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 vs Sakic

View Poll Results: Yzerman or Sakic
Stevie Y 105 45.45%
Sakic 126 54.55%
Voters: 231. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-22-2013, 02:50 PM
  #151
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
An enforcer who is good enough to play on a scoring line gives a star player more room. When Sakic had his best year, it was with Tanguay and Hedjuk.

And it's not like Yzerman always played with crap or enforcers. Wasn't John Ogrodnick (2nd Team All Star in 1985) on Yzerman's line? Gerard Gallant was a 2nd Team All Star in 1989 - didn't he play with Yzerman? Granted, Yzerman outscored Gallant 155-93 in 1989, but he's still better than the crap that people are trying to say Yzerman played with.
Gallant was a good player, no doubt about it but you should realise that Sundin outscored Sakic when Sakic had his best season for the Nords (yes he had 109 points 2 seasons before that but he was better in '94). Nords had Duchesne who was alot better back then than anything you can find on Detroit.

The emergance of Nolan, Foote, Young, Ricci, Rucinsky, Kovalenko, Kamensky.. I mean apart from a goalie and maturity they were pretty stacked.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:52 PM
  #152
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
My interpretation is that Detroit's superior offense is explained by the fact that the Red Wings consistently had better offensive defensemen. Having fast, skilled defensemen who can pass and shoot is beneficial to elite scorers like Sakic and Yzerman. There are a few ways of looking at the data, but it all tells the same story:

Your position that Sakic had more offensive help than Yzerman cannot be reconciled with the facts that Detroit was consistently the higher scoring team and had a decisive edge in offense from defensemen.

====

EDIT: Now that I've dug into the numbers a bit deeper, I no longer accept the claim that Colorado had more top-end talent (as I said in post #43). If you compare the top thirty seasons from Detroit/Colorado forwards (excluding Yzerman/Sakic) from 1989 to 2006, it's even - in both cases the top thirty forwards other than the two #19s scored exactly 2,426 points (81 points per season). This is probably a better metric than counting top ten finishes because your metric arbitrarily counts seasons where a player just barely made the (Gretzky & Lemieux adjusted) top ten (such as Forsberg in 1997) and ignores seasons where a player just barely misses the (adjusted) top ten (such as Shanahan in 2000). If someone has time they can analyze the data in other ways but, overall, this tells me the two teams had comparable top-end talent upfront.
Having better and more consistent offense from the D is one reason why the Wings were higher scoring though the biggest one is the depth past the top 2 lines. However in terms of "help" i still doubt it. The forward lines on Detroit were still rotated much more than Colorado and played more defensively than Colorado in general. This is all post 92 as well and 4 of Yzerman's best offensive years were before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Except he didn't really earn it, because he wasn't actually the league's most outstanding player - Lemiuex and Gretzky were.
k but same with Sakic in 01 then since Mario was pretty clearly the most outstanding player
also Gretzky likely had a less outstanding year than Yzerman in 89

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I don't believe that anything in this particular season could be a guarantee of more points for him. Everything went right for him, and if I was am Yzerman apologist, I wouldn't start trying to replay that season under different circumstances to see what would happen. As you already showed, that year was a massive outlier for him, and he didn't approach that again.
Everything went right for Yzerman including that the team began to tune out the coach, key players including his own linemate had off ice troubles, his wingers just dried up in the second half, and ofc the knee injury he suffered the year before still caused him pain when he was just walking.

Basically the only thing that went right was that 89 prolly saw the best and most consistent wingers on both ends that Yzerman ever saw in his prime. Which is sad. 93 comes close with just Ciccarelli but the other winger was still a problem. 88 too but even though Probert put together a great year for himself he was still an enforcer and Maclean was more skilled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
1989

yzerman: 155 (3rd)
oates: 78 (in 69 games)


2001

sakic: 119 (2nd)
forsberg: 89 (in 73 games)


there's a difference between prime forsberg and pre-prime oates, obviously. but it's not like yzerman's second line center that year was a scrub.
Yzerman had 14 points with Oates involved 13 were on the PP 1 was EV. How many points of Sakic's was Forsberg involved in 01 or other years?

Here is every point from Yzerman in 89-

GAME 1 - DET 2 LAK 8
1: YZERMAN (SHARPLES, BURR) PP (1-0)

GAME 2 - DET 3 VAN 3
5: YZERMAN (GALLANT) EV (2-3)
6: BARR (YZERMAN, FRYCER) EV (3-3)

GAME 3 - DET 2 CGY 3
2: YZERMAN (GALLANT, NORWOOD) PP (1-1)

GAME 4 - STL 8 DET 8
3: BARR (SHARPLES, YZERMAN) PP (3-0)
9: YZERMAN (MACLEAN) PP (6-3)

GAME 5 - DET 5 TOR 3
5: GRAVES (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (2-3)
8: YZERMAN (NORWOOD) EV-EN (5-3)

GAME 6 - CHI 3 DET 4
5: NORWOOD (MACLEAN, YZERMAN) EV (2-3)
6: MACLEAN (YZERMAN) EV (3-3)
7: YZERMAN () EV-OT (4-3)

