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.

Pavel Bure vs Mats Sundin

View Poll Results: Bure vs Sundin in their Prime
Pavel Bure 98 77.17%
Mats Sundin 29 22.83%
Voters: 127. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-01-2013, 07:27 PM
  #26
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
I'll make the homer argument that Sundin was better, since his prime years in Toronto allowed the Leafs to construct a pretty decent contending club around him, while Bure's Vancouver or Florida peak, take whichever or both, did not have the same level of stability that Sundin brought during 1998-2004 in Toronto. Sundin's one great statistical year, 1993, which is often overlooked, was also better than anything Bure put together.
-The Canucks from 92-95 were probably better than any era of the Leafs Sundin was on, and they got further (1 post away from overtime game 7 of the finals).

-Bure's 1994 season is definitely the best season either player ever mustered up.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 07:57 PM
  #27
leeaf83
Registered User
 
leeaf83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,882
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to leeaf83 Send a message via Yahoo to leeaf83
Sundin at his best < Bure at his best

I'm a leaf fan but if I had a contending team and could either sign a 1 year deal for the 1992-95 Bure or Sundin at any point in his career I take Bure in a heart beat. Sundin was containable to an extent but there was no stopping Bure when he was at his best; in the 1994 stars/canucks series, the Stars literally put all their resources into stopping Bure and still lost in 5 games. Bure was good enough to win the conn smythe in 1994 and could have won a hart trophy in a year with weaker competition, Sundin never came close to that level.

That being said if I had the option of drafting Sundin or Bure for a career I do take Sundin. He had 15 solid years from 1992-2008. Bure had about 5 and once you factor things like defense and team play, Sundin wins those intangables hands down. Sundin never became a distraction and wasn't nearly as hard to keep happy.

leeaf83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 08:13 PM
  #28
FrozenJagrt
Registered User
 
FrozenJagrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,496
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeaf83 View Post
Sundin at his best < Bure at his best
But then, Sundin at his worst > Bure at his worst. Bure's peak was without question better than Sundin's. He was the more talented player, and there aren't many that can rival his top performances. But the argument can be made that Sundin had the better career. Consistency and longevity have to count for something.

Game 7 overtime, give me Bure 10 times out of 10. Starting a franchise from scratch, give me Sundin to build around.

Gun to my head, I pick Bure as the better player and I think that is obvious, but I'll take Sundin for the long haul. In my personal opinion, this matchup is really quite close.

FrozenJagrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 08:21 PM
  #29
leeaf83
Registered User
 
leeaf83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,882
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to leeaf83 Send a message via Yahoo to leeaf83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace14 View Post
But then, Sundin at his worst > Bure at his worst. Bure's peak was without question better than Sundin's. He was the more talented player, and there aren't many that can rival his top performances. But the argument can be made that Sundin had the better career. Consistency and longevity have to count for something.

Game 7 overtime, give me Bure 10 times out of 10. Starting a franchise from scratch, give me Sundin to build around.

Gun to my head, I pick Bure as the better player and I think that is obvious, but I'll take Sundin for the long haul. In my personal opinion, this matchup is really quite close.
Oh i don't doubt that one bit, Sundins prime was also 3 times longer than Bure's but the topic is whom was a better player in their primes.

leeaf83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 09:14 PM
  #30
Tony Clifton Leaf
A Mouthful
 
Tony Clifton Leaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,269
vCash: 201
Bure was no doubt the more skilled player, but Mats had incredible consistency.

I would take Mats and his 12 straight 70 + point seasons (Which should actually be 16 straight years, because if the 94/95 season wasn't shortened he would have reached 70 that year as well) to build my team around though.

Tony Clifton Leaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 09:41 PM
  #31
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace14 View Post
Game 7 overtime, give me Bure 10 times out of 10.
What is this. I'll tell you right now that that is probably one of the areas where Sundin could actually rival Bure in their primes. I'm not telling you to forget Bures 1994 Playoffs, but Sundin was a clearcut winner and it was the Leafs that s****d and that's why he has no cups. On Team Sweden Sundin showed this many times over, as a matter of fact he had 15 years of prime Bure when it comes to that. I'm a great Bure supporter but give me a break.

