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.

Fedorov vs. Selanne

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-12-2013, 11:08 AM
  #126
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
I think they are quite impressive.

The Stanley Cup is more important than a successful performance during a regular season.

And Fedorov was an excellent postseason performer in the 1990s.
I did not say that they are not impressive. I just said that the other poster was trying to imply that.

But i do think that those are not the most impressive feats Fedorov had.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:09 AM
  #127
Yamaguchi
Registered User
 
Yamaguchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
Between seasons 80-81 and 89-90 Gartner scored 413 goals good for 4th and Bossy scored 400 good for 5th.

You were looking it from 79-80 to 88-89 seasons which is basically the "wrong" way to do it.


Actually, Bossy has retired in 1987

Yamaguchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:09 AM
  #128
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
Did i miss something or was my math wrong? Your post is not too helpful.
No, your math is right, I just disagree with going from 1980/81 to 89/90

More games are played in the 80s in the 79/80 season than would be 89/90 season so I don't understand how you can cut it up like that unless you are trying to make the stats say what you want.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:11 AM
  #129
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post


More games are played in the 80s during the 79/80 season than would be 89/90.
You are right. I just realized it too when i checked the 90's leader in points. Which should be Gretzky. By my way he would not be the leader, but 4th.

I just somehow thought that the decades were usually counted that way.

My mistake.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:12 AM
  #130
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
Actually, Bossy has retired in 1987
It has nothing to do with the post i quoted.

I realize that he retired before -90.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:13 AM
  #131
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overg View Post
Sigh. Can we put the "he could have won the Norris" quote to rest. It is just completely, utterly, absolutely false. Plus, I'm pretty sure it was Holland or Devallano who said that, not Bowman.

Fedorov was moved to defense because he was playing terrible on offense and complaining about ice time. It was both a "F.U." and a "let's see how this works" from Bowman. He did okay back there, but he wasn't in the same time zone as the real Norris threats. Does anyone really believe he was ever going to be better than even Konstantinov or Lidstrom?
Actually, no, he was always clamoring for more IT so Bowman let him take some shifts on D. It was always one of Sergei's beefs-- ice time. He (and his father) considered himself the best forward on the team, and Feds probably would have been happy playing 28 min/gm.

He was used on the point on the PP unit because he could play defense as well as having an incredible slapshot, which Hasek said he felt was the most difficult in the NHL to handle-- low and hard.

That said, I'm not sure myself where the Lidstrom/Norris comparisons come from, but Sergei's abilities on defense were widely recognized. There's a good quote from Gretzky about it out there somewhere.



Quote:
A second "myth" about Fedorov is that he was one of the best playoff performers of all times. This is usually stated in conjunction with his streak of 20+ pts in the playoffs. Fedorov was a very good playoff performer. He played like a star, was arguably the best Wing during that time-frame, and was absolutely a big factor in the Wings' wins. But he did *not* dominate. He was essentially the Mike Gartner of the playoffs. He steadily put up very good numbers, but very rarely was he actually taking over games (*note this wasn't all on Fedorov. Bowman rolled his lines such that no Wing had the opportunity to take over games).
Completely disagree. I think someone else addressed your Gartner comparison, but Fedorov dominated in the same way Datsyuk dominates. When they're on the ice, the Wings possess the puck and it's very hard to get it away from them. Fedorov was a game-changer and a shutdown forward. His PPG in the playoffs during the Wings career was in the 1.1-ish ppg range.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:14 AM
  #132
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
You are right. I just realized it too when i checked the 90's leader in points. Which should be Gretzky. By my way he would not be the leader, but 4th.

I just somehow thought that the decades were usually counted that way.

My mistake.

No worries at all. Ummm I don't understand the bold part, who Wayne? Bossy?

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:16 AM
  #133
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post
No worries at all. Ummm I don't understand the bold part, who Wayne? Bossy?
Wayne should be the leader of points in 90's. When you challenged my line of thought i had to check it, so i went to hockey-reference and looked up the 90's point leaders by my way and your way.
My way had Gretz at 4th and your's had him at 1st. I knew that he should have been 1st, ergo i was wrong.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:20 AM
  #134
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
No, Wayne should be the leader of points in 90's. When you challenged my line of thought i had to check it, so i went to hockey-reference and looked up the 90's point leaders by my way and your way.
My way had Gretz at 4th and your's 1st. I knew that he should have been 1st, ergo i was wrong.
Generally, it goes by most games played in the decade. That's usually how it is, so like how I presented it to you using the 79/80 season etc..