GAME 7 - TOR 4 DET 2
5: NORWOOD (YZERMAN, OATES) PP (2-3)

GAME 8 - NJD 3 DET 3

GAME 9 - MTL 2 DET 4
3: YZERMAN (SHARPLES) EV (2-1)
5: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, SHARPLES) EV (3-2)
6: YZERMAN (NILL, NORWOOD) EV-EN (4-2)

GAME 10 - MIN 1 DET 4
2: CHIASSON (YZERMAN) SH (1-1)
4: GALLANT (YZERMAN) PP (3-1)

GAME 11 - DET 2 MIN 3

GAME 12 - WSH 3 DET 3
1: SHARPLES (OATES, YZERMAN) PP (1-0)
3: GALLANT (YZERMAN, ZOMBO) EV (2-1)

GAME 13 - PHI 4 DET 3
3: YZERMAN (NORWOOD) PP (1-2)
5: YZERMAN (FRYCER) EV (2-3)
6: YZERMAN (MACLEAN, GALLANT) EV (3-3)

GAME 14 - EDM 2 DET 5
5: GALLANT (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (3-2)

GAME 15 - DET 6 MIN 3
2: GALLANT (YZERMAN) EV (1-1)
6: YZERMAN (BURR, ZOMBO) EV (3-3)

GAME 16 - DET 5 PHI 4
4: YZERMAN (GALLANT, NORWOOD) PP (2-2)
6: YZERMAN (GALLANT, CHIASSON) EV (4-2)
7: YZERMAN (GALLANT, CHIASSON) EV (5-2)

GAME 17 - DET 5 NYR 3
1: YZERMAN (CHIASSON, GALLANT) EV (1-0)
5: MACLEAN (YZERMAN) EV (3-2)
8: HIGGINS (YZERMAN, NILL) EV (5-3)

GAME 18 - DET 4 HFD 3
2: GALLANT (MACLEAN, YZERMAN) EV (2-0)
3: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, GALLANT) PP (3-0)

GAME 19 - BOS 2 DET 5
1: MACLEAN (YZERMAN) EV (1-0)
4: YZERMAN (HOUDA) EV (3-1)
6: YZERMAN (MACLEAN) EV (5-1)

GAME 20 - DET 5 BOS 4
9: YZERMAN (MACLEAN, GALLANT) EV-OT (5-4)

GAME 21 - LAK 8 DET 3
6: YZERMAN (MACLEAN, GALLANT) EV (1-5)
8: YZERMAN (OATES, MACLEAN) PP (2-6)

GAME 22 - WPG 3 DET 6
3: YZERMAN (MACLEAN) EV (3-0)

GAME 23 - WSH 4 DET 3
1: CHIASSON (YZERMAN) SH (1-0)
5: KLIMA (YZERMAN) EV (2-3)
7: YZERMAN 23 (O'CONNELL, BURR) SH (3-4)

GAME 24 - NYI 3 DET 5
1: YZERMAN (GALLANT, MACLEAN) EV (1-0)
2: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, GALLANT) PP (2-0)
4: YZERMAN (GALLANT) EV (3-1)
8: GALLANT (YZERMAN) EV-EN (5-3)

GAME 25 - QUE 3 DET 7
1: SHARPLES (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (1-0)
7: CHIASSON (YZERMAN, FRYCER) EV (5-2)
9: YZERMAN (CHIASSON) EV (6-3)

GAME 26 - DET 4 QUE 6
1: YZERMAN (HOUDA, CHIASSON) EV (1-0)
4: GALLANT (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (3-1)

GAME 27 - DET 2 MTL 7
1: YZERMAN (OATES) PP (1-0)

GAME 28 - TOR 3 DET 4
5: GALLANT (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (3-2)

GAME 29 - DET 8 TOR 2
4: GALLANT (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (3-1)
6: FRYCER (YZERMAN, CHIASSON) PP (4-2)
7: BARR (YZERMAN) SH (5-2)
10: YZERMAN (O'CONNELL) PP (8-2)

GAME 30 - MIN 4 DET 5
1: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) PP (1-0)
9: MACLEAN (PROBERT, YZERMAN) EV (5-4)

GAME 31 - LAK 6 DET 4
1: MACLEAN (ZOMBO, YZERMAN) EV (1-0)
6: ZOMBO (YZERMAN, GALLANT) PP (3-3)
9: YZERMAN (O'CONNELL) EV (4-5)

GAME 32 - DET 2 PIT 3
1: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) EV (1-0)
3: YZERMAN (MURPHY, MACLEAN) PP (2-1)

GAME 33 - STL 3 DET 6
3: GALLANT (YZERMAN) PP (1-2)
6: MACLEAN (CHIASSON, YZERMAN) PP (3-3)
7: YZERMAN (MURPHY, NILL) EV (4-3)
8: GALLANT (YZERMAN, NORWOOD) PP (5-3)

GAME 34 - DET 4 STL 4
2: NORWOOD (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (1-1)
5: CHIASSON (YZERMAN) EV (2-3)
7: YZERMAN (DELORME) EV (3-4)
8: YZERMAN (NORWOOD) PP (4-4)

