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.

Yzerman

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-05-2011, 01:16 AM
  #76
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
To this day, Yzerman remains the only player I have seen who was spoken of in the same breath as Gretzky and Lemieux - without an outcry. Jagr never even had that.
I'm just not buying this. When Yzerman was posting his most impressive offensive seasons he couldn't even get selected to Team Canada for Best on Best tournaments. He wasn't able to crack the Canadian team until quite late in his career when his defense improved.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:19 AM
  #77
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
I'm just not buying this. When Yzerman was posting his most impressive offensive seasons he couldn't even get selected to Team Canada for Best on Best tournaments. He wasn't able to crack the Canadian team until quite late in his career when his defense improved.
The only time he was cut during his prime was in 1991, and it's universally agreed that Keenan made a mistake in cutting Yzerman.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:29 AM
  #78
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The only time he was cut during his prime was in 1991, and it's universally agreed that Keenan made a mistake in cutting Yzerman.
He wasn't selected for the '87 team either. Might have had someting to do with guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and Hawerchuk.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:29 AM
  #79
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
He wasn't selected for the '87 team either. Might have had someting to do with guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and Hawerchuk.
He wasn't in his prime when the 87 team was selected.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:47 AM
  #80
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
He wasn't in his prime when the 87 team was selected.
He had a 90 point season in '87. How on earth can you call it a mistake to exclude him in '91 when Canada went on to win the tournament. Gretzky, Lindros, Messier and Brent Sutter handled the centre ice duties superbly. Notice that Lemiuex didn't play and Yzerman still couldn't make it. Lindros was also younger in '91 than Yzerman was in '87.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 02:32 AM
  #81
lolwut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
He had a 90 point season in '87. How on earth can you call it a mistake to exclude him in '91 when Canada went on to win the tournament. Gretzky, Lindros, Messier and Brent Sutter handled the centre ice duties superbly. Notice that Lemiuex didn't play and Yzerman still couldn't make it. Lindros was also younger in '91 than Yzerman was in '87.
Yzerman was a completely different player after 87. He exploded after that season.

lolwut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 12:00 PM
  #82
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
He had a 90 point season in '87. How on earth can you call it a mistake to exclude him in '91 when Canada went on to win the tournament. Gretzky, Lindros, Messier and Brent Sutter handled the centre ice duties superbly. Notice that Lemiuex didn't play and Yzerman still couldn't make it. Lindros was also younger in '91 than Yzerman was in '87.
Yzerman scored 102 points in 64 games in 87-88. He scored 155 the next year; one of three players to hit that mark.

As for 1991, Yzerman had just finished a three year stretch where he had finished 3rd, 2nd, and 3rd in goals and 3rd, 3rd, and 7th in points. Over the three-year span he was second in goals, fifth in assists, and second in points. Winning or not, Keenan cutting him was a stupid decision at the time. Unless you think Eric Lindros was one of the five best players in the world at the time? He certainly didn't seem to be better than Yzerman in 1992-93; Lindros had Mark Recchi, a linemate of the kind of quality Yzerman had never seen, and yet Yzerman's offensive numbers were FAR better. Many reports since then have said Keenan had some personal issue with Yzerman.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 01:06 PM
  #83
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Yzerman scored 102 points in 64 games in 87-88. He scored 155 the next year; one of three players to hit that mark.

As for 1991, Yzerman had just finished a three year stretch where he had finished 3rd, 2nd, and 3rd in goals and 3rd, 3rd, and 7th in points. Over the three-year span he was second in goals, fifth in assists, and second in points. Winning or not, Keenan cutting him was a stupid decision at the time. Unless you think Eric Lindros was one of the five best players in the world at the time? He certainly didn't seem to be better than Yzerman in 1992-93; Lindros had Mark Recchi, a linemate of the kind of quality Yzerman had never seen, and yet Yzerman's offensive numbers were FAR better. Many reports since then have said Keenan had some personal issue with Yzerman.
Yzerman was correctly ommitted from that team because, at that stage of his career, his defense was atrocious.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 02:00 PM
  #84
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
Yzerman was correctly ommitted from that team because, at that stage of his career, his defense was atrocious.
Hmm. If we add up Selke voting from 88-89 through 90-91, we get this for the following players:

Steve Yzerman (1-1-0)
Mark Messier (1-1-0)
Wayne Gretzky (0-1-0)
Brent Sutter (0-0-1)
Eric Lindros (did not play in NHL)

Yzerman was second over that period in goals (Hull) and fifth in assists (Gretzky, Oates, Coffey, Lemieux) and finished second to Gretzky in points.

