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.

Whose peak season was better, Jagr in 1998-99 or Fedorov in 1993-94

View Poll Results: Better peak season, Jagr or Fedorov
Jagr's 1998-99 season 76 65.52%
Fedorov's 1993-94 season 40 34.48%
Voters: 116. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-06-2013, 09:49 PM
  #51
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Oh, the stats are fine. I just don't think you've considered how many ES goals you have to be on the ice for, to have 82 ES points and only finish +17. Sundin was +22 with "just" 67 ES points? It was a fun stat showing that Jagr had a hand in 52% of his team's goals, but think of what percentage of his team's goals he must have been on the ice for, as well. It must be over 50% of the ES goals against, too, since they allowed 146 ES goals that year and surely Jagr was on the ice for goals he didn't figure into scoring-wise.
It is true that Jagr was on the ice for a lot more goals against. One reason was he played an awful lot because his team was extremely weak outside of him. The second reason was that his team was extremely weak outside of him.

If you want to look at their expected and adjusted +/-, somewhat taking into account team strength, Jagr's season was actually a bigger + than Fedorov's.

Courtesy of overpass:

($ = normalized scoring environment)
Name$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFXEV+/-EV+/-AEV+/-
Fedorov114681.681.1584638
Jagr1361001.370.80-173753

XEV+/- Expected even-strength plus-minus, calculated from R-OFF, $ESGF, and $ESGA.
EV+/- Even-strength plus-minus - simply $ESGF - $ESGA.
AEV+/- Adjusted even-strength plus-minus - plus minus adjusted for scoring level and strength of team. Calculated with (EV+/-) - (XEV+/-). Does not adjust for strength of linemates or opposition.

This also illustrates just how poor Jagr's team was in comparison.


Last edited by BraveCanadian: 09-06-2013 at 09:57 PM.
BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
09-06-2013, 09:50 PM
  #52
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Oh, the stats are fine. I just don't think you've considered how many ES goals you have to be on the ice for, to have 82 ES points and only finish +17. Sundin was +22 with "just" 67 ES points? It was a fun stat showing that Jagr had a hand in 52% of his team's goals, but think of what percentage of his team's goals he must have been on the ice for, as well. It must be over 50% of the ES goals against, too, since they allowed 146 ES goals that year and surely Jagr was on the ice for goals he didn't figure into scoring-wise.
Again, ask yourself, who was on the Penguins roster in 1998-99? Jagr was on the ice for 159 goals for and 94 goals against btw, considering how crappy his team was defensively, that is pretty decent and that speaks to his true dominance.

Just look at 2005-06, Jagr finally had a decent goaltender on his team and a decent team defensive behind him and was +34, (3rd in the NHL). Jagr suffered from playing on some pretty poor defensive teams in the late 90's, that cannot be his fault at all.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
09-06-2013, 10:05 PM
  #53
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
In 1993-94, there were 8 players with 100 Pts or more, including 4 with 110 Pts or more, in total, 20 players scored 90 Pts or more. In 1998-99, only 3 players scored 100 Pts or more (2 of them played on the same team which were Selanne (107) and Karyia (101) and only 9 players scored 90 Pts or more.

You folks tell me, what is more impressive, scoring 127 Pts and having a gap of 20 more points than your nearest competitor or scoring 120 Pts, losing the Art Ross by 10 points and only outscoring the 7th leading scorer by 13 points?

We are not talking about a good Art Ross win here, we're not talking about 1994-95 or 1997-98 Jagr here, we are talking about Jagr at his absolute peak where he obliterated his competition in ways where he would have been top 10 in scoring on assists alone. He was 2nd in goals, 1st in assists (16 more than second assists man Forsberg) and the runaway leader in evenstrength scoring in both goals (33) and points (82). He dominated the scoring charts in ways only few before and none after him have dominated. His scoring lead in both numbers and percentages over his peers in 1998-99 has only ever been equaled or surpassed by the likes of Gretzky, Lemieux, Esposito, Hull, Howe and Orr.