GAME 35 - DET 2 CHI 7
4: MACLEAN (DELORME, YZERMAN) EV (1-3)

GAME 36 - DET 1 BUF 4
1: YZERMAN (MACLEAN, GALLANT) PP (1-0)

GAME 37 - DET 3 HFD 4
2: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) EV (1-1)
3: YZERMAN (GALLANT) EV (2-1)
4: MACLEAN (CHIASSON, YZERMAN) EV (3-1)

GAME 38 - HFD 3 DET 2
2: BARR (YZERMAN, CHIASSON) SH (1-1)
4: YZERMAN (PAVESE, GALLANT) EV (2-2)

GAME 39 - STL 2 DET 4
2: GALLANT (CHIASSON, YZERMAN) PP (1-1)
6: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) EV (4-2)

GAME 40 - VAN 2 DET 2

GAME 41 - DET 2 NJD 5
6: YZERMAN (OATES, NORWOOD) PP (1-5)

GAME 42 - MTL 2 DET 3
2: YZERMAN (MACLEAN, CHIASSON) EV (1-1)

GAME 43 - DET 2 CHI 2

GAME 44 - DET 5 BOS 5
3: YZERMAN () EV (1-2)
4: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, OATES) PP (2-2)
5: BARR (GRAVES, YZERMAN) EV (3-2)
6: YZERMAN (BARR, PAVESE) EV (4-2)
9: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, SHARPLES) EV (5-4)

GAME 45 - DET 8 PHI 4
1: MACLEAN (YZERMAN) EV (1-0)
2: MACLEAN (YZERMAN) EV (2-0)
3: GRAVES (BARR, YZERMAN) EV (3-0)
9: YZERMAN (NORWOOD) SH (8-1)

GAME 46 - CGY 7 DET 1

GAME 47 - CHI 3 DET 2
4: KLIMA (YZERMAN) EV (1-3)

GAME 48 - DET 4 WSH 3
1: GALLANT (YZERMAN, NILL) EV (1-0)
3: YZERMAN (GALLANT) EV (2-1)

GAME 49 - BUF 6 DET 3
1: YZERMAN (GALLANT, KOCUR) PP (1-0)
6: KOCUR (ZOMBO, YZERMAN) PP (2-4)

GAME 50 - TOR 1 DET 8
2: GALLANT (YZERMAN) EV (2-0)
7: YZERMAN (NORWOOD, GALLANT) PP (6-1)
8: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) PP (7-1)

GAME 51 - DET 5 PIT 10
1: CHIASSON (HOUDA, YZERMAN) EV (1-0)
8: YZERMAN (CHIASSON, HOUDA) EV (4-4)

GAME 52 - QUE 4 DET 3
1: GALLANT (CHIASSON, YZERMAN) PP (1-0)
6: OATES (KRENTZ, YZERMAN) PP (2-4)
7: BURR (YZERMAN, CHIASSON) EV (3-4)

GAME 53 - DET 2 CGY 3
1: YZERMAN (BURR) EV (1-0)
2: GALLANT (YZERMAN, CHIASSON) PP (2-0)

GAME 54 - DET 5 EDM 8
5: YZERMAN (CHIASSON) EV (2-3)

GAME 55 - DET 6 WPG 2
1: GALLANT (YZERMAN, SHARPLES) EV (1-0)
5: YZERMAN (MACLEAN) EV (4-1)
6: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, GALLANT) EV (5-1)
7: YZERMAN (CHIASSON, BURR) EV (6-1)

GAME 56 - NJD 6 DET 3
3: BURR (YZERMAN, O'CONNELL) EV (2-1)

GAME 57 - DET 5 MIN 1
1: GALLANT (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (1-0)
4: NILL (YZERMAN, ZOMBO) EV (3-1)
6: YZERMAN (GALLANT, MACLEAN) EV (5-1)

GAME 58 - WPG 2 DET 2
2: YZERMAN () PP-PS (2-0)

GAME 59 - MIN 2 DET 4

GAME 60 - CHI 5 DET 3
2: GALLANT (YZERMAN, OATES) PP (1-1)

GAME 61 - DET 4 BUF 8
8: YZERMAN (HANLON) EV (3-5)

GAME 62 - DET 6 NYI 5
3: BARR (YZERMAN, HIGGINS) EV (2-1)
9: YZERMAN () EV (5-4)
11: YZERMAN (MACLEAN, PAVESE) EV (6-5)

GAME 63 - PIT 6 DET 6
8: YZERMAN (NORWOOD) EV (2-6)
9: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) EV (3-6)
11: NORWOOD (YZERMAN, GALLANT) PP (5-6)
12: YZERMAN (GALLANT, MACLEAN) EV (6-6)

GAME 64 - CHI 0 DET 5
2: HOUDA (YZERMAN, GALLANT) EV (2-0)
3: YZERMAN (CHABOT) SH (3-0)

GAME 65 - DET 4 CHI 4
3: NILL (YZERMAN) EV (2-1)
5: YZERMAN (GALLANT, NORWOOD) EV (3-2)

GAME 66 - NYI 5 DET 6
1: CHIASSON (OATES, YZERMAN) PP (1-0)
5: GALLANT (YZERMAN, MACLEAN) EV (3-2)
9: YZERMAN (CHIASSON, GALLANT) EV (6-3)

