 112 point season in 09/10 has no possibillity to translate into a 98 point seson to beat John LeClair in 96/97?
this is why people disagree with you, because you speak hyperbole.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 08:37 PM
  #110
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Pretty good company for such a mediocre/middle of the pack player
Well to be fair the Sedins combined might be there right?

Well soon maybe.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 09:07 PM
  #111
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
did somebody actually call Sundin that (except specifically compared to "great" players, which by your great standards he is)? you are again arguing with statements nobody made.
and could you answer the other question you are avoiding were you also made a strange statement and then lashed out at the people who responded without actually defending the thing they questioned and now again are avoiding. here it is again:
Not sure what thread you've been reading but Sundin has been called mediocre and middle of the pack at length.
Maybe if you actually read the other posts instead of just focusing on mine looking for something to argue about, you wouldn't be asking.


Quote:
do you honestly think Henriks 112 point season in 09/10 has no possibillity to translate into a 98 point seson to beat John LeClair in 96/97?
this is why people disagree with you, because you speak hyperbole.
Yeah, by all means take something I said defending Sundin as not being a mediocre player and use that completely out of context for the "greatness" argument. Something BTW I said very early in this thread that I do not consider Sundin or the Sedin's as "great" players.
As for whether Hank's 112 season would translate, I believe that has been answered already. The Sedin's sad pre-lockout performances seem to indicate the unlikelihood of that.

Just for you though, I'll re-cap exactly what I have said...

* That it takes more than just a pair of top seasons where you barely out point the rest of pack out of nine seasons to be considered a great player.
*That I do not consider Sundin or the Sedin's as great players.
*That Sundin was a very good to excellent player not just a mediocre/middle of the pack one.
*That Sundin was a better player than either of the Sedin's a HELL of a lot more often and for a HELL of a lot longer.
*That my idea of what is a great player is apparently a lot stricter than most, at least most in this thread.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 02-16-2012 at 09:16 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 03:36 AM
  #112
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Not sure what thread you've been reading but Sundin has been called mediocre and middle of the pack at length.
Maybe if you actually read the other posts instead of just focusing on mine looking for something to argue about, you wouldn't be asking.




Yeah, by all means take something I said defending Sundin as not being a mediocre player and use that completely out of context for the "greatness" argument. Something BTW I said very early in this thread that I do not consider Sundin or the Sedin's as "great" players.
As for whether Hank's 112 season would translate, I believe that has been answered already. The Sedin's sad pre-lockout performances seem to indicate the unlikelihood of that.

Just for you though, I'll re-cap exactly what I have said...

* That it takes more than just a pair of top seasons where you barely out point the rest of pack out of nine seasons to be considered a great player.
*That I do not consider Sundin or the Sedin's as great players.
*That Sundin was a very good to excellent player not just a mediocre/middle of the pack one.
*That Sundin was a better player than either of the Sedin's a HELL of a lot more often and for a HELL of a lot longer.
*That my idea of what is a great player is apparently a lot stricter than most, at least most in this thread.
now you do it again. state a bunch of things that I mostly agree with but has very little to do with my question. if you would only have stated these things I would have no objections.

two last question. was Sundin ever called middle of the pack or mediocre compared to all players or just compared to the very best? if you can present a post were he was I will understand your argument better. if not I must ask if you understand the difference between saying "Bourque is mediocre" and "Orr makes Bourque look mediocre", and the problem with arguing this statement meant somebody said Bourque was mediocre?

as for the translation of Sedins reletively late peak seasons I guess we have to agree to disagree. even if that means that your head will shake.


for the record and having seen Sundin at his best in the National team a number of times I would still put him comfortably ahead of the Sedins for career.

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 06:14 AM
  #113
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
now you do it again. state a bunch of things that I mostly agree with but has very little to do with my question. if you would only have stated these things I would have no objections.

two last question. was Sundin ever called middle of the pack or mediocre compared to all players or just compared to the very best? if you can present a post were he was I will understand your argument better. if not I must ask if you understand the difference between saying "Bourque is mediocre" and "Orr makes Bourque look mediocre", and the problem with arguing this statement meant somebody said Bourque was mediocre?

as for the translation of Sedins reletively late peak seasons I guess we have to agree to disagree. even if that means that your head will shake.


for the record and having seen Sundin at his best in the National team a number of times I would still put him comfortably ahead of the Sedins for career.
Go back and read the context of the "mediocre" and "middle of the pack" comments yourself and make your own decision. Just read the thread from the beginning.
Pay attention to where he says that Sundin was just a 25-30th a season player. That should set the context.

Also, I'm assuming by your last comment, that you're Swedish or close to it, so you will want to pay special attention to the statement that Swedish people only sentimentally hold Sundin in a higher regard simply because of the amount of service to his country. Not because he was almost always the best player on those teams.
Something else btw, that I argued against.

I have a sneaking feeling that, if you read the entire thread from the beginning, that you will not only agree with everything I have said, you will actually be more annoyed than I was/am.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 10:32 AM
  #114
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Go back and read the context of the "mediocre" and "middle of the pack" comments yourself and make your own decision. Just read the thread from the beginning.
Pay attention to where he says that Sundin was just a 25-30th a season player. That should set the context.
I have only found the part were it says "mediocre compared to the true greats". that is why I think you are making strange arguments. saying he was only 25th-30th might be wrong but it is not the same as mediocre. It still might be the best player on a team.