Fedorov's season was impressive but it wasn't on the same level as Jagr's but just below. Fedorov's 1993-94 season pretty much beats anyone else's not named Lemieux, Gretzky or Hasek over the past 25 years but it doesn't beat Jagr's 1998-99 and for that matter 1995-96 seasons either. In fairness, a better season to compare Jagr's to Fedorov's 1993-94 season would be 2005-06 and Jagr was 34 years old by then.


Last edited by livewell68: 09-07-2013 at 12:11 AM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
09-07-2013, 12:12 AM
  #54
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 24,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Does not adjust for strength of linemates or opposition.
And I would say factoring those things in only serves to make the comparison of these two seasons as close as I've been saying from the start.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
09-07-2013, 08:30 AM
  #55
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
And I would say factoring those things in only serves to make the comparison of these two seasons as close as I've been saying from the start.
Only if you think those factors would favour Fedorov which doesn't make any sense.

They were both presumably facing the other teams better players and if anything Jagr had the weaker supporting cast.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
09-07-2013, 12:50 PM
  #56
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,188
vCash: 500
I don't disagree that it's Jagr, but I think some people make too big of a deal about his raw gap in points (20). Pittsburgh basically used him as much as any team would use a #1 defenseman (in fact, only four defensemen played more minutes than Jagr all season), leading to him playing about 352 more minutes of ES and PP hockey than the #2 scorer (who would have to play an additional 15 and a half games at his 22:47 just to equal Jagr's playing time). It's actually a bigger gap than the difference in ES + PP TOI between the leading forward in 2000 (Kovalev, 1755 minutes in 82 GP) and 63 GP Jagr (1445 minutes; difference of 310 minutes)!

With Jagr playing as much as he did and the offense being cycled through his line for half of the game, it makes sense that he had such an abnormally high secondary assist rate even if he only led goals+primary by 1 point (meaning that the 20-point lead was almost entirely comprised of Jagr's 19-point secondary assist lead).

Obviously, that says nothing about team strength - and it only serves to make Jagr more valuable - but the 20-point gap is certainly inflated by TOI - just the same as the 2-point gap in 2000 between Jagr and Bure was deflated by TOI (difference of 213 ES/PP minutes - in Bure's favor - compared to the 352 minute gap in 1999 that went in Jagr's favor). Just something that not enough people think about when they rush to declare Jagr as having the best season from a European... which he totally did in 1999-2000.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
09-07-2013, 03:02 PM
  #57
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
It is true that Jagr was on the ice for a lot more goals against. One reason was he played an awful lot because his team was extremely weak outside of him. The second reason was that his team was extremely weak outside of him.

If you want to look at their expected and adjusted +/-, somewhat taking into account team strength, Jagr's season was actually a bigger + than Fedorov's.

Courtesy of overpass:

($ = normalized scoring environment)
Name$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFXEV+/-EV+/-AEV+/-
Fedorov114681.681.1584638
Jagr1361001.370.80-173753

XEV+/- Expected even-strength plus-minus, calculated from R-OFF, $ESGF, and $ESGA.
EV+/- Even-strength plus-minus - simply $ESGF - $ESGA.
AEV+/- Adjusted even-strength plus-minus - plus minus adjusted for scoring level and strength of team. Calculated with (EV+/-) - (XEV+/-). Does not adjust for strength of linemates or opposition.

This also illustrates just how poor Jagr's team was in comparison.
Exactly as expected.

habsfanatics is offline  
Old
09-07-2013, 07:54 PM
  #58
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,741
vCash: 500
So Fedorov is being punished for playing on a good team? Btw Yzerman was absent most of that year, IIRC.

Livewell: keep on repeating that Fedorov lost to "the shell of Gretzky.". Gretzky was still incredible that year, coming off of the best PO performance in history. To lose to him by 10 points is nothing to scowl at.