GAME 67 - DET 5 STL 4

GAME 68 - DET 3 MIN 5
3: MACLEAN (GALLANT, YZERMAN) EV (1-2)
8: BARR (OATES, YZERMAN) PP (3-5)

GAME 69 - NYR 2 DET 3
2: BARR (YZERMAN, NORWOOD) EV (1-1)
4: CHIASSON (OATES, YZERMAN) PP (2-2)

GAME 70 - DET 3 TOR 5

GAME 71 - DET 2 VAN 2
2: YZERMAN (BARR) EV (1-1)
2: OATES (YZERMAN, NORWOOD) EV (2-1)

GAME 72 - DET 8 EDM 6
2: YZERMAN (GALLANT) EV (2-0)
6: CHIASSON (YZERMAN, HOUDA) EV (3-3)
8: GALLANT (YZERMAN, BARR) PP (4-4)
11: CHABOT (YZERMAN, ZOMBO) SH (6-5)
13: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, GALLANT) EV (7-6)
14: YZERMAN (GALLANT, NORWOOD) EV (8-6)

GAME 73 - DET 2 STL 3
2: KLIMA (YZERMAN, CHIASSON) PP (1-1)

GAME 74 - DET 3 CHI 5
1: MACLEAN (CHIASSON, YZERMAN) PP (1-0)

GAME 75 - TOR 2 DET 6
1: GALLANT (YZERMAN, HOUDA) EV (1-0)
3: NORWOOD (BARR, YZERMAN) EV (2-1)
4: MACLEAN (YZERMAN, OATES) PP (3-1)

GAME 76 - DET 5 TOR 6
3: YZERMAN (GALLANT, NORWOOD) PP (1-2)
4: GALLANT (O'CONNELL, YZERMAN) EV (2-2)

GAME 77 - STL 3 DET 2

GAME 78 - NYR 3 DET 4
4: FEDYK (YZERMAN, GALLANT) EV (3-1)

GAME 79 - MIN 5 DET 1

GAME 80 - DET 2 STL 4
5: YZERMAN (OATES) PP (2-3)

BTW there is one extra EV point and one less PP point so i could have made a mistake in tabulating or THN may have been wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
Teammate card?

Yzerman played on teams with Fedorov, Shanahan, Coffey, Lidstrom, Hull, Robitaille, Sheppard, Ciccarelli, Primeau, Murphy, Chelios, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and others on them throughout his career.
Ok so how many of these guys helped Yzerman put up big numbers in his early career? Fedorov maybe a bit but it isnt like Feds was a consistent winger. Lidstrom maybe in 92 (not 93) though id argue that Lidstrom's point totals were helped by Yzerman/Fedorov MUCH more than the other way around. Coffey yeah for the last 30 games of 93 and Coffey didnt see much of an increase in his own scoring remaining at PPG anyway. Ciccarelli in 93 yes. Sheppard for the second part of 92 and then in the second part of 94 and thats really it and Sakic's wingers in his prime were better than Sheppard anyway.

By the mid 90s though Yzerman had help and got it on the PP especially the team played much more defensively as a whole. It isnt like he was able to take advantage of playing offensively in more situations with them nearly as much as Sakic was with his help.

for putting Primeau on the list

Even in 93 when Detroit actually had a stacked offensive powerhouse Yzerman absolutely crushed his teammates in scoring. 40 points above Ciccarelli and 50 above Fedorov.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
But Fedorov... that guy probably took points away from Yzerman, right?
So Fedorov might have played more with Yzerman actually on his line than Forsberg did with Sakic because in 91 and 92 sometimes Fedorov would be placed on Yzerman's wing to get Fedorov or Yzerman going and in 94 Yzerman played on either Primeau's or Fedorov's wing when returning because he still couldnt take faceoffs. In terms of PP though it seems that Sakic just got a larger proportion of his points on PP than Yzerman in his prime so since Forsberg/Sakic definitely played on the PP together a lot...

Then ofc you have the fact that Forsberg in 96 or 01 is clearly better than Fedorov in 91/92 offensively. It is closer in 93 and 94 but still Forsberg was pretty consistent offensively throughout his career whereas Fedorov only showed his max ability when he got the role, cast, and usage in the mid 90s.

And the fact of the matter is it wasnt having two 1C that cut back Yzerman's scoring as much as it was having 3. Not surprising why Yzerman's scoring explodes when Carson leaves halfway through 93.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
An enforcer who is good enough to play on a scoring line gives a star player more room. When Sakic had his best year, it was with Tanguay and Hedjuk.

And it's not like Yzerman always played with crap or enforcers. Wasn't John Ogrodnick (2nd Team All Star in 1985) on Yzerman's line? Gerard Gallant was a 2nd Team All Star in 1989 - didn't he play with Yzerman? Granted, Yzerman outscored Gallant 155-93 in 1989, but he's still better than the crap that people are trying to say Yzerman played with.
So youre right that Gallant was a good linemate for Yzerman. He brought consistency, chemistry, was scrappy, and while not super talented was hard working. Better linemate than Hejduk/Tanguay? No but not far behind and compares favorably to a guy like Deadmarsh. But Gallant was basically finished after 90 due to his back injuries and that lack of a consistent winger was pretty big on Yzerman.