Quote:
Also, I'm assuming by your last comment, that you're Swedish or close to it, so you will want to pay special attention to the statement that Swedish people only sentimentally hold Sundin in a higher regard simply because of the amount of service to his country. Not because he was almost always the best player on those teams.
Something else btw, that I argued against.
I am swedish and I know swedes often have a very overrated sentimental opinion on Sundin because he was so often the best player on those teams. most swedes with no in-depth knowledge of the NHL would probably put Sundin ahead of Lidström and Salming. Only Forsberg is loved to the same extent, and this is not strange since Sundin has an argument as the greatest international forward ever in best on best tournaments outside of Gretzky.

but his huge lead in international tournament domination over the Sedins is one of the reasons I hold him clearly ahead. he was a beast and it pains me that he never could show it in the NHL to the same extent. then this surely would not be a discussion.

Quote:
I have a sneaking feeling that, if you read the entire thread from the beginning, that you will not only agree with everything I have said, you will actually be more annoyed than I was/am.
I don´t agree with everything you wrote. I think the Sedins have a offensive peak in the NHL that surely matches LeClair and Sundin and that shaking ones head at that statement is stupid. now the question is if they can maintain it and close the gap further.


Last edited by pluppe: 02-17-2012 at 10:38 AM.
pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 11:12 AM
  #115
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluppe View Post
I have only found the part were it says "mediocre compared to the true greats". that is why I think you are making strange arguments. saying he was only 25th-30th might be wrong but it is not the same as mediocre. It still might be the best player on a team.
That was not the spirit of the statements, he even went so far as to say that the Sedin's 2 recent seasons were enough to rank them above Sundin overall.
It was also stated that Sundin was rarely if ever considered a top player in the NHL, to which I also argued against.



Quote:
I am swedish and I know swedes often have a very overrated sentimental opinion on Sundin because he was so often the best player on those teams. most swedes with no in-depth knowledge of the NHL would probably put Sundin ahead of Lidström and Salming. Only Forsberg is loved to the same extent, and this is not strange since Sundin has an argument as the greatest international forward ever in best on best tournaments outside of Gretzky.

but his huge lead in international tournament domination over the Sedins is one of the reasons I hold him clearly ahead. he was a beast and it pains me that he never could show it in the NHL to the same extent. then this surely would not be a discussion.
I think you missed the point of what was said and what I said.
It was stated that Sundin ranks so high to Swedish people because of HOW many times he played, not because of how well he played.
That he is sentimentally revered strictly due to quantity of time not the quality of that time.



Quote:
I don´t agree with everything you wrote. I think the Sedins have a offensive peak in the NHL that surely matches LeClair and Sundin and that shaking ones head at that statement is stupid. now the question is if they can maintain it and close the gap further.
The point was never whether the Sedin's have managed to peak higher than Sundin.
The point was that 2 slightly higher peak seasons is not enough to rank the Sedin's ahead of Sundin's 15+ seasons of excellence.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2012, 08:28 PM
  #116
Regal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,936
vCash: 500
Some really bad arguments in this thread. I like how Rhiessan has harped on Hardyvan before for comparing players based only on "first so many years" instead of comparing primes and peaks whenever they happen for a player, but now the Sedins first few years is a huge knock against them. Who cares when players become good? How about we just stick to comparing them based on the seasons they have, not when they had them.

I also find it funny that their first few seasons are somehow proof they couldn't hack it in the dead puck era. They were nowhere near the players they are now and their numbers then are completely irrelevant to what they would do today. Scoring isn't exactly much higher right now than it was pre lockout and theyre great players along the boards and at cycling the puck. They absolutely would excel in that period.

As well, it seems like everyone is ignoring their seasons before Henriks art ross as if they came out of
nowhere. They were roughly ppg players the four seasons before that while being easily the go to offensive players on the team and having some very Sundin-like seasons to bring up the comparison everyone seems to be making.

Their play the past couple seasons also seems to be dismissed. Have they been at an all time great level? Probably not, but they have been very, very good, especially Henrik in his Hart season. He was unbelievable. This idea that they've lacked competition is somewhat valid, as sure Crosby and Malling havehad injuries and Ovexhkin has missed some time and played below expectations. However, I find the competition gets hugely overrated when people look at the passed, because people just consider the career accomplishments of the players over how well they did that year. Someone can say, well he was up against Gretzky, Lemieux
Lindros, Sakic, Yzerman, Forsberg, etc but then not take into account the fact it was old Gretzky and Yzerman was passed his scoring prime, Forsberg and Lindros were frequently hurt, etc. Hell, Jagr and Sakic missed some decent time with injuries some seasons too. Jagr won the Art Ross one year playing 63 games. Where was Sundin to take advantage and win a scoring title that season?

Now, I don't agree with Ogopogos beliefs. I think being consistently very good is a form of greatness in itself, and a guy like Sundin,
unlike an Andreychuk, was a star top line player for a very long time, not just a guy hanging around putting up filler points. However, the Sedins are now in their third straight year of putting up elite level points after four years of being very good players, and considering their durability and the fact they don't really rely on their physical skills, I could see them being very good for quite a few more years. Its very hard to rank players in the middle of their careers, but if they have another top ten season each this year and come close next, which I feel is pretty reasonable, and then put up 75-80 points for another few years, they should pass a guy like Sundin. Right now, I think the best comparable to Henrik will be Oates. Both not big goal scorers, though elite passers who've led the league in assists a few times. Oates also took awhile to reach his stride and had a few years as a top end point producer before settling in as a ppg player for a number of years. Oates never got the hardware, but he was still at that level for a couple years. I'd have to think about who Daniel might compare to at this point.

before becoming a ppg player

Regal 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 05:50 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.