Which makes the Garnter scored more goals than Bossy wrong. Now, factor in Bossy retired in 1987, it makes the comparison a misnomer and manipulative to bash either Bossy or promote Gartner or use it in any capacity.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:23 AM
  #135
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post
Generally, it goes by most games played in the decade. That's usually how it is, so like how I presented it to you using the 79/80 season etc..

Which makes the Garnter scored more goals than Bossy wrong. Now, factor in Bossy retired in 1987, it makes the comparison a misnomer and manipulative to bash either Bossy or promote Gartner or use it in an capacity.
Basically that was the point the previous poster made. Gartner scored more goals than Bossy in the 80's (which we now have seen is false, but nevertheless) and that could be added to his list of accomplishments. But not a single person in their right mind would suggest that Gartner was better scorer than Bossy.

I guess that was the line of thinking what the poster was going for.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:29 AM
  #136
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,012
vCash: 500
Gartner/Bossy is not the topic, my bad, but exactly - picking a decade is great, but why not 1987-97 or 1993 - 2003? Yes, Bossy was retired, so was Lemieux..bah...Fedorov is even behind him!

Fedorov career in nutshell is 1994, 100 points in 1996, 4x 20 points in playoffs, 3 SC and that Norris quote.
I still have an impression he was not as good as he could be. Someone mentioned he was used in more defensive role under Bowman's command and Fedorov sounds as he is okay with that even when "scoring is fun". Would it be realy so hard for him to push aging Yzerman to the 2nd line? Yzerman maybe wasn't the Norris candidate like Fedorov (the quote is rightfuly overrated) but was more than capable playing defense. And Fedorov having all the skills and hockey sense in the universe, he could skate, he could shoot, he could pass... I don't get it. He was just ok with his role and amount of effort he had to put there.

begbeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:32 AM
  #137
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
Basically that was the point the previous poster made. Gartner scored more goals than Bossy in the 80's (which we now have seen is false, but nevertheless) and that could be added to his list of accomplishments. But not a single person in their right mind would suggest that Gartner was better scorer than Bossy.

I guess that was the line of thinking what the poster was going for.
I personally would take Fedorov over Selanne in the grand scheme of things. My *****/whine/cry is Fedorov's Hart/Selke season is one of the best.

I think too much emphasis is put into the Selke, it's not that awesome of a trophy. I also think too much weight is put into awards on the whole. As that one poster pointed out; how did Tedder Kennedy win the Hart and not get a 1st or 2nd team selection? To me, the Pearson/Lindsey trophy speaks louder than the others. Sometimes, it seems to me, trophies are awarded to the flashy players instead of the deserving ones.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:38 AM
  #138
overg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Actually, no, he was always clamoring for more IT so Bowman let him take some shifts on D. It was always one of Sergei's beefs-- ice time. He (and his father) considered himself the best forward on the team, and Feds probably would have been happy playing 28 min/gm.

He was used on the point on the PP unit because he could play defense as well as having an incredible slapshot, which Hasek said he felt was the most difficult in the NHL to handle-- low and hard.

That said, I'm not sure myself where the Lidstrom/Norris comparisons come from, but Sergei's abilities on defense were widely recognized. There's a good quote from Gretzky about it out there somewhere.

Completely disagree. I think someone else addressed your Gartner comparison, but Fedorov dominated in the same way Datsyuk dominates. When they're on the ice, the Wings possess the puck and it's very hard to get it away from them. Fedorov was a game-changer and a shutdown forward. His PPG in the playoffs during the Wings career was in the 1.1-ish ppg range.
I'm not sure what your disagreement is with the first part. That Fedorov wasn't slumping at forward? Because I very clearly remember that.

I'm familiar with the Gretzky quote you're referring to . . . something about how he (Gretzky) would never have been able to play defense, but Fedorov could. Which is probably true. But it doesn't make Fedorov a Norris candidate. He was able to play both forward and Defense . . . but as others have pointed out, so could Dandenault.

