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.

Yzerman vs Sakic

View Poll Results: Yzerman or Sakic
Stevie Y 65 41.40%
Sakic 92 58.60%
Voters: 157. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-25-2013, 11:43 AM
  #201
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 28,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
By the mid-1990s? The Red Wings were the #1 seed in 1991-92, and they stayed in the mid-90 to 100+ pace for points every year after that (106-point average). He "could only dream of" having a great Cup run at 26? He was on the #2 team in the entire league - the same as Sakic in 1996. Look at the six playoffs leading up to Yzerman's Conn Smythe in 1998:

Yzerman (ages 26-31)
74 GP, 27-37-64, -3
14th in Playoff Scoring
35th in Playoff Points-Per-Game (min. 20 GP)

I mean, he's not bad prior to 1998, but he's certainly nothing special as a playoff performer even when he had a great team, and in fact had better numbers when he was on a bad team (47 points in 39 games prior to 1992). He was a 1.26 point-per-game player in the regular season at this time, but fell to 0.86 despite having home-ice in all but two playoff series in those six years (1997 WCF and 1997 SCF). His 1998 and 2002 certainly add to his overall playoff value, but let's not pretend that he didn't have the opportunity to run up some offensive numbers on some good Red Wings teams.
Okay, early 90s not mid. Yzerman's past his prime when the Wings start winning cups. Unfortunate but Yzerman's best years were wasted on garbage teams.

That's all I'm saying man. If you're looking at it objectively and not trying to win a debate.. It's not really fair to point to Sakic and say look how much better he was in the playoffs... Sakic has a couple of big runs in his prime that Yzerman could only dream of. And other than those big runs it's very even.

Apples to apples. No seasons included where one guy didn't play in postseason.

Age 23: Yzerman has 10 in 6. Sakic has 6 points in 6.
Age 25: Yzerman has 6 in 7. Sakic has 5 in points in 6.
Age 26: Yzerman has 8 in 11. Sakic has 34 in 22. (cup)
Age 27: Yzerman has 7 in 7. Sakic has 25 in 17.
Age 28: Yzerman has 4 in 3. Sakic has 5 in 6.
Age 29: Yzerman has 12 in 15. Sakic has 19 in 19.
Age 30: Yzerman has 20 in 18. Sakic has 9 in 17.
Age 31: Yzerman has 13 in 20. (cup) Sakic has 26 in 21. (cup)
Age 32: Yzerman has 24 in 22. (cup) Sakic has 19 in 21.
Age 33: Yzerman has 13 in 10. Sakic has 9 in 7.
Age 34: Yzerman has 4 in 8. Sakic has 12 in 11.
Age 36: Yzerman has 23 in 23. (cup) Sakic has 9 in 9.
Age 38: Yzerman has 5 in 11. Sakic has 10 in 10.

It's not a huge difference man. Sakic has two great runs when he's younger but Yzerman is on crappy teams at that time. Both guys are pretty good in the playoffs but Sakic has the good fortune to play on better teams earlier on and Yzerman has deep playoff runs past his prime.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 01:09 PM
  #202
SoupNazi
Global Moderator
No Soup for You!!!
 
SoupNazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Kramerica Industries
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,168
vCash: 526
Yzerman.

SoupNazi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 02:36 PM
  #203
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't know what kind of debates you've had in regards to Trottier or whoever...


That's right. He's in his early 20s and in his prime by the time he gets there. This also helps him when you look at postseason totals.

How the hell can we possibly know this? He has his best season when he's in his early 20s and he's on awful teams. There's absolutely no way to know this. For Pete's sake the guy has 10 points in 6 games in '89. That comes out to 36 points over 22 games... two better than Sakic's season.

So don't sit there and try to tell us that he couldn't have had a better run because on a point per game basis he actually did. Too bad he had Greg Hanlon in net and crap for teammates.

It's not an excuse, it's the reality of the situation. You can't have one guy on a terrible team during the majority of his best years and the other guy on great teams and then point to playoff success.

I think Joe Sakic was wicked. I'm not going to try to tear the guy down at all. But if you flip the teams around and when they come into the league it's a totally different situation.
No it is a legit point, your hero guy lafluer will never have his playoff resume shredded apart because he played on stacked teams in a completely diluted league, but you will rip sakic's because he had a reliable 2nd line center. Your just a hypocrite. Sakic had 3 different playoff runs where he had the best ppg and, hes the better playoff performer. Sakic was 27 in 1996 and 32 in 2001, what early 20's cup runs are talking about?

