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.

Who peaked higher defensively?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-25-2013, 02:57 PM
  #1
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,693
vCash: 500
Who peaked higher defensively?

During the dead puck era, there was a big rivalry between the AVS and Stars. Who was the better defensive player between Sakic-Forsberg and Mike Modano. How do they compare defensively to Doug Gilmour?

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:30 PM
  #2
Nalens Oga
HeavenOrLasVegas
 
Nalens Oga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,912
vCash: 2405
Forsberg was the best forechecker and the other two are better defensively in their own zone. I remember Sakic breaking a tonne of rushes on the backcheck.

Nalens Oga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:32 PM
  #3
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,856
vCash: 500
I would rate their defensive peaks:

1) Modano/Gilmour
3) Sakic
4) Forsberg

Modano provided the least amount of offense when at his defensive peak though.

And Gilmour and Forsberg were the only two who came into the league as strong defensive players. But at their peaks, I would rate them as above defensively.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:47 PM
  #4
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,123
vCash: 500
Gilmour likely had the best peak defensively. In the 1993 coaches' poll he was named the best defensive forward and 2nd best penalty killer in the league. In the 1994 coaches' poll, he was second to Fedorov in both categories. If we assume he played 16 ES minutes per game during 1993 (which is merely an estimate, but I feel it's a reasonable one), he'd have a personal GAA of 2.21, quite impressive given the era.


Last edited by Hockey Outsider: 03-25-2013 at 03:52 PM.
Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:51 PM
  #5
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 5,810
vCash: 500
Lehtinen . Modano was not even the best defensive forward on his line.

I'd rank them like this:

Sakic
Gilmour
Modano
Forsberg (as indicated, he was a great forechecker, but not as good in his own zone)

Sentinel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:51 PM
  #6
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
Gilmour likely had the best peak defensively. In the 1993 coaches' poll he was named the best defensive forward and 2nd best penalty killer in the league. In the 1994 coaches' poll, he was second to Fedorov in both categories.
Yeah, maybe I'm underestimating his peak by having Modano equal to it, but his peak was so damn short (I guess that's not really answering the question though).

Modano has the lowest overall peak of the 3, but that's because his offense never reached the level the others did.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 03-25-2013 at 05:08 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:52 PM
  #7
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Lehtinen . Modano was not even the best defensive forward on his line.

I'd rank them like this:

Sakic
Gilmour
Modano
Forsberg (as indicated, he was a great forechecker, but not as good in his own zone)
Who cares if Modano wasn't as good as Lehtinen defensively? Neither were Sakic and Forsberg.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 05:46 PM
  #8
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 12,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kloparren View Post
Forsberg was the best forechecker and the other two are better defensively in their own zone. I remember Sakic breaking a tonne of rushes on the backcheck.
When, exactly, did forechecking become a defensive attribute?

I've seen this in a couple of places now.

Seems that it was always considered a offensive attribute.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 06:30 PM
  #9
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
When, exactly, did forechecking become a defensive attribute?

I've seen this in a couple of places now.

Seems that it was always considered a offensive attribute.
Taking the puck away from or keeping the puck away from the other team has ALWAYS been part of defense. Its called puck possession.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 06:34 PM
  #10
Mike Farkas
Grace Personified
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
When, exactly, did forechecking become a defensive attribute?

I've seen this in a couple of places now.

Seems that it was always considered a offensive attribute.
Forechecking, while aggressive in nature, is absolutely a defensive attribute. Taking the puck away from a player is naturally defensive, doesn't matter where on the ice it occurs.

The dreaded "neutral zone trap" that you seem to worry about quite a bit, is actually a 1-2-2 forecheck...

__________________
http://twitter.com/MichaelFarkasHF

YouTube Channel: The Two-Line Pass - Hockey news, knowledge, video breakdowns and more: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKAI...52Q577Q/videos

Latest installment:Ep. 4 - Brady Skjei Evaluation
Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:15 PM
  #11
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
When, exactly, did forechecking become a defensive attribute?
Well, in the half gasping tones of Eddie Shore... Mister Bonvie, the best Defence
is Offence, and that would feature Forechecking quite prominently. Puck Possession.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:31 PM
  #12
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I would rate their defensive peaks:

1) Modano/Gilmour
3) Sakic
4) Forsberg

Modano provided the least amount of offense when at his defensive peak though.

And Gilmour and Forsberg were the only two who came into the league as strong defensive players. But at their peaks, I would rate them as above defensively.
I would tend to agree with this view.

The hard part is rating them through their entire careers as both Sakic and Modanao were far from finished products defensively when they entered the NHL and Gilmour and Sakic did keep their scoring in his peak defensive era while Modano didn't.

Forsberg and Gilmour to a lesser degree were also physically difficult to play against.

4 interesting centers and thread here.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:34 PM
  #13
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
When, exactly, did forechecking become a defensive attribute?

I've seen this in a couple of places now.

Seems that it was always considered a offensive attribute.
I would tend to agree, it is something that takes place exclusively in the offensive zone and is generally considered more of an offensive skill set I would think.

Kind of like a Dman's ability to pinch at the point and keep the offensive zone, but one could make the claim it's more defensive as he is the last guy back and it's a judgment play.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:51 PM
  #14
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
I would tend to agree with this view.

The hard part is rating them through their entire careers as both Sakic and Modanao were far from finished products defensively when they entered the NHL and Gilmour and Sakic did keep their scoring in his peak defensive era while Modano didn't.

Forsberg and Gilmour to a lesser degree were also physically difficult to play against.

