HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
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 41.67%
Sakic 91 58.33%
Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-18-2013, 02:37 AM
  #101
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
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.
In previous posts I've detailed how, per 82 games, Yzerman's offensive output is extremely close to that of Sakic during the 88-89 through 05-06 period inclusive. I believe it was 38-61-99 per 82 for Sakic and 37-58-95 for Yzerman. Effectively identical.

And you're going to sit here and preach about how Sakic was on a completely different level?

Another amusing part is the fact that you went to the "top 5 Americans" thread, and you used stats there to show why you thought Modano was better than LaFontaine. It was because LaFontaine's prime offense was 88% of Yzerman's while Modano's best five year stretch was 84% of Forsberg's. Because Forsberg was #1.

The same Forsberg who played all of those years with Sakic. And in fact we are talking even about the same time period.

If Yzerman and Sakic were basically even offensively during the period of time they played in the league together, and Sakic played most of that time with Forsberg, who offensively dominated the league, then it stands to reason that Sakic's numbers are inflated by Forsberg's presence.

But neither the Sakic devotees nor the Messier lovers will ever understand that having two high end centers playing offense-first hockey on different lines can be a huge benefit to both. There's no better examples of this than Gretzky with Messier or Nicholls.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 03:01 AM
  #102
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
In previous posts I've detailed how, per 82 games, Yzerman's offensive output is extremely close to that of Sakic during the 88-89 through 05-06 period inclusive. I believe it was 38-61-99 per 82 for Sakic and 37-58-95 for Yzerman. Effectively identical.

And you're going to sit here and preach about how Sakic was on a completely different level?
Wow, you think that is actually a fair comparison? Think about what you did there, that is, if you didn't actually know what you were doing from the start.

Quote:
Another amusing part is the fact that you went to the "top 5 Americans" thread, and you used stats there to show why you thought Modano was better than LaFontaine. It was because LaFontaine's prime offense was 88% of Yzerman's while Modano's best five year stretch was 84% of Forsberg's. Because Forsberg was #1.

The same Forsberg who played all of those years with Sakic. And in fact we are talking even about the same time period.
No, Forsberg wasn't #1, jagr was. And who cares if he was on the same team as Sakic?

Quote:
If Yzerman and Sakic were basically even offensively during the period of time they played in the league together, and Sakic played most of that time with Forsberg, who offensively dominated the league, then it stands to reason that Sakic's numbers are inflated by Forsberg's presence.
But Fedorov... that guy probably took points away from Yzerman, right?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 03:18 AM
  #103
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
jeez, 61-41 for Sakic, and that's 23-12 if you just count regular and reasonably well-known HOH members, not just people who came in, voted, and left.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 05:05 AM
  #104
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
jeez, 61-41 for Sakic, and that's 23-12 if you just count regular and reasonably well-known HOH members, not just people who came in, voted, and left.
Sakic has the clear and decisive edge career wise. I don't dispute that. I dispute that at their absolute bests Yzerman was a better player.

Why would you discount voters opinions because in your mind they are not in the hf history section elite club? Many voters, like myself have followed both of their careers in their entirety, but don't spend countless hrs a day debating it on here, so therefore our opinions aren't as valuable or likely to be as accurate as those who do spend countless hrs debating in this section(some who have never seen them at their best BTW)? How does one gain membership to this club?

When players are close, to me, peak level is more important than sustaining it for a longer time frame. Doing it for longer or more consistently doesn't make them a better player.

I don't debate that Sakic had the better career, I debate that at their absolute best the edge is decisive in Stevie Y's favor. If you can agree to that, then the question becomes, what is more important the better career/longer prime or the higher peak. For me, it's the higher peak.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 05:36 AM
  #105
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 7,144
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Sakic has the clear and decisive edge career wise. I don't dispute that. I dispute that at their absolute bests Yzerman was a better player.

