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.

Yzerman vs Sakic

View Poll Results: Yzerman or Sakic
Stevie Y 65 41.40%
Sakic 92 58.60%
Voters: 157. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-17-2013, 12:25 AM
  #76
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
Lemieux set the alltime record for the highest % involvement in team goals. Your supporting cast argument is beyond ridiculous.
Ok, let's play a game.

I'm a hockey coach, and I have three star offensive forwards on an otherwise average team. I put two of them together on one line, and one on another. I play the lines equally and they match up against equal competition.

Which line do you think scores more points? Why?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 12:40 AM
  #77
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
However, if you start in 91-92 and continue until 98-99, Yzerman played 23 more games than Gretzky while outscoring him at even strength by 19 points and garnering a Selke nomination.
Who cares?

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 01:34 AM
  #78
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 3,025
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Ok, let's play a game.
Only if you tell me how this connects to my statement.

unknown33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 11:06 AM
  #79
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
YearPlayerPosGPESPESPPG
1988-89Mario LemieuxC761021.34
1988-89Wayne GretzkyC781001.28
1988-89Steve YzermanC801011.26
1988-89Bernie NichollsC79871.10
1988-89Rob BrownR68681.00
1988-89Luc RobitailleL78740.95
1988-89Jari KurriR76650.86
1988-89Jimmy CarsonC80650.81
1988-89Doug GilmourC72560.78
1988-89Pat LaFontaineC79530.67
1988-89Paul CoffeyD75490.65
1988-89Peter StastnyC72470.65
1988-89Mark MessierC72460.64
1988-89Michel GouletL80510.64
1988-89Joe SakicC70300.43
YearPlayerPosGPESPESPPG
1989-90Wayne GretzkyC73961.32
1989-90Mario LemieuxC59711.20
1989-90Steve YzermanC79791.00
1989-90Mark MessierC79710.90
1989-90Brett HullR80690.86
1989-90Pat LaFontaineC74630.85
1989-90Luc RobitailleL80670.84
1989-90Joe SakicC80660.83
1989-90Adam OatesC80650.81
1989-90Cam NeelyR76540.71
1989-90Jari KurriR78540.69
1989-90Paul CoffeyD80540.68
1989-90Doug GilmourC78510.65
1989-90Peter Stastny (QUE)C62340.55
1989-90Raymond BourqueD76370.49
1989-90Michel Goulet (QUE)L57210.37
The data you've posted is incomplete.

In 1989, you posted two of Sakic's teammates who recorded 51 and 47 ES point seasons (0.64 and 0.65 ppg, respectively). Yet you didn't show Adam Oates (53 ES points, 0.77 ppg) or Gallant (59 ES points, 0.78 ppg).

In 1990, again you posted two of Sakic's teammates with pedestrian 34 and 21 point ES performances (0.55 and 0.37 ppg, respectively) - but you didn't show Gallant (50 ES points, 0.72 ppg), Burr (40 ES points, 0.53 ppg) or Federko (33 ES points, 0.45 ppg).

I don't have time to go through the rest of the list but when you selectively post data (particularly when it's done in favour of the player you're arguing for), it calls into question everything that you posted. Comparing some of Yzerman's teammates to all of Sakic's is hardly meaningful.

You might respond and tell me that you've excluded players who are a product of Yzerman (Gallant) or played on different lines (Oates), but you fail to do so the same thing for Sakic (as one of many examples, highlighting Forsberg, who was the undisputed #1 centre in 2003 as Sakic missed one-third of the season to injury, and Hejduk, who the great Swede elevated to a Rocket Richard trophy winner).

Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 12:41 PM
  #80
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
i side with sakic, and always have, by a slight but definite margin.

but re: sakic's quiet leadership, i get that he was respected and that his intensity and focus and clutchness were a huge deal to his teammates. but in terms of being a leader in the more obvious messier-like sense, i wonder whether the avs would have been less successful if patrick roy had been the exact same goalie but without being the leader that he was. always felt to me like the addition of roy (and claude lemieux, and mike keane) really changed the culture of that team.
Bingo.

