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.

Is Crosby overrated?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-16-2012, 02:51 PM
  #151
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 36,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
made-up hypothetical nonsense
That's great and all, but perhaps it's best to evaluate players based on things that actually happened?

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 03:23 PM
  #152
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Talk about downplaying a scoring title or what?

He was 19 and didn't exactly have the best supporting staff or line mates of any player in the top 10 scorers that year.

All we need is for hockey to start and for Sid to stay healthy then we will as see what has been hinted at with his great play and desire.
not downplaying a scoring title, hence putting one in quotes. it is impressive to win the scoring title, and win a league MVP, no one has ever discounted that. it is also not easy to win a scoring title, hence the reason we have had 6 different Art Ross winners post lockout. i believe Malkin is the only person to have won 2 scoring titles post lockout.

the point of the thread asked a basic question, is he over rated. putting speculation aside, i think, based on the attention he gets combined with the common theme of him being the "best" player in the world, i would say yes he is over rated.

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 03:28 PM
  #153
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
The cherry picking was in regards to your 1st "prime comp"

No one is disputing Jagr was and has had the best offensive career since Wayne and Mario but you pick and choose alot of things in your arguments depending if it suits your position or not.

There is a lot of talk about the "weakness" of Jagrs teams which is true in some seasons but not for all of them either. throw in the fact that guys like Forsberg and to a lesser extent Crosby have defensive responsibility then you can make a more fair evaluation in comparing guys.

It looks like you are mainly comparing the two guys in "fantasy hockey" terms and stats though which is only part of the picture.
In his prime, Jagr's teams generally were weak. The exceptions may have been '96 and '01. In '96, Francis was injured before the start of the ECF and they completely switched goalies one game into the series, but that was still a bitter 7 game loss to be sure. In '01, their chances were slim to none with a one-armed Jagr and an inexperienced goalie against a far superior NJ team.

I thought we were discussing whether Forsberg was the best playoff player of his era, because that's the only part that's even close IMO. The reason it's close is that Forsberg played on much better teams which always included another HOF center for opponents to also focus on, and almost always had one of the best goalies of all time. Playing for such a powerhouse, there were really no worries as to whether they would make the playoffs, so Forsberg was free to rest and heal his injuries in preparation for the playoffs. These aren't the sorts of situations in which Jagr found himself during his prime. Let's not embellish the myth that Forsberg singlehandedly willed his teams to multiple Cups via his "200 foot game." He had 12 points in 16 games in rounds 2 & 3 in '96, and was outscored by Sakic 34-21 in those playoffs. He missed the WCF & SCF in '01. He was a great playoff player and so was Jagr. I don't see any evidence of Forsberg being on a higher level.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 04:52 PM
  #154
bambamcam4ever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
.... and if you didn't believe Crosby was overrated, have a look at the Poll done in the General Hockey talk section in which you had to pick who the better playmaker is between Crosby, Jagr and Crosby.

Some are claiming Crosby is a top 10 playmaker all-time on the list.

His APG (assists per game) is pretty good, well that's what playing less than 500 games does to you and when you only play 22 games and put up 29 assists, it's going to help your numbers.

I really think younger hockey fans, the ones who never really even saw certain players from the 90's play in their primes (just to show you how young they are) don't really understand how per game stats work.

Lemieux's PPG was above 2.00 when he retired the first time and was the all-time leader. He's now second behind Gretzky. That's just an example.

Would Crosby's per game stats be as high in lets say 5-10 seasons' time? I doubt it.
Only 8 players in NHL history have had a higher career PPG average than Crosby's current 1.40 at any point in their careers(Jagr isn't one of them, I know you're disappointed). Six of those played in the 80s. The career averages of those players all dropped mostly because of the decrease in scoring leaguewide, so while it's possible that Crosby's PPG drops over the next 10 years, I wouldn't count on it falling too much since his last 2 years have been his most productive even with scoring levels similar to the dead-puck era. And by the way, if you use his career adjusted PPG average, there are only 2 forwards in NHL history who have had a higher average at any time, I'll let you guess who they are.

