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
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Fedorov vs. Selanne

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-12-2013, 10:31 PM
  #176
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Not Fedorov.

He has one top five scoring finish. ONE.

And every time that gets brought up, the response is always 'oh well, he sacrificed offense for defense'... Which means he just flat-out wasn't as good at doing both as he is portrayed as, is he?

Look, if he really was a top-five scorer playing Selke-calibre defense... I'd be totally on the bandwagon. But he wasn't. He did that once in a season extremely comparable to Gilmour's best (without the career accomplishments of Gilmour) and never did it again.
Are there even more than 1 hand full of any such seasons in the NHL?

Any in a 21 plus team NHL?

Maybe a couple in the 06 era and a couple of Clarke seasons, which were extremely watered down with the WHA.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:35 PM
  #177
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Again, this isn't about Gilmour and Fedorov. YOU made the assertion that Fedorov should be talked about with Lemieux and Gretzky... Largely based on overinflating his 1994 season which was, overall, no better than Gilmour's 1993.

So please explain what universe Fedorov should be talked about with 99 and 66.
In the decade of the 90's Fedorov was more valuable than either 99 or 66.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

That is if we are talking about his total contribution to making his team better and able to win.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:40 PM
  #178
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
That's it; I'm out.
well you asked and he answered it.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:40 PM
  #179
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Are there even more than 1 hand full of any such seasons in the NHL?

Any in a 21 plus team NHL?

Maybe a couple in the 06 era and a couple of Clarke seasons, which were extremely watered down with the WHA.
Irrelevant.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:45 PM
  #180
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
In the decade of the 90's Fedorov was more valuable than either 99 or 66.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

That is if we are talking about his total contribution to making his team better and able to win.
This isn't even worth a response, is it?

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:48 PM
  #181
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Despite all this, I think that playing for the Wings hurt Fedorov's overall regular season numbers numbers.
It's entirely possible. As soon as Bowman was gone, he went up from 68 points to 83 points, but being on a horrible team the next year sent him crashing back down to 65 points. Either way, there's a bit of a difference between 83 points and 109 points in the DPE. It's not like the Mighty Ducks were letting in significantly more goals with Selanne on the ice than the Red Wings with Fedorov anyway when they had those high-watermark seasons:

Team ES GF/GA
Selanne, 1999: 69-51
Fedorov, 2003: 67-48

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:49 PM
  #182
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
This isn't even worth a response, is it?
Seriously you asked the question and the answer is right there in front of you.

Maybe the Selke is an over rated trophy but playing top notch defense at C like Fedorov did means a lot.

Maybe even more than 66 and 99 getting their 4th and 5th points in a 6-3 or 8-5 game IMO.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:50 PM
  #183
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Red Wing scoring finishes during Fedorov's career:

1990-91: 10th (3 below league average)
1991-92: 4th
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 1st
1994-95: 3rd
1995-96: 3rd
1996-97: 6th
1997-98: 2nd
1998-99: 3rd
1999-00: 1st
2000-01: 5th
2001-02: 2nd
2002-03: 1st

So please. . . let's stop with this idea that Fedorov was somehow hurting for talent or linemates.

Also, before anyone says that Fedorov is responsible for all that offense. Here's the Wings finishes after he left:

2003-04: 2nd
2005-06: 2nd
2006-07: 10th
2007-08: 3rd
2008-09: 1st
The 1990-91 Pittsburgh Penguins finished second overall with 342 goals. Mario Lemieux played 26 games and scored 45 points. So 297 goals were scored without Lemieux's influence. That number would have tied them with the Rangers for fifth. Does that mean Lemieux's dominant play is somehow "less dominant"? Lemieux actually had great linemates at that time (Stevens/Recchi) rather than serviceable forwards like Kozlov and Brown.

Detroit post-Fedorov a) had a budding Pavel Datsyuk and Henrik Zetterberg, and b) traded for NHL scoring leader Robert Lang at the 2004 deadline. It didn't just happen to be a loaded team that kept scoring. They kept adding players. Like Johan Franzen, Jiri Hudler, Valtteri Filppula, and Marian Hossa.

How did Pittsburgh do without Crosby? Pretty well if I recall.