Fedorov's second place in scoring, in conjunction with Selke, is phenomenal regardless of the era. Defense wins games, but Feds was far from a mere defensive forward, Carbonneau-style. That year he was the most complete player in history.


Last edited by Sentinel: 09-08-2013 at 05:48 AM.
Sentinel is offline  
Old
09-07-2013, 11:36 PM
  #59
whatname
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 190
vCash: 500
if we're talking one season, then I would go with Fedorov's Selke and Hart season. Only thing prevented Sergei from winning the Art Ross was the greatest player of all time.

Now, speaking of greatest single season of a Euro, I'd have to say Hasek's best season is right up there with Sergei and Jagr's.

whatname is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 05:54 AM
  #60
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,741
vCash: 500
Also, why is it popular to belittle 98-99 Pittsburgh? Other than Jagr they had a pretty solid cast: Kovalev, Lang, Straka, Morozov, Miller, Titov, K. Hatcher, Kasparaitis, Hrdina, with Barrasso and Skudra in net. A pretty solid crew. Just because they underperformed (as usual) doesn't mean they were as bad as Mr. Livewell says.

Sentinel is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 07:55 AM
  #61
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,072
vCash: 500
As much as I love Fedorov's 94 season, I have to go with Jagr. Jagr literally tore apart his competition what can not be said about Fedorov - offensively. Throw in an overrated Selke and Fedorov still doesnt wash the gap.

begbeee is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 08:16 AM
  #62
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbeee View Post
his competition what can not be said about Fedorov - offensively
It's been said many times that Fedorov's offensive output yields to Jagr's. That's not the point.

Quote:
Throw in an overrated Selke and Fedorov still doesnt wash the gap.
Here's the odd part. Do you think that Selkes are overrated in general? Or just this Fedorov's Selke? Or you don't value two-way players at all?

I take an elite two-way player over an elite scorer any day. The latter wins awards, the former wins games.

Sentinel is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 09:26 AM
  #63
begbeee
Registered User
 
begbeee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Slovakia
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
It's been said many times that Fedorov's offensive output yields to Jagr's. That's not the point.


Here's the odd part. Do you think that Selkes are overrated in general? Or just this Fedorov's Selke? Or you don't value two-way players at all?

I take an elite two-way player over an elite scorer any day. The latter wins awards, the former wins games.
Defense started to be quite overrated on this forum in general. Not saying it's not important, Selke calibre is obviously something special, but not so much that it should wash so spectacular offensive output - jagr's one.

I'm pretty sure there are people on this forum who would argue that Datsyuk is better player than Ovechkin or Malkin, but I'm sure there is no coach who would chose Dats before Ovie. Same goes for Fedorov/Jagr.

begbeee is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 12:28 PM
  #64
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Also, why is it popular to belittle 98-99 Pittsburgh? Other than Jagr they had a pretty solid cast: Kovalev, Lang, Straka, Morozov, Miller, Titov, K. Hatcher, Kasparaitis, Hrdina, with Barrasso and Skudra in net. A pretty solid crew. Just because they underperformed (as usual) doesn't mean they were as bad as Mr. Livewell says.
i think this is very true. if you look at the four playoff games that jagr was hurt against the devils, the pens went 2-2 against the devils. that devils team was a 105 point team, 2nd in the league (and 2nd in GF, 7th in GA).

obviously, with jagr, they went 2-1, but of course that team is going to be better with jagr than without. the point is, those pens underachieved in the regular season and showed their true selves as a competitive team in the playoffs. straka and kovalev were especially good in the devils series.

and no one in this thread is discounting the amazing offensive year jagr had in '99, but in terms of winning games, almost the exact same team, with the addition of kovalev and minus francis, underachieved: slipped from 1st to 3rd in their division, and fell from 5th to 11th in the standings (and would stay as a roughly 90 point team for two years, until mario's comeback). this was jagr's first year as captain. you could say the team let him down, but shouldn't some of that blame fall on jagr as the team's undisputed leader?