bambamcam4ever is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:36 PM
  #155
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamcam4ever View Post
Only 8 players in NHL history have had a higher career PPG average than Crosby's current 1.40 at any point in their careers(Jagr isn't one of them, I know you're disappointed). Six of those played in the 80s. The career averages of those players all dropped mostly because of the decrease in scoring leaguewide, so while it's possible that Crosby's PPG drops over the next 10 years, I wouldn't count on it falling too much since his last 2 years have been his most productive even with scoring levels similar to the dead-puck era. And by the way, if you use his career adjusted PPG average, there are only 2 forwards in NHL history who have had a higher average at any time, I'll let you guess who they are.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1016953

His last two years don't really impress me when compared to other great "half seasons".

Wrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:42 PM
  #156
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamcam4ever View Post
Only 8 players in NHL history have had a higher career PPG average than Crosby's current 1.40 at any point in their careers(Jagr isn't one of them, I know you're disappointed). Six of those played in the 80s. The career averages of those players all dropped mostly because of the decrease in scoring leaguewide, so while it's possible that Crosby's PPG drops over the next 10 years, I wouldn't count on it falling too much since his last 2 years have been his most productive even with scoring levels similar to the dead-puck era. And by the way, if you use his career adjusted PPG average, there are only 2 forwards in NHL history who have had a higher average at any time, I'll let you guess who they are.
Players with long careers will usually have significant drops in PPG due to not being as good of players in their later years. PPG is an indication of ability, but to rely on it as the main basis for value is very flawed. If Crosby can remain healthy, then we will see how his career plays out and start comparing him to some other greats, starting in ~3-5 years. If he can't stay healthy consistently, he may end up in the land of Lindros and Forsberg... and without Lindros' physicality, nor Forsberg's "takin' it up a notch" playoff record... which it would make it difficult for him to really separate himself from those greats.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:46 PM
  #157
PensBandwagonerNo272
the march
 
PensBandwagonerNo272's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Leaving my bias out of it, but yes, I agree.

You would think that he averages 2 ppg with the way a lot of people talk about how he is far and away the best player in the league. Malkin is pretty close and a few others aren't far behind. We'll just have to wait and see what happens over the rest of his career
Since the last lockout Crosby and Malkin are quite a bit ahead of anyone else in PPG. Too lazy to look the stats up but go ahead if you want.

PensBandwagonerNo272 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:49 PM
  #158
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PensBandwagonerNo272 View Post
Since the last lockout Crosby and Malkin are quite a bit ahead of anyone else in PPG. Too lazy to look the stats up but go ahead if you want.
If you took the 30-60 seconds it took to look at the stats, you would see that Ovechkin and Malkin and tied for 2nd behind Crosby in PPG since the lockout. That's how far ahead Ovechkin was as of 2009-10 that his last two years have only brought him down to Malkin level.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...oints_per_game

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 05:51 PM
  #159
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
In his prime, Jagr's teams generally were weak. The exceptions may have been '96 and '01. In '96, Francis was injured before the start of the ECF and they completely switched goalies one game into the series, but that was still a bitter 7 game loss to be sure. In '01, their chances were slim to none with a one-armed Jagr and an inexperienced goalie against a far superior NJ team.

I thought we were discussing whether Forsberg was the best playoff player of his era, because that's the only part that's even close IMO. The reason it's close is that Forsberg played on much better teams which always included another HOF center for opponents to also focus on, and almost always had one of the best goalies of all time. Playing for such a powerhouse, there were really no worries as to whether they would make the playoffs, so Forsberg was free to rest and heal his injuries in preparation for the playoffs. These aren't the sorts of situations in which Jagr found himself during his prime. Let's not embellish the myth that Forsberg singlehandedly willed his teams to multiple Cups via his "200 foot game." He had 12 points in 16 games in rounds 2 & 3 in '96, and was outscored by Sakic 34-21 in those playoffs. He missed the WCF & SCF in '01. He was a great playoff player and so was Jagr. I don't see any evidence of Forsberg being on a higher level.
In the playoffs even on those stacked Avs teams Forsberg really stands out for his scoring and plus/minus.

