The issue seems to be that we are ranking players differently. I try to rank a player by how he contributes to team success or makes his team better, because helping your team win is the point of hockey after all. And I care a lot that Fedorov was always there playing amazing hockey when the Red Wings needed him, and I care a lot less that when the games didn't matter so much (as they didn't really when the Red Wings were a stacked team), he coasted. It's kind of like the Oilers who didn't bother playing defense in the regular season because they didn't need to.
Well, there's some truth to that point-of-view, no doubt. But at some point, you've got to put up or shut up, and if people want to put Fedorov in a category with the Sakics, Yzermans, Messiers. . .well, IMO, he has to do more than just skate really well.
Quote:
If you can find me a large number of people who think that Alex Tanguay was one of the best players in the league and one of the best playoff performers of his era, then we can talk about him as a comparable to Fedorov
We're getting off topic now; this line of questioning started with a comment about someone else's post. But I still want someone to tell me why Fedorov is a top-four player of the DPE that doesn't boil down to, 'well, I watched him and wow was he good'. I mean, I actually do give the 'eye-test' a lot of credence but if you want to say a guy is as good as someone who's consistently trouncing him by 40 points, you need at least be able to add something else.
Quote:
He was 34 when he left Detroit and had to adjust to a new team and system. Some players can do it, Feds obviously didn't.
Honestly, not trying to be sarcastic here but. . . how many excuses does this guy get??? So far we have: linemates, system, attention to defence, regular season laziness, can't adjust to a new system. . .
Quote:
Selanne definitely was better from age 35+ Anyway, I don't think its a coincidence that Feds had his best season since the mid 90s in 2002-03 when Yzerman missed most of the season.
It wasn't just Selanne who was better than Fedorov at 34. All the guys who were also outperforming him at 30, 31, 32, and on were, too.
Quote:
Overrated by who? And I'll rephrase my question another way - Can you name any players who were better playoff performers than Fedorov between the 1995 and 2005 lockouts?
Is that what you said the first time? I read it as, 'what Red Wing was better'. Sorry.
Just off the top of my head, then. . . Sakic, Forsberg, Jagr. Easily.
Quote:
Yeah, that's why judging players by their cumulative playoff stats is can be pretty misleading, and judging them by their per-game playoffs stats can be downright awful. Who cares that Lindros beat up on the weaker Eastern Conference in the early rounds before getting smoked in the finals?
So we can toss out Fedorov's 1995 run as a 'great' playoff run then, right? And, by that logic, I guess 1996 could also potentially be on the chopping board?
seriously, i'm not the only who's said it in this thread and given how you're making the same points over and over again i probably won't be the last, but if you really can't tell the difference between fedorov's defensive game and brind'amour's or gilmour's or oates' or francis' or sakic's... i mean modano is the only one that's close, and it's not that close.
EDIT: okay, that's a jerky and flippant response. but seriously, you're asking for numbers to back up something that can't be shown by numbers. the majority of people who here who don't count selanne as their favourite player will agree that fedorov was by a sizable margin a better defensive player than gilmour, brind'amour, francis, and even modano. are we all liars? are we all wings homers? were we all lost in fedorov's blue eyes?
seriously, i'm not the only who's said it in this thread and given how you're making the same points over and over again i probably won't be the last, but if you really can't tell the difference between fedorov's defensive game and brind'amour's or gilmour's or oates' or francis' or sakic's... i mean modano is the only one that's close, and it's not that close.
Modano skated the most like Fedorov out of those guys, I'll give you that. That is about it.
Modano's defensive play is crazy overblown around here lately and no where near Fedorov imo.
I'd personally take Francis', Gilmour's or Brind'amour's defensive play over Modano any day of the week.
EDIT: okay, that's a jerky and flippant response. but seriously, you're asking for numbers to back up something that can't be shown by numbers. the majority of people who here who don't count selanne as their favourite player will agree that fedorov was by a sizable margin a better defensive player than gilmour, brind'amour, francis, and even modano. are we all liars? are we all wings homers? were we all lost in fedorov's blue eyes?