But Fedorov had poor linemates when compared to basically any other top center from the 90s. I always thought Fedorov would look good between Kariya and Selanne; too bad for the Ducks that those two were gone when they signed Fedorov.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:51 PM
  #184
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Red Wing scoring finishes during Fedorov's career:

1990-91: 10th (3 below league average)
1991-92: 4th
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 1st
1994-95: 3rd
1995-96: 3rd
1996-97: 6th
1997-98: 2nd
1998-99: 3rd
1999-00: 1st
2000-01: 5th
2001-02: 2nd
2002-03: 1st

So please. . . let's stop with this idea that Fedorov was somehow hurting for talent or linemates.

Also, before anyone says that Fedorov is responsible for all that offense. Here's the Wings finishes after he left:

2003-04: 2nd
2005-06: 2nd
2006-07: 10th
2007-08: 3rd
2008-09: 1st
Shouldnt even bother considering what you think about Fedorov but this is a prime example of oversimplistic analysis.

Only on the 94, 95, 96, 03 Red Wings that scored so well did Fedorov play the primary scoring role with the best wingers consistently. There were other times when he did but not consistently.

It isnt surprising to see, when Fedorov had the support and role like in 94 and also 96 he scored alot. When he had the support but the role wasnt so offensive like in 95, he still scored well.

Even Selanne saw his numbers suffer in the 98 when Kariya missed a lot of time.

On those Detroit teams from the mid 90s on the scoring was high because of the depth. The Wings D had their numbers helped more getting to play with a legit scoring line for most of the game but the forwards really didnt having to share their IT and play in a tighter system.

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:52 PM
  #185
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Seriously you asked the question and the answer is right there in front of you.

Maybe the Selke is an over rated trophy but playing top notch defense at C like Fedorov did means a lot.

Maybe even more than 66 and 99 getting their 4th and 5th points in a 6-3 or 8-5 game IMO.
The answer is right in front of me. . . and anyone else who has watched about five minutes of hockey. Which is why I'm not going to bother with this any further.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:52 PM
  #186
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
In the decade of the 90's Fedorov was more valuable than either 99 or 66.
Oh, boy.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:57 PM
  #187
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Shouldnt even bother considering what you think about Fedorov but this is a prime example of oversimplistic analysis.

Only on the 94, 95, 96, 03 Red Wings that scored so well did Fedorov play the primary scoring role with the best wingers consistently. There were other times when he did but not consistently.

It isnt surprising to see, when Fedorov had the support and role like in 94 and also 96 he scored alot. When he had the support but the role wasnt so offensive like in 95, he still scored well.

Even Selanne saw his numbers suffer in the 98 when Kariya missed a lot of time.
This is a prime example of not reading what's right in front of you.

The assertation was made that Fedorov didn't have the talent around him to put up big numbers. Which is absurd. But then, of course, the other Fedorov excuse gets trotted, 'he was concentrating on defense'. . . well, if his numbers suffered so much from playing defense, he clearly wasn't the two-way God he's made out to be, is he?

Seriously. Which is it? Either Fedorov is an incredible two-way player who combines offense and defense or he isn't. If he is (which is the basis of overrating him so much), than the excuse that his numbers suffered because of his defensive play goes out the window.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 10:59 PM
  #188
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The 1990-91 Pittsburgh Penguins finished second overall with 342 goals. Mario Lemieux played 26 games and scored 45 points. So 297 goals were scored without Lemieux's influence. That number would have tied them with the Rangers for fifth. Does that mean Lemieux's dominant play is somehow "less dominant"? Lemieux actually had great linemates at that time (Stevens/Recchi) rather than serviceable forwards like Kozlov and Brown.
Well, the difference there is that Lemieux was actually dominating when he was playing.

Quote:
But Fedorov had poor linemates when compared to basically any other top center from the 90s.
Except Yzerman, right?

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:00 PM
  #189
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Even Selanne saw his numbers suffer in the 98 when Kariya missed a lot of time.
Only on the powerplay - which is understandable. At even-strength, he improved without Kariya:

ES Points
1. Selanne, 67 points (73 GP)
2. Jagr, 64 points (77 GP)
3. Gretzky, 60 points (82 GP)

ES Goals
1. Selanne, 41 goals (73 GP)
2. Bondra, 36 goals (76 GP)
3. LeClair, 35 goals (82 GP)

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:01 PM
  #190
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Except Yzerman, right?
You do know that only one center is on the ice at a time, right?

