Both are completely different players, yet two of the most exciting/skilled players to ever lace them up. Who do you consider the better player in their primes? For me it's a tough one.
Datsyuk defensive game doesnt make up for Bure's offensive edge.
It's safe to say Bure was considered the best offensive forward at some point of his career (1998 - 2001) behind Jagr and if we're talking only about offensive output maybe Bure was the best, given circumstances.
For what it's worth, Datsyuk was 4th at the best during his peak.
Give me Bure.
Who is more flashy player..that's another question IMO.
Give me Datsyuk, for me this is close, yet clear. Bure wasn't Crosby or Malkin, he wasn't going to win any Art Rosses* so against another elite scorer, I don't think he has the offensive edge to make up the huge huge HUGE difference in all-around play. Plus center is more important. Another difference maker in a decision this close. I'd rather build a team around a player like Datsyuk.
*to be fair he finished 2nd to Jagr one year, but Datsyuk finished 4th twice, every time behind first ballot hall of famers and Hart/Ross winners... one year he finished behind Ovechkin, Malkin and Crosby, all of whom are better than Bure, and he won the Selke while doing it. So that impresses me way more.
I find Datsyuk more entertaining to watch, dynamic in so many more ways. Goals like this are so nuts, the guy is amazing
Last edited by revolverjgw: 03-01-2013 at 12:37 PM.
Offensively it's close. As the previous poster noted, Datsyuk finished 4th in scoring back-to-back years 07-09. Only Ovechkin and Malkin outscored him both years combined. Even if you consider a goal scorer more impactful than a playmaker, it's clearly close. The biggest problem with Datsyuk's prime is the impact that injuries (ironically in debate vs. Bure). During 10-11 and 11-12, Datsyuk was again on an identical scoring pace that he had from 07-09 (and again 4th in scoring) at the time two injuries occurred (broken wrist and knee). Both injuries forced him out with surgery and impacted his numbers on return. This season is still to play itself out, but nobody would be surprised by another top 10 scoring finish.
Everywhere else on the ice Datsyuk has a clear advantage. As much as jetsalternate will try to sell us on Bure's defensive game, he was not Datsyuk.
This is Datsyuk hands down. As much as I loved watching Bure play, he was very one dimensional. A Jacques Lemaire vs Peter Bondra comparison could be similar, but Bure had a little more firepower than Bondra.
Give me Datsyuk, for me this is close, yet clear. Bure wasn't Crosby or Malkin, he wasn't going to win any Art Rosses* so against another elite scorer, I don't think he has the offensive edge to make up the huge huge HUGE difference in all-around play. Plus center is more important. Another difference maker in a decision this close. I'd rather build a team around a player like Datsyuk.
*to be fair he finished 2nd to Jagr one year, but Datsyuk finished 4th twice, every time behind first ballot hall of famers and Hart/Ross winners... one year he finished behind Ovechkin, Malkin and Crosby, all of whom are better than Bure, and he won the Selke while doing it. So that impresses me way more.
I find Datsyuk more entertaining to watch, dynamic in so many more ways. Goals like this are so nuts, the guy is amazing
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeBlondeDemon10
This is Datsyuk hands down. As much as I loved watching Bure play, he was very one dimensional. A Jacques Lemaire vs Peter Bondra comparison could be similar, but Bure had a little more firepower than Bondra.
I picked Datsyuk. Yeah give the offensive edge to Bure but not by a whole lot. Give the gigantic defensive edge to Datsyuk and for me at least you've got your answer. Bure was cracking 60 goals a season but even in the years he hit 58 and 59 he didn't even have 100 points. That bothers me a bit about him. Datsyuk is more rounded in his offensive game. You can't deny his skill and he uses his teammates better than Bure did, much better. Sometimes the puck looks like it is on a string with him.
It's interesting that both are excellent players who are overshadowed by their peers in the league. Unfortunately, Bure's reputation has been tarnished over time as a result of parroting and misinformation. I think Datsyuk's career might have gone the same way except members of the media and rational fans have shed light on how tremendous a player he really is. For the first several years of his career, Datsyuk was completely overlooked by most fans and has garnered the reputation of being underrated. This is on its way to being corrected. Bure has always been overlooked, however, especially his earlier years, which were without question his finest. Though he scored 58 and 59 in the dead puck era, he played at his very height in his first four NHL seasons, something most do not recognize simply because he won his Rocket Richard trophies in Florida.