Probert like mentioned before was only there in 88. And at least Probert could play cause Kocur couldnt. As for enforcers bringing Yzerman space maybe but it isnt like the way Yzerman played was not the biggest factor in him getting more space. By all accounts he played like a Crosby or St Louis and agressively initiated contact to get room. He wasnt like Sakic in this regard. And it seems like ppl have pointed out that Sakic had big guys/enforcers playing with him as well so...

Gallant himself says "The best thing about him was that he wasn't a guy who was just going to play the middle of the ice. He'd forecheck and work in the corners. It wasn't like he thought 'I'm the superstar on this line, so get me the puck.' He bumped, he banged, he worked both ends of the rink."



Ogrodnick may have been able to finish for Yzerman but he wasnt a good linemate for him. He was one of those guys on the mid 80s Red Wings who had a repuation for being selfish and had a very incentive based contract. There were rumors that he was upset with Yzerman for shooting too much and not passing to him enough. Not exactly the role models that Sakic had when he came into the league. And what happened to his play in 86 anyway when Yzerman had a poor start and got injured? This is all before Yzerman's prime anyway.


Last edited by toob: 02-22-2013 at 06:07 PM.
toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:54 PM
  #153
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Only compared to what Sakic had in his best years.
Under that light, it was indeed "crap".
Were Tanguay and Hejduk really much better than Gallant?

I realize he got to play with Forsberg on the powerplay, but two superstar centers sharing ice time on the same team is a recipe for less, not more, even strength production from each one, IMO. And yes, this applies to Yzerman too after Fedorov got going.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 07:51 PM
  #154
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Were Tanguay and Hejduk really much better than Gallant?
Yes!

Quote:
I realize he got to play with Forsberg on the powerplay, but two superstar centers sharing ice time on the same team is a recipe for less, not more, even strength production from each one, IMO. And yes, this applies to Yzerman too after Fedorov got going.
By the time Fed's got going, Yzerman was already past his prime and had just suffered the biggest injuries of his career. Injuries that would affect him the rest of the way.

Bottomline...Yzerman, with little help, carried a bad team with horrible goaltending kicking and screaming into the playoffs most years.
Sakic could not do the same for his bad team.
Neither would win the Cup until their teams were complimented but Stevie's success prior to being on a good or great team far exceeds Sakic's success(or lack of) in the same.

I'm sorry but like I said previously, if Stevie doesn't go down in 93/94 with the injuries that slowed him permanently. We aren't even having this conversation.
It's the only reason Joe makes up ground on Stevie to the point where it's so close IMO.
My slight edge still goes to Stevie Wonder.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 08:51 PM
  #155
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 5,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Bottomline...Yzerman, with little help, carried a bad team with horrible goaltending kicking and screaming into the playoffs most years.
Sakic could not do the same for his bad team.
Divisional playoff system, Rhiessan.


Minimum Points to Make the Playoffs

Norris
1984: 68
1985: 62
1986: 57
1987: 70
1988: 52
1989: 66
1990: 76
1991: 68
1992: 70
1993: 85

Adams
1989: 79
1990: 85
1991: 73
1992: 65
1993: 86

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 01:52 AM
  #156
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
k but same with Sakic in 01 then since Mario was pretty clearly the most outstanding player
Not for 43 games.

Quote:
also Gretzky likely had a less outstanding year than Yzerman in 89
There is simply no basis for saying that. Gretzky clearly made a massive impact in LA's fortunes.

Quote:
Everything went right for Yzerman including that the team began to tune out the coach, key players including his own linemate had off ice troubles, his wingers just dried up in the second half, and ofc the knee injury he suffered the year before still caused him pain when he was just walking.

Basically the only thing that went right was that 89 prolly saw the best and most consistent wingers on both ends that Yzerman ever saw in his prime. Which is sad. 93 comes close with just Ciccarelli but the other winger was still a problem. 88 too but even though Probert put together a great year for himself he was still an enforcer and Maclean was more skilled.
What's your point?

All the factors you named, in their own ways, contributed to Yzerman outscoring his 2nd best season by a considerable margin. There's no "alternate reality" where he scores more. 1989 was that alternate reality!

Quote:
So Fedorov might have played more with Yzerman actually on his line than Forsberg did with Sakic because in 91 and 92 sometimes Fedorov would be placed on Yzerman's wing to get Fedorov or Yzerman going and in 94 Yzerman played on either Primeau's or Fedorov's wing when returning because he still couldnt take faceoffs. In terms of PP though it seems that Sakic just got a larger proportion of his points on PP than Yzerman in his prime so since Forsberg/Sakic definitely played on the PP together a lot...

Then ofc you have the fact that Forsberg in 96 or 01 is clearly better than Fedorov in 91/92 offensively. It is closer in 93 and 94 but still Forsberg was pretty consistent offensively throughout his career whereas Fedorov only showed his max ability when he got the role, cast, and usage in the mid 90s.