'99 jagr vs. '94 fedorov is close. i can't actually pick one over the other, definitively. but any suggestion that jagr wins in a landslide seems dishonest to me.

vadim sharifijanov is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 12:32 PM
  #65
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Also, why is it popular to belittle 98-99 Pittsburgh? Other than Jagr they had a pretty solid cast: Kovalev, Lang, Straka, Morozov, Miller, Titov, K. Hatcher, Kasparaitis, Hrdina, with Barrasso and Skudra in net. A pretty solid crew. Just because they underperformed (as usual) doesn't mean they were as bad as Mr. Livewell says.
Check your rosters and stats please.

Kovalev only played 63 games and recorded just 46 points.

Straka had 83 Pts which was the total of assists Jagr had. (BTW, Straka's 4 career high seasons on points came playing along side Jagr be it Pittsburgh or New York).

The Penguins had Jagr with 127 Pts, Straka with 83 Pts and Titov with 56 Pts. Those Penguins players outside of Jagr and to a lesser extend Straka, were a very mediocre team.

As for the Penguins' goaltending trio, their save percentage average hovered around .900% when the rest of the NHL had mostly goalies playing at a .915-920 clip.

The Penguins as a team were 17th (out of a total 27 teams) in goals against so their defense and goaltender was closer to the bottom half and they allowed 57 more goals than Dallas (league leaders in that category) and this despite the entire NHL being in a DPE goal freeze.

You cannot compare the 1993-94 Detroit Red Wings (an elite team) to the 1998-99 Penguins (a mediocre team if you remove Jagr and Straka). The Penguins had only 1 other Hall of Fame player on that team who happened to be Barasso who was long past his prime.

As for the Red Wings team, they had Fedorov, Yzerman, Lidstrom, Coffey, Ciccarelli, Konstantinov (those are players that are HHOF worthy) with a bunch of talented players including Ray Sheppard, Keith Primeau (borderline Hall of Fame), Osgoode. If anything, it was those Red Wings teams that underachieved and with Fedorov being the leader while Yzerman was injured, they faltered in the playoffs. Jagr helped his Penguins teams if anything, overachieve.


Last edited by livewell68: 09-08-2013 at 01:59 PM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 12:42 PM
  #66
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
i think this is very true. if you look at the four playoff games that jagr was hurt against the devils, the pens went 2-2 against the devils. that devils team was a 105 point team, 2nd in the league (and 2nd in GF, 7th in GA).

obviously, with jagr, they went 2-1, but of course that team is going to be better with jagr than without. the point is, those pens underachieved in the regular season and showed their true selves as a competitive team in the playoffs. straka and kovalev were especially good in the devils series.

and no one in this thread is discounting the amazing offensive year jagr had in '99, but in terms of winning games, almost the exact same team, with the addition of kovalev and minus francis, underachieved: slipped from 1st to 3rd in their division, and fell from 5th to 11th in the standings (and would stay as a roughly 90 point team for two years, until mario's comeback). this was jagr's first year as captain. you could say the team let him down, but shouldn't some of that blame fall on jagr as the team's undisputed leader?

'99 jagr vs. '94 fedorov is close. i can't actually pick one over the other, definitively. but any suggestion that jagr wins in a landslide seems dishonest to me.
You want to talk about this Penguins team being underachievers? Actually quite the opposite, the Penguins going into 1998-99 were picked by many NHL pundits to be a lottery team and in fact Jagr wasn't even the pick to win the Hart that season, he was going in as a 5th favorite to win the Hart with Hasek,, Lindros, Selanne, Karyia leading that list as a lot of experts thought Jagr would struggle to fit in to the Captain role and would miss Francis.

If you really want to know how weak that Penguins team was, look no further than 1999-00 (the following season). With Jagr getting off to a blistering 71 Pts (32g and 39a) start in his first 39 games, the Penguins had raced to a 2nd seed in the Eastern Conference (1st in a very tough and competitive division (the Devils and Flyers being the superior teams), then Jagr gets injured, misses 19 games, and by the time he gets back, the Penguins drop to 8th in East (that is a huge 6 position drop in just 19 games). That Penguins team's second leading scorer was Kovalev with just 66 Pts in 82 games (Jagr outscored him by 30 Pts while playing 19 less games).