So the argument that he was defensively incapable doesn't work; he was as good or better as all other centers named according to the PHWA. Which means he must have been left off for his offense. Except he was better at that than everyone there but Gretzky. So we've now established that, Gretzky aside, Yzerman was better than every center on that roster at both ends of the ice. He also led all Canadians in goals over those three years. Why exactly was he left off again? The only possible answer is that he wasn't a big mean hitting machine. Which, in fact, is probably the truth. Keenan had a thing for players who played a big physical game, even if they were less effective than those who were tough but played a finesse game, like Yzerman.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 03:36 PM
  #85
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
To this day, Yzerman remains the only player I have seen who was spoken of in the same breath as Gretzky and Lemieux - without an outcry. Jagr never even had that.
Mark Messier was a reasonable alternative, hence the two Hart/Pearson Trophies (with which I already know you disagree).

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 03:42 PM
  #86
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Hmm. If we add up Selke voting from 88-89 through 90-91, we get this for the following players:

Steve Yzerman (1-1-0)
Mark Messier (1-1-0)
Wayne Gretzky (0-1-0)
Brent Sutter (0-0-1)
Eric Lindros (did not play in NHL)

Yzerman was second over that period in goals (Hull) and fifth in assists (Gretzky, Oates, Coffey, Lemieux) and finished second to Gretzky in points.

So the argument that he was defensively incapable doesn't work; he was as good or better as all other centers named according to the PHWA. Which means he must have been left off for his offense. Except he was better at that than everyone there but Gretzky. So we've now established that, Gretzky aside, Yzerman was better than every center on that roster at both ends of the ice. He also led all Canadians in goals over those three years. Why exactly was he left off again? The only possible answer is that he wasn't a big mean hitting machine. Which, in fact, is probably the truth. Keenan had a thing for players who played a big physical game, even if they were less effective than those who were tough but played a finesse game, like Yzerman.
Are you using the fact that Yzerman had gotten a grand total of 2 votes for the Selke up to that point in his career to show that he was better defensively (at that point) than Mark Messier or Brent Sutter?


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-05-2011 at 03:52 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 03:45 PM
  #87
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Are you really using the fact that Yzerman had gotten a grand total of 2 votes for the Selke up to that point in his career to show that he was better defensively (at that point) than Mark Messier or Brent Sutter?
That strikes me as being more likely a case of one writer trying to protest the common opinion of Yzerman's defense with a vote. I mean, he even received a 1st Team All-Star vote in 1988 when he only played 64 games. Scattered votes like this mean next to nothing.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2011, 04:57 PM
  #88
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
He had a 90 point season in '87. How on earth can you call it a mistake to exclude him in '91 when Canada went on to win the tournament. Gretzky, Lindros, Messier and Brent Sutter handled the centre ice duties superbly. Notice that Lemiuex didn't play and Yzerman still couldn't make it. Lindros was also younger in '91 than Yzerman was in '87.
Lindros being picked was a controversial decision, although not a bad one at all. He was about as good of an 18 year old as we've seen.

However, I can't imagine it would be a decision I would personally make to include an 18 year old who hadn't played a game and leave off Yzerman, or Sakic even at that time.

Yzerman was a guy at that time who was simply too good to leave off the team. Sure there were centers down the middle and maybe he doesn't fit into those roles, but can anyone here say that Yzerman still wouldn't have been a good fit - and agreeable - to play wing?

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2011, 01:55 PM
  #89
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Lindros being picked was a controversial decision, although not a bad one at all. He was about as good of an 18 year old as we've seen.

However, I can't imagine it would be a decision I would personally make to include an 18 year old who hadn't played a game and leave off Yzerman, or Sakic even at that time.

