HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Will Stamkos shatter Pavel Bures goal stats?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-22-2013, 01:02 PM
  #51
Form and Substance
Registered User
 
Form and Substance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
My point wasn't so much that Bure was holding teams back, although I suspect to some degree he was, but more so that his 58 and 59 goal seasons had very little impact on his team. He was not the most important player on the team, he was just a flashy player to sell tickets. Much like Stamkos today in fact. The team would probably better overall if Stamkos was playing at a 40ish goal pace but playing a better team game. Instead, the team is perfectly content spending the entire game trying to get Stamkos to score as many goals as possible at the risk of predictability and less on ice success.
Bure did not hold those teams back, they just weren't good teams. Bure adding a defensive element to his game would have been immaterial to that team 's potential for greater success. It's unfair to pin the team's failures squarely on his shoulders when the lineup itself was completely devoid of good talent besides Whitney and Svehla (who aren't top players on contending teams anyway) and to a much lesser extent Kozlov, Parrish and pre Lightnings Boyle. You can't ice a consistently competitive squad with players like that. Therefore lambasting Bure for scoring goals (even in the fashion that he did) is kind of silly and meaningless considering that the likely outcome if he had forfeited his style of play for the sake of the team would have further negatively impacted the Panthers. The Panthers' marginal improvements over subsequent seasons could be traced to the improved play of Jokinen, the drafting of Weiss and Bouwmeester and the emergence of Luongo as a top 10 goalie in the league, Bure never had a sliver of that talent around him.

Although it is true that Bure wasn't the same player at that point that he was in 1994, he wasn't that hungry to win anymore. Bure has always been a one man show. He won't make others around him better (maybe a good puck moving defenseman will see his numbers jump by a lot) but he alone can significantly alter the complexion of a team. You put him on the ice and he will give you 50 goals (many in spectacular fashion) and draw the opponents top players. That gives other players worth their salt a TON of breathing room.

Tampa also has way more firepower than Florida did those years. Their underachieving is totally less justifiable than Florida.


Last edited by Form and Substance: 04-22-2013 at 01:19 PM.
Form and Substance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2013, 09:28 AM
  #52
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
The one year Florida did make the playoff had [ ... ] more to do with the all star performance of Trevor Kidd
Trevor Kidd played 28 games that year and had the worst GAA of all five Panther goalies.

Quote:
but Bure actually improved his performance, and predictably the team sucked ass.
How is 0.72 GPG and 1.12 PPG an improvement from 0.78 GPG and 1.27 PPG?

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
I guess I'd have to see if Stamkos is scoring as many empty-net goals as Bure was in 1999-2000, but his competition right now sure is a hell of a lot better than Owen Nolan and Tony Amonte.

People seem to overlook that Bure only led goals-per-game once (the year he scored 9 empty-net goals - but otherwise cut the same pace as Jagr). Twice if you insist on removing Lemieux, as some people do. It's not that high of a watermark that Stamkos isn't able to reach it.
At least he didn't score half his goals on the PP or pointless third period hattricks in blowout games like you know who

the edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2013, 09:47 AM
  #53
lakai17
Registered User
 
lakai17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,387
vCash: 50
Bure defined electricity.

lakai17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2013, 10:12 AM
  #54
popculturereference
Registered User
 
popculturereference's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakai17 View Post
Bure defined electricity.
Honestly, it's not that difficult of a word to define. I would be more impressed if he was able to define "etiolate," especially considering that it is his second language.

popculturereference is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-24-2013, 12:03 AM
  #55
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,653
vCash: 500
It looks like Stamkos is going to have a 1,1,2,2 in his first 5 season in the NHL by the age of 22.

Barring a serious career threatening injury, it's a pretty safe bet that he will score many more goals and place at least as high as Bure in the scoring department IMO.

Or maybe when MLS retires he will regress to an average goal scorer, but I highly doubt it.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 12:22 AM
  #56
Danglesonice66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 60
vCash: 500
I'm sure this has been said already but Bure was way more impressive to see live then stamkos and I only saw bure play as a panther. It would be kind of sad to me if stamkos is viewed as the better goal scorer because to me there is just no way. I don't care what stats stamkos puts up. It's like a mule vs a thoroughbred with a bad knee.