Those Penguins teams had some ok offensive players (but that was especially true in 2000-01) but before that Kovalev was a huge underachiever, Lang had yet to break out and Straka was a talented player with a decent two-way game but happened to greatly benefit from playing on the same PP as Jagr and also playing on the 2nd line where he got far less defensive attention since Jagr took all of that attention on the 1st line.

The Penguins were not going to win the Cup anytime soon and if they had, that would have been 100% on Jagr and no one else.


Last edited by livewell68: 09-08-2013 at 01:28 PM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 03:54 PM
  #67
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 24,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Only if you think those factors would favour Fedorov which doesn't make any sense.

They were both presumably facing the other teams better players and if anything Jagr had the weaker supporting cast.
Central division in '93/94 vs Atlantic division in '98/99? The West in the '90s in general vs the East? Shooters in the Central in '93/94 faced some of the best seasons from Belfour, Joseph, Potvin, etc while those in the Atlantic in '98/99 faced prime Brodeur, but old Richter, old Beezer, and a LOT of the Salo/Flaherty tandem on the Islanders, etc.

I think any teammate advantage that can be found for Fedorov simply washes with any opposition advantage; given who they were playing and scoring against every day, imo.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 04:17 PM
  #68
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Central division in '93/94 vs Atlantic division in '98/99? The West in the '90s in general vs the East? Shooters in the Central in '93/94 faced some of the best seasons from Belfour, Joseph, Potvin, etc while those in the Atlantic in '98/99 faced prime Brodeur, but old Richter, old Beezer, and a LOT of the Salo/Flaherty tandem on the Islanders, etc.

I think any teammate advantage that can be found for Fedorov simply washes with any opposition advantage; given who they were playing and scoring against every day, imo.
In 1993-94 the Blackhawks and Leafs were 5th and 6th respectively in GAA.

In 1998-99 the Devils and Flyers were 6th and 7th in GAA. Not much of a difference there. The Devils and Flyers were both powerhouses in the 1998-99 season, 5 of the top 8 teams in GAA in 1998-99 were in the Eastern Conference.

The Penguins were 8th in the East in 1998-99 and upset the 1st seed Devils in the first round. In 1993-94 the Red Wings were the 1st seed in the West and lost to the 8th seed Sharks. You tell me who was more impressive considering the teammates and supporting cast they both had to play with.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 04:24 PM
  #69
Evincar
Not God, Grodd
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Also, why is it popular to belittle 98-99 Pittsburgh? Other than Jagr they had a pretty solid cast: Kovalev, Lang, Straka, Morozov, Miller, Titov, K. Hatcher, Kasparaitis, Hrdina, with Barrasso and Skudra in net. A pretty solid crew. Just because they underperformed (as usual) doesn't mean they were as bad as Mr. Livewell says.
How the hell is that a solid crew? Morozov, Miller, Hrdina are pretty crummy players. Lang and Kovalev were bad that year.

Evincar is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 04:39 PM
  #70
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
Check your rosters stats please.

Kovalev only played 63 games and recorded just 46 points.

Straka had 83 Pts which was the total of assists Jagr. (BTW, Straka's 4 career high seasons on points came playing along side Jagr be it Pittsburgh or New Yor).

The Penguins had Jagr with 127 Pts, Straka with 83 Pts and Titov with 56 Pts. Those Penguins players outside of Jagr and to a lesser extend Straka, were a very mediocre team.

As for the Penguins' goaltending trio, their save percentage average hovered around .900% when the rest of the NHL had mostly goalies playing at a .915-920 clip.

The Penguins as a team were 17th (out of a total 27 teams) in goals against so their defense and goaltender was closer to the bottom half and they allowed 57 more goals than Dallas and this despite the entire NHL being in DPE goal freeze.