As for the second part, yes, the Wings dominated possession when Fedorov was on the ice. They also tended to dominate possession when every other line was on the ice. That team played like a machine for a number of years, and all four lines bought into the left Wing lock.

Finally, with respect to Fedorov's pts per game in the playoff, per the chart linked earlier, that would put him 13th for players during that time frame. Fedorov was the most productive player on the best playoff team over that time frame, which is indeed very impressive. But he was not a game-breaker in the playoffs in the same way other superstars were. Which again, wasn't entirely on Fedorov, as Bowman was so into rolling his lines equally it wasn't unusual for Kris Draper to lead Wings forwards in ice time. It would be hard for anyone to completely dominate a game with ice time being split up in such a manner.

overg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:39 AM
  #139
Yamaguchi
Registered User
 
Yamaguchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbeee View Post
Gartner/Bossy is not the topic, my bad, but exactly - picking a decade is great, but why not 1987-97 or 1993 - 2003? Yes, Bossy was retired, so was Lemieux..bah...Fedorov is even behind him!

Fedorov career in nutshell is 1994, 100 points in 1996, 4x 20 points in playoffs, 3 SC and that Norris quote.
I still have an impression he was not as good as he could be. Someone mentioned he was used in more defensive role under Bowman's command and Fedorov sounds as he is okay with that even when "scoring is fun". Would it be realy so hard for him to push aging Yzerman to the 2nd line? Yzerman maybe wasn't the Norris candidate like Fedorov (the quote is rightfuly overrated) but was more than capable playing defense. And Fedorov having all the skills and hockey sense in the universe, he could skate, he could shoot, he could pass... I don't get it. He was just ok with his role and amount of effort he had to put there.


I guess Sergei's job was not pushing Yzerman to the 2nd line but helping the team win another Stanley Cup by providing some offense and shutting down the opponents. And he did it well.

Yamaguchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:41 AM
  #140
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post
To me, the Pearson/Lindsey trophy speaks louder than the others.
And who won it in 1994?

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:42 AM
  #141
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbeee View Post
Gartner/Bossy is not the topic, my bad, but exactly - picking a decade is great, but why not 1987-97 or 1993 - 2003? Yes, Bossy was retired, so was Lemieux..bah...Fedorov is even behind him!

Fedorov career in nutshell is 1994, 100 points in 1996, 4x 20 points in playoffs, 3 SC and that Norris quote.
I still have an impression he was not as good as he could be. Someone mentioned he was used in more defensive role under Bowman's command and Fedorov sounds as he is okay with that even when "scoring is fun". Would it be realy so hard for him to push aging Yzerman to the 2nd line? Yzerman maybe wasn't the Norris candidate like Fedorov (the quote is rightfuly overrated) but was more than capable playing defense. And Fedorov having all the skills and hockey sense in the universe, he could skate, he could shoot, he could pass... I don't get it. He was just ok with his role and amount of effort he had to put there.
Make this clear, this is not my research but was used in the other Selanne/Fedorov thread years ago.

Look at this comparison: It's interesting anyhow, I do think Fedorov is overrated and glorified. He could be a case for "would've should've or could've":


Quote:
1.Fedorov 107
2.Brind'Amour 97
3.Brind'Amour 87
3.Fedorov 87
5.Brind'Amour 86
5.Fedorov 86
7.Fedorov 83
8.Brind'Amour 82
9.Fedorov 79
10.Brind'Amour 77
11.Brind'Amour 74
12.Brind'Amour 74
13.Brind'Amour 70
14.Fedorov 69
15.Fedorov 68

Both were good defensively and good in the playoffs. Seems like they are about equal on offense. :p
Using this, you can see how close they were offensively, it should be noted that Brind'Amour did not play on teams as great as Fedorov did. So, perhaps you are inflating Fedorov too much?

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:43 AM
  #142
BamBamCam*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Seattle/Boston
Country: Ireland
Posts: 1,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
And who won it in 1994?
I would appreciate it if you wouldn't rip one sentence out of my post and make it look like I am saying something else. Thanks

I already have said I would chose Fedorov over Selanne.

BamBamCam* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:46 AM
  #143
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overg View Post
He was able to play both forward and Defense . . . but as others have pointed out, so could Dandenault.
But how many can play both defence and art ross calibre forward?