Look your not going to be able to answer the question and give yzerman a case for being the better playoff performer because he simply isnt. Yeah go ahead and brag about yzerman's production in 6 games, in a season that averaged 7.4 goals per game, nice way to respond to a 34 point playoff run in a much lower scoring environment. Especially when the likes of savard and federko were having higher playoff production in the 80s than yzerman lol.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 03:01 PM
  #204
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,756
vCash: 500
Yzerman had rotten luck as far as injuries go in the playoffs. Him taking a puck to the eye at the end of his career was just par for the course. Every other year he was missing games due to injury or playing with one that would keep most others sidelined (Bowman has stated Yzerman had the highest pain tolerance of any player he has known)... So it's fair to say a lot of Yzerman's postseason performances were disappointing, especially production-wise, but it's also where he started cementing his leadership in Detroit - playing, still very well, hobbled so often.

I think Yzerman's tolerance for pain drags his PPG down significantly. Most other players, even super-stars, are going to play 3/4 of the games Yzerman played, and are going to be more healthy and rested for them. Their PPG will look better. But having a severely injured Yzerman actually playing was still far superior to having no Yzerman.

Anyways, I'd still give Sakic an edge on playoffs, and go back and forth between these two guys a lot when I am trying to not be biased.

I'm currently in the Yzerman camp now on a bit of a peak buzz. I just feel Yzerman was significantly better at their best - he controlled the game better, made his teammates better, and was far more involved without the puck as well. You heard his name alongside Gretzky and Lemieux, and didn't think twice of it - something that would not sound right with Sakic.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 03:35 PM
  #205
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Okay, early 90s not mid. Yzerman's past his prime when the Wings start winning cups. Unfortunate but Yzerman's best years were wasted on garbage teams.

That's all I'm saying man. If you're looking at it objectively and not trying to win a debate.. It's not really fair to point to Sakic and say look how much better he was in the playoffs... Sakic has a couple of big runs in his prime that Yzerman could only dream of. And other than those big runs it's very even.

Apples to apples. No seasons included where one guy didn't play in postseason.

Age 23: Yzerman has 10 in 6. Sakic has 6 points in 6.
Age 25: Yzerman has 6 in 7. Sakic has 5 in points in 6.
Age 26: Yzerman has 8 in 11. Sakic has 34 in 22. (cup)
Age 27: Yzerman has 7 in 7. Sakic has 25 in 17.
Age 28: Yzerman has 4 in 3. Sakic has 5 in 6.
Age 29: Yzerman has 12 in 15. Sakic has 19 in 19.
Age 30: Yzerman has 20 in 18. Sakic has 9 in 17.
Age 31: Yzerman has 13 in 20. (cup) Sakic has 26 in 21. (cup)
Age 32: Yzerman has 24 in 22. (cup) Sakic has 19 in 21.
Age 33: Yzerman has 13 in 10. Sakic has 9 in 7.
Age 34: Yzerman has 4 in 8. Sakic has 12 in 11.
Age 36: Yzerman has 23 in 23. (cup) Sakic has 9 in 9.
Age 38: Yzerman has 5 in 11. Sakic has 10 in 10.

It's not a huge difference man. Sakic has two great runs when he's younger but Yzerman is on crappy teams at that time. Both guys are pretty good in the playoffs but Sakic has the good fortune to play on better teams earlier on and Yzerman has deep playoff runs past his prime.
as it stands, sakic has more exceptional runs, but as you say it's not an exceptionally sizable difference. but if you adjust for era, the difference becomes more pronounced. which is of course not to say that yzerman hasn't had an excellent playoff career, but sakic is bar none the greatest playoff forward of his generation.

but more importantly, i think the teammates/dead wings thing is a bit of a canard.

looking just at the runs where the red wings made the second round, yzerman showed himself more than capable of carrying the team offensively when he was "the man" ('87). sakic has shown the same without forsberg ('01).