You cannot compare the 1993-94 Detroit Red Wings (an elite team) to the 1998-99 Penguins (a mediocre team if you remove Jagr and Straka).
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
You want to talk about this Penguins team being underachievers? Actually quite the opposite, the Penguins going into 1998-99 were picked by many NHL pundits to be a lottery team and in fact Jagr wasn't even the pick to win the Hart that season, he was going in as a 5th favorite to win the Hart with Hasek,, Lindros, Selanne, Karyia leading that list.

If you really want to know how weak that Penguins team was, look no further than 1999-00 (the following season). With Jagr getting off to a blistering 71 Pts (32g and 39a) start in his first 39 games, the Penguins had raced to a 2nd seed in the Eastern Conference (1st in a very tough and competition division (the Devils and Flyers being the superior teams), then Jagr gets injured, misses 19 games, and by the time he gets back, the Penguins drop to 8th in East (that is a huge 6 position drop in just 19 games). That Penguins team's second leading scorer was Kovalev with just 66 Pts in 82 games (Jagr outscored by 30 Pts while playing 19 less games).

Those Penguins teams had some ok offensive players (but that was especially true in 2000-01) but before that Kovalev was a huge underachiever, Lang had yet to break out and Straka was a talented player with a decent two-way game but happened to greatly benefit from playing on the same PP as Jagr and also playing on the 2nd line were he got far less defensive attention since Jagr took all of that attention on the 1st line.

The Penguins were not going to win the Cup anytime soon and if they had, that would have 100% on Jagr and no one else.
in the four games jagr missed in the first round, straka put up 4 goals, 2 assists. kovalev put up 2 goals, 5 assists. hell, kip miller put up 1 goal, 4 assists. not saying jagr didn't boost straka's numbers, but the complementary scorers on the roster were more than capable of putting up points without him. it wasn't the '94 wings, but this wasn't exactly bure on the '01 panthers either.

but again, shouldn't the underachieving of jagr's teammates at least be partly on jagr, who was their captain? ("underachiever" is your word, re: kovalev, btw)

and i think you're overstating jagr's impact on his teammates, in terms of taking away the toughest checkers. obviously, your best d-men and defensive forwards will of course be on jagr. but you take jagr out of the lineup for four playoff games and straka, kovalev, and kip miller all put up monster points totals. they did *better* without jagr, so it's hard to say straka's ES production benefited from being on the second line behind jagr. (and is that even true? i thought straka was his linemate that season...) now if you want to talk about a guy coming in and opening up easy offensive minutes for his teammates, look at 2001, when mario comes back and straka, kovalev, and lang all have by far the best seasons of their careers up to that point.

now the point of saying all that isn't to say that jagr didn't come by his points honestly, or that his offensive edge over fedorov wasn't very very real. the point is, looking at the production of a guy's teammates ultimately show their true value. jagr got offensive opportunities that when he was out went to kovalev. kovalev did just fine with those opportunities; he wasn't jagr, but he wasn't his '99 regular season performance (or his quiet performance against the leafs in round two) either.

vadim sharifijanov is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 04:56 PM
  #71
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 4,012
vCash: 500
Why are people kidding themselves calling Red Wings of '94 a powerhouse or that they lost the first round should be put on Fedorov?

Red Wings in '94 was a good team but very inexperienced. Most of their keyplayers during that playoff was under 25 or injured (Yzerman). It was Osgoods first playoff and people seem to only view the names on the roster and remember how they were in their prime. This is pre-prime Draper, McCarty, Lidström, Osgood, Kozlov, Primeau...

Fedorov himself was only 24 iirc and he won Hart and Selke. Tbh I'll take the guy who helped his team at both ends of the rink over the guy who barely had defensive responsibllities.

Hobnobs is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 05:08 PM
  #72
Evincar
Not God, Grodd
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobnobs View Post
Why are people kidding themselves calling Red Wings of '94 a powerhouse or that they lost the first round should be put on Fedorov?