Why would you discount voters opinions because in your mind they are not in the hf history section elite club? Many voters, like myself have followed both of their careers in their entirety, but don't spend countless hrs a day debating it on here, so therefore our opinions aren't as valuable or likely to be as accurate as those who do spend countless hrs debating in this section(some who have never seen them at their best BTW)? How does one gain membership to this club?
.
To be fair, as a "non HoH-elite member" i think you make good points. Whenever i read your posts i think of you as one of the better debaters of this board.

That said, i am not even sure the difference on peak (one season) is that much different that it would make case for overcoming Sakic's better career.

I actually think there is case for Sakic of the better season between these two.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 06:01 AM
  #106
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 2,966
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
In previous posts I've detailed how, per 82 games, Yzerman's offensive output is extremely close to that of Sakic during the 88-89 through 05-06 period inclusive.
Talk about cherrypicking stats.
Hint: Sakic entered the league 5 years later. Plus leaguewide GPG.

unknown33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 10:39 AM
  #107
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 2,934
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 and proceeded to personally perform shutdown duties on a peak Wayne Gretzky.
For the record I voted Yzerman. I do give him credit for being behind only Gretzky and Lemieux offensively while playing with Probert and Gallant.

Yzerman had the one major season that stands out - but I'd be a hypocrite to use that season as my argument when I'm not using it to rank Lafontaine over Modano in the Best Americans thread.

But I do however put Yzerman slightly ahead of Sakic. I think he had more of the ability to make everyone on the other team look stupid. As was stated, the only real wrong answer is if someone pretends there's some kind of significant gap - there just isn't.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 10:59 AM
  #108
Guest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,239
vCash: 500
I voted Sakic. The margin is so close between the two players it's like looking under a microscope to see a hairline difference. I think you could argue either side effectively.

I didn't look at the stats so much as my memory of the two players. It seemed like Yzerman was a high scorer in the earlier part of his game and as widely reported worked on all aspects of his game to become a better player. Sakic was a complete player as well but had some real high quality seasons as a mature player. I'm specifically reminded of the year or so when Canada won the Gold, Colorado won the Cup, and Sakic won the Hart all within about a 12 month (give or take) time. At that time I would put him at his best, and I would put that as better than Yzerman's best which you could argue 1988 or 1998 among other years.

One issue I always have with these types of questions is how you are defining the better player. It was a simple pick 'em. I think you could arrive at different answers for various different subquestions. Who had the better peak? Who was the more consistent player? Who was a better leader? Who made his teammates better? Who had the most success? Etc. People often use their own criteria to judge a situation and it might not be equal for everyone if we are all judging based on something different.

Guest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 08:51 PM
  #109
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Wow, you think that is actually a fair comparison? Think about what you did there, that is, if you didn't actually know what you were doing from the start.

No, Forsberg wasn't #1, jagr was. And who cares if he was on the same team as Sakic?
You called Forsberg the "#1 mortal" as you did with Yzerman in that particular post. Does that mean you rank Jagr alongside Lemieux and Gretzky all-time?

Quote:
But Fedorov... that guy probably took points away from Yzerman, right?
He certainly didn't cause as much offensive inflation. They played on separate lines at ES and PP. Forsberg and Sakic played together on the PP often and even had a couple large stretches in the regular season where they were on a line together. The only time Yzerman and Fedorov were on the same "regular" line was in the 2001-02 playoffs. And Yzerman outscored Fedorov.

Quote:
Originally Posted by unknown33 View Post
Talk about cherrypicking stats.
Hint: Sakic entered the league 5 years later. Plus leaguewide GPG.
I don't see how it's cherry picking stats; it's a direct comparison of their total offensive output while both players were in the league. And you want to complain about league-wide GPG? If we remove the 2002-03 season from the equation, Sakic and Yzerman both missed about 70 games from 1996-97 through 2003-04. In 2002-03 Yzerman missed almost the entire season (played 16 games) due to knee surgery that was unprecedented for an active athlete, and Sakic missed 24 games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjcurrie View Post
For the record I voted Yzerman. I do give him credit for being behind only Gretzky and Lemieux offensively while playing with Probert and Gallant.