Yzerman and Fedorov played on different lines at ES and on the PP.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:04 PM
  #191
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
This is a prime example of not reading what's right in front of you.

The assertation was made that Fedorov didn't have the talent around him to put up big numbers. Which is absurd. But then, of course, the other Fedorov excuse gets trotted, 'he was concentrating on defense'. . . well, if his numbers suffered so much from playing defense, he clearly wasn't the two-way God he's made out to be, is he?

Seriously. Which is it? Either Fedorov is an incredible two-way player who combines offense and defense or he isn't. If he is (which is the basis of overrating him so much), than the excuse that his numbers suffered because of his defensive play goes out the window.
So wait im not reading you pointing to Red Wings scoring numbers and extrapolating the talent around him?

When Fedorov scored 87 points in 93, he wasnt playing with the two best scorers Yzerman and Ciccarelli much at all. So why point to the Wings amazing amount of goals scored to assume he had help around him? The best offensive players werent playing around him...

And who said anything about D and two way play? Clear example of reading something thats NOT in front of you.

Rolling 4 lines, less ice time, worse wingers, are the reasons being bought up.

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:06 PM
  #192
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
You do know that only one center is on the ice at a time, right?

Yzerman and Fedorov played on different lines at ES and on the PP.
Not at all what I said.

You said, 'had poor linemates when compared to basically any other top center from the 90s'

So I'm asking: Did Yzerman have good linemates in the 90s? Yes or no? Because eventually you have to stop using that excuse for every single Red Wing player.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:08 PM
  #193
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
So wait im not reading you pointing to Red Wings scoring numbers and extrapolating the talent around him?

When Fedorov scored 87 points in 93, he wasnt playing with the two best scorers Yzerman and Ciccarelli much at all. So why point to the Wings amazing amount of goals scored to assume he had help around him? The best offensive players werent playing around him...

And who said anything about D and two way play? Clear example of reading something thats NOT in front of you.

Rolling 4 lines, less ice time, worse wingers, are the reasons being bought up.
So in a decade of playing on a top ten offensive team, Fedorov never got on the ice with any talent. Not once.

Wow. You know what? I'm convinced. That IS something that no other player in hockey could manage.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:12 PM
  #194
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
So in a decade of playing on a top ten offensive team, Fedorov never got on the ice with any talent. Not once.

Wow. You know what? I'm convinced. That IS something that no other player in hockey could manage.
So after just recently quoting my post where i said "Only on the 94, 95, 96, 03 Red Wings that scored so well did Fedorov play the primary scoring role with the best wingers consistently. There were other times when he did but not consistently." you go and make this strawman.

Im super dumb for realizing how pointless it would be to discuss a Red Wing with you and still doing it. my bad

And before you jump on the D thing again Fedorov got the most consideration for the Selke in his best offensive years anyway so that shows how dumb Selke voting is. He got less consideration for the Selke when he was playing more defensively anyway...

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:59 PM
  #195
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
This is a prime example of not reading what's right in front of you.

The assertation was made that Fedorov didn't have the talent around him to put up big numbers.
You're putting words in my mouth. I said he had significantly weaker linemates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Not at all what I said.

You said, 'had poor linemates when compared to basically any other top center from the 90s'

So I'm asking: Did Yzerman have good linemates in the 90s? Yes or no? Because eventually you have to stop using that excuse for every single Red Wing player.
Yzerman played more with Shanahan than Fedorov did, but there was a good stretch where Shanahan played with Larionov on the third line, while Yzerman and Fedorov had other wingers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
He got less consideration for the Selke when he was playing more defensively anyway...
It's a matter of people seeing his offense drop and assuming he wasn't playing as well overall; Fedorov was 2nd in Selke voting with the most first-place votes in his second season, without being a top scorer. He was fourth the next year (Gilmour's undeserved Selke) and then came his Hart/Selke year.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 01:09 AM
  #196
vadim sharifijanov
free higgy
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Okay, that's not a fair criticism. Everyone looks like a compiler when compared to their top-five years. I don't see why the label should be applied to a player who led his team in scoring last year, and finished #8 in league scoring (despite missing nine games) the year before that. Remember from mid-February to late-March of 2011 when the Ducks were on their playoff push, and Selanne on four occasions sent a game into overtime by scoring in the final two minutes? Calling him a compiler makes it seem like he didn't have an effect on his team. He personally robbed the 9th and 10th place finishers of points while helping to boost his team just above the playoff threshold.
by compiler, i mean good seasons that don't add to the player's resume. it's not a diss necessarily, but the point is that, to arbitrarily pick a player most of us like and respect, joe sakic can have three, five, even ten compiler seasons and it's not going to put him on mario's level. gartner, of course, had an entire career of compiler seasons, which is nice and all but still places him squarely as only a fraction of the player that, say, cam neely was.

i.e., what i meant by compiler is not the same thing as you're arguing against.


Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
You don't even have to say "what if?" about Selanne in this case; Selanne accomplished a hell of a lot in the NHL despite peaking in the DPE, and will be crossing into the top-15 in scoring any day now. Asking "what if?" puts him in an entirely different conversation. As long as you're not using his injury years to deride him, I'm not sure why 2001-2004 should even come up, other than to point out that his injury years in San Jose had a Fedorov-level offense.
the "what if" is clearly playoffs, i.e. the gap in selanne's resume. during his peak, he had basically no playoff impact. after his comeback, he had a good but not great impact on the playoffs. that period in between, it seems, instead of being the black hole it rightfully is-- and i say this fully acknowledging that selanne has, as you say, accomplished enough that we can all pretend those years never happened and he's still an all-time great-- i think we're saying, "after the lockout, selanne was a better playoff performer than during his peak. now if he'd been healthy, and if he'd been on a team with scoring depth, that would be the perfect storm of his playoff production turning from disappointing to good while selanne was still at peak form." and i think in a lot of selanne discussion we're projecting that perfect storm that may have, but never actually, happened. and selanne's very strong post-lockout play admittedly makes this projecting very tempting to do.

i know none of us here are literally saying that, but that's what i'm reading between the lines (not just in this thread but in any of the countless devoted to selanne).

but to reiterate the original point: fedorov is held to the standard of what he could have been if he'd given it his all all the time. that standard is a guy who contends for the art ross while winning selkes. that standard is not selanne. conversely, we often don't look at selanne '06-to-present for what they were, but as tokens for or evidence that the four seasons before the lockout that injuries robbed us of would have been amazing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
despite Fedorov's 1994 season being THE linchpin that his alleged 'greatness' is tied to. . . it simply wasn't as exceptional as some fanboys would like to believe. Gilmour did exactly the same thing, at exactly the same time.
can i ask: are you just arguing for the sake of arguing, can you really not tell the difference between '94 fedorov's defense and '93 gilmour's, or did you not watch those years?

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 01:39 AM
  #197
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 26,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Wait- what? Are you saying that the Detroit Red Wings didn't make the Finals in 1995?
Would you believe it isn't even the first time I replaced Detroit with Colorado in my mind when it comes to NJ's opponent in '95? It's not even so long since I've thought about how few games it took them to get there, what with L.A.'s run last year leading up to the Final and comparisons I had found/heard/read. Still, how often does a team that gets swept in the Final produce the playoff points leader?

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 02:48 AM
  #198
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
by compiler, i mean good seasons that don't add to the player's resume. it's not a diss necessarily, but the point is that, to arbitrarily pick a player most of us like and respect, joe sakic can have three, five, even ten compiler seasons and it's not going to put him on mario's level. gartner, of course, had an entire career of compiler seasons, which is nice and all but still places him squarely as only a fraction of the player that, say, cam neely was.

i.e., what i meant by compiler is not the same thing as you're arguing against.
How does an 8th place finish not add to his resume in this argument? Hell, Fedorov only placed 8th or higher once. We're comparing him to Sergei Fedorov; we're not trying to see if Selanne can chase down a top-30 player by maintaining relevance in his 40s.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
the "what if" is clearly playoffs, i.e. the gap in selanne's resume. during his peak, he had basically no playoff impact. after his comeback, he had a good but not great impact on the playoffs. that period in between, it seems, instead of being the black hole it rightfully is-- and i say this fully acknowledging that selanne has, as you say, accomplished enough that we can all pretend those years never happened and he's still an all-time great-- i think we're saying, "after the lockout, selanne was a better playoff performer than during his peak. now if he'd been healthy, and if he'd been on a team with scoring depth, that would be the perfect storm of his playoff production turning from disappointing to good while selanne was still at peak form." and i think in a lot of selanne discussion we're projecting that perfect storm that may have, but never actually, happened. and selanne's very strong post-lockout play admittedly makes this projecting very tempting to do.