4 interesting centers and thread here.
Modano kept us his scoring while getting better defensively too; he just wasn't as good as the others at scoring to begin with.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 09:34 PM
  #15
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 12,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Well, in the half gasping tones of Eddie Shore... Mister Bonvie, the best Defence
is Offence, and that would feature Forechecking quite prominently. Puck Possession.
So offense is defense.

Now I've got it.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 09:40 PM
  #16
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,693
vCash: 500
I feel Modano is getting a bit underrated in peak offense. He did finish 4th, 11th and 12th in points per game respectively in 1998, 2000 and 2003, which is essentially the same level of offense as Gilmour, however Gilmour was better in the playoffs. Had modano played the full 1998 season, he could have been a solid hart candidate.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 09:48 PM
  #17
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
So offense is defense.
Correct. Mao Zedong, Machiavelli, Sun Tzu. The only real
defense is active defense. The hand that strikes also blocks.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:13 PM
  #18
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
1. Gilmour
2. Forsberg
3. Modano
4. Sakic

There's definitely an argument between Sakic v. Modano; Sakic was the better defensive player to begin with, but Modano had a more defensive coaching influence during his peak time. That said, neither of them are near the other two. I think Gilmour's 93 and 94 were a bit overrated, and generally both were just below the "elite" few defensive forwards in the NHL in a given year.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:27 PM
  #19
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
1. Gilmour
2. Forsberg
3. Modano
4. Sakic

There's definitely an argument between Sakic v. Modano; Sakic was the better defensive player to begin with, but Modano had a more defensive coaching influence during his peak time. That said, neither of them are near the other two. I think Gilmour's 93 and 94 were a bit overrated, and generally both were just below the "elite" few defensive forwards in the NHL in a given year.
Sakic was brutal defensively in the early part of his career, maybe from 92-96 he was a bit better, but from 89-91ish, sakic was extremely one dimensional.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:44 PM
  #20
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Modano kept us his scoring while getting better defensively too; he just wasn't as good as the others at scoring to begin with.
While this is true, I was going off of memory and his 1 50 goal season was early on.

Adjusted he became a better scorer while his defense went up as well.

I haven't looked at it in depth but I don't think he had the offensive line mates that the 3 other guys had, at times, but maybe that's just an impression I have, I haven't looked at it all that closely.

I always thought Mike could have been more offensively than he was and got the impression, right or wrong, that his skating was his best plus plus skill while his hockey sense wasn't up to the same speed.


Last edited by Hardyvan123: 03-25-2013 at 10:53 PM.
Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:55 PM
  #21
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Sakic was brutal defensively in the early part of his career, maybe from 92-96 he was a bit better, but from 89-91ish, sakic was extremely one dimensional.
I don't think you remember Modano during the early 90s.

There's a reason he played a lot of RW (leading to a 50-goal season); that reason is that he ALSO was brutal defensively.

That's why the "Yzerman was terrible defensively early on" argument is so hilarious to me. When compared to other offensively skilled centers he played against he was quite solid defensively.

That's why I kind of separate Sakic/Modano and Forsberg/Gilmour into two tiers here. At their absolute best, there wasn't much difference. But Forsberg and Gilmour were able to be that good for a much longer period; it's not just a matter of a lucky run or different linemates in a given season.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:04 PM
  #22
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I don't think you remember Modano during the early 90s.

There's a reason he played a lot of RW (leading to a 50-goal season); that reason is that he ALSO was brutal defensively.

That's why the "Yzerman was terrible defensively early on" argument is so hilarious to me. When compared to other offensively skilled centers he played against he was quite solid defensively.

That's why I kind of separate Sakic/Modano and Forsberg/Gilmour into two tiers here. At their absolute best, there wasn't much difference. But Forsberg and Gilmour were able to be that good for a much longer period; it's not just a matter of a lucky run or different linemates in a given season.
Yerman wasnt terrible defensively, he was just focused on scoring, but he wasnt some great defensive player either, his own fans who saw his whole peak on this forum would tell u the same.

I'm well aware that modano had a negative reputation as a primadonna early on in his career, but from 96-2000is, i would say he was a full notch above sakic defensively.

Young Sakic however was aweful defensively, so there is no point in even comparing them early on because neither had a defensive element at that stage in thier career.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 12:21 AM
  #23
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
I'm well aware that modano had a negative reputation as a primadonna early on in his career, but from 96-2000is, i would say he was a full notch above sakic defensively.
A full notch? How big are these notches?

Quote:
Young Sakic however was aweful defensively, so there is no point in even comparing them early on because neither had a defensive element at that stage in thier career.
Sakic was better when both were young. It doesn't mean Sakic wasn't bad defensively; he just wasn't AS bad.

It's like comparing Tanner Glass and Darroll Powe in the area of offensive ability. They've each played about 30 games this season and each play about 10 minutes per game, but neither has a point. Who's better offensively? There is definitely an answer, but it doesn't matter much.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 01:11 AM
  #24
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
A full notch? How big are these notches?



Sakic was better when both were young. It doesn't mean Sakic wasn't bad defensively; he just wasn't AS bad.

It's like comparing Tanner Glass and Darroll Powe in the area of offensive ability. They've each played about 30 games this season and each play about 10 minutes per game, but neither has a point. Who's better offensively? There is definitely an answer, but it doesn't matter much.
From 1997 to 1999 he was clearly better in his own zone, from 2000 to 2003 it became close but edge still goes to modano. I think he was the more impactful defensive center, could care less what linemates are brought up.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 06:01 AM
  #25
PhillyBluesFan
Registered User
 
PhillyBluesFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,696
vCash: 500
Forsberg
Gilmour




Modano/Sakic

PhillyBluesFan 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 05:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.