And the fact of the matter is it wasnt having two 1C that cut back Yzerman's scoring as much as it was having 3. Not surprising why Yzerman's scoring explodes when Carson leaves halfway through 93.
wow... so basically what I said, then?

If Fedorov played with Yzerman, that's a level of support Sakic never had. And of course, Sakic never needed a comparable talent put on his line to "get him going". Carson was not a #1 center as of 1993. Detroit was an excellent team. Look what happened to his stats after he left Detroit. And even if this was some sort of legitimate "excuse", 1993 is the only season it really comes close to explaining. Did the wings have three arguable #1 centers at any other time?

So youre right that Gallant was a good linemate for Yzerman. He brought consistency, chemistry, was scrappy, and while not super talented was hard working. Better linemate than Hejduk/Tanguay? No but not far behind and compares favorably to a guy like Deadmarsh. But Gallant was basically finished after 90 due to his back injuries and that lack of a consistent winger was pretty big on Yzerman.

Probert like mentioned before was only there in 88. And at least Probert could play cause Kocur couldnt. As for enforcers bringing Yzerman space maybe but it isnt like the way Yzerman played was not the biggest factor in him getting more space. By all accounts he played like a Crosby or St Louis and agressively initiated contact to get room. He wasnt like Sakic in this regard. And it seems like ppl have pointed out that Sakic had big guys/enforcers playing with him as well so...

Gallant himself says "The best thing about him was that he wasn't a guy who was just going to play the middle of the ice. He'd forecheck and work in the corners. It wasn't like he thought 'I'm the superstar on this line, so get me the puck.' He bumped, he banged, he worked both ends of the rink."



Ogrodnick may have been able to finish for Yzerman but he wasnt a good linemate for him. He was one of those guys on the mid 80s Red Wings who had a repuation for being selfish and had a very incentive based contract. There were rumors that he was upset with Yzerman for shooting too much and not passing to him enough. Not exactly the role models that Sakic had when he came into the league. And what happened to his play in 86 anyway when Yzerman had a poor start and got injured? This is all before Yzerman's prime anyway.[/QUOTE]

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Divisional playoff system, Rhiessan.


Minimum Points to Make the Playoffs

Norris
1984: 68
1985: 62
1986: 57
1987: 70
1988: 52
1989: 66
1990: 76
1991: 68
1992: 70
1993: 85

Adams
1989: 79
1990: 85
1991: 73
1992: 65
1993: 86
Thanks for pointing this out.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 02:47 AM
  #157
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Not for 43 games.
number of games has nothing to do with who was the most outstanding player
clearly Mario in terms of play and story

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
There is simply no basis for saying that. Gretzky clearly made a massive impact in LA's fortunes.
tons of basis actually
first you have Yzerman's own impact on keeping Detroit from completely collapsing
second you have Yzerman outplaying Gretzky

What's your point?

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
All the factors you named, in their own ways, contributed to Yzerman outscoring his 2nd best season by a considerable margin. There's no "alternate reality" where he scores more. 1989 was that alternate reality!
lol yes having a hurt knee DID help Yzerman score so much more than ever before as did NOT having Klima and Probert and the lack of support from the D as compared to before

and actually something cant be an alternate reality if it happened

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
wow... so basically what I said, then?

If Fedorov played with Yzerman, that's a level of support Sakic never had. And of course, Sakic never needed a comparable talent put on his line to "get him going". Carson was not a #1 center as of 1993. Detroit was an excellent team. Look what happened to his stats after he left Detroit. And even if this was some sort of legitimate "excuse", 1993 is the only season it really comes close to explaining. Did the wings have three arguable #1 centers at any other time?
No youre missing the entire point. 91/92/93 Fedorov is simply not as helpful offensively to Yzerman as 96/01 Forsberg was to Sakic. Thats pretty clear not to mention that Sakic relied on the PP (and so Forsberg) for a bigger proportion of his stats than Yzerman did for his. Oh and obviously Sakic could never get going like Yzerman could and prolly not even like Fedorov at his best could so there was no need to bother trying.

Carson wasnt a #1C in 93? Ok well he seemed to be one in 92 when he was leading the team in scoring for the first third of the year playing with the best scoring winger the team had. Add to that 91. And yes you could even say Yzerman/Fedorov/Larionov was another time when there were 3 arguable 1Cs on the same team and not many would contest that the line rolling hurt the Wings' personal stats in the late 90s. It isnt an "excuse" it was a reason stated by Red Wings coach and EACH of the 3 centers themselves that scoring was distributed more evenly. And 93 isnt the only year also 92 and 91 when Fedorov and Carson were also there!

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:04 AM
  #158
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
number of games has nothing to do with who was the most outstanding player
clearly Mario in terms of play and story
so... you're going on record as saying you'd have voted for Mario for the Pearson, then?

Quote:
tons of basis actually
first you have Yzerman's own impact on keeping Detroit from completely collapsing
second you have Yzerman outplaying Gretzky
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect!

Quote:
lol yes having a hurt knee DID help Yzerman score so much more than ever before as did NOT having Klima and Probert and the lack of support from the D as compared to before

and actually something cant be an alternate reality if it happened
Oh, so his knee was so hurt that he vastly outscored any other season he ever put up, so the argument goes that if it wasn't hurt and if he had superstar Petr Klima (career high 68 points) then he'd have scored... 180, 190 points?