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:46 AM
  #144
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,088
vCash: 500
seems like we're holding fedorov to the standard of what he could have done, and not to what he did do vs. what selanne did.

conversely-- and it happens less on HOH than in general discussions about the guy-- we see this sentiment where post-lockout selanne isn't viewed objectively either, but gets a boost because we all thought he was finished. i mean, everything he did after '06 is extremely impressive. but it all comes with a qualifier: "for a guy his age." gartner has been brought up, for god knows what reason, in this thread. if post-'06 selanne isn't the definition of compiling (relative to his peak, the actual meat of his HHOF case), i don't know what is.

which is all to say that fedorov left us wanting more. i get that. whereas we look at peak selanne, then post-lockout selanne, and we say "what if?" about the period in between. but these "what ifs"-- for a fedorov who cared and a selanne who was healthy-- seem to be held as a negative in one case and a positive in the other.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:50 AM
  #145
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,012
vCash: 500
Maybe...he liked is so much that walked away from 10 milion dollars per year in Detroit.

I feel somehow lost in this topic. Don't know what we discuss here. I don't deny Fedorov's greatness, he was helluva player, I remember watching his 5-goal game with open mouth... I just feel Selanne career and prime was even better. That's all. We should discuss that if there are some doubts about that.

begbeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 11:55 AM
  #146
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BamBamCam View Post
I would appreciate it if you wouldn't rip one sentence out of my post and make it look like I am saying something else.
You were suggesting that the Hart and the Selke Fyodorov won in 93-94 were possibly given to the "flashy player" instead of the one who deserved it. But the Pearson Award you value higher suggests otherwise.

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 12:02 PM
  #147
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
seems like we're holding fedorov to the standard of what he could have done, and not to what he did do vs. what selanne did.

conversely-- and it happens less on HOH than in general discussions about the guy-- we see this sentiment where post-lockout selanne isn't viewed objectively either, but gets a boost because we all thought he was finished. i mean, everything he did after '06 is extremely impressive. but it all comes with a qualifier: "for a guy his age." gartner has been brought up, for god knows what reason, in this thread. if post-'06 selanne isn't the definition of compiling (relative to his peak, the actual meat of his HHOF case), i don't know what is.

which is all to say that fedorov left us wanting more. i get that. whereas we look at peak selanne, then post-lockout selanne, and we say "what if?" about the period in between. but these "what ifs"-- for a fedorov who cared and a selanne who was healthy-- seem to be held as a negative in one case and a positive in the other.
I disagree that Selanne after lockout is just a compiler. But after the cup win in 07 he has been the ultimate compiler. Those two years after lockout are very important in terms of valuing Selanne's career. He was definitely a star forward those years and redeemed a lot of the "what if's" those two years. Those are the reason why today Selanne gets a lot slack from his injury years. Without 05/06 and 06/07 most of us would think that Selanne just regressed without clear indication why.

I also think that caring and being injured are two separate things. When someone is questioning players motivation it is bound to come up as a negative.
Selanne never seemed like a guy who lacked heart. Fedorov sometimes left that bad taste in your mouth when you felt like he could have pushed it a bit more.

It tells a great deal about players abilities when he is questioned about his motivation in the same thread where he is compared to a top-100 HOF player.

Edit: I just realized that you probably meant Selanne was a compiler after his cup win. Which i agree with.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 12:05 PM
  #148
Yamaguchi
Registered User
 
Yamaguchi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
You were suggesting that the Hart and the Selke Fyodorov won in 93-94 were possibly given to the "flashy player" instead of the one who deserved it. But the Pearson Award you value higher suggests otherwise.

Fyodorov is a cool way to spell his name. Theodoroff would be even cooler.

Yamaguchi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 12:10 PM
  #149
TAnnala
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 10,239
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
Fyodorov is a cool way to spell his name. Theodoroff would be even cooler.
Theodoroff is not his real name. Fyodorov on the other hand is.

Or if someone's is Jack would you like me to spell it Jaska?

Edit: It is the old Russian name, i mean. Not English name.

TAnnala is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-12-2013, 12:11 PM
  #150
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamaguchi View Post
Fyodorov is a cool way to spell his name. Theodoroff would be even cooler.
I'm transcribing, not translating.

Theokritos is online now   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 05:06 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.