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.

Forsberg's 02/03 season was more impressive than his 95/96 season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-12-2013, 09:12 AM
  #1
siegeofshanghai*
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 103
vCash: 500
Forsberg's 02/03 season was more impressive than his 95/96 season

I often get to hear that Forsberg had his best season when he scored 116p in 1996, however considering that the scoring was all-time low in 02/03 his 106p in 75 games is definitely more impressive.

Not only did he miss 7 games, but he was also +52 and made Milan Hejduk score 50 goals the one and only time in his career.

also, since Forsberg only played 82 games once in his career (1996) you gotta wonder more many more times he would break 100p if not being injured all the time.

siegeofshanghai* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 11:54 AM
  #2
Sticks and Pucks
Registered User
 
Sticks and Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,280
vCash: 500
The 02-03 season was definitely more impressive. Forsberg didn't even lead his team in scoring in 95-96 (Sakic) and Sakic was out for parts of the 02-03 season. Forsberg won the Art Ross and the Hart that year. There is no doubt in my mind that Forsberg's best season was in 02-03.

Sticks and Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 12:12 PM
  #3
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by siegeofshanghai View Post
I often get to hear that Forsberg had his best season when he scored 116p in 1996, however considering that the scoring was all-time low in 02/03 his 106p in 75 games is definitely more impressive.

Not only did he miss 7 games, but he was also +52 and made Milan Hejduk score 50 goals the one and only time in his career.

also, since Forsberg only played 82 games once in his career (1996) you gotta wonder more many more times he would break 100p if not being injured all the time.
You are definitely correct. You might get some opposition on the main board, but I'm betting that around here almost everyone will share your opinion. Yet another example of how inaccurate ranking players by raw point totals is.

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 01:23 PM
  #4
billybudd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 8,050
vCash: 500
Frankly, that his 02-03 season was better should go without saying.

billybudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 01:35 PM
  #5
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,175
vCash: 500
Forsberg's 95–96 season is still a very impressive season. It was his first full NHL season playing 82 games, and would also be his only 80+ games season, and he finished 5th in the league in points, only 4 points behind teammate Sakic who finished 3rd. Lindros though at 6th place with 115 points had a much better PPG.

One could also argue, if we're only talking about the point race, that Lemieux, Jagr, Sakic, Francis, Lindros, Kariya, Selänne, Mogilny and Fedorov in 95–96 is a bit tougher competition than Näslund, Thornton in Boston, Hejduk, Bertuzzi, Demitra and Glen Murray in 2002–03

the edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 01:52 PM
  #6
ForsbergForever
Red Rocket
 
ForsbergForever's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,619
vCash: 500
I think his 2005-06 season would have been even better had he not been derailed by injury.

ForsbergForever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 02:18 PM
  #7
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the edler View Post
One could also argue, if we're only talking about the point race, that Lemieux, Jagr, Sakic, Francis, Lindros, Kariya, Selänne, Mogilny and Fedorov in 95–96 is a bit tougher competition than Näslund, Thornton in Boston, Hejduk, Bertuzzi, Demitra and Glen Murray in 2002–03
I can understand that. A 2003 Forsberg doesn't outscore Lemieux or Jagr that year either. Not even close I don't think. Heck a 2003 Forsberg barely outscored a 2003 Mario.

But yeah, despite his run to the Cup in 1996 which he did well (although more on a Kamensky level on his team that spring) he definitely was more polished by 2003 and that was a very low scoring year. He was the best player in the NHL that year and I think that beats being a top 10ish player in 1996 despite it being a very competitive year.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2013, 02:27 PM
  #8
Sticks and Pucks
Registered User
 
Sticks and Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I can understand that. A 2003 Forsberg doesn't outscore Lemieux or Jagr that year either. Not even close I don't think. Heck a 2003 Forsberg barely outscored a 2003 Mario.
On that note, would you say that 02-03 Forsberg = 95-96 Sakic/Lindros?

Sticks and Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2013, 10:05 AM
  #9
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstOverallLine View Post
On that note, would you say that 02-03 Forsberg = 95-96 Sakic/Lindros?
Hmm, tough one. You have to throw in Joe's 1996 postseason as well. If that's the case, then not even close. But to just isolate their regular seasons, yeah Sakic in 1996 is pretty much Forsberg in 2003.

I think Lindros had a better regular season in 1996 than Sakic did, and better than Forsberg in 2003. Not by a lot, but still better.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2013, 10:30 AM
  #10
Cyborg LeClair
14 28 10 16
 
Cyborg LeClair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 727
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForsbergForever View Post
I think his 2005-06 season would have been even better had he not been derailed by injury.
I agree. It felt like every game he was connecting with Simon Gagne for one or two goals. It was so exciting and he was really creative playing with the Flyers. It would've been an amazing season if he stayed healthy throughout. But that's just the story of Peter Forsberg

Cyborg LeClair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2013, 09:05 PM
  #11
OmniCube
Registered User
 
OmniCube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by siegeofshanghai View Post
I often get to hear that Forsberg had his best season when he scored 116p in 1996, however considering that the scoring was all-time low in 02/03 his 106p in 75 games is definitely more impressive.