Quote:
No youre missing the entire point. 91/92/93 Fedorov is simply not as helpful offensively to Yzerman as 96/01 Forsberg was to Sakic. Thats pretty clear not to mention that Sakic relied on the PP (and so Forsberg) for a bigger proportion of his stats than Yzerman did for his. Oh and obviously Sakic could never get going like Yzerman could and prolly not even like Fedorov at his best could so there was no need to bother trying.
LOL, sorry I wouldn't have bothered with all this if I knew you were just trying to be funny.

Quote:
Carson wasnt a #1C in 93? Ok well he seemed to be one in 92 when he was leading the team in scoring for the first third of the year playing with the best scoring winger the team had. Add to that 91. And yes you could even say Yzerman/Fedorov/Larionov was another time when there were 3 arguable 1Cs on the same team and not many would contest that the line rolling hurt the Wings' personal stats in the late 90s. It isnt an "excuse" it was a reason stated by Red Wings coach and EACH of the 3 centers themselves that scoring was distributed more evenly. And 93 isnt the only year also 92 and 91 when Fedorov and Carson were also there!
This was all very funny. Thank you.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:14 AM
  #159
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 730
vCash: 500
Yzerman > Sakic

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:16 AM
  #160
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Divisional playoff system, Rhiessan.


Minimum Points to Make the Playoffs

Norris
1984: 68
1985: 62
1986: 57
1987: 70
1988: 52
1989: 66
1990: 76
1991: 68
1992: 70
1993: 85

Adams
1989: 79
1990: 85
1991: 73
1992: 65
1993: 86
1989: 66 - Nords 61
1990: 76 - 31
1991: 68 - 46
1992: 70 - 52
1993: 85 - 104

Nords wouldnt have been better of in the Norris division anyway.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:18 AM
  #161
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
1989: 66 - Nords 61
1990: 76 - 31
1991: 68 - 46
1992: 70 - 52
1993: 85 - 104

Nords wouldnt have been better of in the Norris division anyway.
Thanks for pointing this out.





toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:33 AM
  #162
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
1989: 66 - Nords 61
1990: 76 - 31
1991: 68 - 46
1992: 70 - 52
1993: 85 - 104

Nords wouldnt have been better of in the Norris division anyway.
of course they would be.... anyone would be. With fewer games against Montreal and Boston, and more against the Leafs and Stars, any team would fare better.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:57 AM
  #163
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
of course they would be.... anyone would be. With fewer games against Montreal and Boston, and more against the Leafs and Stars, any team would fare better.
Not THAT much better.
Those Nord teams were pretty horrible defensively. If the more conservative teams in the Adams and the Eastern conference in general were lighting up the Nords like that. What happens if they have to play a lot more games against the much higher flying teams of the west?
They only get worse.

That's a 6 point gap in '89
A whopping 45 points in '90
22 points in '91
18 points in '92

Bad argument imo.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 04:05 AM
  #164
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 5,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
1989: 66 - Nords 61
1990: 76 - 31
1991: 68 - 46
1992: 70 - 52
1993: 85 - 104

Nords wouldnt have been better of in the Norris division anyway.
1984: Detroit's 69 points wouldn't have been enough to qualify for the playoffs in any other division. Even the team that finished ahead of Detroit, the St. Louis Blues, would have been out of luck in any other division.

1985: Detroit's 66 points would have left them out of the playoffs in both the Adams and the Smythe Divisions - where the cutoff is 82 points.

1986: Detroit has the worst team in the league.

1987: Detroit makes the playoffs by playing in the only division without three 80-point teams. In fact, the Norris Division features zero 80-point teams.

1988: Detroit goes 9-4-3 without Yzerman. Then they won two rounds without Yzerman.

1989: For 32 of their 80 games, the Nordiques face the Canadiens (115), Bruins (88), Sabres (83), and Whalers (79) - while the Red Wings win the Norris with 80 points (just 1 more than the fourth-placed Whalers). You think the Nordiques wouldn't have been better off going to war against a division where the best team is about as good as the fourth-best team of the one they were in? Detroit wouldn't have made the playoffs in the Adams if they switched places with Quebec, because they would've been playing two of the best teams in the league for 16 games.

1990: Detroit wouldn't have made the playoffs in any division.

1991: Detroit gets 76 points in the Norris while Hartford takes the final spot in the Adams with 73. Philadelphia misses the playoffs with 76 points and a better goal differential than Detroit, because they play in the Patrick Division.

1992: For the first time in Yzerman's career, neither the division nor the team's success without him can take away from the claim that he "carried a bad team with horrible goaltending kicking and screaming into the playoffs." And hey, isn't that Nicklas Lidstrom and Sergei Fedorov?

quoipourquoi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 04:40 AM
  #165
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
of course they would be.... anyone would be. With fewer games against Montreal and Boston, and more against the Leafs and Stars, any team would fare better.
Nords record vs. Norris.

