HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Lindros and LeClair

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-08-2006, 02:15 PM
  #26
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by booboosae35 View Post
You do realize that Lindros was not even in the top 10 in goals, assists, or points in 1997, right? Definitely not understanding how find some equivalency between Lindros, Lemieux, and Jagr for that season, or any for that matter.
He had something like 80 points in 50 games that season, didn't he? Not to mention that he carried his team to the finals. He was a wrecking ball in those playoffs untill the Detroit series.

He was never as good as Lemieux, but in my mind he was on par with Jagr in in the mid-late 90's. He beat Jagr out for the Hart and Pearson in 1995 when they tied for the league lead in points.

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2006, 02:30 PM
  #27
skunt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by booboosae35 View Post
You do realize that Lindros was not even in the top 10 in goals, assists, or points in 1997, right? Definitely not understanding how find some equivalency between Lindros, Lemieux, and Jagr for that season, or any for that matter.
Lindros missed 30 games due to injury.

Pro-rate his totals over a full season and he finishes tied for third in goals (50), first in assists (74), and first in points (124). Not a huge stretch since he had scored at about the same rate in the previous 2 seasons.

skunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2006, 11:12 PM
  #28
Gags1288
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian_fanatic View Post
In his prime not many players I'd take over Lindros. Lindros in his prime was the greatest power forward in NHL history. I'd rather have a Lindros in his prime over a Gordie Howe in his prime. He was just that dominate. I also liked his career(Lindros) than Forsbergs. In his prime he was so complete it was scary. Good offensively, defensively, gritty, and one hell of a hitter.

That hit on Andreas Dackell still makes me go damn...
One of the best hits I've ever seen, listen to the noise it makes when he hits him. I can't remember a more punishing clean hit.:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pGU3BkQ05Yg

But to answer the question, Lindros made Leclair. John had some natural finishing abilities around the net, but we would have never approached 50 without Eric. Leclair never scored 20 goals before coming to the Flyers. His first full season with the Flyers, he potted 51 goals...I think that says it all.

I'd still take Eric on my team any day over Leclair even if for only 30 games in a season.

Gags1288 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2006, 11:18 PM
  #29
The_Eck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,034
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheChief View Post
in 1997 Eric Lindros was top 3 in hockey. Only guys who I thought were either more dominant also played in Pen.

Lindros
Mario
Jagr

These players were in the same category
In '97: Mario >>>>>>>>>> Jagr > Lindros. JAGr and Lindros were nowhere near Lemieux.

The_Eck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2006, 11:23 PM
  #30
Gags1288
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Eck View Post
In '97: Mario >>>>>>>>>> Jagr > Lindros. JAGr and Lindros were nowhere near Lemieux.
Maybe not on the score board, but if you're talking about dominance then Eric belongs in the discussion with Mario that season. He had a very similar PPG and everything else he brought to the table was incredible. Eric was well on his way to becoming a borderline top 10 player of all time before his injuries with a top 5 career PPG and a physical package no one had ever brought to the table. Now don't get me wrong, he was no Lemieux, but I don't think it's out of line to discuss who was more dominant in that season.

Gags1288 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2006, 11:47 PM
  #31
norrisnick
Registered User
 
norrisnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russian_fanatic View Post
In his prime not many players I'd take over Lindros. Lindros in his prime was the greatest power forward in NHL history. I'd rather have a Lindros in his prime over a Gordie Howe in his prime. He was just that dominate. I also liked his career(Lindros) than Forsbergs. In his prime he was so complete it was scary. Good offensively, defensively, gritty, and one hell of a hitter.

That hit on Andreas Dackell still makes me go damn...
The key difference being that Gordie's prime was 20 f**king years long. Top 5 in scoring for 20 consecutive seasons. 6 scoring titles, 6 Hart trophies, 4 Cups. E's 4-5 years of dominance doesn't hold a candle to that.

norrisnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2006, 07:37 AM
  #32
octopi
Registered User
 
octopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 30,703
vCash: 703
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick View Post
The key difference being that Gordie's prime was 20 f**king years long. Top 5 in scoring for 20 consecutive seasons. 6 scoring titles, 6 Hart trophies, 4 Cups. E's 4-5 years of dominance doesn't hold a candle to that.
20 years ago? Gordie Howe is 79. I'm going out on a limb and saying his prime was at least 45 years ago. I don't think any of us were even born yet. Well, except Kira

octopi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2006, 10:22 AM
  #33
Clarence Beeks
Registered User
 
Clarence Beeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In the Deep South
Country: United States
Posts: 7,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopi View Post
20 years ago? Gordie Howe is 79. I'm going out on a limb and saying his prime was at least 45 years ago. I don't think any of us were even born yet. Well, except Kira
He said 20 years LONG, not 20 years AGO.