Sakic wins nothing without those additions. And then what?

But the same could be said for Yzerman if Detroit doesn't add those big pieces in similar fashion. That's why too much is made of the whole leadership debate i.e. Yzerman going from a terrible leader to one of the greatest of all-time because they all of a sudden won it all.

Both were good leaders, but like any other great player - it takes a great supporting cast or that leadership goes all for naught.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 12:54 PM
  #81
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhockey193195 View Post
This comparison has been done 10 million times on this board. And I will say the same thing now as I always have:

These two guys were two of the absolute greatest, had very similar careers, and you absolutely cannot go wrong picking one or the other. I personally think Sakic comes out a fraction ahead, but if you were to pick Yzerman instead, who could possibly complain.

So long as you don't claim that one was substantially better than the other, there is no wrong answer here.
Probably the best answer.

I feel like there are a lot of players ranked on here who are very close and could go either way. At times you could group 10 or more players when doing an all-time list and put their names in a hat. Some times they're all so close the differences are miniscule. Yet there's an explosion when someone ranks one ahead of the other.

I love the debates. They're great. And most bring something to the table that maybe you never thought of previously. But rather than saying "this guy is definitely #17 behind so and so at #14, 15 and 16 and if you don't think so you're an idiot." You gotta allow some leeway and be open to the possibility that the order could just as easily be reversed when they're that close in ranking. I think that's the case with Yzerman and Sakic, though I would argue Yzerman here. So basically just have a good honest case for the player and don't claim there's a big gap, and you can't really go wrong.


Last edited by tjcurrie: 02-17-2013 at 01:00 PM.
tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 03:31 PM
  #82
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,629
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Nonsense.

Sakic was on a horrible Nordiques team for quite some time before the Nords/Avs developed into a powerhouse.

He is the only player to score 100 points on a last place team.
You honestly believe that Yzerman had as much help as Sakic did with the Nords? Thats nonsense... Sundin, Statsny, Owen Nolan etc.

newfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 04:37 PM
  #83
Unaffiliated
Registered User
 
Unaffiliated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Richmond, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,138
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars23* View Post
Sakic's peak earned him no awards. He didn't win the Hart until his 30's when the league had no threat from Lemieux and Gretzky.
Conn Smythe isn't an award?

Unaffiliated is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 04:42 PM
  #84
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfy View Post
You honestly believe that Yzerman had as much help as Sakic did with the Nords? Thats nonsense... Sundin, Statsny, Owen Nolan etc.
Did you actually go look at the Nords before you posted this?

Sakic's early career was on horrible, horrible teams. Even worse than the dead wings teams.

The specific part of your post that was incorrect was the Sakic having more help over his "whole career" which is just plain false.

Period.

I'm not picking sides on this one. They are too close to call and anyone who thinks that it isn't close is wrong.

Period.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 04:48 PM
  #85
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,241
vCash: 500
I'm curious as to the ages of all the voters. I think something like that really plays a part. There's probably a good chance most people say 25 and under would be partial to Sakic.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 07:27 PM
  #86
King Forsberg
21 68 88 16 44 28
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,196
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I'd actually say Sakic was better the previous season, when he scored 81 points in 60 games, 58 of them at even strength. The big difference in his total PPG output between the two seasons was driven by a healthy Forsberg in 2000-01 (as opposed to Forsberg playing only 49 games).

The biggest question I have always had about this comparison, in so far as the fact that people love to glue the two players back to back in rankings, is this one: "What would Joe Sakic's peak/prime/career have looked like if he had played it without Peter Forsberg?"
Sakic may have had better short periods in other years than 2001 but I think it's easy to say that was his best year and in fact his peak.

I think Sakic still would have had a great career even without Forsberg. Sakic had 4 100+ point seasons without Forsberg. He was more than capable of putting up points. His peak and prime may have taken a bit of a hit but then again maybe the Avs\ Nordiques rely more on Sakic and he puts up more points. Maybe he plays with Lindros and puts up more points. The what ifs are endless.

What would Yzermans career look like without Lidstrom or Fedorov? His peak would obviously be the same but maybe he doesn't win any cups and maybe his legacy is as a loser rather than a winner.

King Forsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 08:06 PM
  #87
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,629
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Did you actually go look at the Nords before you posted this?

Sakic's early career was on horrible, horrible teams. Even worse than the dead wings teams.

Period.
Some of those Nords teams were worse but I still think Sakic had more offensive support. Sakic played 2 years before he had Sundin, he had Statsny. Yzerman played a lot more years with worse offensive support, Sakic got support pretty much right away.

And either way, I was talking more about during their offensive primes. Theres no way during Sakics best offensive years that he had even comparable help to Yzerman and Yzerman did it while taking all the hard defense. Forsberg took pressure off Sakic during his offensive peak

newfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 08:56 PM
  #88
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,974
vCash: 500
1989

yzerman: 155 (3rd)
oates: 78 (in 69 games)


2001

sakic: 119 (2nd)
forsberg: 89 (in 73 games)


there's a difference between prime forsberg and pre-prime oates, obviously. but it's not like yzerman's second line center that year was a scrub.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 09:21 PM
  #89
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
Only if you tell me how this connects to my statement.
Because in my example, there were three star players. Two played on the same line (we'll call it Line A), while one was the only star on his line (Line B).

It's reasonable to surmise that if all three are equally talented offensively and play equal time, and the remaining three forwards are "average" offensively, that Line A's forwards would finish 1, 2, and 4 in scoring on the team.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 09:50 PM
  #90
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjcurrie View Post
Bingo.

Sakic wins nothing without those additions. And then what?

But the same could be said for Yzerman if Detroit doesn't add those big pieces in similar fashion. That's why too much is made of the whole leadership debate i.e. Yzerman going from a terrible leader to one of the greatest of all-time because they all of a sudden won it all.

Both were good leaders, but like any other great player - it takes a great supporting cast or that leadership goes all for naught.
Yzerman had already led a sub-.500 (78 points) Wings team to the conference finals and proceeded to personally perform shutdown duties on a peak Wayne Gretzky.

The Wings had 93 points the next season and met the Oilers again in the conference finals, although Yzerman missed the last 16 games of the regular season and the first two rounds of the playoffs (and first two games of the Edmonton series).

If Fedorov, Lidstrom, and Forsberg decide to simply never come over, and the Roy trade doesn't happen, I think Yzerman ends up winning a lot more than Sakic. In part because Yzerman was already winning before he had those guys. Removing Fedorov, Yzerman plays more in the early 90s (Murray doesn't share time as much between Yzerman, Fedorov, and Carson) and his numbers for 90-91 and 91-92 probably look more like 89-90 and 92-93. His 92-93 numbers would have been even higher as he'd have been playing more with Fedorov's absence, so maybe Yzerman ends up in the 150 range again? He likely scores more than 82 in 93-94 because he'd instantly be option #1 instead of being placed behind Fedorov when he came back from injury. 90 points? 95? Maybe even another 100 point season? Or maybe he doesn't get injured, and ends up due to health and his increased pace due to increased time actually winning the Art Ross (his actual pace put him at 119 points on a full season, compared to Gretzky's 130 and Fedorov's 120).

There's probably no Steve Chiasson trade (he'd be needed with Lidstrom not around). If Carson was still traded it probably puts Primeau in the #2 slot, so I don't think that happens when it did.

And maybe they don't ship Dallas Drake out in a Tim Cheveldae/Bob Essensa swap.

How many butterflies have I stepped on?

Sakic, as far as I've established, is through 1993-94 untouched. He would play 1994-95 without Forsberg, but possibly with Sundin; Sundin was traded for Clark largely because Forsberg was coming over. If they knew they weren't getting Forsberg, they likely don't trade Sundin. So we're still at Sakic-Sundin-Nolan as the guys in Quebec. They move to Colorado. Roy gets blown out, but is NOT traded to Colorado. One of the two trades which built the Avs into a contender never happens, and the other has been severely neutered by the loss of the key piece.
Colorado likely tries to find a star goalie, probably tries to pick up Belfour when he's available, Ranford in 99 maybe ends up in Colorado instead of Detroit.

