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.

Crosby vs. Claude Lemieux... or Fedorov

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-07-2014, 01:30 AM
  #1
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Crosby vs. Claude Lemieux... or Fedorov

Yes, you've read it right. Not Mario Lemieux. Claude. The one who was always nothing special in the regular season, but turned it on in playoffs like few others. Won four Cups, was a big part in three of them, including the Conn Smythe.

OK, if that's too much of a stretch, take Fedorov. Loses to Crosby on all accounts during the regular season (except that incredible 93-94 season), but the man was a beast in playoffs. Even in losing efforts (95 Finals, 99 WCSF) he played reasonably well. He was never ever blamed for his team's failure.

Sure, Crosby's numbers look good in the regular season. But outside of those two runs in 08 and 09, he didn't just "not do well" in playoffs. He flat out sucked in playoffs. The last two exits have been as close to "disgraceful" and the two before were pretty lame as well. Not only he doesn't do well (we all know situations when players play well, but the team just does not advance), but he is clearly one of the main reasons why his team does not advance. Yet he is consistently brought up as "the best player in the world." He is... in the regular season only. In the last four playoffs he has not even been in the top five.

Internationally, he is nothing special either. Sure, he scored two goals in two Olympic finals, but he was clearly outplayed by his teammates. Fedorov in his last world championship was the best player on his team.

So my question is: in your evaluation of a player, do you value regular season achievements more than playoffs + international performance? Regular season is where awards are and points can be racked up, and there Crosby shines. On the other hand you have players like Fedorov, Lemieux, and, lately, Doughty, who are clearly not interested in killing themselves during the regular season, yet turn it on big time for big games.

Since I don't know how to make a poll, you can just answer in text

Sentinel is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 01:37 AM
  #2
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 56,055
vCash: 50
Putting Claude into the debate will cause you to get beat down

Sid the kid is over a pts a game player in both regular season and playoffs


Fedorov just under

Claude comes third in this race

jumptheshark is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 02:32 AM
  #3
Skobel24
#Ignited
 
Skobel24's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,174
vCash: 50
Crosby. Easily.

Skobel24 is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 03:55 AM
  #4
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 12,411
vCash: 50
Crosby vs. Claude is so ridiculously lopsided that it shouldn't be brought up.

Fedorov is more interesting one. Although I don't see how anyone could justify Feds over Crosby by any metric. Well, one peak-season is compelling case and frankly, maybe I'd side with Feds. Other than that, Crosby has already surpassed Fedorov in the all-time ranking by a clear margin.

TAnnala is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 04:11 AM
  #5
5 4 Fighting
Big member
 
5 4 Fighting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bk all day
Country: United States
Posts: 4,869
vCash: 783
Aside from the all-time ranking mumbo jumbo, if I had a choice to take 1 player for a playoff game, it's between Fedorov and Forsberg for me. I'd choose Sergei over both Crosby and C. Lemieux just because of his versatility, #1 Winger, #1 Center, top-pairing defenseman you name it, he does it at an elite level. Also, one if the fastest, most agile players to ever lace them up. One of my all-time favorites.

5 4 Fighting is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 06:21 AM
  #6
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
A few questions:

How do you come to the conclusion that the player who has the highest active playoff PPG, has two of the top five playoff performances since 2005, was the best forward for Canada at the 2014 Olympics in the semi's and finals, only shows up in the regular season?

Would you also describe Malkin's playoff performance last year as disgraceful or his last two games against NYR this year?

daver is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 06:32 AM
  #7
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
Crosby has already surpassed Fedorov in the all-time ranking by a clear margin.
Based on what? Regular season? That's not what I'm talking about. Because in playoffs Fedorov (and even Lemieux) have the edge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
How do you come to the conclusion that the player who has the highest active playoff PPG, has two of the top five playoff performances since 2005, was the best forward for Canada at the 2014 Olympics in the semi's and finals, only shows up in the regular season?

Would you also describe Malkin's playoff performance last year as disgraceful or his last two games against NYR this year?
Malkin was clearly better than Crosby in this year's playoffs. And better than Crosby in playoffs in general.

Crosby was not Canada's best forward in the semis against US. No points, and his defensive play, while good, but not on the level of Toews and others.

Let's do this: forget the regular season altogether. Would you really pick Crosby over Claude Lemieux (let alone Fedorov) for a playoff run? Crosby's PPG stats are virtually meaningless: he pounded on the likes of NYI and Columbus, while falling short against the real enemy. Lemieux brought his A-game against big opponents. So did Fedorov.