Bure's playmaking ability is underrated, his ability to dominate games is underrated, and his defensive work is also underrated. Though defensively he was not at Datsyuk's level, Bure was above average defensively. He was a crafty player with tremendous hockey IQ and made things happen by anticipating plays and using his speed to change his positioning and chase down pucks before anyone else could reach them. Bure was dynamic, not one-dimensional.
I really like both players and I think they face similar circumstances in their respective eras. I give Bure the edge, though. Every time he had the puck, especially when beginning in the defensive zone, there was a chance he could score.
... for sure. Better all-round game, not as completely out of your seat electric as Bure' could be from centre to the crease when the spirit moved him but still, Datsyuk, what can you say, highly creative & interesting player to be watching, far more consistent than Pavel, serious 2 way player.
I think they are equal plan and square, but different. Bure is the best goalscorer of his generation while Datsyuk is the best two way player, i really think it's more what kind of player you prefer then who is the better of the two. Because it's hard to have a reasona ble comparisson between the two, because while Bure is a poor playmaker, Datsyuk is elite and vice versa on the goalscoring, while Datsyuk gives you a complete well rounded game, bure will give you some electriyfying offense...
Bure was cracking 60 goals a season but even in the years he hit 58 and 59 he didn't even have 100 points. That bothers me a bit about him.
Wait, really?
In his 99-00 season Bure was on pace for 104 points in a year that no one else in the league cracked 100 (although Jagr would've gotten there had it not been for injuries).
In his 00-01 season he had 92 points when the next highest scorer in Florida had 14 goals and 37 points. That's a staggering gap.
I'd pick Datsyuk too, but the offensive gap here is large, IMO.
These players are so different, it's really hard for me to choose. Neither was ever really in a serious conversation for best player in the world for an extended period, but each was only 1 step behind. At this point, their longevity is pretty similar too.
I have to go with Datsyuk a slight edge over Bure.
Bure was one of the league's top offensive forwards at his peak. Datsyuk was as well, except he also won multiple Selkes as the league's best defensive forward.
If you had to pick one of them for offense only, it's Bure. For defense, physical play, longevity/durability; all of those go to Datsyuk. And Datsyuk is not much behind in the offensive category. Especially when you consider Bure v. Datsyuk on defense.
This poll should really make people think about Fedorov; Datsyuk is similar to Fedorov in that both are elite two way centers, but Datsyuk doesn't have the explosive speed or cannon shot Fedorov did.
I picked Datsyuk. Yeah give the offensive edge to Bure but not by a whole lot. Give the gigantic defensive edge to Datsyuk and for me at least you've got your answer. Bure was cracking 60 goals a season but even in the years he hit 58 and 59 he didn't even have 100 points. That bothers me a bit about him. Datsyuk is more rounded in his offensive game. You can't deny his skill and he uses his teammates better than Bure did, much better. Sometimes the puck looks like it is on a string with him.
I usually hate arguments like this, but could this be partly attributed to how awful those Panther teams were at scoring goals? I mean, Bure was actually quite a good passer. We all know that he really never needed help to score goals, but I definitely think a little help on offense would have jacked up his assist totals. He really only had Whitney and Kozlov to work with, and Kozlov obviously was a pass first, pass second, pass third, shoot fourth kind of player.
Bure had the gamebreaking niche which made it possible for him to score sick loads of goals playing with uttery crap players, this shows his individual skill, it was utterly insane. I want to excuse Datsyuk, but Datsyuk doesen't have that electrifying offense which Bure possesed, but while Bure could utterly pawn on his own, he wasen't a remarkable teamplayer because he simply don't need them and the way he played, he rarely used them which is a disadvantage for Bure. His overall game is subpar, he don't use his linemates very well, maybe he never had anyone good to play with to begin with, i don't know.