Or perhaps Colorado ends up instead of matching that Sakic offer sheet, they end up trading Sakic to NYR for something like Kovalev, Leetch, Richter, and picks.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 09:55 PM
  #91
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
The data you've posted is incomplete.

In 1989, you posted two of Sakic's teammates who recorded 51 and 47 ES point seasons (0.64 and 0.65 ppg, respectively). Yet you didn't show Adam Oates (53 ES points, 0.77 ppg) or Gallant (59 ES points, 0.78 ppg).

In 1990, again you posted two of Sakic's teammates with pedestrian 34 and 21 point ES performances (0.55 and 0.37 ppg, respectively) - but you didn't show Gallant (50 ES points, 0.72 ppg), Burr (40 ES points, 0.53 ppg) or Federko (33 ES points, 0.45 ppg).

I don't have time to go through the rest of the list but when you selectively post data (particularly when it's done in favour of the player you're arguing for), it calls into question everything that you posted. Comparing some of Yzerman's teammates to all of Sakic's is hardly meaningful.

You might respond and tell me that you've excluded players who are a product of Yzerman (Gallant) or played on different lines (Oates), but you fail to do so the same thing for Sakic (as one of many examples, highlighting Forsberg, who was the undisputed #1 centre in 2003 as Sakic missed one-third of the season to injury, and Hejduk, who the great Swede elevated to a Rocket Richard trophy winner).
I wanted to include Gallant, actually, but I couldn't pull up his numbers. The same is true of Walt Poddubny as far as Sakic is concerned, I believe it was the 88-89 season I was looking for in particular, but my memory could be incorrect as that post was completed over the course of several days.

EDIT-Table is edited to include the above players.


Last edited by pdd: 02-17-2013 at 10:05 PM.
pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2013, 10:05 PM
  #92
CanadienShark
Registered User
 
CanadienShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,528
vCash: 517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrath View Post
Well.... Wayne and Mario exceeded 155 points 3 more times after the 88-89 season... so it was done again.


Then they have plenty of 155+ point seasons from 88-89 and before too.
He didn't say, "no one has ever done it," rather he said, "no one will again."

CanadienShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 12:03 AM
  #93
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadienShark View Post
He didn't say, "no one has ever done it," rather he said, "no one will again."
Mario and Gretzky did it again after he did. His wording should have been more clear if he meant that nobody from today forward will do it again.

Also, it'd be imprudent to say nobody ever puts up over 155 points again, changes in rules could increase general scoring again.

Wrath is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 12:13 AM
  #94
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Yzerman also had a Selke.

Sakic got points from prime Forsberg. Yzerman did not share that luck with Gretzky or Lemieux.
Teammate card?

Yzerman played on teams with Fedorov, Shanahan, Coffey, Lidstrom, Hull, Robitaille, Sheppard, Ciccarelli, Primeau, Murphy, Chelios, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and others on them throughout his career.

Stephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 01:03 AM
  #95
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
Teammate card?

Yzerman played on teams with Fedorov, Shanahan, Coffey, Lidstrom, Hull, Robitaille, Sheppard, Ciccarelli, Primeau, Murphy, Chelios, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and others on them throughout his career.
Yzerman during his prime:
102 in 64 (87-88)
155 in 80 (88-89)
127 in 79 (89-90)
108 in 80 (90-91)
103 in 79 (91-92)
137 in 84 (92-93)
82 in 58 (93-94)

All seasons of 80+ points by any other Red Wing during Yzerman's prime:
120 in 82 (Fedorov, 93-94)
97 in 82 (Ciccarelli, 92-93)
93 in 76 (Gallant, 88-89)
93 in 82 (Sheppard, 93-94)
87 in 73 (Fedorov, 92-93)
86 in 80 (Fedorov, 91-92)
80 in 69 (Gallant, 89-90)

Now let's do Sakic. I would define his prime years as 94-95 through 00-01.