Sentinel is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 06:44 AM
  #8
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Based on what? Regular season? That's not what I'm talking about. Because in playoffs Fedorov (and even Lemieux) have the edge.
In what metric? Both players never had a playoff run like Crosby's and PPG is well below Crosby's despite playing in a higher scoring era (Lemieux more so than Fedorov).

daver is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 06:55 AM
  #9
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Malkin was clearly better than Crosby in this year's playoffs. And better than Crosby in playoffs in general.

Crosby was not Canada's best forward in the semis against US. No points, and his defensive play, while good, but not on the level of Toews and others.

Let's do this: forget the regular season altogether. Would you really pick Crosby over Claude Lemieux (let alone Fedorov) for a playoff run? Crosby's PPG stats are virtually meaningless: he pounded on the likes of NYI and Columbus, while falling short against the real enemy. Lemieux brought his A-game against big opponents. So did Fedorov.
You didn't answer the question, by your standards he was a "disgrace" because he had no points against Boston in 2013 and failed against NYR in games this year.

You obviously didn't watch the US game and/or understand Canada's gameplan.

I would pick pre-concussion Crosby without hesitation over them.

daver is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 07:16 AM
  #10
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,822
vCash: 500
Okay, I think you might be overreacting to Crosby's bad playoff this year. He's usually quite good.


Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
Both players never had a playoff run like Crosby's and PPG is well below Crosby's despite playing in a higher scoring era (Lemieux more so than Fedorov).
Don't know that I agree with this.


Sergei Fedorov, 1995
Average Opponent GA: 227
7 Goals, 17 Assists in 17 Games
1.41 points-per-game (1.41 without ENG)

Claude Lemieux, 1997
Average Opponent GA: 218
13 Goals, 10 Assists in 17 Games
1.35 points-per-game (1.35 without ENG)

Sidney Crosby, 2008
Average Opponent GA: 216
6 Goals, 21 Assists in 20 Games
1.35 points-per-game (1.20 without ENG)

Sidney Crosby, 2009
Average Opponent GA: 238
15 Goals, 16 Assists in 24 Games
1.29 points-per-game (1.21 without ENG)


It could certainly be argued that both Fedorov and Lemieux were better in their best runs than Crosby was in either of his best two runs. Of course, Crosby makes up any lost ground with additional playoffs at only slightly lesser levels.

quoipourquoi is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 07:20 AM
  #11
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 12,411
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentinel View Post
Based on what? Regular season? That's not what I'm talking about. Because in playoffs Fedorov (and even Lemieux) have the edge.
Fed's might have the edge on both playoff peak and regular season peak, if we consider on singular season as a peak.

But Crosby already has more elite regular season's and playoffs than Feds. I know you won't agree with me on this one, but it is not going to surprise me.

TAnnala is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 07:28 AM
  #12
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 12,411
vCash: 50
But at first I misinterpreted this thread. I thought you meant overall.

In the playoffs, all three were great and everyone had similar peak in the playoffs.


Crosby is the best player out of these three, but his playoff resume is not that much ahead of Feds, who has done all the same things as Crosby has in the playoffs. Led the playoffs in goals, assists and points.

But outside of that one year when Feds had 24 points in 17 games, was he ever considered as Conn Smythe threat? I know he had those three consecutive 20 point performances after that 24 point, but in any of those playoffs, was he considered as the best/top-3 player playing that year? Good, certainly. Elite? Not sure.

TAnnala is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 07:30 AM
  #13
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 12,411
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
In what metric? Both players never had a playoff run like Crosby's and PPG is well below Crosby's despite playing in a higher scoring era (Lemieux more so than Fedorov).
Really, you are going to underline the word never?

TAnnala is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 07:55 AM
  #14
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,795
vCash: 500
Your view of Lemieux is skewed due to two seasons it seems - 1995 and 1997. His career playoff numbers are only very slightly better on a per-game basis than his regular-season numbers.

And, of course, you're comparing two completed careers to someone in mid-career. At age 26, Fedorov had yet to win a Cup, and Lemieux had only the one in his rookie season, and no Conn Smythe. In Montreal's 1989 Cup run, he was 13th in team scoring, and followed that up with one goal in 11 games in 1990 - but hey, at least he spent more time in the penalty box than anyone on his team! Lemieux had scored 56 points in 91 playoff games at that point in a higher-scoring era than Crosby, who has 114 in 95 games. Fedorov's better than Lemieux here, but still trails Crosby even if you do not consider the relative scoring levels.