Clarence Beeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2006, 10:24 AM
  #34
octopi
Registered User
 
octopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 30,703
vCash: 703
Quote:
Originally Posted by booboosae35 View Post
He said 20 years LONG, not 20 years AGO.
Oops, my bad....must work on this ADD....is that a butterfly?

octopi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2006, 10:24 AM
  #35
Clarence Beeks
Registered User
 
Clarence Beeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: In the Deep South
Country: United States
Posts: 7,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by skunt View Post
Lindros missed 30 games due to injury.

Pro-rate his totals over a full season and he finishes tied for third in goals (50), first in assists (74), and first in points (124). Not a huge stretch since he had scored at about the same rate in the previous 2 seasons.
Unfortunately for your argument the NHL doesn't prorate statistics. In addition, it's kind of hard to use the previous 2 seasons a point of comparison since 94-95 (2 seasons before) was the lockout season (only 48 games played).

Clarence Beeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2006, 10:27 AM
  #36
BuppY
Registered User
 
BuppY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,158
vCash: 500
Lindros was crazy good when he was young and healthy. He was GOOD.

BuppY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2006, 10:32 AM
  #37
Drewr15
Registered User
 
Drewr15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Milford, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 5,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gags1288 View Post
One of the best hits I've ever seen, listen to the noise it makes when he hits him. I can't remember a more punishing clean hit.:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pGU3BkQ05Yg

But to answer the question, Lindros made Leclair. John had some natural finishing abilities around the net, but we would have never approached 50 without Eric. Leclair never scored 20 goals before coming to the Flyers. His first full season with the Flyers, he potted 51 goals...I think that says it all.

I'd still take Eric on my team any day over Leclair even if for only 30 games in a season.
All I know is in 96-97 Lindros missed 30 games and leclair still scored 50 goals. The next year Lindros missed 20 games and Leclair scored 51 goals. Maybe playing with Lindros got Leclair from the 40 goal mark to the 50 goal mark but Lecliar would still have been one of the top goal scorers in the league without him IMO.

Drewr15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 04:06 AM
  #38
skunt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by booboosae35 View Post
Unfortunately for your argument the NHL doesn't prorate statistics. In addition, it's kind of hard to use the previous 2 seasons a point of comparison since 94-95 (2 seasons before) was the lockout season (only 48 games played).
I was only trying to show you that in 96-97, there was definately some equivalency. Certainly durability has something to do with the value of a player, but in the games Eric did play, he was one of the league's elite scorers.

1. Lemieux (1.61)
2. Lindros (1.52)
3. Jagr (1.50

For the other thing:

PPG in 94-95: 1.52
PPG in 95-96: 1.58
PPG in 96-97: 1.52

Thread was started on JP Dumont, who missed something like 30 games this season. 20 goals in 54 games = 30 goals, right? Probably not for Dumont given his history of inconsistency. Looking at the figures above, you cannot say the same for Lindros. Over that three year period he scored points at a remarkably consistent rate. If he avoids injury, there's good chance that he would have continued his 1.5 PPG pace over the remaing 30 games and finished around the totals I calculated.

skunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 04:22 AM
  #39
skunt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewr15 View Post
All I know is in 96-97 Lindros missed 30 games and leclair still scored 50 goals. The next year Lindros missed 20 games and Leclair scored 51 goals. Maybe playing with Lindros got Leclair from the 40 goal mark to the 50 goal mark but Lecliar would still have been one of the top goal scorers in the league without him IMO.
It would be nice to see some figures on how he scored with and without Lindros in the seasons the two played together. Lindros' leaving is undoubtedly a factor in John's relative lack of success, but Eric's departure also coincides with some serious injuries, Ken Hitchcock and his defensive system, and Leclair's 31st birthday... the other variables in his post-Lindros career make it hard to pass any judgement.

skunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 07:37 AM
  #40
Kaktus*
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 22,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gags1288 View Post
One of the best hits I've ever seen, listen to the noise it makes when he hits him. I can't remember a more punishing clean hit.:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pGU3BkQ05Yg

But to answer the question, Lindros made Leclair. John had some natural finishing abilities around the net, but we would have never approached 50 without Eric. Leclair never scored 20 goals before coming to the Flyers. His first full season with the Flyers, he potted 51 goals...I think that says it all.

I'd still take Eric on my team any day over Leclair even if for only 30 games in a season.
I remember that game. Great hit. The saddest thing about that game was that Ottawa re-grouped and won that game.
Not too many players were better 92-97. Big E was top 5 players easy if not top 3.

Kaktus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 12:45 PM
  #41
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,789
vCash: 500
I think LeClair gets underrated by many. Yeah, he didn't put up big numbers until he got to Philly, but keep in mind he was still fairly young (25 or 26) and had never been given the chance to shine. He was given more responsibility in Philly and responded accordingly.