Sakic
62 in 47 (94-95)
120 in 82 (95-96)
74 in 65 (96-97)
63 in 64 (97-98)
96 in 73 (98-99)
81 in 60 (99-00)
118 in 82 (00-01)

And now, Sakic's teammates in those years. Pro-rating the "80" line to 45 points for 94-95.

Forsberg 116 in 82 (95-96)
Forsberg 97 in 78 (98-99)
Forsberg 91 in 72 (97-98)
Forsberg 89 in 73 (00-01)
Forsberg 50 in 47 - projects to 88 in 82 (94-95)
Forsberg 86 in 65 (96-97)
Nolan 49 in 46 - projects to 86 in 81 (94-95)
Kamensky 85 in 81 (95-96)

Even just looking at the straight comparison, Sakic's teammates were noticeably better. If you use the pro-rated numbers and set the cut-off at 85 points, Quebec/Colorado loses zero of eight while Detroit loses Gallant's 89-90 season.

And what pushes it even further in Yzerman's favor? The one big season had by a Red Wing - Fedorov's 93-94 - was a season he missed a third of. And Yzerman scored at basically that same pace. On the other hand, Sakic had Forsberg, who was his offensive equal. In only one season does Forsberg not appear, and that is 99-00; Forsberg was injured and missed 33 games, scoring 51 in 49.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 01:25 AM
  #96
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 9,768
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
However, if you start in 91-92 and continue until 98-99, Yzerman played 23 more games than Gretzky while outscoring him at even strength by 19 points and garnering a Selke nomination.

That is a pretty random fact. Since no-one on their right mind would try to suggest that Yzerman was in the same category as a Even-Strength player as Gretzky was.

You do make good points time to time but i feel like this is just useless trivia.
Makes no difference in my opinion when deciding the better player of Yzerman vs. Sakic

I pick Sakic but that is just because it is Monday. On Tuesdays and Thursdays i take Yzerman. 5 vs 2 for me.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 01:26 AM
  #97
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Yzerman had already led a sub-.500 (78 points) Wings team to the conference finals
to get to the conference finals you had to win two divisional series. The 78-point Wings weren't great, but they beat the 72-point Hawks and then the 70-point Leafs, so what exactly is your point?

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 01:29 AM
  #98
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post

Now let's do Sakic. I would define his prime years as 94-95 through 00-01.

Sakic
62 in 47 (94-95)
120 in 82 (95-96)
74 in 65 (96-97)
63 in 64 (97-98)
96 in 73 (98-99)
81 in 60 (99-00)
118 in 82 (00-01)
It's actually impossible to pick out a block of consecutive seasons for Sakic that constitute a "prime", like you can so easily for Yzerman. Sakic had 100 point seasons 17 years apart, and only fell under 1.00 PPG twice in that period. His actual six best seasons are in a ten-year period from 1995-2004.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 01:56 AM
  #99
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
It's actually impossible to pick out a block of consecutive seasons for Sakic that constitute a "prime", like you can so easily for Yzerman. Sakic had 100 point seasons 17 years apart, and only fell under 1.00 PPG twice in that period. His actual six best seasons are in a ten-year period from 1995-2004.
The reason I cut it off when I did is because Sakic in 2001-02 drops under PPG, and only once in the years following (06-07) does he clear 1.10; which is a mark he cleared every year until 2001 except for 88-89 and 97-98. I started with 1994-95 because that's the year when he first started to be a consistent elite-level scorer.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 02:23 AM
  #100
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The reason I cut it off when I did is because Sakic in 2001-02 drops under PPG, and only once in the years following (06-07) does he clear 1.10; which is a mark he cleared every year until 2001 except for 88-89 and 97-98. I started with 1994-95 because that's the year when he first started to be a consistent elite-level scorer.
if you want to compare Sakic and Yzerman best vs. best, then just because Yzerman's best 6 seasons were consecutive doesn't mean you have to pick consecutive seasons for Sakic. Doing so cuts off a good number of his best seasons, and it's obviously not fair. But Yzerman people have been trying this for years here.

Yzerman just isn't at a Messier or Sakic level, sorry.

He's fairly close, though.

seventieslord is online now   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 12:55 AM.

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.