but what i haven't seen anyone analyze is the years where yzerman did have help. sakic has shown that he can take the reins and be "the man," even on a stacked team ('96, '97). but what years did yzerman step up with fedorov, shanahan, etc. on his team? not '92, definitely not '95, not '97; you could only really make an argument for his conn smythe year (obviously), 2002, and say he co-led the team offensively with fedorov in '96. at the same ages that sakic rose to the forefront of a stacked title contender (26 and 27), yzerman took a backseat to fedorov in '92 and paul coffey in '93. those wings teams won the campbell conference the first year and finished a close second in '93, and finished 3rd and 5th in the league. and it's not like tim cheveldae was preventing yzerman from scoring the points that fedorov did.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I think Joe Sakic was wicked. I'm not going to try to tear the guy down at all. But if you flip the teams around and when they come into the league it's a totally different situation.
actually, i'd like to entertain this scenario. in '87, yzerman is on a tear in the playoffs and leads the wings to the third round. an excellent performance, and signals his ascension to superstardom.

now i in no way, shape, or form want to diminish that run by yzerman. but the very next year, with yzerman injured, that same wings team wins two playoff rounds and proceeds to get summarily dismissed by the oilers again. the fact that yzerman played the last three games of that second oilers series is irrelevant for my purposes. what is relevant is that the same quasi-cinderella team came out of the norris both years, once with their superstar and once without. the fact that they did the same thing without him, with probert and oates in the second year outscoring yzerman in the first year in the exact same number of games, tells us that there was a different common denominator that contributed to those two teams: jacques demers, who won the jack adams both years.

now put a 21 and 22 year old sakic on those teams. i don't think it makes the difference against the oilers, but i don't think he makes those teams any worse either, and at least he's probably there in '88 being the more durable player. but being on those red wings teams of the late 80s actually improves, rather than detract from, sakic's resume. his nords were the worst team in the league and didn't make the playoffs when he was those ages.

follow that forward, though. sakic gains sheppard, ciccarelli, fedorov, lidstrom, vlady, etc. do they fare better against the hawks in '92? does he make the difference against the leafs in '93 (one goal series)? do the wings still get upset by the sharks in '94? does a 29 year old sakic find a way to beat the devils in '95? i'm not saying all those things are reversed with sakic instead of yzerman, but even if he swings one or two, he remains a guy with a better playoff portfolio than yzerman.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 04:35 PM
  #206
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
does a 29 year old sakic find a way to beat the devils in '95?
Your other hypotheticals are plausible, but not this one. It was a complete beatdown. The DRW couldn't even get the puck into the offensive zone effectively.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 05:51 PM
  #207
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
No it is a legit point, your hero guy lafluer will never have his playoff resume shredded apart because he played on stacked teams in a completely diluted league, but you will rip sakic's because he had a reliable 2nd line center. Your just a hypocrite. Sakic had 3 different playoff runs where he had the best ppg and, hes the better playoff performer. Sakic was 27 in 1996 and 32 in 2001, what early 20's cup runs are talking about?

Look your not going to be able to answer the question and give yzerman a case for being the better playoff performer because he simply isnt. Yeah go ahead and brag about yzerman's production in 6 games, in a season that averaged 7.4 goals per game, nice way to respond to a 34 point playoff run in a much lower scoring environment. Especially when the likes of savard and federko were having higher playoff production in the 80s than yzerman lol.
much lower? The leage average in '96 was 6.4.... and Sakic was 26 during those playoffs..

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 06:59 PM
  #208
aemoreira1981
Registered User
 
aemoreira1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 5,038
vCash: 500
It's pretty much a push on leadership qualities, maybe a bit to Sakic in that regard especially given how he had to grow up much more quickly after the Swift Current Broncos bus crashed in 1986 (one of the leading scorers on the team ahead of Sakic died in the crash; Sakic ended up scoring 60 goals that year). The stats edge gives it to Stevie Y...and I voted Stevie Y, but it's very close.

aemoreira1981 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 07:01 PM
  #209
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 38,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadekuuro View Post
Your other hypotheticals are plausible, but not this one. It was a complete beatdown. The DRW couldn't even get the puck into the offensive zone effectively.
Agreed, we got utterly curbed stomped. No amount of hypothetical gymnastics could change the outcome of that series, short of nonsense like "what if Stevens, Lemieux, and Brodeur all suffered season-ending injuries in game 1?"

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 07:21 PM
  #210
MadLuke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobnobs View Post
much lower? The leage average in '96 was 6.4.... and Sakic was 26 during those playoffs..
3.2 vs 3.7 goal by team is a good difference, around 15% more. that turn 87-88 points seasons to around 100 points seasons.

MadLuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 07:36 PM
  #211
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
as it stands, sakic has more exceptional runs, but as you say it's not an exceptionally sizable difference. but if you adjust for era, the difference becomes more pronounced. which is of course not to say that yzerman hasn't had an excellent playoff career, but sakic is bar none the greatest playoff forward of his generation.

but more importantly, i think the teammates/dead wings thing is a bit of a canard.

looking just at the runs where the red wings made the second round, yzerman showed himself more than capable of carrying the team offensively when he was "the man" ('87). sakic has shown the same without forsberg ('01).

but what i haven't seen anyone analyze is the years where yzerman did have help. sakic has shown that he can take the reins and be "the man," even on a stacked team ('96, '97). but what years did yzerman step up with fedorov, shanahan, etc. on his team? not '92, definitely not '95, not '97; you could only really make an argument for his conn smythe year (obviously), 2002, and say he co-led the team offensively with fedorov in '96. at the same ages that sakic rose to the forefront of a stacked title contender (26 and 27), yzerman took a backseat to fedorov in '92 and paul coffey in '93. those wings teams won the campbell conference the first year and finished a close second in '93, and finished 3rd and 5th in the league. and it's not like tim cheveldae was preventing yzerman from scoring the points that fedorov did.




actually, i'd like to entertain this scenario. in '87, yzerman is on a tear in the playoffs and leads the wings to the third round. an excellent performance, and signals his ascension to superstardom.

now i in no way, shape, or form want to diminish that run by yzerman. but the very next year, with yzerman injured, that same wings team wins two playoff rounds and proceeds to get summarily dismissed by the oilers again. the fact that yzerman played the last three games of that second oilers series is irrelevant for my purposes. what is relevant is that the same quasi-cinderella team came out of the norris both years, once with their superstar and once without. the fact that they did the same thing without him, with probert and oates in the second year outscoring yzerman in the first year in the exact same number of games, tells us that there was a different common denominator that contributed to those two teams: jacques demers, who won the jack adams both years.

now put a 21 and 22 year old sakic on those teams. i don't think it makes the difference against the oilers, but i don't think he makes those teams any worse either, and at least he's probably there in '88 being the more durable player. but being on those red wings teams of the late 80s actually improves, rather than detract from, sakic's resume. his nords were the worst team in the league and didn't make the playoffs when he was those ages.

follow that forward, though. sakic gains sheppard, ciccarelli, fedorov, lidstrom, vlady, etc. do they fare better against the hawks in '92? does he make the difference against the leafs in '93 (one goal series)? do the wings still get upset by the sharks in '94? does a 29 year old sakic find a way to beat the devils in '95? i'm not saying all those things are reversed with sakic instead of yzerman, but even if he swings one or two, he remains a guy with a better playoff portfolio than yzerman.
Comparing just points when talking about performance leaves out a lot. The Red Wings as a whole were less offensively potent in 87 then 88. In 87 they were down 3-1 to the Leafs and came back. Yzerman was called "by far" the best player for that series. And though they lost both series vs Edmonton in 5 games in 87 they kept it very close in every game except for the last.

It wasnt Cheveldae preventing Yzerman from scoring more than Fedorov or Coffey in the early/mid 90s it was injuries and since
  • Yzerman's production in playoffs when he wasnt injured as badly before or even after his prime
  • Yzerman's production in the series before he got actually got injured
I think its safe to say that healthy Yzerman would score a bit more.

Also the stats dont always tell you everything
  • In 96 though the points are the same Yzerman was clearly the best Red Wing and Fedorov was (unfairly IMO) criticized.
  • In 02 although Yzerman outscored Fedorov by 4 points Fedorov had his best playoff has a very strong argument as the best Red Wing if you just consider on ice performance.

As for durability, the 88 knee injury which was the origin of all the other knee problems was a freak accident and wouldnt have happened in today's league with the moorings now. You can make the argument that the 93 injury was due to style of play because it was a combination of a lot of hits to the back Yzerman took and not just the single Steen incident. Yzerman did play down low in traffic more than Sakic and liked to carry the puck more so stylistically he opened himself up to more punishment.

And like the other guys have said 95 would require more than just replacing injured and ineffectual Yzerman with say Conn Smythe performing Sakic. The Wings best players Fedorov and Coffey were also banged up and not playing well. The complimentary players Dino, Sheppard, and Primeau basically sucked. Bowman was thoroughly outcoached.

On top of that the Devils themselves played about the best they could have. They played with hunger like the Wings in 97 did too.

