HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

What is the case for Lafleur over Jagr?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-18-2011, 03:01 PM
  #101
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Two of the three seasons Lemaire scored 90+ points were without Lafleur as a linemate. Some powerplay time may have overlapped. Basically 92,95, 97- with Lafleur points. Effectively no imagination is required Lemaire definitely is a stand alone HHOFer as the point differential is nowhere near your hypothetical.

Previously I have shown that Shutt when paired with Henri Richard in the 1974 playoffs was extremely effective and this prepped him for the level of performance he enjoyed with Lemaire and Lafleur.
even if the differential was 10 or 15%, both players have career numbers that are borderline to begin with. That might have been all it took to hypothetically keep them out. Or maybe not. who knows.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
01-18-2011, 03:16 PM
  #102
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
It should be Jagr in a walk imo. He dominated Guy in every individual statistic, but we doesn't have as many cups. Jagr, has better peak, better longevity, better everything.

To me Jagr is ahead quite easily. To have him 23rd seems ridiculously high too, where is the list. I want to see the 22 players better than him.

habsjunkie2* is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 03:46 PM
  #103
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
Jan Hrdina

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
Yeah, 2 more points in one more game. WOW.

After Jagr left, Penguins ended up dead last in their division with -50 GF/GA ration. Missed playoffs.

The last Jagr's season with Pens: Penguins 3rd in their division, made playoffs, +25 GF/GA ratio.

Clearly, Jagr made the most out of his linemates.
Jan Hrdina after Jagr left had his only 20+ goal season and was 11 points better than with Jagr.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...hrdinja01.html

Also Washington was worse with Jagr than without.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 04:17 PM
  #104
Reds4Life
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Jan Hrdina after Jagr left had his only 20+ goal season and was 11 points better than with Jagr.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...hrdinja01.html

Also Washington was worse with Jagr than without.
Jagr's Washington years are nothing he's proud of. But later he carried Rangers, a team that was considered weak and should have ended last in the Conference, to the playoffs and being the MVP according to PA. He certainly needs linemates that fit his playstyle, just like all other superstar forwards.

Reds4Life is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 04:28 PM
  #105
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,559
vCash: 500
I know I had the Rangers pegged for 3rd last that year... after Washington and Carolina, who almost everyone agreed were the two teams that looked the worst on paper heading into the season.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
01-18-2011, 04:45 PM
  #106
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,812
vCash: 500
Henrik Lundqvist deserves just as much credit as Jagr for the Rangers rebirth, IMO.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now  
Old
01-18-2011, 04:47 PM
  #107
Reds4Life
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Henrik Lundqvist deserves just as much credit as Jagr for the Rangers rebirth, IMO.
No doubt about that.

Reds4Life is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 05:13 PM
  #108
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,900
vCash: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Henrik Lundqvist deserves just as much credit as Jagr for the Rangers rebirth, IMO.
Should also give a bit of Credit to Tom Renney, who was a finalist for coach of the year.

Dark Shadows is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 07:42 PM
  #109
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
True

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Should also give a bit of Credit to Tom Renney, who was a finalist for coach of the year.
True but this also illustrates how fragile coach of the year nominations and voting are. Once the rest of the league figures out what the coach is doing it becomes very hard to sustain the level of performance.

Even harder than for a player

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 07:56 PM
  #110
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 500
I See...............

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
even if the differential was 10 or 15%, both players have career numbers that are borderline to begin with. That might have been all it took to hypothetically keep them out. Or maybe not. who knows.
Finally starting to see why we tend to disagree, especially on HHOF worthiness.

I do not see borderlines, benchmark numbers or limits. I recognize that in certain instances - Shutt/Lemaire/Lafleur the net result was greatly superior to the sum potential of the parts and to me this makes each contributor a worthy HHOF member.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 08:11 PM
  #111
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Finally starting to see why we tend to disagree, especially on HHOF worthiness.

I do not see borderlines, benchmark numbers or limits. I recognize that in certain instances - Shutt/Lemaire/Lafleur the net result was greatly superior to the sum potential of the parts and to me this makes each contributor a worthy HHOF member.
I'm not disagreeing with that... they are the same player whether they play with Lafleur or not. Unfortunately the hockey world is obsessed with career point totals. that has a lot to do with HHOF nominations.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
01-18-2011, 08:12 PM
  #112
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
even if the differential was 10 or 15%, both players have career numbers that are borderline to begin with. That might have been all it took to hypothetically keep them out. Or maybe not. who knows.
How do you quantitatively evaluate a two-way guy like Lemaire (or a purely defensive player for that matter) with the lousy defensive stats that are available in hockey?