Datsyuk is not close when it comes to offense, i just wanted to point that out to people saying he is equal to Bure on that department. Datsyuk however is an excelent teamplayer who does it ALL, he play defense, he scores fancy goals, he creates space with sick stickhandling, he is also very intelligent and has a better ice awarness. Remarlable playmaker.
I voted for Datsyuk as well, pretty much a no-brainer really... saw a lot Bure here in Vancouver, and your quite right, he was an independent, a solo artist to a large degree. Electrifying yes, people literally ripped out of their seats when he was flying, really "on". Mindblowing acceleration & speed, quick hands. Unfortunate that he was never able to really put it all together. Seriously play with others. Selfish with the puck by nature.
Ive played with & against guys like that over the years. Goalie. Despite the torque, ability to leave everyone in their spray & wake, not enough consistent "finish". Couldnt close the deal, put the gasket in the basket 9 out of 10 times. Had overplayed themselves & the puck. Mind, eyes & hands unable to keep up with their speed. Disconnect. Shot wide or lost the puck in their skates, winding up deep shooting from a bad angle or in a corner or behind the net itself. His team mates still trying to catch up way back at centre ice, he now quite harmless, rendered impotent. I wouldnt call that "smart". Nailing it less than 10% of the time on a potentially glorious scoring opportunity? And at what cost to the "team"? Sustained deliberate group attack. Unity.
But yes, when he did score, or having used his speed to draw checks, feed an open player as a result, beyond siiiiick. Mind blowing. Law of averages simply dont work that way in a team sport like hockey though. Datsyuk on the other hand, he uses everyone. Coming or going. Like a Fighter Pilot. 360 degree vision, always aware, conscious, wary.
Datsyuk is not close when it comes to offense, i just wanted to point that out to people saying he is equal to Bure on that department.
People *generally* consider a player's "peak" to be his best stretch of three seasons. Given Bure's injury issues, I'll place the following conditions on this comparison: seasons will not be included unless they exceed at least TWO of the following thresholds: 40GP, 1GPG, 1.5 APG, 2PPG.
Furthermore, I will be comparing both "raw" stats and "adjusted" stats (provided by www.hockey-reference.com) so that we can see how the player's era affected him.
So here are each player's three-season "peaks" according to those criteria; I have two separate periods included for Bure because his "raw peak" does not line up with his "adjusted peak":
Raw stats:
Year
Player
GP
G
A
P
GPG
APG
PPG
91-92
Bure (raw peak)
65
34
26
60
0.52
0.40
0.92
92-93
Bure (raw peak)
83
60
50
110
0.72
0.60
1.33
93-94
Bure (raw peak)
76
60
47
107
0.79
0.62
1.41
Total
Bure (raw peak)
224
154
123
277
0.69
0.55
1.24
97-98
Bure (adj. peak)
82
51
39
90
0.62
0.48
1.10
99-00
Bure (adj. peak)
74
58
36
94
0.78
0.49
1.27
00-01
Bure (adj. peak)
82
59
33
92
0.72
0.40
1.12
Total
Bure (adj. peak)
238
168
108
276
0.71
0.45
1.16
06-07
Datsyuk
79
27
60
87
0.34
0.76
1.10
07-08
Datsyuk
82
31
66
97
0.38
0.80
1.18
08-09
Datsyuk
81
32
65
97
0.40
0.80
1.20
Total
Datsyuk
242
90
191
281
0.37
0.79
1.16
Adjusted stats:
Year
Player
GP
G
A
P
GPG
APG
PPG
91-92
Bure (raw peak)
65
30
23
53
0.46
0.35
0.82
92-93
Bure (raw peak)
83
49
40
89
0.59
0.48
1.07
93-94
Bure (raw peak)
76
55
43
98
0.72
0.57
1.29
Total
Bure (raw peak)
224
134
106
240
0.60
0.47
1.07
97-98
Bure (adj. peak)
82
59
45
104
0.72
0.54
1.27
99-00
Bure (adj. peak)
74
64
39
103
0.86
0.53
1.39
00-01
Bure (adj. peak)
82
65
35
100
0.79
0.43
1.22
Total
Bure (adj. peak)
238
188
119
307
0.79
0.50
1.29
06-07
Datsyuk
79
28
60
88
0.35
0.76
1.11
07-08
Datsyuk
82
34
71
105
0.41
0.87
1.28
08-09
Datsyuk
81
34
66
100
0.42
0.81
1.23
Total
Datsyuk
242
96
197
293
0.40
0.81
1.21