So even with all the Wings healthy and performing their best, that series is still VERY close.

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 09:05 PM
  #212
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 28,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
No it is a legit point, your hero guy lafluer will never have his playoff resume shredded apart because he played on stacked teams in a completely diluted league, but you will rip sakic's because he had a reliable 2nd line center. Your just a hypocrite. Sakic had 3 different playoff runs where he had the best ppg and, hes the better playoff performer. Sakic was 27 in 1996 and 32 in 2001, what early 20's cup runs are talking about?

Look your not going to be able to answer the question and give yzerman a case for being the better playoff performer because he simply isnt. Yeah go ahead and brag about yzerman's production in 6 games, in a season that averaged 7.4 goals per game, nice way to respond to a 34 point playoff run in a much lower scoring environment. Especially when the likes of savard and federko were having higher playoff production in the 80s than yzerman lol.
WTF are you talking about?

I didn't rip Sakic at all. I think he's awesome. He was a great playoff performer and he can play on my team anytime.

I just don't think that the postseason performances are that much different. One guy just played for worse teams in his prime than the other. Nobody is ripping Joe Sakic dude.

Get a grip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
as it stands, sakic has more exceptional runs, but as you say it's not an exceptionally sizable difference. but if you adjust for era, the difference becomes more pronounced. which is of course not to say that yzerman hasn't had an excellent playoff career, but sakic is bar none the greatest playoff forward of his generation.

but more importantly, i think the teammates/dead wings thing is a bit of a canard.

looking just at the runs where the red wings made the second round, yzerman showed himself more than capable of carrying the team offensively when he was "the man" ('87). sakic has shown the same without forsberg ('01).

but what i haven't seen anyone analyze is the years where yzerman did have help. sakic has shown that he can take the reins and be "the man," even on a stacked team ('96, '97). but what years did yzerman step up with fedorov, shanahan, etc. on his team? not '92, definitely not '95, not '97; you could only really make an argument for his conn smythe year (obviously), 2002, and say he co-led the team offensively with fedorov in '96. at the same ages that sakic rose to the forefront of a stacked title contender (26 and 27), yzerman took a backseat to fedorov in '92 and paul coffey in '93. those wings teams won the campbell conference the first year and finished a close second in '93, and finished 3rd and 5th in the league. and it's not like tim cheveldae was preventing yzerman from scoring the points that fedorov did.

actually, i'd like to entertain this scenario. in '87, yzerman is on a tear in the playoffs and leads the wings to the third round. an excellent performance, and signals his ascension to superstardom.

now i in no way, shape, or form want to diminish that run by yzerman. but the very next year, with yzerman injured, that same wings team wins two playoff rounds and proceeds to get summarily dismissed by the oilers again. the fact that yzerman played the last three games of that second oilers series is irrelevant for my purposes. what is relevant is that the same quasi-cinderella team came out of the norris both years, once with their superstar and once without. the fact that they did the same thing without him, with probert and oates in the second year outscoring yzerman in the first year in the exact same number of games, tells us that there was a different common denominator that contributed to those two teams: jacques demers, who won the jack adams both years.

now put a 21 and 22 year old sakic on those teams. i don't think it makes the difference against the oilers, but i don't think he makes those teams any worse either, and at least he's probably there in '88 being the more durable player. but being on those red wings teams of the late 80s actually improves, rather than detract from, sakic's resume. his nords were the worst team in the league and didn't make the playoffs when he was those ages.

follow that forward, though. sakic gains sheppard, ciccarelli, fedorov, lidstrom, vlady, etc. do they fare better against the hawks in '92? does he make the difference against the leafs in '93 (one goal series)? do the wings still get upset by the sharks in '94? does a 29 year old sakic find a way to beat the devils in '95? i'm not saying all those things are reversed with sakic instead of yzerman, but even if he swings one or two, he remains a guy with a better playoff portfolio than yzerman.
Yzerman has help later on, mostly past his prime. He's got two seasons in his prime with good teammates and gets hurt. And even then in '92 and '93 the goalie behind him is Tim Chevldae... how is he supposed to advance? By '94 he gets hurt.

As I said, I think Sakic is the better player later in their careers. Yzerman just has too many injuries and Sakic is still putting up points. I take Yzerman because I felt that in his prime he was ridiculous. I don't think the playoff argument holds water esp when we look at those stats. I'm okay with somebody else taking Sakic but it's Yzerman for me.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 09:38 PM
  #213
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I just don't think that the postseason performances are that much different. One guy just played for worse teams in his prime than the other.
But Yzerman was playing in a divisional playoff system that would have made it easier for him to maintain his effectiveness.