No, I'm not asking for numbers. I'm asking for more than, 'well, he was really, really good!!!!!!!' Do you understand the difference? Do you understand capitalization?
And if you could read, you would note that I never denied that Fedorov was a great defensive player (overrated there, too, though). But he was a 70-point defensive center, and that is not enough to put you on par with the guys he is being put on par with here. Hell, its not even enough to get you past Selanne, IMO.
Uh-huh. Because I've been using some heavy arithmetic here, haven't I?
Is it really that difficult for you to tell the difference between a 60-point season and a 100-point season?
okay, so right before you posted that reply, i said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov
EDIT: okay, that's a jerky and flippant response. but seriously, you're asking for numbers to back up something that can't be shown by numbers. the majority of people who here who don't count selanne as their favourite player will agree that fedorov was by a sizable margin a better defensive player than gilmour, brind'amour, francis, and even modano. are we all liars? are we all wings homers? were we all lost in fedorov's blue eyes?
but we've broken this down in this thread already. the debate is basically this: a guy who plays really awesome defense and produces in the playoffs vs. a guy who is awesome in the regular season and who may or may not have been good in the playoffs if he'd had the chance.
no amount of scrutinizing fedorov's regular season point production or qualifying his playoff numbers by per-game percentages or whatever is going to account for how good his defense was. and, as you don't seem to know or want to admit, that defense was FAR better than the defense of elite two-way players you've been comparing fedorov to.
you keep saying to prove it. you can't prove that with numbers. we can only prove it by telling you what we saw. the technology hasn't yet been invented for you to remember our memories.
the majority of people who here who don't count selanne as their favourite player will agree that fedorov was by a sizable margin a better defensive player than gilmour, brind'amour, francis, and even modano. are we all liars? are we all wings homers? were we all lost in fedorov's blue eyes?
1. I didn't say he wasn't a better defensive player than them. I said he wasn't a better defensive player than Guy Carbonneau, Jere Lehtinen, and Michael Peca. And yeah, I'll stand by that one.
2. You weren't lost in Fedorov's blue eyes? They're the eyes of a young Alec Baldwin.
okay, so right before you posted that reply, i said:
but we've broken this down in this thread already. the debate is basically this: a guy who plays really awesome defense and produces in the playoffs vs. a guy who is awesome in the regular season and who may or may not have been good in the playoffs if he'd had the chance.
no amount of scrutinizing fedorov's regular season point production or qualifying his playoff numbers by per-game percentages or whatever is going to account for how good his defense was. and, as you don't seem to know or want to admit, that defense was FAR better than the defense of elite two-way players you've been comparing fedorov to.
you keep saying to prove it. you can't prove that with numbers. we can only prove it by telling you what we saw. the technology hasn't yet been invented for you to remember our memories.
1. I didn't say he wasn't a better defensive player than them. I said he wasn't a better defensive player than Guy Carbonneau, Jere Lehtinen, and Michael Peca. And yeah, I'll stand by that one.
Something tells me a post about how amazing his 120-point season was is coming up.
1. I didn't say he wasn't a better defensive player than them. I said he wasn't a better defensive player than Guy Carbonneau, Jere Lehtinen, and Michael Peca. And yeah, I'll stand by that one.
2. You weren't lost in Fedorov's blue eyes? They're the eyes of a young Alec Baldwin.
haha. in this case, i wasn't talking about you (but i've had enough arguing for one night, so let's agree to disagree that fedorov wasn't on those other guys' levels for now). i was referring to:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat
And if you could read, you would note that I never denied that Fedorov was a great defensive player (overrated there, too, though). But he was a 70-point defensive center, and that is not enough to put you on par with the guys he is being put on par with here. Hell, its not even enough to get you past Selanne, IMO.
comparing fedorov's defense to gilmour and brind'amour is denying the greatness of fedorov's defense. i mean, you'd choke even harder on your own rage if i said, "i never denied that selanne was great offensively. but... mark recchi, john leclair, markus naslund."