Even with the 11 less games than Sakic during their time together in Colorado, there is a really strong argument that Forsberg was the most important position player on those Avs teams.

Even with the weaker supporting cast, at some point one has to acknowledge Peter being great in the playoffs period IMO.

Sid has also been great in the playoffs and injuries aside only Wayne had a better overall start to his career in any forwards first 7 seasons IMO.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 06:27 PM
  #160
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
In the playoffs even on those stacked Avs teams Forsberg really stands out for his scoring and plus/minus.

Even with the 11 less games than Sakic during their time together in Colorado, there is a really strong argument that Forsberg was the most important position player on those Avs teams.

Even with the weaker supporting cast, at some point one has to acknowledge Peter being great in the playoffs period IMO.

Sid has also been great in the playoffs and injuries aside only Wayne had a better overall start to his career in any forwards first 7 seasons IMO.
Maybe you missed where in my last posts I said "Forsberg was a great playoff player." If you mean he was better in the playoffs than Jagr, then I must respectfully disagree.

I don't think injuries can just be set aside. When a player misses a few games here and there... or 10-20 games in a couple seasons... yeah, that can be put aside for the most part. When a player, at his youngest and presumably healthiest, has missed > 20 games in 3/7 seasons, and isn't playing anywhere yet this season... or like Forsberg, only plays > 60 games 6 times... or like Lindros, plays more than 65 games 4 times (and not all of those in his prime)... then no, injuries can't be set aside, as they are an integral part of that player's (lack of) value. It's also a bit different when a player put in a very good ~10 consecutive seasons, a la Orr, Lafleur, Bossy, etc. (although still hurting their career value substantially), compared to players that are constantly in and out of the lineup and creating disruptions for their teams (Lemieux, Lindros, Forsberg, Crosby, etc.).


Last edited by Czech Your Math: 12-16-2012 at 06:33 PM.
Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 06:50 PM
  #161
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
Maybe you missed where in my last posts I said "Forsberg was a great playoff player." If you mean he was better in the playoffs than Jagr, then I must respectfully disagree.

I don't think injuries can just be set aside. When a player misses a few games here and there... or 10-20 games in a couple seasons... yeah, that can be put aside for the most part. When a player, at his youngest and presumably healthiest, has missed > 20 games in 3/7 seasons, and isn't playing anywhere yet this season... or like Forsberg, only plays > 60 games 6 times... or like Lindros, plays more than 65 games 4 times (and not all of those in his prime)... then no, injuries can't be set aside, as they are an integral part of that player's (lack of) value. It's also a bit different when a player put in a very good ~10 consecutive seasons, a la Orr, Lafleur, Bossy, etc. (although still hurting their career value substantially), compared to players that are constantly in and out of the lineup and creating disruptions for their teams (Lemieux, Lindros, Forsberg, Crosby, etc.).
Honestly Czech, I think you're letting your Jagr bias cloud your judgement on this one.
I'm actually agreeing with Hardy on this one and that happens about as often as Hal Gill scores a goal.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:00 PM
  #162
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Honestly Czech, I think you're letting your Jagr bias cloud your judgement on this one.
I'm actually agreeing with Hardy on this one and that happens about as often as Hal Gill scores a goal.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I watched both players as well. I don't believe the data supports that Forsberg was better in his playoff prime than Jagr was in his. I think Jagr has a small edge during his playoff prime, although it might be better to just say they were about equal. The fact is that Jagr had a higher PPG during his playoff prime... as good or better adjusted plus-minus estimates (don't have as detailed of data, but that's what it appears to me). Jagr was scoring huge OT goals, leading them past teams when Lemieux was injured, and skating through an opponent in SCF which had won 11 in a row to tie the first game with 5 minutes left... all at ages when Forsberg was still in Sweden. He was helping Nylander lead in playoff PPG after two rounds and leading in playoff points/PPG himself after two rounds, in consecutive seasons... again, at ages when Forsberg wasn't even trying to play a full NHL season. In between, he had scoring and ES data that was as good or better, while leading weaker teams to 2 ECFs and upsets of #1 and #2 seeds in four separate years. He had more points during a Cup run than Forsberg ever did. His playoff PPG took a hit, since he played at younger/older ages than Forsberg ever did, and played with one arm ('01 & '06), while Forsberg took off entire seasons and playoff rounds (including two during one his two Cups). Still, he has more playoff points than non-Oiler except Brett Hull (one point behind), despite losing 1 (maybe 2?) lockout seasons, playing with mostly weak teams in his prime, and playing 3 years in the KHL. If you believe my opinion is due to bias... well, that's how you see it then. I see it as two of the great playoff players in history, and it's close, but I give the edge to Jagr for the reasons listed above.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:02 PM
  #163
Fred Taylor
The Cyclone
 