1984
Detroit (69 points; 7th in West) vs. St. Louis (71 points; 6th in West)
1985
Detroit (66 points; 7th in West) vs. Chicago (83 points; 5th in West)
1987
Detroit (78 points; 5th in West) vs. Chicago (73 points; 6th in West)
Detroit (78 points; 5th in West) vs. Toronto (70 points; 7th in West)
Detroit (78 points; 5th in West) vs. Edmonton (106 points; 1st in West)
1989
Detroit (80 points; 4th in West) vs. Chicago (66 points; 9th in West)
1991
Detroit (76 points; 6th in West) vs. St. Louis (105 points; 2nd in West)


The only time they drew a bad matchup was 1991. Every other season, they were protected in the playoffs from having to take on stronger teams than would be expected under the current format. It doesn't matter if Detroit is 7th out of 10 in the Conference if they're playing a team with just 2 more points in the 1st round. What is precluding Yzerman from recording points here?


And why rag on Tim Cheveldae? It's not all his fault. He was putting up the same numbers in the playoffs (.897) in 1992 and 1993 as he did in the regular season (.887). Look at their losses in 1992 to Chicago: 2-1, 3-1, 5-4, 1-0. The offense disappeared for all but one game. He played just as expected, but the best offensive team in the Conference couldn't solve Belfour.

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 10:03 PM
  #214
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But Yzerman was playing in a divisional playoff system that would have made it easier for him to maintain his effectiveness.

1984
Detroit (69 points; 7th in West) vs. St. Louis (71 points; 6th in West)
1985
Detroit (66 points; 7th in West) vs. Chicago (83 points; 5th in West)
1987
Detroit (78 points; 5th in West) vs. Chicago (73 points; 6th in West)
Detroit (78 points; 5th in West) vs. Toronto (70 points; 7th in West)
Detroit (78 points; 5th in West) vs. Edmonton (106 points; 1st in West)
1989
Detroit (80 points; 4th in West) vs. Chicago (66 points; 9th in West)
1991
Detroit (76 points; 6th in West) vs. St. Louis (105 points; 2nd in West)


The only time they drew a bad matchup was 1991. Every other season, they were protected in the playoffs from having to take on stronger teams than would be expected under the current format. It doesn't matter if Detroit is 7th out of 10 in the Conference if they're playing a team with just 2 more points in the 1st round. What is precluding Yzerman from recording points here?


And why rag on Tim Cheveldae? It's not all his fault. He was putting up the same numbers in the playoffs (.897) in 1992 and 1993 as he did in the regular season (.887). Look at their losses in 1992 to Chicago: 2-1, 3-1, 5-4, 1-0. The offense disappeared for all but one game. He played just as expected, but the best offensive team in the Conference couldn't solve Belfour.
Well if we are just considering putting up points then Yzerman seems to have put them up fine in the 80s. It's the early/mid 90s where his production dips due to injuries.

Also you should look at the team GA rather than the overall record for what is easier/harder to put up points. For example 84 Blues and 85 Hawks were middle of the road in GA 12th and 9th, 87/89 12th Hawks were below average 15th/16th and 87 Leafs were among the worst 18th.

Yzerman also typically scored significantly less against Norris teams than other divisions in his prime anyway. In 89 he scored 3 goals and 11 points against Chicago in the regular season. Playing the Norris doesnt look like it helped his stats at all. Just the opposite

toob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 10:43 PM
  #215
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,860
vCash: 500
Ouch! 80-56!

one thing few seem to note is that1980s Norris division playoff points are of a pretty low value compared to most other playoff points.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
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.
I'm not saying they weren't. But give them a full year in that division, and they'd definitely be closer to a playoff spot because they'd get more points than they would in the Norris, and the 4th place team would have many fewer points than the 4th place team in the Norris.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
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.
Well, for one thing, that wasn't even the highest PPG average of his career, 1995-96 was (adjusted, the 2001 season would be a little higher but not an outlier like Yzerman's 1989)

using the same indicators I used for Messier and Yzerman previously:

1st/2nd: 1%
1st/9th: 14%
2nd/5th: 7%
2nd/9th: 13%

Sakic actually has the most consistent 9 best seasons I've seen in any player. His best seasons are less of an outlier than any other elite player I know of, along with Gordie Howe.