Darth Yoda is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 11:01 PM
  #32
leeaf83
Registered User
 
leeaf83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,882
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to leeaf83 Send a message via Yahoo to leeaf83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
What is this. I'll tell you right now that that is probably one of the areas where Sundin could actually rival Bure in their primes. I'm not telling you to forget Bures 1994 Playoffs, but Sundin was a clearcut winner and it was the Leafs that s****d and that's why he has no cups. On Team Sweden Sundin showed this many times over, as a matter of fact he had 15 years of prime Bure when it comes to that. I'm a great Bure supporter but give me a break.
Not to mention the fact that in an OT situation, Sundin is far less likely to get scored ON.

leeaf83 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 06:46 AM
  #33
tony d
The franchise
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,303
vCash: 500
Pavel Bure. In his prime perhaps one of the purest goal scorers of all time.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 06:53 AM
  #34
JetsAlternate
Registered User
 
JetsAlternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leeaf83 View Post
Not to mention the fact that in an OT situation, Sundin is far less likely to get scored ON.
Pavel Bure, at least in his prime, was not a defensive liability. In fact, he was a primary contributor to the Canucks' defense. I will have definitive proof of this shortly. While I can't say yet whether or not he was a problem in Florida, I have about 30 minutes of footage from three games showcasing his two-way game early in his career.

I wouldn't have expected anything less from him. He was trained in the Soviet system, and I do believe the defensive aspects of hockey were taught to him there. If I were to blame anyone for ruining him, it would be the Canucks' management and coaching staff at the time.

JetsAlternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 08:58 AM
  #35
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsAlternate View Post
Pavel Bure, at least in his prime, was not a defensive liability.
Truth.

Around here though, everyone just labels him a cherrypicker like he was in Florida for his whole career.

I don't blame him for cherrypicking in Florida. What else was he going to do with those teams?

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:15 AM
  #36
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Bure on the Rangers was still the deadliest player on the ice, most nights...playing basically in a wheelchair.

Bure's offensive skills DESTROY that of Sundin. Sundin just stayed healthier, longer. If Bure had remained healthy, these two would NEVER be compared by anyone who wishes others to take them seriously.

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:42 AM
  #37
Tkachuk4MVP
22 Years of Fail
 
Tkachuk4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsAlternate View Post
Pavel Bure, at least in his prime, was not a defensive liability. In fact, he was a primary contributor to the Canucks' defense. I will have definitive proof of this shortly. While I can't say yet whether or not he was a problem in Florida, I have about 30 minutes of footage from three games showcasing his two-way game early in his career.

I wouldn't have expected anything less from him. He was trained in the Soviet system, and I do believe the defensive aspects of hockey were taught to him there. If I were to blame anyone for ruining him, it would be the Canucks' management and coaching staff at the time.

+1. Bure was a freaking machine with the Canucks, oftentimes the first forward back to break up a play after singlehandedly creating a scoring chance at the other end. He definitely cherrypicked more with the Panthers but wasn't nearly as bad as the HF groupthink would have you believe, plus he was riddled with injuries at that time and still carried a very mediocre team (Peter Worrell got regular minutes!) into the playoffs.

Tkachuk4MVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 12:34 PM
  #38
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkachuk4MVP View Post
+1. Bure was a freaking machine with the Canucks, oftentimes the first forward back to break up a play after singlehandedly creating a scoring chance at the other end. He definitely cherrypicked more with the Panthers but wasn't nearly as bad as the HF groupthink would have you believe, plus he was riddled with injuries at that time and still carried a very mediocre team (Peter Worrell got regular minutes!) into the playoffs.
This is pure revisionism, the trade with St. Louis really was the start of the turnaround for the Canucks, Bure had a great start in Vancouver and was an electrifying player but there is some crap going on here in his description and impact on a team.

Linden was the true leader and inspiration on that team and lead the Canucks in scoring in 92 followed by Ronning and with good contributions, especially in the playoffs, by Courtnall and Momessio.

Lumme was also a very good addition and captain Kirk found his stride in 92 as well.

Little kids and uniformed people would look to the bright shiny new object Bure, and man he was very electrifying to say the least, but this attempt at a rewrite of his impact on the team is just plain revisionism to say the least.

Regular minutes for Worrell?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...worrepe01.html

Uh okay, more revisionism and yes Pavel was great that year but teams still make playoffs not any single player.

The biggest difference was that Florida while scoring more goals than in 99 also cut down on goals allowed but it all came to a halt in the 1st round.