Red Wings in '94 was a good team but very inexperienced. Most of their keyplayers during that playoff was under 25 or injured (Yzerman). It was Osgoods first playoff and people seem to only view the names on the roster and remember how they were in their prime. This is pre-prime Draper, McCarty, Lidström, Osgood, Kozlov, Primeau...

Fedorov himself was only 24 iirc and he won Hart and Selke. Tbh I'll take the guy who helped his team at both ends of the rink over the guy who barely had defensive responsibllities.
I wouldnt put the loss on Fedorov but I definitely wouldnt call their team inexperienced.

Evincar is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 05:36 PM
  #73
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
in the four games jagr missed in the first round, straka put up 4 goals, 2 assists. kovalev put up 2 goals, 5 assists. hell, kip miller put up 1 goal, 4 assists. not saying jagr didn't boost straka's numbers, but the complementary scorers on the roster were more than capable of putting up points without him. it wasn't the '94 wings, but this wasn't exactly bure on the '01 panthers either.

but again, shouldn't the underachieving of jagr's teammates at least be partly on jagr, who was their captain? ("underachiever" is your word, re: kovalev, btw)g =

and i think you're overstating jagr's impact on his teammates, in terms of taking away the toughest checkers. obviously, your best d-men and defensive forwards will of course be on jagr. but you take jagr out of the lineup for four playoff games and straka, kovalev, and kip miller all put up monster points totals. they did *better* without jagr, so it's hard to say straka's ES production benefited from being on the second line behind jagr. (and is that even true? i thought straka was his linemate that season...) now if you want to talk about a guy coming in and opening up easy offensive minutes for his teammates, look at 2001, when mario comes back and straka, kovalev, and lang all have by far the best seasons of their careers up to that point.

now the point of saying all that isn't to say that jagr didn't come by his points honestly, or that his offensive edge over fedorov wasn't very very real. the point is, looking at the production of a guy's teammates ultimately show their true value. jagr got offensive opportunities that when he was out went to kovalev. kovalev did just fine with those opportunities; he wasn't jagr, but he wasn't his '99 regular season performance (or his quiet performance against the leafs in round two) either.
Straka had career highs of 95, 83, 76 and 70 points and the constant was Jagr. As for the 1999 playoffs you keep bringing up, sure Straka put up great numbers but take away the hattrick and his numbers don't look as impressive. The Devils underestimated the Penguins with Jagr out of the lineup yet they were still up on the Penguins 3-2 in the series and it was Jagr, not any other player who led thecomeback.



[QUOTE] Michael Farber, SI, 1999:
Quote:
Last month Chicago Blackhawks assistant coach Denis Savard proclaimed Jagr "the best player in the game by a million miles," as if the subject were as closed as a team meeting.

...

"Jaromir should get a cut of every contract of everyone who plays with him before signing a new deal because half the money they're getting is due to him," Constantine says, despite his occasional differences with his star. "He makes it tricky for this organization. We have to ask ourselves how good the guy is. Is he good because he plays with Jagr? Not taking anything anyway from Marty Straka, who's a helluva player, but none of the guys Jaromir plays with have a time-tested history of being major talents." There is no one riding shotgun for Jagr the way Joe Sakic does for Forsberg, John LeClair does for Lindros or Selanne does for Kariya. Pittsburgh has several forwards with a clue, but it also has more extras than there were in Titanic.

...

"There are probably four ways to play Jagr, all of them wrong," Montreal assistant coach Dave King says. "He's the toughest player in hockey to devise a game plan against."
/QUOTE]


Last edited by livewell68: 09-08-2013 at 05:43 PM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 05:41 PM
  #74
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 24,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
In 1993-94 the Blackhawks and Leafs were 5th and 6th respectively in GAA.

