HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

What is "generational"?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-14-2012, 03:05 AM
  #126
The Perfect Human*
Bow Down to Lidas
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,712
vCash: 500
"Generations" are defined by style of hockey, etc.

I'd say the current "generation" has been from about first lockout till now. I'd say generational talent's we've had in that term are limited:

Hasek
Lidstrom
borderline Jagr

The Perfect Human* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 01:50 PM
  #127
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
I don't know. It is kind of hard to think that there would be some kind of bias in Sakic vs. Yzerman discussion. I mean in wide range. Both were absolutely amazing players and great cornerstones for any franchise. But I have yet to seen a compelling argument that puts Yzerman ahead of Sakic. There is an argument to be made and it is definitely not black and white situation.

I just feel Sakic has more credentials of being ranked ahead of Yzerman than the other way around. Adjusted points gives them basically equal position in all-time point list with Sakic ahead 29 points. Given that Hockey-Reference's adjustment penalize 80's players too much Yzerman should get some benefit of a doubt there. But the drastic 150 games played difference in favor of Yzerman there should be a noted difference in favor of Sakic. Also their top-10 point finishes are almost double in favor of Sakic. Leadership and intangibles should be noted as even since both were proven play-off performers..

It is kind of even now to think of it. Both players also drop just outside of the "generational" label, for me. Basically they are as good as it gets without being exceptional super-stars.

Neither of these guys is top-5 player in any kind of way, as you suggested. But i could maybe see an argument for top-10. But given the fact that these two have almost identical career value it is hard to place them too much apart from each other and frankly, i can't see myself putting both guys in top-10.

As close as it is possible to get generational without being one. I think.
I don't agree with the "almost identical career" line that is trumpeted at all, though.

Point 1, team strength. Both began their careers on bottom feeders. But Sakic was on the league's best regular season team in his 7th season, while Yzerman waited another two to play on a high-level team. The fact that Quebec/Colorado became a contender within a couple seasons of Detroit doing so, and Yzerman being several years older, should illustrate this point.

Point 2, overlap career. Joe Sakic and Steve Yzerman were generally considered comparable players overall in the late 90s. Through their overlap (88-89 through 2005-06) Sakic averaged 99 points per 82 games while Yzerman averaged 95. Yzerman won a Selke and ws nominated another time. Sakic was nominated once, but began his career as a poor to average defensive forward and didn't really "evolve" until Colorado and the DPE. Yzerman was a solid defensive forward (he was used in that capacity often in the 80s by Demers) who developed into a top shut-down forward, sacrificing elite offense to do so. This is the stuff people think of when they say "even".

Point 3, pre-Sakic Yzerman vs. Post-Yzerman Sakic. Yzerman's 1987-88 season was cut short by injury, but it was better than any of Sakic's post-2006 seasons by a fair margin offensively, and Sakic's defense had weakened a fair bit by this point. And Yzerman had multiple other solid offensive seasons as well.

Conclusion: Yzerman was comparable to Sakic offensively in seasons played together while outplaying him defensively, as well as the best year between the two. In seasons not played together, Yzerman outplayed Sakic offensively with a minimal defensive difference, as well as the best season between the two in those years. Yzerman is clearly the better player.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 09:37 PM
  #128
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemsky_83 View Post
"Generations" are defined by style of hockey, etc.

I'd say the current "generation" has been from about first lockout till now. I'd say generational talent's we've had in that term are limited:

Hasek
Lidstrom
borderline Jagr
Everyone that puts Jagr as borderline and not as definitive Generational Talent, I would like to know your reasoning behind it.

2 Stanley Cups, 1 Olympic Gold, 2 World Championship Golds (played a big role on all 3 of the International Gold wins), 5 Art Ross trophies, 2 other 2nd place finishes, 1 Hart, (6 total Hart finalist), 2 other 4th place finishes, 3 Pearson awards, 11 total top 10 scoring finishes, 15 straight 30 + goals seasons (tied for NHL record), 15 straight 70 + pts seasons (NHL record), 6 seasons with 1.50 PPG or better.


I can go on with his accomplishments.

How is he not a definite Generational Talent?

livewell68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 09:44 PM
  #129
HavlatMach9
Registered User
 
HavlatMach9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
How is he not a definite Generational Talent?
because only
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
5 Art Ross trophies, 2 other 2nd place finishes, 1 Hart, (6 total Hart finalist),
Too bad for him he played in an era beneath the greatest players ever. If he was in another era, he'd be generational.

HavlatMach9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 09:45 PM
  #130
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemsky_83 View Post
"Generations" are defined by style of hockey, etc.

I'd say the current "generation" has been from about first lockout till now. I'd say generational talent's we've had in that term are limited:

Hasek
Lidstrom
borderline Jagr
I think if you put Hasek and Lidstrom as generational, Jagr must be too. Sakic is borderline (easily the second best forward behind Jagr after 94/95), but I don't think he's quite on the same level as the three listed.

No defensemen close to Lidstrom (Bourque and Chelios got old after the first lockout, leaving just Stevens/Pronger/Nied, who aren't close enough IMO). Hasek is the best since half of Roy's cups (and two of three smythes) come from pre-lockout. Brodeur and Roy are in a tier below Hasek post-lockout.


All that said, my personal definition of generational is absolute dominance of peers by a very large margin, thus the only ones I consider generational are the big four, honorable mention to Bobby Hull, maybe if he didn't play in the WHA....


Last edited by Wrath: 12-14-2012 at 09:52 PM.
Wrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 09:51 PM
  #131
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HavlatMach9 View Post
because only

Too bad for him he played in an era beneath the greatest players ever. If he was in another era, he'd be generational.
Those alone should make him a generational player.