Yzerman was a guy at that time who was simply too good to leave off the team. Sure there were centers down the middle and maybe he doesn't fit into those roles, but can anyone here say that Yzerman still wouldn't have been a good fit - and agreeable - to play wing?
I still say he wasn't wanted on the '91 team because he was so one dimensional. Not being selected may have been the wake up call he needed. He transformed his game and became a superb two way player. I would argue that he was a much better player in the seasons following his last 100 point campaign.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2011, 02:02 PM
  #90
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
I still say he wasn't wanted on the '91 team because he was so one dimensional. Not being selected may have been the wake up call he needed. He transformed his game and became a superb two way player. I would argue that he was a much better player in the seasons following his last 100 point campaign.
He was definitly not one dimensional.

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2011, 02:22 PM
  #91
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobnobs View Post
He was definitly not one dimensional.
Really good argument.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2011, 04:43 PM
  #92
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
I still say he wasn't wanted on the '91 team because he was so one dimensional. Not being selected may have been the wake up call he needed. He transformed his game and became a superb two way player. I would argue that he was a much better player in the seasons following his last 100 point campaign.
Yzerman transformed his game in the later stages and was very diligent about it. However, an older Yzerman with better defense was still not a better player than a 155 point Yzerman in his prime with worse defense. He became a better leader and such, but a more well rounded player, not a better overall player.

Keenan was a jerk for what he did. Yzerman was not in the mold of a Bure or Kovalchuk when it came to defense. He was capable which is the best word I can use. He wasn't elite defensively, just........present. It isn't as if he hung around the red line waiting for a pass. He WAS the guy who led the rush and carried it up the ice.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2011, 05:30 PM
  #93
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
But Keenan selected Dale Hawerchuk for the very same role that he turned Yzerman down for, and Hawerchuk never played that role in the NHL, right?
Not really, considering he picked Dirk Graham. Leaving Yzerman off the roster was a huge snub imo. There was no reason that he shouldn't have made it. Saying Stevie Y was one dimensional in 1991 is revisionist history tbh. He was a pretty well rounded player, he was no defensive specialist, but he was more than capable.

Since when has decisions made by Keenan been taken as the gospel. I remember it like it was yesterday and the consensus was that is was a bad decision, the team won, so it won't gain much attention, but whatever, talking about this 20 years later with people who weren't watching, having them tell me why he was left off is kinda funny. Not saying you btw, but yeah.

Yzerman's early year defensive shortcomings are exaggerated to say the least.


Last edited by habsjunkie2*: 12-06-2011 at 05:41 PM.
habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2011, 06:28 PM
  #94
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
After reading this thread and thinking about the all time lists, I can't help but laugh. Fans can't properly depict a player from 20 years ago and we're supposed to take their word on players from 50-70 years ago as being worth something.

Steve Yzerman was not atrocious defensively in 1991, period. This is a blatant lie.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2011, 07:30 PM
  #95
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syckle78 View Post
Why doesn’t Yzerman get the same benefit of the doubt that some other all-time greats get when it comes to injuries? There a lot of talk about how much greater some players would have been if their careers were not cut short by injury or if they had been healthy for their entire career. Yzerman clearly does not this same treatment on this board when ranking the best players of all time. I think it is completely overlooked that he struggled with injuries the majority of his career since the time he wrecked his knee on the goalpost against buffalo.

This is not talked about though; it is like people think he was healthy from the time that happened till his epic performance in the 2002 playoffs. We hear about Mario’s back, Bure and Orr’s knees, Forsberg’s maladies etc., etc. But, through the 90s Yzerman struggled with injuries, except he played through them and remained a ppg+ player and become very good on defense. Is it overlooked because he played and didn’t miss huge time in the 90’s? Because, they didn’t cut his career short?

I bring this up because I cannot understand how he is so underrated all time. Him being ranked 36th on this forum just boggles my mind. He is ranked 6th ALL TIME in points and has every excuse every other player has had for not having more; bad linemates at his offensive peak pre-injuries, injuries, becoming a dominate defensive player, sacrificing for the team to win, and missing games due to work stoppages.

So tell me, why is he ranked so low? Because he does not have trophy case of individual awards playing behind Wayne and Mario? Because he was not lucky enough to have a dominate team early on like Crosby has had for instant success? The dude was just flat out dominant in anything he chose and was a tremendous leader and the cornerstone of a franchise that went from completely inept to being contenders year in and year out.