I made a whole post about this before, you never replied.

Quote:
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.
Look, if Yzerman was as good as you say, then it wouldn't have really mattered who his wingers were.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Lemieux: 5 games, 2-4-6
Yzerman: 6 games, 2-4-6
Sakic: 6 games, 4-3-7

I don't recall who played the game Lemieux missed, but that's evenly distributed scoring on that line. Sakic is clearly the "triggerman" as one might expect given where each of them are at in their career.
wasn't the line Gagne/Sakic/Iginla?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 11:30 PM
  #216
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Well, for one thing, that wasn't even the highest PPG average of his career, 1995-96 was (adjusted, the 2001 season would be a little higher but not an outlier like Yzerman's 1989)

using the same indicators I used for Messier and Yzerman previously:

1st/2nd: 1%
1st/9th: 14%
2nd/5th: 7%
2nd/9th: 13%

Sakic actually has the most consistent 9 best seasons I've seen in any player. His best seasons are less of an outlier than any other elite player I know of, along with Gordie Howe.

I made a whole post about this before, you never replied.


[quote]Look, if Yzerman was as good as you say, then it wouldn't have really mattered who his wingers were.

The ice time was the major thing. If his ice time was cut down 2-3 minutes or more from what a normal top center gets because Bryan Murray felt like playing Jimmy Carson a lot, that is a huge cut in his offensive production. It's like the reverse of Messier's 89-90 spike.

Quote:
wasn't the line Gagne/Sakic/Iginla?
It didn't start out that way.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 11:33 PM
  #217
Wrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post


It didn't start out that way.
But when Sakic scored most of his points, and when they mattered the most, it was with the Sakic/Iginla/Gagne line, which he was clearly the driving force for....

Wrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 11:37 PM
  #218
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The ice time was the major thing. If his ice time was cut down 2-3 minutes or more from what a normal top center gets because Bryan Murray felt like playing Jimmy Carson a lot, that is a huge cut in his offensive production. It's like the reverse of Messier's 89-90 spike.



It didn't start out that way.
mmmh hmmm. Any comment about the supposed outlier seasons that Messier and Sakic had, that Yzerman apparently didn't have?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 11:40 PM
  #219
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrath View Post
But when Sakic scored most of his points, and when they mattered the most, it was with the Sakic/Iginla/Gagne line, which he was clearly the driving force for....
Well, Iginla's second goal in the GMG was with Sakic and Yzerman.

And the fact that a player (in this case Sakic) scored the majority of his points from one game out of six would normally be used as a negative when describing them, would it not? Expectations of consistent play and all.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2013, 11:55 PM
  #220
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
And the fact that a player (in this case Sakic) scored the majority of his points from one game out of six would normally be used as a negative when describing them, would it not? Expectations of consistent play and all.
Whereas Yzerman's three points against Belarus were what really separated Canada from the pack...

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:02 AM
  #221
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
mmmh hmmm. Any comment about the supposed outlier seasons that Messier and Sakic had, that Yzerman apparently didn't have?
I've never said Yzerman's 88-89 wasn't an outlier. But let's perform some math (uh oh) and project all of his prime seasons to the full season GP.

87-88: 50-52-102 in 64 = 63-65-128 in 80
88-89: 65-90-155 in 80
89-90: 62-65-127 in 79 = 63-66-129 in 80
90-91: 51-57-108 in 80
91-92: 45-58-103 in 79 = 46-59-105 in 80
92-93: 58-79-137 in 84
93-94: 24-58-82 in 58 = 35-84-119 in 84

Yzerman's seven season prime, if we total up the projections, would be this:

560GP, 381-500-881 or 56-73-129 per-82. If he posts those numbers every year for those seven seasons, with no Mario or Wayne, his Ross finishes would be as such:
88: 2nd (Savard, 131)
89: 1st (assuming Nicholls loses at least 21 points)
90: 1st (goals tiebreaker with Messier)
91: 2nd (Hull, 131)
92: 1st
93: 5th (LaFontaine 148, Oates 142, Selanne/Turgeon 132)
94: 1st

That's not such a bad run.

Without 88-89, Yzerman has this:

480GP, 316-410-726 or 54-70-124 per-82.