As you can see, based off of raw numbers, Bure has literally no advantage in the late 90s, which was his *true* peak. Going from the adjusted numbers, he has a small advantage. But it's not enough to place him outside of being able to say "Datsyuk was close to Bure offensively." because those three-year averages bring us these stat lines:
Bure: 79GP, 63-40-103
Datsyuk: 81GP, 32-66-98
Is five points enough of a gap to say "he's not close" offensively? I don't think so. Especially when Bure played far more minutes total (he played almost 20 minutes just of ES time, and ~5 minutes PP time) while mostly ignoring defensive responsibility when not on the PK (he was an effective PKer and had he been put in the role could likely have been a very good two-way forward). But Datsyuk wins this because his defensive advantage is just so massive that Bure's small gap ahead in offense doesn't do it for him. And even if you use raw stats and even out the games (add ~40 games to Bure at his career PPG rate), Bure is only about 70 points ahead in 740 games; that's less than ten points in a single season. And Bure had the advantage of the early 90s to rack up big totals.
...while mostly ignoring defensive responsibility when not on the PK (he was an effective PKer and had he been put in the role could likely have been a very good two-way forward).
In brackets, periodically, not consistently, had no "head" for it, pattern & mold already finished, cant re-jig, make anew. Simply wasnt ever going to be a "a very good two way player". He was a thorougbred. Built for speed on the flats. Horses run fast because their scared. Did you know that? Its true. Instinctive. Bure' same thing, total sprinter. Couldnt handle Steeplechase, the 440 let alone distance running. Couldnt/wouldnt think defensively much to the frustration of many. So, rather than messing with that talent, forcing a round peg into a square hole, no choice but to let him run wild, run fast & usually solo. You "might" get lucky. Like a marble on Roulette Wheel. Just throw him out there, see what gives.
Pretty surprised that the poll is so close. I guess many don't realize how difficult is to play great defense and at the same time still post elite offensive numbers. But okay... defense is underrated in general. Make such a poll among NHL coaches and GMs and I would be surprised if Bure gets more than 2-3 votes out of 60.
I'm glad you brought these point spreads up, let's take a closer look at who each player played with during these eras and find out how they attained such glory,
Pavel bure almost one man team down in Florida, has kozlov?
Pavel datsyuk had/has zetterberg, lidstrom, rafalski, hossa, franzen
Detroit was built to win cups, Florida was not
As you can see, based off of raw numbers, Bure has literally no advantage in the late 90s, which was his *true* peak. Going from the adjusted numbers, he has a small advantage. But it's not enough to place him outside of being able to say "Datsyuk was close to Bure offensively." because those three-year averages bring us these stat lines:
Bure: 79GP, 63-40-103
Datsyuk: 81GP, 32-66-98
Is five points enough of a gap to say "he's not close" offensively? I don't think so. Especially when Bure played far more minutes total (he played almost 20 minutes just of ES time, and ~5 minutes PP time) while mostly ignoring defensive responsibility when not on the PK (he was an effective PKer and had he been put in the role could likely have been a very good two-way forward). But Datsyuk wins this because his defensive advantage is just so massive that Bure's small gap ahead in offense doesn't do it for him. And even if you use raw stats and even out the games (add ~40 games to Bure at his career PPG rate), Bure is only about 70 points ahead in 740 games; that's less than ten points in a single season. And Bure had the advantage of the early 90s to rack up big totals.[/QUOTE]
If we are talking about prime ability then why not? Selanne also scores goals, but is pretty much useless in every other aspect of the game.
I just have the feeling that Selanne would edge out Datsuyk but Bure is not doing it. Which would be pretty interesting since Bure and Selanne were arguably equally valuable in their prime.