Yzerman had the one major season that stands out - but I'd be a hypocrite to use that season as my argument when I'm not using it to rank Lafontaine over Modano in the Best Americans thread.
Yzerman had 87-88, where he had 50-52-102 (equivalent to 63-65-128 on a full, healthy year and behind only Lemieux, Gretzky, and Savard on the full season. Yzerman obviously has his 88-89 season. In 89-90, he was right up there as well, with Messier jumping into the group after Carson walked out on the Oilers and ended up traded to Detroi, and Mess ended up basically centering two lines. And then Yzerman was still a top scorer over the next few seasons, despite being used in sort of a three-center platoon by Bryan Murray. 1992-93 is another notable year, and part of that is due to Carson being traded to LA and Yzerman reclaiming ice time.
Quote:
But I do however put Yzerman slightly ahead of Sakic. I think he had more of the ability to make everyone on the other team look stupid. As was stated, the only real wrong answer is if someone pretends there's some kind of significant gap - there just isn't.
I would agree with Yzerman having that quality, but I don't know if I'd judge a player based on it. Alexei Kovalev being "incredibly talented" is based on that idea. And in his prime, he did exactly that. He dominated the league and that was about the best way of describing his performance.

But at the same time, Alexei Yashin was capable of doing that kind of thing. And to continue with the Russian theme, there are guys like Alexander Radulov.

Do we rank those guys ahead of a Steve Larmer, Keith Tkachuk, or Mike Gartner who was at their best one of the league's top players but was never a "flashy" player (even despite Gartner's superhuman speed) who "made the opponent look stupid". But then I think that the best modern example I can think of for this is Henrik Zetterberg; he's not flashy, just incredibly effective. And I realize how underrated Zetterberg is compared to other players who bring more flash with their game.

So maybe it's true that a lot of what people think of in ranking players All-Time is based on flash. I certainly think that's the case with Messier, although his "flash" was his aggressive physical game - something unusual for top end centers.

And I think a lot of what people think in Yzerman vs. Sakic has to do with their recollection of the players. I know that other posters have hinted at this, but although Sakic only entered the league five years later (and left three later) his prime began seven years later. Yzerman's prime was ending twenty years ago, Sakic's was ending ten years ago. Twenty year old posters remember that Sakic was awesome and that Yzerman was "a future HHOFer who captained a great Wings team, but wasn't the star on it." A twenty-five year-old poster would have been twelve or possibly thirteen when Yzerman won the Selke and was named to the first-team in 2000, and only 8-9 when he was first nominated for the Selke. That means 7 or under when Yzerman was in his prime.

Chris Chelios is an excellent example of how younger posters remembering only last impressions of a great player who ended in decline can lower that player's ranking. I can tell you that Chris Pronger and Martin Brodeur will probably also see this effect. Sergei Fedorov seems to have suffered it pretty heavily as well, as the general opinion of him seems to have dropped considerably in the past couple of seasons.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 09:22 PM
  #110
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 2,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Yzerman had 87-88, where he had 50-52-102 (equivalent to 63-65-128 on a full, healthy year and behind only Lemieux, Gretzky, and Savard on the full season. Yzerman obviously has his 88-89 season. In 89-90, he was right up there as well, with Messier jumping into the group after Carson walked out on the Oilers and ended up traded to Detroi, and Mess ended up basically centering two lines. And then Yzerman was still a top scorer over the next few seasons, despite being used in sort of a three-center platoon by Bryan Murray. 1992-93 is another notable year, and part of that is due to Carson being traded to LA and Yzerman reclaiming ice time.


I would agree with Yzerman having that quality, but I don't know if I'd judge a player based on it. Alexei Kovalev being "incredibly talented" is based on that idea. And in his prime, he did exactly that. He dominated the league and that was about the best way of describing his performance.

But at the same time, Alexei Yashin was capable of doing that kind of thing. And to continue with the Russian theme, there are guys like Alexander Radulov.

Do we rank those guys ahead of a Steve Larmer, Keith Tkachuk, or Mike Gartner who was at their best one of the league's top players but was never a "flashy" player (even despite Gartner's superhuman speed) who "made the opponent look stupid". But then I think that the best modern example I can think of for this is Henrik Zetterberg; he's not flashy, just incredibly effective. And I realize how underrated Zetterberg is compared to other players who bring more flash with their game.