Last edited by Danglesonice66: 04-26-2013 at 12:33 AM.
Danglesonice66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 12:44 AM
  #57
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,995
vCash: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danglesonice66 View Post
I'm sure this has been said already but Bure was way more impressive to see live then stamkos and I only saw bure play as a panther. It would be kind of sad to me if stamkos is viewed as the better goal scorer because to me there is just no way. I don't care what stats stamkos puts up. It's like a mule vs a thoroughbred with a bad knee.
Well, that would have to be one hard kicking mother ******* mule!!!

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 12:48 AM
  #58
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danglesonice66 View Post
I'm sure this has been said already but Bure was way more impressive to see live then stamkos and I only saw bure play as a panther. It would be kind of sad to me if stamkos is viewed as the better goal scorer because to me there is just no way. I don't care what stats stamkos puts up. It's like a mule vs a thoroughbred with a bad knee.
Results over style. Tons of guys were more impressive to watch than slow, choppy Brett Hull but only TWO guys scored more goals than him. Stamkos has the shot and the same kind of nose for the net that will keep him racking up goals even after his speed leaves him.

revolverjgw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 05:37 AM
  #59
JetsAlternate
Registered User
 
JetsAlternate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
Results over style. Tons of guys were more impressive to watch than slow, choppy Brett Hull but only TWO guys scored more goals than him. Stamkos has the shot and the same kind of nose for the net that will keep him racking up goals even after his speed leaves him.
Does no one else take into account Brett Hull only scored 50+ goals twice without Adam Oates? In his three seasons with Oates, Hull scored 72, 86, and 70 goals respectively. With Craig Janney, he scored 54 and 57. After that, he never had the same sort of playmaker and leveled off into a 30-goal scorer.

When comparing Stamkos and Bure, and even Hull and Bure, one has to consider the latter scored 60, 60, 59, 58, and 51 without a real playmaker in his five only healthy seasons. I'll argue a player of Janney's caliber or Oates' caliber would have made Pavel Bure an 80+ goal scorer easily. With a playmaker, the possibilities would have been endless. Bure played with greater style than Hull, but he was also more effective individually when he was healthy.

One also has to wonder how effective Stamkos will be when Martin St. Louis retires. Both Hull and Stamkos require a playmaker to some extent in order to succeed. Bure never had that luxury.


Last edited by JetsAlternate: 04-26-2013 at 05:43 AM.
JetsAlternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 06:44 AM
  #60
LeBlondeDemon10
BlindLemon Haystacks
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsAlternate View Post
Does no one else take into account Brett Hull only scored 50+ goals twice without Adam Oates? In his three seasons with Oates, Hull scored 72, 86, and 70 goals respectively. With Craig Janney, he scored 54 and 57. After that, he never had the same sort of playmaker and leveled off into a 30-goal scorer.

When comparing Stamkos and Bure, and even Hull and Bure, one has to consider the latter scored 60, 60, 59, 58, and 51 without a real playmaker in his five only healthy seasons. I'll argue a player of Janney's caliber or Oates' caliber would have made Pavel Bure an 80+ goal scorer easily. With a playmaker, the possibilities would have been endless. Bure played with greater style than Hull, but he was also more effective individually when he was healthy.

One also has to wonder how effective Stamkos will be when Martin St. Louis retires. Both Hull and Stamkos require a playmaker to some extent in order to succeed. Bure never had that luxury.
Yeah, I would tend to agree that Stamkos is more like Hull and Hull played with very good playmaking centermen most of his career. I don't know though that Bure would have benefited a lot from a good centerman. He liked to handle the puck too much. Hull didn't touch the puck a lot until it was time to shoot. He'd find a way to get open and then boom. .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wJe4c-GNk8

BTW found this gem on youtube. Habs and CSKA from 1990, Russian broadcast. I don't think this game was televised in Canada. At 10:30, watch a young Pavel Bure walk around a Habs defenseman (Donald Dufresne?) and score a beauty of a goal on Roy. He must be only 18 years old here.

LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 06:51 AM
  #61
Noldo
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,062
vCash: 500
It's a fallacy that Bure would have done even better with a better playmaking center. Bure, like young Selanne, relied first and foremost on his speed and thus a defenceman with excellent first pass (like Housley for Selanne) was way more important for Bure's success than good playmaking center.

Noldo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 11:00 AM
  #62
nerdman60
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 239
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Uhm... Bure's goals were in the Dead Puck Era. Stamkos' aren't. Stamkos has better teammates too. Bure >>> Stamkos. I even rank Bure over Ovechkin, although that margin is slipping away quickly.
Agreed with everything in this post. Bure's goals were in an era where you shouldn't be scoring 50+ goals and he did.

nerdman60 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-26-2013, 11:22 AM
  #63
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetsAlternate View Post
Does no one else take into account Brett Hull only scored 50+ goals twice without Adam Oates? In his three seasons with Oates, Hull scored 72, 86, and 70 goals respectively. With Craig Janney, he scored 54 and 57. After that, he never had the same sort of playmaker and leveled off into a 30-goal scorer.

When comparing Stamkos and Bure, and even Hull and Bure, one has to consider the latter scored 60, 60, 59, 58, and 51 without a real playmaker in his five only healthy seasons. I'll argue a player of Janney's caliber or Oates' caliber would have made Pavel Bure an 80+ goal scorer easily. With a playmaker, the possibilities would have been endless. Bure played with greater style than Hull, but he was also more effective individually when he was healthy.

One also has to wonder how effective Stamkos will be when Martin St. Louis retires. Both Hull and Stamkos require a playmaker to some extent in order to succeed. Bure never had that luxury.
He obviously wasn't going to hit 70 without Oates, but it's pretty normal for a goal scorer to level off at the age he did. At 38 Hull was 8th in the league in goals and he didn't have any elite playmaker. Datsyuk was a kid and didn't get to 40 assists. In '95 he scored at a 50 goal pace without a real playmaker, another 50 goal pace the next with nobody special. Another 40 the next season with Turgeon. Hull scored a ton of goals in a ton of different situations for a very long time and he didn't need Oates.

You don't just mix and match players haphazardly, different skillsets compliment each other to varying degrees. Bure was a one man show and nothing like Hull and I seriously doubt there'd be anywhere near the same level of chemistry if he hooked up with Oates. Hull could score with anyone but he was also the absolute ideal triggerman for a situation like that because of his polar opposite style.

Stamkos will probably end up like Hull. Maybe he never scores 60 goals without St. Louis, but he's the kind of player that will produce like clockwork as long as he plays with anybody competent. People don't seem to realize that he doesn't just score picture perfect one timers, he scores tons of dirty goals from around the net. You don't need an elite playmaker if you've got the brains and instinct that Stamkos and Hull have.

Does this make them better than Hull, I don't know, but it's silly to automatically put Bure ahead of them because he has sick youtube highlights

As far as the deadpuck stuff goes- there are less goals being scored now than when Bure scored 59 and 58 with the Panthers. It's harder to score on these goalies.

revolverjgw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2013, 02:00 AM
  #64
Danglesonice66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 60
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
Results over style. Tons of guys were more impressive to watch than slow, choppy Brett Hull but only TWO guys scored more goals than him. Stamkos has the shot and the same kind of nose for the net that will keep him racking up goals even after his speed leaves him.
I can't say I disagree with you really. I think bure's style and skill would have worked even better if he became more of a passer/playmaker than he was. There is really nothing sneaky about he way he got a lot of his goals. With all of the defenseive attention he attracted and time he spent with the puck on his stick I think he could have racked up some elite assist numbers if he set his mind to it. Stamkos is playing the game he was built to play, I think bure may have missed the mark just a bit with his stratagie.

Danglesonice66 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 02:51 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.