Yes, I am I am a huge Yzerman fan and yeah he has been talked about a lot here. I read tons of the views on him by posters in this forum and it doesn’t make sense he is ranked so low.
Yes Yzerman is rated low here and like you said i think it is due a lot to the fact that his awards voting and scoring placements arent as high as other (inferior) players. I personally think that his awards voting and scoring placements are not representative of his stature as a player due to various contextual considerations but one of the dominant paradigms here seems to be a ranking based on relative dominance of era. Unfortunately for Yzerman the era of the late 80s early 90s was the most competitive in terms of offensive forwards. Add to that considerations of injuries and coaching and team composition and team performance which hurt Yzerman's production and prominence at the time.

In 88 Yzerman was a strong Hart Trophy candidate against Lemieux and Gretzky then he got hurt. In 89 Yzerman was actually the favorite for the Hart Trophy over Lemieux and Gretzky according to an informal poll of 20ish of the voters in March but then the Wings ended the season on a big skid and dropped in the league standings. In 90 seems that the three best players in the league were all disqualified from even placing high in Hart Trophy voting due in large part to poor team performance. In 91 and 92 Yzerman's ice time (and thus scoring) dropped a lot because Murray came in with a more team oriented philosophy and Fedorov and Carson were also first line centers on the same team. When you have to share your ice time (and wingers) your numbers are bound to drop (by the way this especially hurt Carson and i dont think enough attention has been given to the situation in Detroit for his career fizzling out). In 93 before Carson was traded Yzerman was scoring at a similar rate as the previous 2 seasons. As soon as Carson left Yzerman's scoring exploded.

The defense thing is another reason. It is almost as if Yzerman is being penalized for becoming so good defensively in his later career as people start anachronistically foiling late Yzerman with an early Yzerman that was bad defensively. Not only is this exagerrated to the point of being incorrect (look at what Demers and Murray had to say about Yzerman's defense before Bowman and what Yzerman himself says: "I always considered myself a decent two-way player," he said. "It's just that I never got noticed about playing defense until I stopped scoring.") but it is also highly oversimplistic. Look at changing league trends, changing team needs, changes in coaching, changing supporting cast, changes in Yzerman's abilities and limitations due to age and injuries, and perhaps most importantly changes in perception for a good explanation. Just because a player makes changes in his game and focuses on defense later in his career doesnt mean he was some kind of defensive liability before that.

Still outside of hfboards Yzerman is ranked high (as i think he should be). For example just recently he was named the 3rd best center of the modern era by Hockey Night in Canada's Best of the Best. The same media people who didnt give Yzerman enough credit during the mid 90s seem to hold him in extremely high esteem now not to mention players, coaches, managers, scouts, fans.

You do make a good point about Yzerman's injuries and his ranking though. People who think he recovered from his injury in 88 because of his 89 season dont know that Yzerman had that knee bother him throughout that season. That 88 knee injury was a career threatening one and it very likely adversely affected his career. That 155 point season may have not even been the true peak of Yzerman without that injury. This site does a good job of listing a lot of Yzerman's injuries throughout his career. It isnt complete but it really shows how many problems he had with that right knee beginning with his rookie season.