He had a great shot and the instincts to match. He had the proverbial nose for the net. And he was strong, too. He could stand in front of the net and take the punishment, or get involved in the corner battles to set up a play. I don't know if he scores the most goals in the league from 1995 to 2000 (thanks to MS for pointing that out in another thread), but he probably scores 40 goals several times. He was that good of a goal scorer.

Funny thing about LeClair is he was a five-time all-star. Five straight all-star selections, too. Every skater with five all-star team selections is in the HHOF. Yet when HHOF discussions come up (at least around here), few say he'll get in. I'm one of them, but it's not as far fetched as you might think. (Of course, part of the problem is the dearth of talent at LW compared to other positions for oh, say, the last 60 years).

Did LeClair benefit from playing with Lindros? Of course. But Lindros wasn't good enough of a playmaker to turn a 20-goal man into a perennial 50-goal threat. We're not talking about Wayne Gretzky or Adam Oates here.

As for Lindros: a lot of people blame the concussions for his struggles. And there is some merit to that. But to me, the real turning point was a potentially fatal collapsed lung suffered in 1998-99. Many believe he was playing the best hockey of his career at that point. In that season, you had Jagr and Lindros, and then everyone else. But he suffered the lung injury, and then there was a major spat between Clarke and the Lindros Camp. That was the big falling out point. Lindros struggled in 1999-2000 even before the concussions and went as far as to apologize to his teammates for his performance, saying he was distracted by his deteriorating relationship with Clarke.

Lindros was never going to be one of the all-time greats. Didn't have the mental edge that the other greats do. He wasn't going to be the Next One, wasn't even going to be better than say, Messier. But he could have been one of the very best from his era. He was one of the top five players on the planet from 1995-1999.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 05:32 PM
  #42
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Lindros was never going to be one of the all-time greats. Didn't have the mental edge that the other greats do. He wasn't going to be the Next One, wasn't even going to be better than say, Messier. But he could have been one of the very best from his era. He was one of the top five players on the planet from 1995-1999.
I beg to differ on that one. He was well on his way to being one of the best of all time. At least as good as Messier IMO. It was his injuries that killed him also by the way that he played much like Orr who played throught any kind of pain with his knees. Now I'm not putting Lindros with Orr, but if he was healthy his whole career we'd be talking about him in the same breathe as Lafleur and Messier, right around there in the all time list which is at or around #11-13 all time.

Dont forget his injuries though. In 1998 Kasparitis hit him giving him a concussion. Then the collapsed lung in 1999, then Stevens hit in 2000. Throw in his missed season with Philly as well as even his injured wrist this year and you've got a promising athlete who got injured way too often. His play was rambunctious and he seldom kept his head up which led to his demise.

But think about it, from 95-99 other than Lemieux who was the best player on the planet? I'll say Lindors. After Lemieux's retirement in '97 if you were a GM who would you have wanted on your team? At that time I think everyone would have said Lindros especially after his '97 playoffs. Other than that you have Jagr and Kariya. But a healthy Big E was more valuable.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 05:41 PM
  #43
PapaBear*
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,063
vCash: 500
Reminded me a lot of the Yotes...

Thachunk-JR-Doan line. That line was a beast downlow.

PapaBear* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2006, 06:12 PM
  #44
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
I beg to differ on that one. He was well on his way to being one of the best of all time. At least as good as Messier IMO. It was his injuries that killed him also by the way that he played much like Orr who played throught any kind of pain with his knees. Now I'm not putting Lindros with Orr, but if he was healthy his whole career we'd be talking about him in the same breathe as Lafleur and Messier, right around there in the all time list which is at or around #11-13 all time.

Dont forget his injuries though. In 1998 Kasparitis hit him giving him a concussion. Then the collapsed lung in 1999, then Stevens hit in 2000. Throw in his missed season with Philly as well as even his injured wrist this year and you've got a promising athlete who got injured way too often. His play was rambunctious and he seldom kept his head up which led to his demise.

But think about it, from 95-99 other than Lemieux who was the best player on the planet? I'll say Lindors. After Lemieux's retirement in '97 if you were a GM who would you have wanted on your team? At that time I think everyone would have said Lindros especially after his '97 playoffs. Other than that you have Jagr and Kariya. But a healthy Big E was more valuable.
Lindros didn't have Messier's killer instinct or big-game mentality. If you needed a big goal in a Game 7 or an elimination game, Messier would get it. He'd skate through, skate over or skate around the opposition to get it. Or he'd set up the play to get the goal. Or he'd toss the big hit to change the tone of a game. Lindros suffered the lung injury eight years after he was drafted. At the same age, Messier had won three Stanley Cups, already established himself as a dominant playoff performer and had won a Conn Smythe. BTW, Lindros definitely had moments of playoff brilliance, but in three straight years - 1995 against New Jersey, 1996 against Florida and 1997 versus Detroit - Lindros was a total non-factor when his team needed him.

God Bless Canada 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 03:42 PM.

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.