Last edited by Hardyvan123: 01-02-2013 at 12:43 PM.
Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 12:52 PM
  #39
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,106
vCash: 500
I have to go with the big, talented responsible center who played almost twice as many games over the flashy more often than not 1-way winger.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 03:35 PM
  #40
FrozenJagrt
Registered User
 
FrozenJagrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,496
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
What is this. I'll tell you right now that that is probably one of the areas where Sundin could actually rival Bure in their primes. I'm not telling you to forget Bures 1994 Playoffs, but Sundin was a clearcut winner and it was the Leafs that s****d and that's why he has no cups. On Team Sweden Sundin showed this many times over, as a matter of fact he had 15 years of prime Bure when it comes to that. I'm a great Bure supporter but give me a break.
There aren't many people who know Sundin's career, his game winning goals and overtime heroics, better than me. I idolized the guy growing up and to this day he is my favourite player. But when I want someone to score a goal, I go Bure. As good as Mats was, Bure was far more of a game breaker.

FrozenJagrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 03:54 PM
  #41
Tkachuk4MVP
22 Years of Fail
 
Tkachuk4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
This is pure revisionism, the trade with St. Louis really was the start of the turnaround for the Canucks, Bure had a great start in Vancouver and was an electrifying player but there is some crap going on here in his description and impact on a team.

Linden was the true leader and inspiration on that team and lead the Canucks in scoring in 92 followed by Ronning and with good contributions, especially in the playoffs, by Courtnall and Momessio.

Lumme was also a very good addition and captain Kirk found his stride in 92 as well.

Little kids and uniformed people would look to the bright shiny new object Bure, and man he was very electrifying to say the least, but this attempt at a rewrite of his impact on the team is just plain revisionism to say the least.

Regular minutes for Worrell?

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...worrepe01.html

Uh okay, more revisionism and yes Pavel was great that year but teams still make playoffs not any single player.

The biggest difference was that Florida while scoring more goals than in 99 also cut down on goals allowed but it all came to a halt in the 1st round.


Where in my post did I downplay Linden's role and say that the Canucks were a one-man team? I was only responding to people's claims that Bure sat at the blueline and waited for outlet passes, THAT is revionist history.

As for Worrell, he had no business being in the NHL let alone playing 70+ games and averaging almost 10 minutes a game. By "regularly" I meant that he was frequently in the lineup, not that he played a ton of minutes.

Tkachuk4MVP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 04:02 PM
  #42
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Hardyfan 123 is correct though I have a lot of respect for Bure.Sometimes people on this over hype or under-hype a player.We say a particular player was a drinker or a smoker and ignore other players to fit their arguement

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 04:35 PM
  #43
Haj
Registered User
 
Haj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,572
vCash: 50
I'm a big Pavel Bure fan. Bure will stick out immediately in your head because you can visualize two or three highlights that are unique to him.

But Mats Sundin played at a high level for nearly twice as long as Pavel.


Bure - 702 games played, 779 points
Sundin - 1346 games played, 1349 points


If I was starting a franchise, I'd take Sundin over Bure.

Lets say hypothetically injuries were not a concern, I would take Bure..

Haj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:05 PM
  #44
Evincar
Your Final Judgement
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
This is pure revisionism, the trade with St. Louis really was the start of the turnaround for the Canucks, Bure had a great start in Vancouver and was an electrifying player but there is some crap going on here in his description and impact on a team.

Linden was the true leader and inspiration on that team and lead the Canucks in scoring in 92 followed by Ronning and with good contributions, especially in the playoffs, by Courtnall and Momessio.

Lumme was also a very good addition and captain Kirk found his stride in 92 as well.

Little kids and uniformed people would look to the bright shiny new object Bure, and man he was very electrifying to say the least, but this attempt at a rewrite of his impact on the team is just plain revisionism to say the least.
Maybe not in his rookie season (where he lead the team in goals) but Bure easily carried the Vancouver offence until his 1995 injury.

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:09 PM
  #45
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haj View Post
I'm a big Pavel Bure fan. Bure will stick out immediately in your head because you can visualize two or three highlights that are unique to him.

But Mats Sundin played at a high level for nearly twice as long as Pavel.


Bure - 702 games played, 779 points
Sundin - 1346 games played, 1349 points


If I was starting a franchise, I'd take Sundin over Bure.

Lets say hypothetically injuries were not a concern, I would take Bure..
I would still probably take Bure if I'm starting a franchise.

I think history shows that if your team is built around Mats Sundin, you will be a bubble playoff team that won't really come close to winning the Cup, as long as Mats is your best player. When the Leafs were actually competitors, I thought Curtis Joseph was their best player.