Scoring 155 is always going to be an outlier. But is it an outlier against 100-point seasons or 120-point seasons? And given that only three players have ever scored 155 points, how do you quantify it and compare it to his regular career?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:08 AM
  #222
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,287
vCash: 500
2002 Canada
When Sakic records a point: 4-0-0
When Sakic does not record a point: 0-1-1

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:15 AM
  #223
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 38,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I've never said Yzerman's 88-89 wasn't an outlier. But let's perform some math (uh oh) and project all of his prime seasons to the full season GP.

87-88: 50-52-102 in 64 = 63-65-128 in 80
88-89: 65-90-155 in 80
89-90: 62-65-127 in 79 = 63-66-129 in 80
90-91: 51-57-108 in 80
91-92: 45-58-103 in 79 = 46-59-105 in 80
92-93: 58-79-137 in 84
93-94: 24-58-82 in 58 = 35-84-119 in 84

Yzerman's seven season prime, if we total up the projections, would be this:

560GP, 381-500-881 or 56-73-129 per-82. If he posts those numbers every year for those seven seasons, with no Mario or Wayne, his Ross finishes would be as such:
88: 2nd (Savard, 131)
89: 1st (assuming Nicholls loses at least 21 points)
90: 1st (goals tiebreaker with Messier)
91: 2nd (Hull, 131)
92: 1st
93: 5th (LaFontaine 148, Oates 142, Selanne/Turgeon 132)
94: 1st

That's not such a bad run.

Without 88-89, Yzerman has this:

480GP, 316-410-726 or 54-70-124 per-82.

Scoring 155 is always going to be an outlier. But is it an outlier against 100-point seasons or 120-point seasons? And given that only three players have ever scored 155 points, how do you quantify it and compare it to his regular career?
This is one of the most disingenuous uses of statistics I have ever seen. The very fact that the mean is not a resistant measure to outliers renders this whole chest-pounding exercise pointless.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:26 AM
  #224
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I've never said Yzerman's 88-89 wasn't an outlier. But let's perform some math (uh oh) and project all of his prime seasons to the full season GP.

87-88: 50-52-102 in 64 = 63-65-128 in 80
88-89: 65-90-155 in 80
89-90: 62-65-127 in 79 = 63-66-129 in 80
90-91: 51-57-108 in 80
91-92: 45-58-103 in 79 = 46-59-105 in 80
92-93: 58-79-137 in 84
93-94: 24-58-82 in 58 = 35-84-119 in 84

Yzerman's seven season prime, if we total up the projections, would be this:

560GP, 381-500-881 or 56-73-129 per-82. If he posts those numbers every year for those seven seasons, with no Mario or Wayne, his Ross finishes would be as such:
88: 2nd (Savard, 131)
89: 1st (assuming Nicholls loses at least 21 points)
90: 1st (goals tiebreaker with Messier)
91: 2nd (Hull, 131)
92: 1st
93: 5th (LaFontaine 148, Oates 142, Selanne/Turgeon 132)
94: 1st

That's not such a bad run.

Without 88-89, Yzerman has this:

480GP, 316-410-726 or 54-70-124 per-82.

Scoring 155 is always going to be an outlier. But is it an outlier against 100-point seasons or 120-point seasons? And given that only three players have ever scored 155 points, how do you quantify it and compare it to his regular career?
You said in regards to Messier, "his best season, so much so that it's a massive outlier, was 1990", and of course anything you say about Messier is meant to be a negative, so I clearly proved that Yzerman's best season was a much bigger outlier no matter how you attempt to quantify it. Since then, you've said little on the topic of outliers beyond trailing off.

by the way, if you'd been paying attention you'd know that all of the calculations I did were based on points per game already - not just raw points.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 08:55 AM
  #225
unknown33
Registered User
 
unknown33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Europe
Country: Marshall Islands
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
560GP, 381-500-881 or 56-73-129 per-82. If he posts those numbers every year for those seven seasons, with no Mario or Wayne, his Ross finishes would be as such:
88: 2nd (Savard, 131)
89: 1st (assuming Nicholls loses at least 21 points)
90: 1st (goals tiebreaker with Messier)
91: 2nd (Hull, 131)
92: 1st
93: 5th (LaFontaine 148, Oates 142, Selanne/Turgeon 132)
94: 1st
So what you are doing to get those finishes is: Giving credit to Yzerman for games he missed, but NOT applying this to every other player in the league (comparing Yzerman's PPG to other players points)?

unknown33 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 05:00 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.