Fred Taylor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamcam4ever View Post
Only 8 players in NHL history have had a higher career PPG average than Crosby's current 1.40 at any point in their careers(Jagr isn't one of them, I know you're disappointed). Six of those played in the 80s. The career averages of those players all dropped mostly because of the decrease in scoring leaguewide, so while it's possible that Crosby's PPG drops over the next 10 years, I wouldn't count on it falling too much since his last 2 years have been his most productive even with scoring levels similar to the dead-puck era. And by the way, if you use his career adjusted PPG average, there are only 2 forwards in NHL history who have had a higher average at any time, I'll let you guess who they are.
Exactly. I don't see how he's overrated as a playmaker.

Fred Taylor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:17 PM
  #164
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamcam4ever View Post
Only 8 players in NHL history have had a higher career PPG average than Crosby's current 1.40 at any point in their careers(Jagr isn't one of them, I know you're disappointed). Six of those played in the 80s. The career averages of those players all dropped mostly because of the decrease in scoring leaguewide, so while it's possible that Crosby's PPG drops over the next 10 years, I wouldn't count on it falling too much since his last 2 years have been his most productive even with scoring levels similar to the dead-puck era. And by the way, if you use his career adjusted PPG average, there are only 2 forwards in NHL history who have had a higher average at any time, I'll let you guess who they are.
I'm actually confused by the "at any point in their career" statement, because from 93/94-02/03 (10 straight seasons) Jagr averaged 1.41 PPG and the majority of those were some pretty damned low scoring years to boot.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:54 PM
  #165
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
You're entitled to your opinion, but I watched both players as well. I don't believe the data supports that Forsberg was better in his playoff prime than Jagr was in his. I think Jagr has a small edge during his playoff prime, although it might be better to just say they were about equal. The fact is that Jagr had a higher PPG during his playoff prime... as good or better adjusted plus-minus estimates (don't have as detailed of data, but that's what it appears to me). Jagr was scoring huge OT goals, leading them past teams when Lemieux was injured, and skating through an opponent in SCF which had won 11 in a row to tie the first game with 5 minutes left... all at ages when Forsberg was still in Sweden. He was helping Nylander lead in playoff PPG after two rounds and leading in playoff points/PPG himself after two rounds, in consecutive seasons... again, at ages when Forsberg wasn't even trying to play a full NHL season. In between, he had scoring and ES data that was as good or better, while leading weaker teams to 2 ECFs and upsets of #1 and #2 seeds in four separate years. He had more points during a Cup run than Forsberg ever did. His playoff PPG took a hit, since he played at younger/older ages than Forsberg ever did, and played with one arm ('01 & '06), while Forsberg took off entire seasons and playoff rounds (including two during one his two Cups). Still, he has more playoff points than non-Oiler except Brett Hull (one point behind), despite losing 1 (maybe 2?) lockout seasons, playing with mostly weak teams in his prime, and playing 3 years in the KHL. If you believe my opinion is due to bias... well, that's how you see it then. I see it as two of the great playoff players in history, and it's close, but I give the edge to Jagr for the reasons listed above.
What are you talking about with Jagr's prime here exactly?

Forsbergs whole career in the playoffs is his prime. His plus minus on those great Avs teams really sets him apart from his teammates as well.