So maybe it's true that a lot of what people think of in ranking players All-Time is based on flash. I certainly think that's the case with Messier, although his "flash" was his aggressive physical game - something unusual for top end centers.

And I think a lot of what people think in Yzerman vs. Sakic has to do with their recollection of the players. I know that other posters have hinted at this, but although Sakic only entered the league five years later (and left three later) his prime began seven years later. Yzerman's prime was ending twenty years ago, Sakic's was ending ten years ago. Twenty year old posters remember that Sakic was awesome and that Yzerman was "a future HHOFer who captained a great Wings team, but wasn't the star on it." A twenty-five year-old poster would have been twelve or possibly thirteen when Yzerman won the Selke and was named to the first-team in 2000, and only 8-9 when he was first nominated for the Selke. That means 7 or under when Yzerman was in his prime.

Chris Chelios is an excellent example of how younger posters remembering only last impressions of a great player who ended in decline can lower that player's ranking. I can tell you that Chris Pronger and Martin Brodeur will probably also see this effect. Sergei Fedorov seems to have suffered it pretty heavily as well, as the general opinion of him seems to have dropped considerably in the past couple of seasons.
Oh I know he had other great season, but let's face it, the one that stands out above anything else he or Sakic did when you look at everything is that 88-89 year. The rest you can compare at least closely with each other. I'm just saying I'm not taking that season and making it the tie breaker.

But something has to be the tie breaker, right? And for me that's it. Yzerman had that Gretzky-Lemieux type ability where he could take the puck and play keep away basically. Maybe that's how he came up with his 155 point season despite not having much help. He could just dominate on his own. Sakic wasn't really like that I don't think. Like I said, something has to be the tie breaker.

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 10:29 PM
  #111
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,519
vCash: 500
Higher offensive peak: Yzerman
Highest defensive peak: Yzerman

Sakic had more help in his offensive prime as well undoubtedly, which made his prime look more impressive I would argue. Does Sakic have his best offensive seasons without the help he had?

newfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 10:32 PM
  #112
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I don't see how it's cherry picking stats; it's a direct comparison of their total offensive output while both players were in the league. And you want to complain about league-wide GPG?
Yes we do want to bring up the issue of leaguewide GPG, which I was hoping the rest of that paragraph might address......


Quote:
If we remove the 2002-03 season from the equation, Sakic and Yzerman both missed about 70 games from 1996-97 through 2003-04. In 2002-03 Yzerman missed almost the entire season (played 16 games) due to knee surgery that was unprecedented for an active athlete, and Sakic missed 24 games.
Instead I just see a bunch of irrelevance which has nothing to do with GPG here.

Wrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 10:44 PM
  #113
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrath View Post
Yes we do want to bring up the issue of leaguewide GPG, which I was hoping the rest of that paragraph might address......

Instead I just see a bunch of irrelevance which has nothing to do with GPG here.
I was pointing out that over the entire time they played in the league together, they missed about the same amount of time if you remove that one season.

But if you want to adjust for leaguewide GPG, here goes. Using adjusted stats from hockey-reference.com we get:

Sakic: 39-62-101
Yzerman: 36-57-93

So Sakic wins a small victory there, which was expected as he posted larger numbers than Yzerman in the DPE and smaller during the 80s/early 90s. In fact, Yzerman is probably closer than you were expecting. Given Yzerman's defensive advantage over him during the same period and the fact that it's still only 8 points per 82 games, that's pretty clearly a win for Yzerman IMHO.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 10:52 PM
  #114
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I was pointing out that over the entire time they played in the league together, they missed about the same amount of time if you remove that one season.