i know none of us here are literally saying that, but that's what i'm reading between the lines (not just in this thread but in any of the countless devoted to selanne).
Where did you get this idea that Selanne was a "disappointing" playoff performer in his peak seasons? I must have posted these numbers five times in the last four months:

Playoffs as a Top-10 Scorer
27 GP, 19 G, 8 A, 27 PTS

Playoffs as a #11-20 Scorer
37 GP, 11 G, 18 A, 29 PTS

Playoffs as a Below-Point-Per-Game Scorer
47 GP, 11 G, 12 A, 23 PTS


And he wasn't beating up on bottom-ten defensive teams like the 1995 Sharks or 1998 Coyotes to get those peak numbers; eight of those 27 games were against Detroit, because that's who bad teams played in the early rounds in the West.

Selanne didn't leave an "impact" because in order to make one of those in the playoffs in the DPE, a Western Conference skater needed to play for Dallas, Colorado, or Detroit instead of a one-line team. It's not like Lidstrom was being held-off of the Kariya-Selanne line because Bowman had to worry about Marty McInnis burning them on the other matchups. You know who did have that luxury? Fedorov. No Lidstrom to play against, and teams couldn't put all of their attention on him, because Brendan Shanahan or Steve Yzerman would've eaten them up (not unlike Sakic against Chicago in 1996 when Forsberg drew the Chelios matchup, or Malkin against Detroit in 2009 when Crosby drew the Lidstrom matchup).

A small sample size is not the same as being "disappointing" though, and any questioning of how Selanne would perform in a playoff atmosphere on a better, deeper team is largely quelled by his having led two best-on-best Olympics in scoring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
but to reiterate the original point: fedorov is held to the standard of what he could have been if he'd given it his all all the time. that standard is a guy who contends for the art ross while winning selkes. that standard is not selanne. conversely, we often don't look at selanne '06-to-present for what they were, but as tokens for or evidence that the four seasons before the lockout that injuries robbed us of would have been amazing.
Because they gave him a Masterton Trophy in 2005-06 for that very reason. It's not like anyone is coming in here and barking about how Selanne could have been a 750/1600 player with his health; we know what he accomplished and are judging him on exactly that. On the other hand, people are pretending that Fedorov in 1994 resembled Fedorov in the other 93.4% of his career, because he was able to pick up some playoff points against the outmatched 1995 Sharks and 1998 Coyotes. He balanced top-five offense with elite defense once in his life, and never broke the 50 or 40 goal thresholds again - his only other HOF-level season being a 9th place finish. Do you realize how many times Selanne has finished higher than 9th? Seven. That's the actual number - not some projection of what he would have had based upon a rose-tinted view of what could have been. He has seven to Fedorov's one.

1994 was a pretty big departure from everything else Fedorov did in his career, and if we judged Fedorov based upon what he did for his remaining years as opposed to what we assume he possessed the talent to do, he would barely be on anyone's radar as an offensive player.


Though I'll give you credit for this: you haven't compared Fedorov to Gretzky or Lemieux, so that's a step in the right direction.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 03:00 AM
  #199
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Would you believe it isn't even the first time I replaced Detroit with Colorado in my mind when it comes to NJ's opponent in '95? It's not even so long since I've thought about how few games it took them to get there, what with L.A.'s run last year leading up to the Final and comparisons I had found/heard/read. Still, how often does a team that gets swept in the Final produce the playoff points leader?
Off the top of my head, Lindros in 1997 was swept, Forsberg in 1999 and 2002 didn't make it to the Finals, Gaborik was a point away from leading in 2003 without making it to the Finals, and I want to say that Giroux nearly did it from two rounds of work in 2012. It's not that strange, but still quite an accomplishment. Like I said though, he led the playoffs in scoring because he was able to really pound the stuffing out of San Jose's .850 goaltending (11 points in 4 games). Francis and Fleury had some rounds like that themselves, but they didn't make it out of rounds one/two respectively, so it's not like they were going to chase down Fedorov for the lead. Who else was up there? Broten?

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2013, 09:36 AM
  #200
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
This isn't even worth a response, is it?
Well the argument for Fedorov is really strong, didn't think it was so absolute though.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:59 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.