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.

Is Mario's 1995-96 Season a little overrated?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-31-2012, 04:49 PM
  #76
Helm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 88 Broad Street
Posts: 1,538
vCash: 500
lol at so many getting mad at the OP's question. He never said Mario sucked because if it. He asked what he thought was a legitimate question.

Helm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 05:23 PM
  #77
Andong Wang
Registered User
 
Andong Wang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: LI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,768
vCash: 500
"50% of goal production" can be translated to "same production but more assists."

Andong Wang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 05:29 PM
  #78
Jossipov
Patty's Better
 
Jossipov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Arlington, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,588
vCash: 500
Mario Lemieux was getting over Cancer FFS...no it's not overrated.

Jossipov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 05:35 PM
  #79
211*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jossipov View Post
Mario Lemieux was getting over Cancer FFS...no it's not overrated.
yea its like the weakest, least threatening, known to man. not to mention lemieux is the laziest player in nhl history. horrible 200 ft game.

211* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:01 PM
  #80
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,690
vCash: 500
Mario had a great year in 1996 but the mediocre plus-minus and high percentage of points on the powerplay is the main reason why his peak/prime isn't considered as good as Gretzky or Orr's.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:01 PM
  #81
Wedontneedroads
Registered User
 
Wedontneedroads's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 3,066
vCash: 50
I don't get why people try to question Lemieux or Gretzky's numbers. They are insanely untouchable, and will stay that way. Wanna know why?

They were that ****ing good.

Wedontneedroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:04 PM
  #82
Helm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 88 Broad Street
Posts: 1,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by irbelikewall View Post
I don't get why people try to question Lemieux or Gretzky's numbers. They are insanely untouchable, and will stay that way. Wanna know why?

They were that ****ing good.
I agree that they were but they were both also two of the laziest players to ever play the game if the puck wasn't on their stick. So maybe the OP was just wondering what others thought is all.

Helm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:06 PM
  #83
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helm View Post
I agree that they were but they were both also two of the laziest players to ever play the game if the puck wasn't on their stick. So maybe the OP was just wondering what others thought is all.
In a 1984 NHL coach's poll, Gretzky finished 4th for the "hardest worker" in the league

Mario Lemieux reported being shocked by how hard Gretzky worked when they were teammates at the 1987 Canada Cup

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:08 PM
  #84
Reverend Mayhem
Fire this man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,867
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Who played goal for the Penguins that year?

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:11 PM
  #85
Helm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 88 Broad Street
Posts: 1,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
In a 1984 NHL coach's poll, Gretzky finished 4th for the "hardest worker" in the league

Mario Lemieux reported being shocked by how hard Gretzky worked when they were teammates at the 1987 Canada Cup
lol. No. Maybe Mario thought so because he was lazy on defense also. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't ever once remember Gretzky working hard on defense. I'm not talking for a year or a game but just a shift.

Edit: but I don't want to derail this thread. If you have proof pm me or if you want show it here but inwontvreply so it will end.

Helm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:16 PM
  #86
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helm View Post
Maybe I'm wrong
Well, at least part of your post was correct.

Cawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:18 PM
  #87
Jamin
Registered User
 
Jamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luigi Lemieux View Post
Pittsburgh's defense was horrendous that year, that's why. They lead the nhl with 362 goals for, but had 284 GA, which would be 20th out of 26 teams. 1995-96 Pittsburgh was probably the last true run and gun team...they literally did not care about defense.
Thats what I figured but then someone posted how Jagr and other top 6 players were plus. Im curious if there is any reason to this besides "durr plus minus is useless. so scoring points is bad" etc that alot of people who missed the point keep harping on.

If the team is so bad why was he terrible in plus minus but other offensive players were not

Jamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:23 PM
  #88
Jamin
Registered User
 
Jamin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,922
vCash: 500
Well it seems to me at least the bottom half of page 3 seems to answer the OP. Lol at how many people got offended by such a simple question

Jamin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:27 PM
  #89
MJB Devils23*
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 36,965
vCash: 500
While I do find it interesting his +/- was so low, I certainly wouldn't at all say it was overrated. I do see that Jagr, Nedved, and Francis all had a +/- in the 20's and 30's. But I then come to find out they were all on the same line for a good portion of the year.

MJB Devils23* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 06:41 PM
  #90
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
There were two main lines that year:

Naslund-Lemieux-Sandstrom
Nedved-Francis-Jagr

ES points:
Lemieux 73, +10
Sandstrom 36, +4
Naslund 45, +17

Jagr 95, +31
Nedved 76, +37
Francis 63, +25

PP points:

Lemieux 79
Francis 54
Jagr 51
Zubov 32
Sandstrom 30
Nedved 20

Jagr's line scored more at even strength and was also more of a possession line. If the Pens didn't hold possession, their defense was swiss cheese, so it became dependent on Barrasso/Wregget to stand on their head. Except for Zubov, who was very good at moving the puck at ES and on the PP, the defensemen were simply passengers on the +/- train, thanks to having two of the best lines in the league. Tamer was decent defensively, but when Tamer and Joseph are your shutdown d-men, you're in real trouble. That's why the Pens abandoned defense for the most part, because it was not a winning strategy for that team.