But if you want to adjust for leaguewide GPG, here goes. Using adjusted stats from hockey-reference.com we get:

Sakic: 39-62-101
Yzerman: 36-57-93

So Sakic wins a small victory there, which was expected as he posted larger numbers than Yzerman in the DPE and smaller during the 80s/early 90s. In fact, Yzerman is probably closer than you were expecting. Given Yzerman's defensive advantage over him during the same period and the fact that it's still only 8 points per 82 games, that's pretty clearly a win for Yzerman IMHO.
People on this forum really overrate the defensive impact of forwards, yzerman's defensive impact does not make up for 8 points per 82 games, especially when hes being compared to a guy that also had a 2 way game and the fact that yzerman didnt really become a two way player until his offense dipped. Exactly how man extra points are you going to give yzerman for his edge in defense, 10? 20?

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 11:11 PM
  #115
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
People on this forum really overrate the defensive impact of forwards, yzerman's defensive impact does not make up for 8 points per 82 games, especially when hes being compared to a guy that also had a 2 way game and the fact that yzerman didnt really become a two way player until his offense dipped. Exactly how man extra points are you going to give yzerman for his edge in defense, 10? 20?
Yzerman was a good defensive forward going back to the mid 80s, and centered both the primary scoring line and primary checking line under Jacques Demers. Against Edmonton in 1987, Yzerman's main job was to stop Gretzky from scoring - and he did it well. Sakic didn't develop that level of defense until the late 90s.

Yzerman, as we know, was already an elite defensive forward at that time, although he was no longer scoring 100 points. Part of that, of course, can be attributed to his play style; in 96-97 Yzerman outscored Sakic at even strength per-game and he was within 0.01 of Sakic in 97-98.

Furthermore, I don't think Sakic was a poor defensive forward to begin with, but if we take his entire time from 88-89 through 05-06 I don't think you can classify Sakic as anything more than "above average" defensively. Certainly he was very good during his prime, but we're talking about a range of 17 seasons, most of which Sakic was not a significant defensive force. Yzerman spent a decade of that time as an elite defensive forward and more of it as a "good" defensive forward, so the defensive gap is pretty significant.

So yeah, I think ten points might be fair. Twenty points if you prefer solid defensive play.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 11:17 PM
  #116
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
Why would you discount voters opinions because in your mind they are not in the hf history section elite club? Many voters, like myself have followed both of their careers in their entirety, but don't spend countless hrs a day debating it on here, so therefore our opinions aren't as valuable or likely to be as accurate as those who do spend countless hrs debating in this section(some who have never seen them at their best BTW)? How does one gain membership to this club?
Glad you spoke up. Don't mean to "discount" anyone. Just saying that out of all these votes, there are 35 people who I can truly "vouch" for. The others could all be fanboys for all I really know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
You called Forsberg the "#1 mortal" as you did with Yzerman in that particular post. Does that mean you rank Jagr alongside Lemieux and Gretzky all-time?
Not alongside them, but way ahead of Yzerman and definitely in the "immortal" category as far as point production goes. this is a 5-time scoring champ we're talking about here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Given Yzerman's defensive advantage over him during the same period and the fact that it's still only 8 points per 82 games, that's pretty clearly a win for Yzerman IMHO.
Wow... really? That's a 9% difference in the attribute that is, by far, the most important for a forward, and you think that defense makes that up?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 11:37 PM
  #117
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Wow... really? That's a 9% difference in the attribute that is, by far, the most important for a forward, and you think that defense makes that up?
On a ten point scale, if 10 is "Selke level", 5 is "average NHLer, and 1 is "significant liability" here's how I would rate them.

Rating Yzerman 88-89 through 05-06 inclusive as a whole I'd rate him a 9. He was Selke level and a contender for the trophy for several years consecutively, any of which he could have won it. He was also good to very good defensively in the years outside of that stretch. I recognize that this stretch doesn't include Yzerman's first few seasons in the NHL, but the point of the comparison is how well they did while both were in the league.

Sakic, I would rate him a 7. When he came into the league he was pretty average defensively and only very slowly improved on that aspect as he improved as a player in general. He had improved his defense significantly as the DPE rolled around, which allowed Colorado to put him on the ice in more situations and for more minutes (in his prime Sakic averaged more than 25 minutes on the ice).

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 11:39 PM
  #118
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I was pointing out that over the entire time they played in the league together, they missed about the same amount of time if you remove that one season.