Jagr doesn't beat Forsberg in any PPG scenarios in the playoffs either.

That's all before the difference in their 2 way games as well.

Jagr has the better career, based on everything and staying healthy but Peter is the clear more dominant player in the playoffs.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 08:06 PM
  #166
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
What are you talking about with Jagr's prime here exactly?

Forsbergs whole career in the playoffs is his prime. His plus minus on those great Avs teams really sets him apart from his teammates as well.

Jagr doesn't beat Forsberg in any PPG scenarios in the playoffs either.

That's all before the difference in their 2 way games as well.

Jagr has the better career, based on everything and staying healthy but Peter is the clear more dominant player in the playoffs.
Forsberg career 171 Pts in 151 GP = 1.13
Jagr '92-'08 = 168 Pts in 145 GP = 1.16

Jagr's obviously separated himself from his teammates through plus-minus as well. From '92-'08, he was +36 on teams that were a cumulative -34. That means without Jagr's line (+36 * 5 players = +180), the team was ~ -43 (-34 -180 = -214... -214/5 = -43).

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 08:56 PM
  #167
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 36,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bambamcam4ever View Post
Only 8 players in NHL history have had a higher career PPG average than Crosby's current 1.40 at any point in their careers(Jagr isn't one of them, I know you're disappointed). Six of those played in the 80s. The career averages of those players all dropped mostly because of the decrease in scoring leaguewide, so while it's possible that Crosby's PPG drops over the next 10 years, I wouldn't count on it falling too much since his last 2 years have been his most productive even with scoring levels similar to the dead-puck era. And by the way, if you use his career adjusted PPG average, there are only 2 forwards in NHL history who have had a higher average at any time, I'll let you guess who they are.
All that says is that Jagr took a few extra years to get going, but once he did his production was as good or better (taking into account teammates and era), and he wasn't missing significant amounts of games either.

I know it's popular among fans of Forsberg, Crosby, Lindros, and others to emphasize stats such as PPG, but personally I actually think a player appearing in games rather than someone at replacement-level should be valued and commended.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 09:28 PM
  #168
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,481
vCash: 500
Therw are tonnes of fun players to watch nowadays. Giroux, Malkin, Datsyuk etc. But not one of them look so dominant and dangerous shift to shift as Crosby. I know the eye test is not reliable for history but for the present it's certainly useful and that's where Crosby sticks out above everyone atm for me at least. So he is the best player now and going by the assumption that today's competition is always improving, he ia comparable to almost any great from the past.

Elever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:19 PM
  #169
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
Forsberg career 171 Pts in 151 GP = 1.13
Jagr '92-'08 = 168 Pts in 145 GP = 1.16

Jagr's obviously separated himself from his teammates through plus-minus as well. From '92-'08, he was +36 on teams that were a cumulative -34. That means without Jagr's line (+36 * 5 players = +180), the team was ~ -43 (-34 -180 = -214... -214/5 = -43).
So Jagr get 39 (18-21-39) games in a higher scoring era (92-94) at least in the regular season with some really great players and the difference is .03 PPG?

Forsberg's 2 way game more than makes up for it.

Sure Jagr had many lower end team mates but here is how Peter compared to all other Avs.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

Forsberg doubles the next best guy.

Your method actually benifits Jagr from playing on weak teams (overall) and often on great lines with a defensively responsible guy like Francis as well.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 10:43 PM
  #170
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
Forsberg career 171 Pts in 151 GP = 1.13
Jagr '92-'08 = 168 Pts in 145 GP = 1.16

Jagr's obviously separated himself from his teammates through plus-minus as well. From '92-'08, he was +36 on teams that were a cumulative -34. That means without Jagr's line (+36 * 5 players = +180), the team was ~ -43 (-34 -180 = -214... -214/5 = -43).
If you're going to surgically remove two blemishes that bookend Jagr's career, why can't you do the same for Forsberg after he was traded to Nashville? At that point, he had played 139 GP at 1.17 points-per-game - with his peak seasons coming in the Dead Puck Era with five series against a team like Detroit.