89 - 4-10-1
90 - 2-13-0
91 - 2-11-2
92 - 3-10-1
93 - 6-6-2

So you are saying that they would magically improve this record?

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 03:48 PM
  #166
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 730
vCash: 500
Just like Yzerman magically got more help with his stats in his best years with Fedorov/Oates then Sakic with Forsberg in his best.

Yzerman
89 (Oates) 1EV 13PP 0SH 14/155 9%
93 (Fedorov) 6EV 3PP 1SH 10/137 7.3%

Sakic
96 (Forsberg) 1EV 19PP 2SH 22/120 18.3%
01 (Forsberg) 6EV 23PP 3SH 32/118 27.1%

Oates 89 69GP 78P 1.13PPG, 77 points behind Yzerman
Fedorov 93 73 GP 87P 1.19PPG 50 points behind Yzerman
Forsberg 96 82GP 116P 1.41PPG, 4 points behind Sakic
Forsberg 01 73GP 89P 1.22PPG, 29 points behind Sakic

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 05:02 PM
  #167
habsfanatics*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
Just like Yzerman magically got more help with his stats in his best years with Fedorov/Oates then Sakic with Forsberg in his best.

Yzerman
89 (Oates) 1EV 13PP 0SH 14/155 9%
93 (Fedorov) 6EV 3PP 1SH 10/137 7.3%

Sakic
96 (Forsberg) 1EV 19PP 2SH 22/120 18.3%
01 (Forsberg) 6EV 23PP 3SH 32/118 27.1%

Oates 89 69GP 78P 1.13PPG, 77 points behind Yzerman
Fedorov 93 73 GP 87P 1.19PPG 50 points behind Yzerman
Forsberg 96 82GP 116P 1.41PPG, 4 points behind Sakic
Forsberg 01 73GP 89P 1.22PPG, 29 points behind Sakic
Seems like a lot of revisionism going on in here to be completely honest. Yzerman and Fedorov never even played with each other while they both at their best. Sakic had way more help from his line mates. Debating this is silly imo.

habsfanatics* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 07:23 PM
  #168
tjcurrie
Registered User
 
tjcurrie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gibbons, Alberta
Posts: 3,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
of course they would be.... anyone would be. With fewer games against Montreal and Boston, and more against the Leafs and Stars, any team would fare better.
You watch your mouth!

tjcurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 09:16 PM
  #169
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Nords record vs. Norris.

89 - 4-10-1
90 - 2-13-0
91 - 2-11-2
92 - 3-10-1
93 - 6-6-2

So you are saying that they would magically improve this record?
Nothing more than a small sample anomaly. The teams in the Norris were typically Much worse. Everyone knew that.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 09:18 PM
  #170
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjcurrie View Post
You watch your mouth!
Hey, thanks for getting only 51 points in 1988, allowing us to get into the playoffs with 52!

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 09:31 PM
  #171
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Nothing more than a small sample anomaly. The teams in the Norris were typically Much worse. Everyone knew that.
Seventies...that's not really a small sample size, that's 5 years man and it seems to clearly show that while the there were teams in the Norris that were bad, the Nords were clearly even worse.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 10:39 PM
  #172
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,622
vCash: 500
The Nords were absolutely awful early in Sakic's career.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2013, 08:05 AM
  #173
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Nothing more than a small sample anomaly. The teams in the Norris were typically Much worse. Everyone knew that.
Since when is a losing record 4 years in a row an anomaly?

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2013, 08:10 AM
  #174
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
The Nords were absolutely awful early in Sakic's career.
Yes, the first two or three years... Then they had a nice core in place but were to your to consistantly compete but by then Sakic had good linemates like Sundin, Nolan and later on a good supports cast on defense led by Duchesne.

It took 7 or 8 years for Yzerman to get something similiar.

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2013, 10:51 AM
  #175
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
There is simply no basis for saying that. Gretzky clearly made a massive impact in LA's fortunes.
So much more outstanding that Yzerman outscored him at even strength while being his team's primary checking forward. Gretzky also played on a team which featured a second line that had the 4th and 5th best even strength scorers; both of whom would join him on the team's #1 PP unit.

But go ahead and say Gretzky was more outstanding.

Quote:
All the factors you named, in their own ways, contributed to Yzerman outscoring his 2nd best season by a considerable margin. There's no "alternate reality" where he scores more. 1989 was that alternate reality!
Ok, and you're saying Sakic's best season wasn't hugely separated from the rest of his career? I wouldn't expect 1998 Sakic to put up 2001.

wow... so basically what I said, then?

Quote:
If Fedorov played with Yzerman, that's a level of support Sakic never had. And of course, Sakic never needed a comparable talent put on his line to "get him going". Carson was not a #1 center as of 1993. Detroit was an excellent team. Look what happened to his stats after he left Detroit. And even if this was some sort of legitimate "excuse", 1993 is the only season it really comes close to explaining. Did the wings have three arguable #1 centers at any other time?
Carson and Fedorov eating away at Yzerman's time (the attempt to run three scoring lines when they only had the parts for two) and taking wingers also reduced his numbers in 90-91 and 91-92. If the Carson trade was never made, Yzerman's prime would look far more impressive statistically.

pdd 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 07:27 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.