Not only did he miss 7 games, but he was also +52 and made Milan Hejduk score 50 goals the one and only time in his career.

also, since Forsberg only played 82 games once in his career (1996) you gotta wonder more many more times he would break 100p if not being injured all the time.
Forsberg was much better than any other forward in the league during 2002-03, and anyone arguing otherwise didn't watch him that year.

OmniCube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-15-2013, 10:36 PM
  #12
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmniCube View Post
Forsberg was much better than any other forward in the league during 2002-03, and anyone arguing otherwise didn't watch him that year.
I would agree and to Phil's earlier point he was easily in the top 10 in the NHL for 96, probably in the top 5 for forwards.

People forget that in the low scoring era he played in and despite the injuries Peter top 100 points (adjusted) 4 times with 118,112,119,105 and also had seasons of
95
90
87
73 points

that's 8 seasons of elite to excellent production, even with the injuries.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 12:40 PM
  #13
Sticks and Pucks
Registered User
 
Sticks and Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmniCube View Post
Forsberg was much better than any other forward in the league during 2002-03, and anyone arguing otherwise didn't watch him that year.
He was better. He wasn't MUCH better. Naslund finished two points behind him in the scoring race. Granted, Naslund played more games but you can't deny that he still managed to score 48 goals and win the Pearson. Mario Lemieux also scored at a sick pace, had he played a full season I think he would have been right up there. He didn't have much help on that terrible Pens team either. Palffy had 85 points in 76 games on an LA Kings team where the second leading scorer was defenceman Mathieu Schneider who scored 42 points and was traded at the trade deadline. Give him another weapon and he would be right up there too. So my point is, Forsberg may have been the best forward that year, but I don't think he was MUCH better than everyone else.

Sticks and Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 02:11 PM
  #14
Ishdul
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Lithuania
Posts: 2,486
vCash: 500
I don't think many people who have put any thought into such things actually consider his 95/96 season to be better.

Ishdul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 02:20 PM
  #15
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstOverallLine View Post
He was better. He wasn't MUCH better. Naslund finished two points behind him in the scoring race. Granted, Naslund played more games but you can't deny that he still managed to score 48 goals and win the Pearson. Mario Lemieux also scored at a sick pace, had he played a full season I think he would have been right up there. He didn't have much help on that terrible Pens team either. Palffy had 85 points in 76 games on an LA Kings team where the second leading scorer was defenceman Mathieu Schneider who scored 42 points and was traded at the trade deadline. Give him another weapon and he would be right up there too. So my point is, Forsberg may have been the best forward that year, but I don't think he was MUCH better than everyone else.
Forsberg lost the Pearson because he missed his games in December and didn't catch up in the scoring race until the players were already voting. Naslund and Lemieux were significantly more dependent upon 5-on-4 advantages for their offense than Forsberg - and while strength in advantageous offensive situations is commendable, their teams weren't faring nearly as well defensively in even-strength situations. Forsberg was a +52 on a team that was +/-0 with him off the ice (hence the gap between his numbers and teammate Joe Sakic's +4), whereas Naslund's +6 ranked just 12th on his squad and Lemieux's -25 was third-worst on his team and among the worst in the league.

To say that Forsberg wasn't much better is to ignore that not only did he score at a higher rate, but that opposition teams were also not scoring against his line specifically. Forsberg and his linemates were +52, +52, and +34. The next highest Avalanche forward was +8. He may have been far removed from his PK days, but his offense was legitimately one of the best even-strength defenses in the league.

Removing PK GA/minutes
Forsberg: 42 GA in 1434 minutes
Madden: 36 GA in 1239 minutes

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 02:24 PM
  #16
Sticks and Pucks
Registered User
 
Sticks and Pucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Forsberg lost the Pearson because he missed his games in December and didn't catch up in the scoring race until the players were already voting. Naslund and Lemieux were significantly more dependent upon 5-on-4 advantages for their offense than Forsberg - and while strength in advantageous offensive situations is commendable, their teams weren't faring nearly as well defensively in even-strength situations. Forsberg was a +52 on a team that was +/-0 with him off the ice (hence the gap between his numbers and teammate Joe Sakic's +4), whereas Naslund's +6 ranked just 12th on his squad and Lemieux's -25 was third-worst on his team and among the worst in the league.