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat
No, I'm not asking for numbers. I'm asking for more than, 'well, he was really, really good!!!!!!!' Do you understand the difference? Do you understand capitalization?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat
Your memories don't make it reality.
i guess not. but at a certain point, if a majority of posters who saw the guy play and with reasonable records for posting informed opinions all remember the same thing (and i'll exclude myself from that group), it has to count for something, right?
haha. in this case, i wasn't talking about you (but i've had enough arguing for one night, so let's agree to disagree that fedorov wasn't on those other guys' levels for now). i was referring to:
comparing fedorov's defense to gilmour and brind'amour is denying the greatness of fedorov's defense. i mean, you'd choke even harder on your own rage if i said, "i never denied that selanne was great offensively. but... mark recchi, john leclair, markus naslund."
I don't have any preference for Selanne. I think you're confusing me with someone else.
I also think you're underrating Gilmour and Brind'Amour's defense. They were very, very good. Gilmour was basically Peca for the first three years of his career before he exploded in the 1984 playoffs.
And I'd suggest if you're 'choking on your own rage', you are tad bit emotionally attached to Fedorov and probably not looking at this objectively.
Quote:
i guess not. but at a certain point, if a majority of posters who saw the guy play and with reasonable records for posting informed opinions all remember the same thing (and i'll exclude myself from that group), it has to count for something, right
Actually, I'm not seeing all the really top-notch History board posters defending Fedorov. I mean, Big Phil went with Selanne. That's not to besmirch the guys who like Fedorov, I'm just saying that your view of this as a couple of Selanne fanboys arguing against all common sense is not at all accurate.
Wait. Are we talking about total performance over four rounds or aren't we? Because when I posted the PPG stats over Fedorov's four year run, I was told it was harder to produce over all four rounds. Now, its best round of the playoffs, is it?
You said that Lindros outplayed Fedorov. One might assume you meant in the Finals series, head-to-head, when Lindros was rendered ineffective.
Quote:
Let's forget Yzerman for a second. Larionov (at 36 years old!) has the same PPG as Fedorov in 1997
Larionov played with Shanahan in 1997. In 1999, Shanahan played mostly with Yzerman and Kozlov, who had spent most of the decade pinned to Fedorov, played with Larionov.
Quote:
then has a better PPG in 1999 when he's even older. Now, if Fedorov is getting the same opportunities as everyone else, why is he getting consistently outscored by an older Yzerman and on occassion by an ancient Larionov?
You know the Red Wings better than I do, and you're saying that they got pretty much the same opportunities, so how can that possibly happen to an elite-level talent like Fedorov? Systems are the same. Opportunities are the same. Fedorov had someone else on the ice with him on the power-play right? I mean, they weren't just sending him out there by himself, were they?
Generally, he was out there with Kozlov and Larionov or Ciccarelli/Lapointe (depending on when in the 90s we're talking about).
Quote:
You use two examples of guys from an era when almost no one played that long, and two guys with serious injury problems.
Bure played a combined 107 games in the two years leading up to his retirement. Forsberg was four years removed from being able to hit 75 games in a season. Fedorov played 75, 80 and 81 games in his last three seasons in Detroit, and 80 his first in Anaheim. Not comparable.
Healthy, elite centers of Fedorov's era and their production at that age?
Joe Sakic- 87 points
Ron Francis- 87 points
Adam Oates- 82 points
Mats Sundin- 78 points
Mike Modano- 77 points (in 78 games)
Fedorov had 65! You know where that puts him on the list for that age, in that era (era being 1996-1997 to the 2004 lockout. Essentially, the DPE)? Eleventh. Between Craig Conroy and Rod Brind'Amour (there's that name again).
That's Fedorov healthy on a team with as much ice-time as he could possibly want, no left-wing lock, no line-rolling. . . and he's producing like Rod Brind'Amour. And yet, judging by the pro-Fedorov crowd in this thread, he's easily better than all those names, give or take a Joe Sakic. (And the only guy by that age who was not great defensively was Sundin)
And in his last season as a Red Wing, he scored 83 points. Guess what? Fedorov had Prospal and Sykora in the low 50s as the only other talented forwards on the team in Anaheim that first year. He played more ES time than he had in Detroit, but his PP time wasn't any higher. And Niclas Havelid was the highest scoring defenseman on the team.