But if you want to adjust for leaguewide GPG, here goes. Using adjusted stats from hockey-reference.com we get:

Sakic: 39-62-101
Yzerman: 36-57-93

So Sakic wins a small victory there, which was expected as he posted larger numbers than Yzerman in the DPE and smaller during the 80s/early 90s. In fact, Yzerman is probably closer than you were expecting. Given Yzerman's defensive advantage over him during the same period and the fact that it's still only 8 points per 82 games, that's pretty clearly a win for Yzerman IMHO.
What time frame of seasons are we talking about with those adjusted stats? 8 points isnt really that much when you consider what some assists are given for and everything that difference isnt huge. I would wonder with that comparison when the seasons were so that teammates could be accounted for and just what level of defensive play we could really attribute to Yzerman

newfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-18-2013, 11:58 PM
  #119
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfy View Post
What time frame of seasons are we talking about with those adjusted stats? 8 points isnt really that much when you consider what some assists are given for and everything that difference isnt huge. I would wonder with that comparison when the seasons were so that teammates could be accounted for and just what level of defensive play we could really attribute to Yzerman
That's a per-82 projection of adjusted stats, using the method and stats found at www.hockey-reference.com

The time period is the overlap between their careers, which is 1988-89 through 2005-06.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2013, 06:41 AM
  #120
Up the Irons
Registered User
 
Up the Irons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,506
vCash: 480
didn't vote. too close, too similar. the one thing Sakic has the Yzerman didn't is a Hart, as the world's best player. tho, if Jagr had really tried, we all know he was the world's best at the time.

flip a coin.

Up the Irons is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2013, 10:58 AM
  #121
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
That's a per-82 projection of adjusted stats, using the method and stats found at www.hockey-reference.com

The time period is the overlap between their careers, which is 1988-89 through 2005-06.
So a couple prime Yzerman years are cut off really, Yzermans defensive edge isnt accounted for and it doesnt take his high scoring years with terrible teammates into account. That comparison looks pretty good for Yzerman

newfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2013, 12:41 PM
  #122
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustE View Post
didn't vote. too close, too similar. the one thing Sakic has the Yzerman didn't is a Hart, as the world's best player.
Yzerman's Pearson in '89 is worth a hell of a lot more than Sakic's Hart and Pearson in '01 IMO.

Honestly, if Stevie hadn't have run into the injuries that slowed him down permanently in 93/94, this poll wouldn't even be close.

At their absolute best, 100% healthy, Yzerman was clearly the better player.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2013, 12:44 PM
  #123
Avalanche19
Rookie User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2
vCash: 500
Both are NHL greats but being a Colorado fan and hating the Wings I am a little biased and have to go with Sakic.

Avalanche19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2013, 01:18 PM
  #124
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Yzerman's Pearson in '89 is worth a hell of a lot more than Sakic's Hart and Pearson in '01 IMO.

Honestly, if Stevie hadn't have run into the injuries that slowed him down permanently in 93/94, this poll wouldn't even be close.

At their absolute best, 100% healthy, Yzerman was clearly the better player.
Yeah, I am still not going to vote on this one because I think they are very very close, but I agree.

Yzerman was the better player at their absolute best, but he was slowed by injuries and changed his game.

Sakic was right up there as far as peak goes and also had better longevity as a top scorer largely because he was able to stay mostly healthy until he fed his hand to a snowblower.

If your definition of who was a better player is something along the lines of career value I would give a slight nod to Sakic.

If your definition of who was a better player is who was the best at their best I would give a slight nod to Yzerman.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-19-2013, 01:22 PM
  #125
King Forsberg
21 68 88 16 44 28
 
King Forsberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,004
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfy View Post
Higher offensive peak: Yzerman
Highest defensive peak: Yzerman

Sakic had more help in his offensive prime as well undoubtedly, which made his prime look more impressive I would argue. Does Sakic have his best offensive seasons without the help he had?
Does Yzerman have his beat defensive seasons without the help he had? A lot harder to try and quantify defense but its still worth considering.

King Forsberg 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 01:10 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.