His value wasn't just offense as you well know.

I think there are plenty of examples of guys in already that don't have the "career numbers" so we're doing it wrong.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 08:15 PM
  #113
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
How do you quantitatively evaluate a two-way guy like Lemaire (or a purely defensive player for that matter) with the lousy defensive stats that are available in hockey?

His value wasn't just offense as you well know.

I think there are plenty of examples of guys in already that don't have the "career numbers" so we're doing it wrong.
I think there are more examples of players in the hall thanks to a career point total than the opposite (heavy on peak, lacking career numbers)

seventieslord is online now  
Old
01-18-2011, 09:21 PM
  #114
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I think there are more examples of players in the hall thanks to a career point total than the opposite (heavy on peak, lacking career numbers)
Well that could be true too.. the point is there doesn't appear to be any set criteria.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
01-18-2011, 09:58 PM
  #115
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,728
vCash: 500
Tied for peak, LaFleur with an easy win for playoffs, but Jagr over-compensates with prime and career.
I take Jagr here - though they are still close.

RabbinsDuck is offline  
Old
01-19-2011, 10:06 AM
  #116
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Wingers managed this as well. Maurice Richard with Henri Richard and Dickie Moore facilitaed their adaptation into the NHL by creating more ice for them. He also helped Ken Moadell at center once Lach retired.

Hull with Murray Balfour and Chico Maki to name a couple.

Today to an extent you see it with players like Ovechkin, St,Louis with Stamkos,

Just a short list without any research.
Jagr did manage it contrary to popular belief.

Jagr led the league in assists 3 times, had 80+ assists twice as a winger. Jagr did elevate his linemates to a point where they were playing on the first line. On any other team Miller would have been a 4th line player at best.

In 2005-06 Jagr turned Petr Prucha (rookie) into a 30 goal scorer. The following season Prucha scored 22 goals (Jagr had a reconstructed shoulder) and so this clearly shows Jagr did elevate his teammates and linemates play.

Jagr usually served as his team's primary playmaker and goal scorer.


Last edited by livewell68: 01-19-2011 at 10:11 AM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
01-19-2011, 10:09 AM
  #117
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Should also give a bit of Credit to Tom Renney, who was a finalist for coach of the year.
Sure but who remembers the Rangers in the 2005-06 playoffs? Jagr dislocated his shoulder and the team including Lundqvist completely faultered and was swept rather disicively by the New Jersey Devils.

Comparing Lundqvist though to Dryden makes no sense in this case because it is essentially Jagr vs Lafleur.

Lafleur had maybe the 2nd best "peak or prime" goaltender of all-time in net (Hasek being the 1st).

Lundqvist is a great goaltender but has not even won a Vezina yet.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
01-19-2011, 10:51 AM
  #118
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Tied for peak, LaFleur with an easy win for playoffs, but Jagr over-compensates with prime and career.
I take Jagr here - though they are still close.

Easy win for playoffs?

Isn't Jagr's PPG in the playoffs better than Lafleur's?

Tied for peak? I think the edge (based on teammates and respective scoring and eras) goes to Jagr.

Aren't primes and peaks the same thing essentially?

The difference is that Jagr was able to extend his peak past his prime while Lafleur (due injuries) was not able to do that.

Career though goes to Jagr in a decisive manner.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
01-19-2011, 07:46 PM
  #119
blogofmike
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jags6868 View Post
Easy win for playoffs?

Isn't Jagr's PPG in the playoffs better than Lafleur's?


Tied for peak? I think the edge (based on teammates and respective scoring and eras) goes to Jagr.

Aren't primes and peaks the same thing essentially?

The difference is that Jagr was able to extend his peak past his prime while Lafleur (due injuries) was not able to do that.

Career though goes to Jagr in a decisive manner.
Jagr's playoff ppg is marginally better:

Career Playoffs PPG
Jagr: 1.071
Lafleur: 1.047

Looking at those numbers, and considering that Lafleur scored 10 points in his last 27 games, Lafleur's playoff prime must be good. And it is:

Playoffs PPG
Lafleur 74-75 to 78-79: 1.536
Jagr single-season high: 1.500

Over a 5-year span, Lafleur's ppg averaged out to a higher rate than Jagr's career high in 2008 (or 1998 if you prefer.) Toss in Game 7 against the Bruins in 79, 26 points in 14 games in 1977, and being the primary offensive player on 4 straight Cup teams in general, I'd say Lafleur takes the playoffs.