Remember, the players on the PP (Lemieux, Francis, Jagr, Sandstrom) also take a hit to their +/- when a SH goals is scored. That's probably why Naslund and Nedved have the best +/- on their lines, because they played less on the PP.
Well, thats a very thorough response.

So what happened the next season, when he led the team in +\-? Did he play with different players, or did he just put in more effort in the 2-way game instead of playing all offence and abandoning the defensive side?

Cawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:10 PM
  #91
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz View Post
Well, thats a very thorough response.

So what happened the next season, when he led the team in +\-? Did he play with different players, or did he just put in more effort in the 2-way game instead of playing all offence and abandoning the defensive side?
In '97, they mostly used a super-line of Lemieux-Francis-Jagr.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:10 PM
  #92
Helm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 88 Broad Street
Posts: 1,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz View Post
Well, at least part of your post was correct.
Well, who can argue with these facts you represent.

Helm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:21 PM
  #93
clefty
Ice cream for crow
 
clefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Fujairah
Posts: 17,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cawz View Post
Well, thats a very thorough response.

So what happened the next season, when he led the team in +\-? Did he play with different players, or did he just put in more effort in the 2-way game instead of playing all offence and abandoning the defensive side?
That year he played left wing with Francis and Jagr. Francis is the common thread, he won a Selke for a good reason.

clefty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:23 PM
  #94
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
In '97, they mostly used a super-line of Lemieux-Francis-Jagr.
Strange that they stacked the line in 1996-97, but all three saw their totals decline, even in relation to the rest of the league

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:24 PM
  #95
BuckyDornster
Speed kills, Del.
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cumberland
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 1200
66 was a beast, who gives a crap about his +/-.

BuckyDornster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:28 PM
  #96
MadLuke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Strange that they stacked the line in 1996-97, but all three saw their totals decline, even in relation to the rest of the league
Not strange for Mario, one more year was a lot for him and Jagr played only 63 games and still scored 47 could have scored about 60 goals that season and 130 points.

Maybe the powerplay were down a bit ? Mario scored 50% less goal on the power play.

MadLuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:36 PM
  #97
MadLuke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,478
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensFanDan View Post
66 was a beast, who gives a crap about his +/-.
Because they indicate the number of goal scored when we was on the ice vs the goal allowed, the most important thing in hockey (scoring more goal than the other team, anyway you achieve to make that statement true).

The thing that hurt Mario on the +/- is it remove the fact that he was the best player on the power play and that is a very useful thing.

Gretzky in the 1993-94 was not view as a great player and not considered for the hart, despite winning the art ross because of is weak 5vs5 result, so the question of 95-96 Lemieux winning the Hart over Hasek and considered better than Jagr is it justified ?

The answer is probably yes, but the question is not stupid and who seriously give really a crap about 5vs5 result on a large sample size ? come-on, +/- giving team situation and taking consideration player role and player generaly on the ice when playing (from his team and the opponent team) have certainly a good value on large sample size.

MadLuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:41 PM
  #98
clefty
Ice cream for crow
 
clefty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Fujairah
Posts: 17,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Strange that they stacked the line in 1996-97, but all three saw their totals decline, even in relation to the rest of the league
Well remember that was Lemieux's (first) last season, and his back was giving him major issues. He couldn't practice, couldn't tie his own skates, and had to physically grab his pant leg and lift it over the boards to jump onto the ice.

Also, take into account the steady decline of offensive numbers in the 90s. Lemieux's 122 points still lead the league by a mile.

clefty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:51 PM
  #99
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Strange that they stacked the line in 1996-97, but all three saw their totals decline, even in relation to the rest of the league
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadLuke View Post
Not strange for Mario, one more year was a lot for him and Jagr played only 63 games and still scored 47 could have scored about 60 goals that season and 130 points.

Maybe the powerplay were down a bit ? Mario scored 50% less goal on the power play.
Yes, it was in large part due to fewer PPOs (down league-wide), less effective PP (still 22%, but 26% in '96) and Jagr being injured for ~1/4 of season. Also, they forced teams to pick their poison at ES in '96, but had all their ammo on one line in '97, and there's only one puck to go around. They had traded both Zubov and Naslund, and Sandstrom was injured for half the year. All of these factors add up.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-31-2012, 08:55 PM
  #100
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,024
vCash: 500
The Pens were known for not having great defense and some hot and cold goaltending. Mario himself wasn't on the ice to play defense. He wasn't the type of player to do that. It is rather strange that in 1996-'97 when Mario has 39 less points he has a much better rating of +27. The Penguins weren't a better team that year by any means. I really can't explain that jump.

As for the powerplay, I think it's a good thing. Mario scored 69 goals in 1995-'96. He scored 31 on the PP and 8 shorthanded. That's 30 goals even strength. Mario was always a special teams monster in his career. He was built for setting up shop on the power play. He had massive weapons at his disposal.

His plus minus is a little misleading because he was by far the best player in the NHL that year.

Big Phil 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 06:51 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.