In 1998-99 the Devils and Flyers were 6th and 7th in GAA. Not much of a difference there. The Devils and Flyers were both powerhouses in the 1998-99 season, 5 of the top 8 teams in GAA in 1998-99 were in the Eastern Conference.
So? I think shooters facing Belfour/the Blackhawks, Joseph/the Blues, Potvin/the Leafs, and Moog/the Stars in '93/94 is a rougher road to point production than facing Brodeur/the Devils, 32 year old Beezer/the Flyers, 32 year old Richter/the Rangers, and Salo/Flaherty/the Islanders. Team GA rankings do little besides remind us that Jagr was on the ice for a BUNCH more than Fedorov.

But the truth is, in '98/99 players played against every team of every division in both conferences, and it was the rest of the Eastern conference that really sucked. Let's look at where Jagr made his hay:

Atlantic: 27 pts in 19 games
Northeast: 38 points in 20 games (11 pts in 4 games vs Montreal)
Southeast: 29 points in 18 games (9 pts in 4 games vs Washington)
----------------------------------------------------------------
=94 pts in 57 games (1.65 GAA)

c.f. 33 points in 24 games vs the West:

Central: 9 pts in 7 games
Northwest: 12 pts in 8 games
Pacific: 12 pts in 9 games
----------------------------------
=33 points in 24 games (1.38 GAA)

135 point pace vs the East, 113 point pace vs the West. Look at the rest of the top scorers that year, and you'll see that they all have higher PPG vs the East (aside from Kariya, who was actually opposite). Selanne had a 120 point pace vs the East and 116 points vs the West . Forsberg's pace was 116 points vs the East, 96 points vs the West. Sakic 109 vs the East, 107 vs the West, etc. Look at how close those bold parts are, and think about that.

I submit that greater familiarity with weaker teams and goaltenders in a weaker conference resulted in Jagr's points totals suggesting a much greater gap between him and Selanne, Kariya, Forsberg, and Sakic than was actually the case. Projected against all Western ("better") conference opponents, Jagr wouldn't even have taken home the Art Ross.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline  
Old
09-08-2013, 05:46 PM
  #75
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
So? I think shooters facing Belfour/the Blackhawks, Joseph/the Blues, Potvin/the Leafs, and Moog/the Stars in '93/94 is a rougher road to point production than facing Brodeur/the Devils, 32 year old Beezer/the Flyers, 32 year old Richter/the Rangers, and Salo/Flaherty/the Islanders. Team GA rankings do little besides remind us that Jagr was on the ice for a BUNCH more than Fedorov.

But the truth is, in '98/99 players played against every team of every division in both conferences, and it was the rest of the Eastern conference that really sucked. Let's look at where Jagr made his hay:

Atlantic: 27 pts in 19 games
Northeast: 38 points in 20 games (11 pts in 4 games vs Montreal)
Southeast: 29 points in 18 games (9 pts in 4 games vs Washington)
----------------------------------------------------------------
=94 pts in 57 games (1.65 GAA)

c.f. 33 points in 24 games vs the West:

Central: 9 pts in 7 games
Northwest: 12 pts in 8 games
Pacific: 12 pts in 9 games
----------------------------------
=33 points in 24 games (1.38 GAA)

135 point pace vs the East, 113 point pace vs the West. Look at the rest of the top scorers that year, and you'll see that they all have higher PPG vs the East (aside from Kariya, who was actually opposite). Selanne had a 120 point pace vs the East and 116 points vs the West . Forsberg's pace was 116 points vs the East, 96 points vs the West. Sakic 109 vs the East, 107 vs the West, etc. Look at how close those bold parts are, and think about that.

I submit that greater familiarity with weaker teams and goaltenders in a weaker conference resulted in Jagr's points totals suggesting a much greater gap between him and Selanne, Kariya, Forsberg, and Sakic than was actually the case. Projected against all Western ("better") conference opponents, Jagr wouldn't even have taken home the Art Ross.
A team that was top 8 GAA. Have you ever thought that maybe the reason why Jagr dominated the Habs was because he was a great player and not because they were a weak team? That Habs team made the playoffs btw.

livewell68 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:43 AM.

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.