To say that Forsberg wasn't much better is to ignore that not only did he score at a higher rate, but that opposition teams were also not scoring against his line specifically. Forsberg and his linemates were +52, +52, and +34. The next highest Avalanche forward was +8. He may have been far removed from his PK days, but his offense was legitimately one of the best even-strength defenses in the league.

Removing PK GA/minutes
Forsberg: 42 GA in 1434 minutes
Madden: 36 GA in 1239 minutes
Who was Forsberg's line playing against? Is it possible that his coach was sheltering him against other top players/starting more shifts in the offensive zone?

Sticks and Pucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 02:26 PM
  #17
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstOverallLine View Post
Who was Forsberg's line playing against? Is it possible that his coach was sheltering him against other top players/starting more shifts in the offensive zone?
The word is that by the 2000s, Sakic had a greater defensive role than Forsberg

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 03:21 PM
  #18
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The word is that by the 2000s, Sakic had a greater defensive role than Forsberg
Sakic took on Forsberg's PK responsibilities in 2000, but by 2003, he was putting in 4th/5th forward PK minutes. His even-strength defensive responsibilities consisted of matching up against most other teams' top offensive lines (even when Yelle was still there, for the most part) because Forsberg drew the oppositions' defensive matchups. It's a system that theoretically should have boosted Sakic's offensive numbers since he was going punch-for-punch and boosted Forsberg's plus-minus numbers because there would be a less threatening counter-attack despite stronger defense.

While the plus-minus reflects this, Forsberg's offensive numbers remained fairly healthy relative to Sakic's, with Sakic blowing people's doors down in 2000 and 2001. 2002 saw a noticeable dip for Sakic, as Forsberg wasn't there to draw a defensive matchup away, thus changing the types of matchups teams could apply against the Sakic line. Enter 2003, when Sakic goes down with an injury: Forsberg steals his linemates and scores 38 points in 20 games during Sakic's two lengthy hiatuses.

Forsberg certainly wasn't a sheltered player, outside of taking fewer faceoffs than he did in the late-90s. As much as Hartley and Granato would have loved to have Forsberg play against weaker matchups, it's not really feasible when the other team consistently pulls their weaker defensive players off the ice to ensure that such a thing does not happen.

1997-98 is probably right up there with 2002-03 in terms of his seasons that blow 1995-96 out of the water. That's the season that he was within striking distance of Jagr's Art Ross, something he possibly could have won had Marc Crawford given him less PK time in favor of ES/PP minutes. I don't think Crawford was wrong for wanting to burn his best player's candle at both ends, as Colorado was a rather poor defensive team and the PK was one of the few bright spots, but it is the sort of thing that often goes unnoticed when people talk about 1997-98, both at the time and in retrospect.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2013, 04:48 PM
  #19
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmniCube View Post
Forsberg was much better than any other forward in the league during 2002-03, and anyone arguing otherwise didn't watch him that year.
I'm not sure I'd say "much" better either. He needed the last game of the year to win the scoring title. Mario was lapping the NHL in the first half of the season. Thornton had 101 points although no question Forsberg was better, and Bertuzzi had the best season of his career and was a physical beast. He was the best forward, but not by a country mile.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 07:45 PM
  #20
Fred Taylor
The Cyclone
 
Fred Taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,294
vCash: 500
I think I would say Forsberg was much better than any other player in 02-03 and 03-04 even though he only played half the season. It was similar to Crosby's 10-11. No one during that time period had close to his overall game.

Fred Taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 08:51 PM
  #21
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 Fred Taylor View Post
I think I would say Forsberg was much better than any other player in 02-03 and 03-04 even though he only played half the season. It was similar to Crosby's 10-11. No one during that time period had close to his overall game.
I'd say that dominance really started when he came back for the 2002 playoffs.

King Forsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 09:19 PM
  #22
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I'm not sure I'd say "much" better either. He needed the last game of the year to win the scoring title. Mario was lapping the NHL in the first half of the season. Thornton had 101 points although no question Forsberg was better, and Bertuzzi had the best season of his career and was a physical beast. He was the best forward, but not by a country mile.
Naslund played out of his mind in 02-03 and was better than Bertuzzi.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 02:00 PM
  #23
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,628
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Naslund played out of his mind in 02-03 and was better than Bertuzzi.
Naslund was the one Forsberg ended up winning the scoring title against on the last day of the season. No doubt Naslund was elite at this time. Not terribly far from Forsberg in my mind either. At least we know a lot of people thought he had a better year since he won the Lindsay award.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2013, 05:55 PM
  #24
MarkusNaslund19
Registered User
 
MarkusNaslund19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country:
Posts: 1,231
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstOverallLine View Post
On that note, would you say that 02-03 Forsberg = 95-96 Sakic/Lindros?
Not to derail this thread. But to me Sakic's 00-01 season was better than his 95-96 (certainly if we exclude the playoffs).

MarkusNaslund19 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 06:24 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.