In the entire history of the NHL, only 3 players have ever won more Art Ross trophies than Jagr's 5, Lemieux and Howe have 6 each and Gretzky has 10 (Esposito has 5 but won all 5 with Orr, while Jagr won 4 of his 5 without Lemieux).

Those 3 players ahead of Jagr are among the top 4 greatest players to ever play in the NHL.

There was a thread created in the History section a while ago that talked about Hart trophy shares and Jagr was 6th on that list if I'm not mistaken.

Do you want to know the players ahead of him?

Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, Beliveau, Bobby Hull and Orr.

Jagr was also the first European trained hockey player to win the Art Ross.

Not only was he dominant, he was also a pioneer for the sport and was among a young group of European stars from the 80's and early 90's who paved the way for the current European stars we have now.

Jagr's consistency as a scorer is also above most other greats.

He was a more consistent player than Lemieux and his overall longevity is probably only bettered by Howe and Gretzky among forwards.


He is 100% a Generational Talent.

livewell68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:53 AM
  #132
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,034
vCash: 500
I think you should have a look at this coming from the History section where players were ranked by decade or half decades at a time.

Seasons
Player
POS
"HHOF Monitor" PTS

1990-95 Lemieux Mario C 1214.00
1990-95 Gretzky Wayne C 1184.00
1990-95 Bourque Ray D 1147.85
1990-95 Hull Brett RW 1044.00
1990-95 Belfour Ed G 899.00
1990-95 Roy Patrick G 867.00
1990-95 Jagr Jaromir RW 780.00
1990-95 Stevens Kevin LW 755.50
1990-95 Fedorov Sergei C 716.00
1990-95 Chelios Chris D 663.90

1995-04 Jagr Jaromir RW 2359.00
1995-04 Hasek Dominik G 1958.50
1995-04 Lidstrom Nicklas D 1858.60
1995-04 Sakic Joe C 1758.00
1995-04 Brodeur Martin G 1382.50
1995-04 Forsberg Peter C 1326.00
1995-04 Lemieux Mario C 1269.00
1995-04 Kariya Paul LW 1214.50
1995-04 Selanne Teemu RW 1146.00
1995-04 Naslund Markus LW 1098.00

1995-00 Jagr Jaromir RW 1862.00
1995-00 Hasek Dominik G 1538.50
1995-00 Selanne Teemu RW 994.00
1995-00 Kariya Paul LW 927.00
1995-00 Lemieux Mario C 925.50
1995-00 Lidstrom Nicklas D 890.60
1995-00 Yzerman Steve C 720.00
1995-00 Forsberg Peter C 670.50
1995-00 Leclair John LW 653.50
1995-00 Brodeur Martin G 627.00

2000-04 Sakic Joe C 1135.50
2000-04 Lidstrom Nicklas D 968.00
2000-04 Naslund Markus LW 947.50
2000-04 Iginla Jarome RW 932.50
2000-04 Brodeur Martin G 755.50
2000-04 Forsberg Peter C 655.50
2000-04 St. Louis Martin RW 625.50
2000-04 Roy Patrick G 538.50
2000-04 Jagr Jaromir RW 497.00
2000-04 Sundin Mats C 476.00

This should prove to all that Jagr is Generational.

People who are willing to put Lidstrom and Hasek ahead of Jagr should see who is 1st between 1995 and 2004 overall, it's no other than Jagr, the very same player who is ahead of both Hasek and Lidstrom.


Last edited by livewell68: 12-16-2012 at 02:12 PM.
livewell68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:18 PM
  #133
Hammer Time
Registered User
 
Hammer Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,738
vCash: 500
Generational talents of the last 15 years: Jagr, Lidstrom, Hasek, Brodeur.

Crosby or Malkin could become the next one if they keep up their high-scoring ways for a few more seasons.

Hammer Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 08:04 PM
  #134
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I don't agree with the "almost identical career" line that is trumpeted at all, though.

Point 1, team strength. Both began their careers on bottom feeders. But Sakic was on the league's best regular season team in his 7th season, while Yzerman waited another two to play on a high-level team. The fact that Quebec/Colorado became a contender within a couple seasons of Detroit doing so, and Yzerman being several years older, should illustrate this point.

Point 2, overlap career. Joe Sakic and Steve Yzerman were generally considered comparable players overall in the late 90s. Through their overlap (88-89 through 2005-06) Sakic averaged 99 points per 82 games while Yzerman averaged 95. Yzerman won a Selke and ws nominated another time. Sakic was nominated once, but began his career as a poor to average defensive forward and didn't really "evolve" until Colorado and the DPE. Yzerman was a solid defensive forward (he was used in that capacity often in the 80s by Demers) who developed into a top shut-down forward, sacrificing elite offense to do so. This is the stuff people think of when they say "even".

Point 3, pre-Sakic Yzerman vs. Post-Yzerman Sakic. Yzerman's 1987-88 season was cut short by injury, but it was better than any of Sakic's post-2006 seasons by a fair margin offensively, and Sakic's defense had weakened a fair bit by this point. And Yzerman had multiple other solid offensive seasons as well.

Conclusion: Yzerman was comparable to Sakic offensively in seasons played together while outplaying him defensively, as well as the best year between the two. In seasons not played together, Yzerman outplayed Sakic offensively with a minimal defensive difference, as well as the best season between the two in those years. Yzerman is clearly the better player.
If either is better than the other, it's not by a "clear' margin at all.....

Not going to even bother arguing this with you because I know it will lead nowhere.

Wrath 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 06:53 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.