With Bure, you don't have him for nearly as long, but if he's your best player (and playing like he cares, which he didn't always do), you have a legit shot at contending for the Cup (like in 1994). And if your team is otherwise total garbage, he might be able to carry you into the playoffs anyway (like 2000). Basically, I see Sundin as an above average #1 center for a long time, but not a difference-maker in the way that a motivated Pavel Bure was.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:50 PM
  #46
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,106
vCash: 500
Getting that big, strong, talented center is just so much harder to come by than finding a speedy winger that can score, even one of Bure's level.
Take any number of years at random during Sundin's career, it will surprise you how many times he was actually the leading scoring among centers or close to it.
Bure fares much, much worse vs other Wingers because as I said, they are much more common.

I'm obviously a Habs fan and "we" have been looking for a center like Sundin since a certain #4 retired over 40 years ago.
I guess it just makes me appreciate the rarity of it that much more.
Also why us silly Hab fans are so excited about Galchenyuk and why the Lecavalier rumours just never seemed to die all those years.

So while I see how the flash of a Bure might blind someone a bit imo, I would take the center every time. Just so much more valuable over the long haul and in many more situations.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 01-02-2013 at 10:03 PM.
Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:04 PM
  #47
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Getting that big, strong, talented center is just so much harder to come by than finding a speedy winger that can score, even one of Bure's level.
Take any number of years at random during Sundin's career, it will surprise you how many times he was actually the leading scoring among centers or close to it.
Bure fares much, much worse vs other Wingers because as I said, they are much more common.

I'm obviously a Habs fan and "we" have been looking for a center like Sundin since a certain #4 retired over 40 years ago.
I guess it just makes me appreciate the rarity of it that much more.
Also why us silly Hab fans are so excited about Galchenyuk and why the Lecavalier rumours just never seemed to die all those years.

So while I see how the flash of a Bure might blind someone a bit imo, I would take the center every time. Just so much more valuable over the long haul and in many more situations.
I'd agree here 100%.

TDMM alluded a bit to how Toronto fared with Sundin being the centerpiece but let's be a bit fair here, Bure's Canuck teams were much more balanced and just plain better than most of the Sundin lead Leaf teams.

Sundin also showed what he could do on a world stage, with supporting talent in best on best situations.

Consistency matters and for me a 16 year prime like Sundin ahd is just plain amazing and heck he has 2 straight 5 and 2 straight 7 years primes that are better than any of Bur's straight 5 or 7 year prime.

If consecutive years don't matter then sure I can see why people are taking Bure, he was an ELITE goal scorer in the 90's.

Bure was 15th in goals in the 90's, ironically right behind Mats Sundin but he was 4th in GPG and the other top 5 guys, except Selanne played and padded that stat a bit in 91.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...order_by=goals

If Bure had not been injured or sat out.....but he did so that's what we are left with, what the 2 guys actually did on the ice.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:33 PM
  #48
Evincar
Your Final Judgement
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I'd agree here 100%.

TDMM alluded a bit to how Toronto fared with Sundin being the centerpiece but let's be a bit fair here, Bure's Canuck teams were much more balanced and just plain better than most of the Sundin lead Leaf teams.
Did you count the Leafs from 1998-2004?

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 01:24 AM
  #49
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Litework View Post
Did you count the Leafs from 1998-2004?
Well looking at those 6 playoff seasons here is the great top 3 in goals and points for thsoe Leafs in those 6 years


99 Sundin 83 (31) Thomas 73 (28) Berezan 59 (37)
00 Sundin 73 (32) Thomas 63 (29) Hoglund 56 (29)
01 Sundin 74 (28) Roberts 53 (29) Perreault 52 (24)
02 sundin 80 (41) Tucker 59 (24) Mogilny 57 (24)
03 Mogilny 79 (33G) sundin 72 (37 G) Antropov (16)
04 Sundin 75 (31) McCabe 53 (16) Nieuwendyk 50 (22) RobertsG (28)


So even in their best years he leads the team in scoring 5 times by 10,10,21,21 and 22 points.

He only leds the team in goals 4 years though, comes in 2nd the 2 other years.

I guess we could do an entire list but that's the support he got in those 6 playoff years.

From 95-98 it was worse.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 01:55 AM
  #50
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,583
vCash: 500
I hope people who vote Sundin would also pick Gartner over Lindros.

MadArcand 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 04:55 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.