Jagr is better offensively and has better size, but Sakic is a much better two-way player who has been a Selke finalist and his overtime goals playoff record and Conn Smythe makes him a better clutch player IMO.
Defense and leadership by a wiiiiiiide margin. Offensively, Sakic's not that far off.
and what makes Sakic better than Jagr defensively by a wiiiiiiiiiide margin exactly? when Jagr was on the ice he almost always had control of the puck and was arguably the hardest player to knock off the puck ever, it doesnt get much better defensively than by holding the puck with the other team not being able to touch it. If you think the leadership gap is so wiiiiiiiiiiide then you never watched Jagr captaining the Pens plain and simple. Jagr negated the need for the Pens to play defense when he was on the ice and that goes beyond what Sakic could do. Jagr lead some of the worst teams to play in the time the two have been in the league to the playoffs year after year with no help he carried them on his shoulders but because he wasnt Canadian and didnt conduct himself like a good north american captain should he was never given the credit he deserved for his leadership.
Jagr is better offensively and has better size, but Sakic is a much better two-way player who has been a Selke finalist and his overtime goals playoff record and Conn Smythe makes him a better clutch player IMO.
Jagr has the record for most overttime goals in history so its not like Jagr isnt clutch himself.
Jagr's the slightly ''better'' player, but I'd take Sakic for my team without hesitation. Jagr scores a few more points, Sakic's better on and off the ice in every other way.
I love Joe Sakic and all, but how is this even close? There is definitely an anti-Jagr bias on these boards that prevent many from looking at it objectively. Sakic is not and never was the defensive demon that some of you would like to believe, and the difference between him and Jagr, defensively, (if there is one at all) is negligible at best. His lone Selke nomination was a sham. Jagr has been moody at times throughout his career, but he's been a good leader for the Rags and through his time with the Pens where he was carrying them in his back. The perceived difference in leadership quality isn't enough to put Sakic ahead of Jagr.
"Leadership" is by far the most overrated trait in all of pro sports. By this point, with the way people like to throw it around, it's almost become a paper quality. People who use it as the focal point of their argument are really just grasping for straws/have run out of real arguments, IMO.
Sakic is not and never was the defensive demon that some of you would like to believe, and the difference between him and Jagr, defensively, (if there is one at all) is negligible at best.
Come on, Jagr was as lazy as it comes in the defensive zone during his prime. Sakic finished top 10 in Selke voting several times so you can't compare their defensive games.
If I want a primaddona that can put up a few more points I'll take Jagr.
If I want a player that is responsible on both ends of the ice, busts his butt every shift, and is the most respected player in the game then I'll take Sakic.
If I want a primaddona that can put up a few more points I'll take Jagr.
If I want a player that is responsible on both ends of the ice, busts his butt every shift, and is the most respected player in the game then I'll take Sakic.
Joe Sakic sure doesn't seem to be busting his butt on "every shift" against the Wings in the playoffs this year - sure looks invisible to me.
Meanwhile, Jagr has been great in these playoffs and has been anything but a primadonna.
The point is people who have to resort to hyperbole for arguments have little to contribute to an actual debate.
obviously not, while i am a fan i am not the biggest and i'd definately take Sakic. A little something called leadership.
all that leadership hasn't really done anything to elevate himself over Jagr. Say what you will, but the point remains they still both have just 2 cups, and despite playing on weaker teams throughout his career Jagr for the most part had similar results.
Sakic rarely ever dominated like Jagr. Sakic has had a bunch of those 70-80 seasons with the occasional bump into the 100s, but I believe has only received Hart consideration twice in his career, while Jagr was consistently finishing in the top 3. You would be hard pressed to find any one season where yu could honestly say Sakic was the best player in the game. Even in his Hart winning season he still lost the Art Ross.
) be considered more important than regular season benchmarks