People look at what Rick Nash has shown he can potentially do, and give him the benefit of the doubt. Fedorov actually DID dominate the league. Maybe he didn't put up the overall numbers every year. But he was one of the league's best players.; I refer back to the ES stats I posted above.
I don't have any preference for Selanne. I think you're confusing me with someone else.
I also think you're underrating Gilmour and Brind'Amour's defense. They were very, very good. Gilmour was basically Peca for the first three years of his career before he exploded in the 1984 playoffs.
And I'd suggest if you're 'choking on your own rage', you are tad bit emotionally attached to Fedorov and probably not looking at this objectively.
Actually, I'm not seeing all the really top-notch History board posters defending Fedorov. I mean, Big Phil went with Selanne. That's not to besmirch the guys who like Fedorov, I'm just saying that your view of this as a couple of Selanne fanboys arguing against all common sense is not at all accurate.
Couldn't agree more. Players like gilmour, datsyuk, brind'amour and peak modano are pretty much on fedorov's level defensively. (mod)
Fedorov finished top 15 in scoring a grand total of 4 times, the offensive gap between the two is very large. Offense from a forward is significantly more important, and selanne has him beat clear cut in terms of durability. Teemu has surpassed Sergei and in 10 years he will be ranked higher when its all said and done. Red Wings fans want to make all the excuses they want for fedorov, I can easily bring up the issue of selanne's knees. If he had surgery done earlier, he would dust fedorov away offensively and really thats the main job of a forward, to go out and score.
Selanne has 3 seasons where he was in the conversation for best forward, fedorov has like 1.
Thier hart voting, a criteria devilmademe loves to use.
Selanne: 3, 5, 5, 6, 9
Fedorov: 1,5, 9.
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 03-16-2013 at 12:49 AM.
Reason: Flaming
Count me on Selanne side in this thread. I can't respond to everything, but it's clear Fedorov was not as good as some make him to be. Yeah, sure..that one helluva season goes to Fedorov. I wrote like few pages before Fedorov had the luxury of no need to put up 100% effort during regular season. And yes he had luxury of playing against at least one punching bag on the everyyear way to finals. His defensive aspect of game can't hold the candle to Selanne's production, especially after Fedorov should-be-his-prime 60 points years. When he was put in Selanne's position he did what? Yes, he led Ducks in points with stellar 65 points year to nonplayoff year.
Fedorov is more in category what he could be than what he actually was. And this fact is overrun with defense argument from his fanboys.
Count me on Selanne side in this thread. I can't respond to everything, but it's clear Fedorov was not as good as some make him to be. Yeah, sure..that one helluva season goes to Fedorov. I wrote like few pages before Fedorov had the luxury of no need to put up 100% effort during regular season. And yes he had luxury of playing against at least one punching bag on the everyyear way to finals. His defensive aspect of game can't hold the candle to Selanne's production, especially after Fedorov should-be-his-prime 60 points years. When he was put in Selanne's position he did what? Yes, he led Ducks in points with stellar 65 points year to nonplayoff year.
Fedorov is more in category what he could be than what he actually was. And this fact is overrun with defense argument from his fanboys.
I'm getting really sick of posters calling anyone who disagrees with their evaluation about a particular player "fanboys." It's borderline flaming and it adds nothing productive to your argument.
Sorry then.
We're running in circles. Every single argument has been made. On previous 2 pages I've read posts about things discussed like 10 pages before. Than again, where are we going? Is this about how good was Fedorov or comparing him to Selanne?
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 03-16-2013 at 06:55 AM.
Sorry then.
We're running in circles. Every single argument has been made. On previous 2 pages I've read posts about things discussed like 10 pages before. Than again, where are we going? Is this about how good was Fedorov or comparing him to Selanne?
How are those going to be mutually exclusive when the comparison is between two such high-calibre players?