Forsberg (1997-2004): 105 GP, 44 G, 127 PTS; .43 GPG, 1.21 PPG; 82 GP Pace: 34 G, 99 PTS

And he was better defensively to boot. Exactly what is the argument for Jagr here? Because he had a good series against New York in 1992 without Lemieux?

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 11:09 PM
  #171
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
If you're going to surgically remove two blemishes that bookend Jagr's career, why can't you do the same for Forsberg after he was traded to Nashville? At that point, he had played 139 GP at 1.17 points-per-game - with his peak seasons coming in the Dead Puck Era with five series against a team like Detroit.

Forsberg (1997-2004): 105 GP, 44 G, 127 PTS; .43 GPG, 1.21 PPG; 82 GP Pace: 34 G, 99 PTS

And he was better defensively to boot. Exactly what is the argument for Jagr here? Because he had a good series against New York in 1992 without Lemieux?
Just bringing this up for the "Forsberg never scored more than 30 goals in a year" crowd. He would have easily if he was in a different context. What did he lack? His shot was pretty damn good, and he had the offensive vision.

Not saying he was a 50 goal scorer or anything but like some people what if too much some people take stats at face value too much.

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 11:22 PM
  #172
od71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietCompany View Post
Therw are tonnes of fun players to watch nowadays. Giroux, Malkin, Datsyuk etc. But not one of them look so dominant and dangerous shift to shift as Crosby. I know the eye test is not reliable for history but for the present it's certainly useful and that's where Crosby sticks out above everyone atm for me at least. So he is the best player now and going by the assumption that today's competition is always improving, he ia comparable to almost any great from the past.
When he was so dominant? In 2009 when Malkin led the Pens to the Stanley Cup? Or in Vancouver 2010 when he was invisible on ice just to suddenly appear in OT of the final to score lucky goal?

od71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 11:22 PM
  #173
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Just bringing this up for the "Forsberg never scored more than 30 goals in a year" crowd. He would have easily if he was in a different context. What did he lack? His shot was pretty damn good, and he had the offensive vision.

Not saying he was a 50 goal scorer or anything but like some people what if too much some people take stats at face value too much.
What you say is true, and he has moments and series, in the playoffs and international tournaments and in Sweden and a couple of select NHL seasons where he scores at a 35 plus goal pace, his NHL resume in the regular season is that of a very good 2 way center who was a play maker first, very much in the Bobby Clarke, Igor Larinov mode.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 11:29 PM
  #174
I Am Score*
---BradD---
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,666
vCash: 500
Figuring all Crosby is a one style player, i'd say maybe. He doesn't shoot from different points in the ice but is a good passer.

Honestly I think currently Malkin is better than him. Crosby has obviously had the best career but I think there are alot of players better than him.

Datsyuk is not overrated by the way. The man has got sick hands and knows how to play the game. I'd say he is slightly underrated. When people think of the big name stars, they think Stamkos, Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Giroux, etc. No where does Datsyuk come into the picture. He's not the greatest goal scorer but sets up he play very nicely and is dangerous in the zone.

If you want to talk crazy underrated players, please go talk to Jordan Staal and Daniel Briere.

I Am Score* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 11:33 PM
  #175
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Just bringing this up for the "Forsberg never scored more than 30 goals in a year" crowd. He would have easily if he was in a different context. What did he lack? His shot was pretty damn good, and he had the offensive vision.

Not saying he was a 50 goal scorer or anything but like some people what if too much some people take stats at face value too much.
What did he lack? A reason to have to shoot more. He wasn't in the Sidney Crosby position of having linemates who couldn't hit water if they fell out of Dustin Byfuglien's boat. In the playoffs though, they didn't have time for Claude Lemieux to be snake-bitten, so if that happened (1996 and 1999), Forsberg would shoot in situations during which he would otherwise have passed. He had the hands to finish, but it was always about winning with Peter Forsberg. Like... in a way that would make Patrick Roy blush!

Colorado stood a better chance of winning with him passing to Lemieux and Hejduk. So that was his role on the team.

quoipourquoi 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 05:18 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.