One thing that Yzerman is criticized for is his lack of playoff production and success in the early and mid 90s but people forget that he was injured one way or another every single year.
  • 91: Yzerman scores 3 goals and 6 points in first 3 games against the Blues getting the Wings off to a series lead but hurts his knee in game 3. He still plays in the next 4 games but is pointless and the Blues come back to win in 7.
  • 92: Yzerman hurts his rib early in the series against Minnesota but doesnt miss a game though he only gets 3 goals and 8 points in 11 games that postseason.
  • 93: Yzerman has 3 goals and 5 points in the first 2 games against the Leafs and the Wings win both games but then hurts his wrist in game 3. He only gets 1 goal and 2 points for the remainder of the series and the Leafs win in 7.
  • 94: Yzerman misses the first 4 games against the Sharks which is split 2 games each and because of this he comes back early for the last 3 games but only scores 1 goal and 4 points as the Wings lose in 7. If Yzerman wasnt hurt and played the entire series it seems unlikely that the Sharks would win. There would go the biggest playoff disappointment and biggest reason for the choker label for Yzerman and the Wings.
  • 95: Yzerman scores 3 goals and 11 points in his first 9 games before hurting his knee in game 4 against the Sharks. He has arthroscopic surgery and quickly comes back in game 4 against the Blackhawks but only scores 1 goal and 2 points in his last 6 games.
  • 96: Yzerman scores 8 goals and 17 points in 13 games in the first 2 series basically carrying the seriously underachieving Wings over the Blues to the conference finals. Gets hurt in game 1 against the Avs (injury might have its origin in the OT goal celebration) and misses game 2. Comes back hurt for the next 4 games but doesnt score a goal and only gets 3 points in the series as the Wings get eliminated.
Yeah people play and produce through injuries in the playoffs. Obviously Yzerman did both. But it is wrong to expect full production from an injured Yzerman and it is wrong to just look at the stats and team results without looking at context and put the choker label on him. Who knows though maybe Yzerman would be ranked higher in the minds of some if he sat out those games that he was hurt and thus maintained a much better scoring rate?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Yzerman was cut from team canada because keenan didnt consider him as a two hundred foot player.
Is this just conjecture? Because it doesnt hold up to fact checking. First of all Yzerman wasnt cut from Team Canada in 91 he was on the taxi squad and decided to leave. Second the reason that Keenan actually gave for not giving Yzerman a regular spot was that he had a bad training camp and not anything about defense. Now Yzerman was quite rightly pissed off about this for a couple of reasons. First Alan Eagleson had earlier promised Yzerman a spot on the team and he turned out to be lying. Second Keenan reason of having a bad camp wasnt a uniform standard because Messier didnt even participate in camp and got a spot on the team. I speculate that Keenan just didnt like Yzerman very much. Sather picked Yzerman for Team Canada coming off his rookie year in 84 and let him play in 4 games with tonsillitis before scratching him. Yzerman also dominated the 89 and 90 World Championships. This Canada Cup talk is really one of the poorest cases against Yzerman...

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
That's a big factor, sure. When you look at his prime in the late-eighties and early-nineties, he's almost unanimously slated sixth behind Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, Roy, and Bourque. Added to that, his career fell close enough to those of Hasek, Jagr, Sakic, and Lidstrom that the majority has him behind them as well, making him somewhere around the 10th best since 1984.
Except with regards to the late 80s part at least Yzerman was actually unanimously considered better (and for many not just better but in a different class) than every player in the league except for Lemieux and Gretzky and he was considered by some to be in the same league as Lemieux and Gretzky... I may be unaware of something but nobody seems to have considered Messier or Bourque or Roy as such.

True that on hfboards Yzerman seems to be be widely considered after all of those guys you listed but im pretty sure thats not the case in the wider hockey following world where he is widely considered better than most if not all of the listed. Lidstrom ranking over Yzerman on here is the one that most surprises me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
imo, it is hard to argue yzerman had a better peak.

jagr scored about as much in more difficult circumstances and with less TOI. he also controlled play in a way yzerman could not.
If you are talking about a more extended prime of 6+ years then you can say Jagr scored about as much than Yzerman but in his peak in the late 80s Yzerman scored significantly more. Jagr did maintain his offense for longer than Yzerman did (due especially to injuries and coaching) but Yzerman at his best was better offensively than Jagr at his best.

Yes Jagr had to face better goaltending and stronger team D (though id argue that Jagr was built for the dead puck era as his strength made the clogged ice much less of an obstacle than it was for smaller and weaker players (like Kariya or even Selanne) - the dead puck era affected other players negatively much more than Jagr) and these circumstances do even up the gap quite a bit. However due to teams playing more structured defensive systems the shadows that Yzerman had to deal with became less and less of a factor. Also defensive demands on Yzerman were clearly greater than on Jagr.

Ice time is a very strange argument in Jagr's favor of being more offensively productive. First of all the only time Yzerman got significantly more ice time than Jagr ever did was under Demers when he got around 30 minutes. As soon as Murray came in (and Fedorov and Carson) Yzerman's ice time was cut by drastically. Yzerman also played roles that Jagr didnt play (defensively) especially in penalty killing where a big chunk of the extra ice time went. Yzerman's extra ice time probably burned him out more than confer any advantage offensively. This is all notwithstanding the change from a long shift game to short shift game and the changed nature of play in general.