Iain Fyffe is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 08:09 AM
  #15
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAnnala View Post
But outside of that one year when Feds had 24 points in 17 games, was he ever considered as Conn Smythe threat? I know he had those three consecutive 20 point performances after that 24 point, but in any of those playoffs, was he considered as the best/top-3 player playing that year? Good, certainly. Elite? Not sure.
Many point to 1997. I believe Vernon to be a fine choice, but I might be in the minority.

quoipourquoi is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 08:27 AM
  #16
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Don't know that I agree with this.


Sergei Fedorov, 1995
Average Opponent GA: 227
7 Goals, 17 Assists in 17 Games
1.41 points-per-game (1.41 without ENG)

Claude Lemieux, 1997
Average Opponent GA: 218
13 Goals, 10 Assists in 17 Games
1.35 points-per-game (1.35 without ENG)

Sidney Crosby, 2008
Average Opponent GA: 216
6 Goals, 21 Assists in 20 Games
1.35 points-per-game (1.20 without ENG)

Sidney Crosby, 2009
Average Opponent GA: 238
15 Goals, 16 Assists in 24 Games
1.29 points-per-game (1.21 without ENG)


It could certainly be argued that both Fedorov and Lemieux were better in their best runs than Crosby was in either of his best two runs. Of course, Crosby makes up any lost ground with additional playoffs at only slightly lesser levels.
The difference being those runs didn't include all four rounds.

Take away Crosby's last round in 2009 and he has a 14 goals, 28 points in 17 games for a 1.65 PPG.

Take away Crosby's last round in 2008 and he has a 1.50 PPG in 14 games.

Neither Fedorov or Lemieux was above a PPG in years they got to the final.


Last edited by daver: 06-07-2014 at 08:34 AM.
daver is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 09:00 AM
  #17
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
The difference being those runs didn't include all four rounds.

Take away Crosby's last round in 2009 and he has a 14 goals, 28 points in 17 games for a 1.65 PPG.

Take away Crosby's last round in 2008 and he has a 1.50 PPG in 14 games.

Neither Fedorov or Lemieux was above a PPG in years they got to the final.
Fedorov went all four rounds in 1995.


And if you take away Crosby's final round in 2008, his average opponent had a GA of 234 (2009: 236 GA). So his competition was noticeably worse than Claude Lemieux's (218 GA). And since Crosby didn't score any EN points in the Finals, those are inflating his offensive numbers to a greater effect.

Sergei Fedorov, 1995 (Western Conference)
Average Opponent GA: 234
4 Goals, 15 Assists in 13 Games
1.46 points-per-game (1.46 without ENG)

Claude Lemieux, 1997
Average Opponent GA: 218
13 Goals, 10 Assists in 17 Games
1.35 points-per-game (1.35 without ENG)

Sidney Crosby, 2008 (Eastern Conference)
Average Opponent GA: 234
4 Goals, 17 Assists in 14 Games
1.50 points-per-game (1.29 without ENG)

Sidney Crosby, 2009 (Eastern Conference)
Average Opponent GA: 236
14 Goals, 14 Assists in 17 Games
1.65 points-per-game (1.53 without ENG)


So, considering opposing team effects with Claude Lemieux and defensive play with Sergei Fedorov, it's a negligible difference of contribution between their three rounds and Sidney Crosby's three rounds in either year. The idea that "both players never had a playoff run like Crosby's" is an incorrect one. They each had runs similar to Crosby's best - and possibly better ones.

quoipourquoi is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 09:21 AM
  #18
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
So, considering opposing team effects with Claude Lemieux and defensive play with Sergei Fedorov, it's a negligible difference of contribution between their three rounds and Sidney Crosby's three rounds in either year. The idea that "both players never had a playoff run like Crosby's" is an incorrect one. They each had runs similar to Crosby's best - and possibly better ones.
Strength of their relative teams also needs to added into the discussion especially for Lemieux in 1997.

We'll say for the sake of argument they arguably had one playoff run as good as Crosby's two runs (three if we include his 1.46 PPG in 13 games in 2010) and are still well behind in career playoff PPG.

Throughout their careers, did these guys dominate as many series as Crosby has?

daver is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 09:32 AM
  #19
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daver View Post
Strength of their relative teams also needs to added into the discussion especially for Lemieux in 1997.

We'll say for the sake of argument they arguably had one playoff run as good as Crosby's two runs (three if we include his 1.46 PPG in 13 games in 2010) and are still well behind in career playoff PPG.