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2011, 08:19 PM
  #96
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
Good post

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2011, 08:26 PM
  #97
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,456
vCash: 500
I'm sorry, if the following were true

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob
Except with regards to the late 80s part at least Yzerman was actually unanimously considered better (and for many not just better but in a different class) than every player in the league except for Lemieux and Gretzky and he was considered by some to be in the same league as Lemieux and Gretzky... I may be unaware of something but nobody seems to have considered Messier or Bourque or Roy as such.
Then there is no way that Yzerman would have been left behind in both the 1987 and 1991 Canada Cups. Are you sure you're not extrapolating from Yzerman's career season over the wider timeframe of the late 80s?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2011, 08:41 PM
  #98
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm sorry, if the following were true

Then there is no way that Yzerman would have been left behind in both the 1987 and 1991 Canada Cups. Are you sure you're not extrapolating from Yzerman's career season over the wider timeframe of the late 80s?
Being left off the '87 roster wasn't all that shocking as a few have explained earlier in this thread.
'91 though, there was a lot of shock and head scratching at the time. Many fans and media alike were cautiously and subtlety criticizing Iron Mike over that decision.
If they hadn't of won, Yzerman's snubbing would of been by far the first thing on the menu but they did so it wasn't.

I don't agree that Yzerman was always mentioned in the same breath as Gretz and Mario offensively during this time but he was definitely mentioned.
Again, Stevie's Pearson over 66 and 99 about says it all on this front IMO.
I have always put more stock in the Pearson than the Hart. The players know what they're seeing and facing out there.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2011, 08:50 PM
  #99
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Being left off the '87 roster wasn't all that shocking as a few have explained earlier in this thread.
'91 though, there was a lot of shock and head scratching at the time. Many fans and media alike were cautiously and subtlety criticizing Iron Mike over that decision.
If they hadn't of won, Yzerman's snubbing would of been by far the first thing on the menu but they did so it wasn't.

I don't agree that Yzerman was always mentioned in the same breath as Gretz and Mario offensively during this time but he was definitely mentioned.
Again, Stevie's Pearson over 66 and 99 about says it all on this front IMO.
I have always put more stock in the Pearson than the Hart. The players know what they're seeing and facing out there
.
Not arguing with your greater point, but I disagree about the value of the Pearson. Though I guess Yzerman's win made more sense than Mike Liut's.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2011, 09:02 PM
  #100
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm sorry, if the following were true



Then there is no way that Yzerman would have been left behind in both the 1987 and 1991 Canada Cups. Are you sure you're not extrapolating from Yzerman's career season over the wider timeframe of the late 80s?
Leaving Yzerman off the 87 team was a surprising decision due to his playoff performance that season but 87 isnt included in the time frame im giving. Yzerman could still be considered only the 5th best Canadian center at the time.

The 91 team was selected after the end of the 91 season which saw a pretty big drop in Yzerman's production after Murray had come in. Yet again i have to ask why being left Team Canada in 91 by Keenan is any sort of big counterargument especially with the evidence presented. It clearly was a controversial move to be covered so extensively in the media. It clearly wasnt a popular move as fans chanted "Stevie" during the 1st game before Yzerman left the team for good in 91. The most you can say is that Keenan did not view Yzerman the same way the consensus seemed to.

Yzerman made the team in 84 under Sather most likely at the expense of Savard. I dont think that proves Yzerman was better than Savard around that time. Yzerman should have picked St Louis and Stamkos for the 10 team (i still think that a Tampa Bay line would have been more effective than the San Jose line). The fact that he didnt shouldnt be taken as some kind of knock against those guys. A better explanation might be that Yzerman seems to have been favoring Western Conference players perhaps because he saw them a lot more.

I would say the "3rd best" talk started in November 87 (88 season) and by December during that 22 game point streak it was probably becoming consensus and it carried through a lot of the 90 season. Most of the "in the league of Gretzky and Lemieux" talk i have personally seen was during the 89 season or the first few months of the 90 season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Not arguing with your greater point, but I disagree about the value of the Pearson. Though I guess Yzerman's win made more sense than Mike Liut's.
Yzerman also won Player of the Year from The Hockey News in 89. It was a fan vote based so you might be inclined to disregard it but it does show how Yzerman was considered.

I will try to pull out some of my old issues and post some scans tomorrow.


Last edited by toob: 12-08-2011 at 09:07 PM.
toob 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 11:51 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.