Throughout their careers, did these guys dominate as many series as Crosby has?
Well then, my job here is done, isn't it? My opening post in this thread said that "Crosby makes up any lost ground with additional playoffs at only slightly lesser levels." I just didn't agree with the idea that they "never had a playoff run like Crosby." Because they did.

quoipourquoi is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 09:39 AM
  #20
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,568
vCash: 500
Based on this train of thought, Justin Williams and Esa Tikkanen must be all-time greats.

Dennis Bonvie is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 09:44 AM
  #21
TAnnala
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Oulu
Posts: 12,411
vCash: 50
Esa Tikkanen is an ll-time great.

Well, not necessary. But I think he is the best thing since sliced bread. Or was the best thing since sliced bread. Hate to see him slip in to the life of overweight drunk.

He was truly one of the most annoying players to play against.

TAnnala is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 10:36 AM
  #22
daver
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 3,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Well then, my job here is done, isn't it? My opening post in this thread said that "Crosby makes up any lost ground with additional playoffs at only slightly lesser levels." I just didn't agree with the idea that they "never had a playoff run like Crosby." Because they did.
Fair enough.

daver is online now  
Old
06-07-2014, 10:49 AM
  #23
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,109
vCash: 500
Feds was much better than Crosby defensively. In all his five Cup-contending campaigns (WCF or higher) he was a Conn Smyth candidate (would have certainly won it in 95, had Wings won the Cup, and was every bit as good as Lidstrom in 02). Feds' 5 runs >>> Crosby's 2 runs. I also take his WHC08 over anything Crosby did internationally.

I don't know why we should eliminate anything from Crosby's playoffs. His last four playoffs ranged from subpar to awful. Oh, and I watched the Canada-US game just fine, thank you very much.

Lemieux on ice scared me. He scared me more than Forsberg and Kamensky (his linemates). Even after the Turtle Dance he was still a major threat. The man was great in playoffs. Crosby didn't scare me in playoffs.

Sentinel is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 11:02 AM
  #24
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
Your view of Lemieux is skewed due to two seasons it seems - 1995 and 1997. His career playoff numbers are only very slightly better on a per-game basis than his regular-season numbers.

And, of course, you're comparing two completed careers to someone in mid-career. At age 26, Fedorov had yet to win a Cup, and Lemieux had only the one in his rookie season, and no Conn Smythe. In Montreal's 1989 Cup run, he was 13th in team scoring, and followed that up with one goal in 11 games in 1990 - but hey, at least he spent more time in the penalty box than anyone on his team! Lemieux had scored 56 points in 91 playoff games at that point in a higher-scoring era than Crosby, who has 114 in 95 games. Fedorov's better than Lemieux here, but still trails Crosby even if you do not consider the relative scoring levels.
Exactly. It seems strange to nitpick Crosby for his bad playoff performances, while saying that Claude Lemieux always showed up. OP's original post seems to basically come down to "Claude Lemieux was scarier when he played against the Red Wings."

I'll take Crosby over Lemieux, even playoffs alone. Lemieux often raised his game a ton in the playoffs a some very notable occasions, but he had a lot farther to go, since his regular season game wasn't close.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
Well then, my job here is done, isn't it? My opening post in this thread said that "Crosby makes up any lost ground with additional playoffs at only slightly lesser levels." I just didn't agree with the idea that they "never had a playoff run like Crosby." Because they did.
Eh, I don't even know about that. Teams gameplan(ned) against Crosby (and Fedorov) in the playoffs. Did anyone really go out of their way to stop Lemieux in 1996-97 with Sakic and Forsberg on his team?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
06-07-2014, 11:43 AM
  #25
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Eh, I don't even know about that. Teams gameplan(ned) against Crosby (and Fedorov) in the playoffs. Did anyone really go out of their way to stop Lemieux in 1996-97 with Sakic and Forsberg on his team?
Yes. With Forsberg playing ineffectively because of the concussion, Konstantinov was playing Lemieux rather physically instead (including a butt-ending and a rather solid check in Game 3). It was the Red Wings' physicality that kept Lemieux from the front of the net for most of the series. After the way Lemieux closed out Edmonton, he was absolutely the player on Detroit's radar. Glen Sather had some egg on his face after chirping about Lemieux in the press, but Ron Low didn't have the horses to stop him; Scotty Bowman did. And when they dropped the ball, Vernon came up big - most notably in Game 6.

quoipourquoi is online now  
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 10:27 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.