Last edited by blogofmike: 01-19-2011 at 07:47 PM. Reason: added word "in"
blogofmike is offline  
Old
01-20-2011, 08:19 AM
  #120
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blogofmike View Post
Jagr's playoff ppg is marginally better:

Career Playoffs PPG
Jagr: 1.071
Lafleur: 1.047

Looking at those numbers, and considering that Lafleur scored 10 points in his last 27 games, Lafleur's playoff prime must be good. And it is:

Playoffs PPG
Lafleur 74-75 to 78-79: 1.536
Jagr single-season high: 1.500

Over a 5-year span, Lafleur's ppg averaged out to a higher rate than Jagr's career high in 2008 (or 1998 if you prefer.) Toss in Game 7 against the Bruins in 79, 26 points in 14 games in 1977, and being the primary offensive player on 4 straight Cup teams in general, I'd say Lafleur takes the playoffs.

When you compared Lafleur's peak PPG and then showed Jagr's single-season high, did you mean playoffs or regular season?

If you're speaking about regular season, Jagr equaled or eclipsed the 1.50 PPG mark 6 times.

Also what is not being shown is that Jagr's prime coincided with the "Dead Puck Era" where scoring was down in general and to have a PPG in the playoffs over 1.30 was quite impressive.

The 1999-00 playoff season is an example, Jagr only played 11 games (16 Pts) and finished 7th in overall playoff scoring, while Hull played 23 games and had 24 Pts to lead the playoffs.

In fact I believe Jagr's 1.50 PPG in the 2007-08 (at age 37) was the highest PPG in the playoffs in a decade. (Malkin would equal that in 2008-09 when he had 36 Pts in 24 games)

livewell68 is offline  
Old
01-20-2011, 09:13 AM
  #121
JaymzB
Registered User
 
JaymzB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 2,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jags6868 View Post
Also what is not being shown is that Jagr's prime coincided with the "Dead Puck Era" where scoring was down in general and to have a PPG in the playoffs over 1.30 was quite impressive.
And what you are missing is averaging over 1.30 PPG during Lafleur's time is even more impressive, since he is the only one to do it (Sittler was second during that period with a 1.24 PPG avg.). If you extrapolate those #’s over an 82 game season, Lafleur would lead in scoring by 25 points. He would lead by 36 points over his closest teammate.

JaymzB is offline  
Old
01-20-2011, 09:19 AM
  #122
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaymzB View Post
And what you are missing is averaging over 1.30 PPG during Lafleur's time is even more impressive, since he is the only one to do it (Sittler was second during that period with a 1.24 PPG avg.). If you extrapolate those #’s over an 82 game season, Lafleur would lead in scoring by 25 points. He would lead by 36 points over his closest teammate.
Annnnnd then we go around again to the relative team strength and start this all over.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
01-20-2011, 10:29 AM
  #123
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,862
vCash: 500
Combine that with era I see no possible way to argue Lafleur was more valuable offensively in each of their playoff years overall. Prime is close enough that it's too hard to call, but then Jagr gets the edge in longevity.

Infinite Vision* is offline  
Old
01-20-2011, 10:38 AM
  #124
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Annnnnd then we go around again to the relative team strength and start this all over.
Exactly.

The Montreal Canadiens won 6 Stanley Cups in the 1970's while Lafleur was the Conn Smythe winner once out of those 6 championships.

So cleatly Lafleur had a greater supporting cast.

Also Lafleur only led the Montreal Canadiens 3 times out of those 6 Stanley Cup runs.

Lafleur might have the main offensive force of the team but needless to say those teams were as deep as they come.

They have players capable of scoring on all 4 lines, had great defensemen and all that took away the pressure from Lafleur.

Jagr on the other hand was always keyed in on and was always the subject of opposing teams' defense and defensive schemes.

Opposing teams to Jagr could match up their best defensive line and best defensmen against him because his teams were not very deep.

Lafleur had the luxury of not always facing this stiffling defense.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
01-20-2011, 11:01 AM
  #125
JaymzB
Registered User
 
JaymzB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 2,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Annnnnd then we go around again to the relative team strength and start this all over.
Sure, but does anyone for a second doubt that Lafleur wasn’t facing all the best checkers from his opponents? And again, as far as offensive production goes, he towers over not only his teammates, but the rest of the league. Don’t get me wrong, in an All-Time list perspective, I’d rank Jagr over Lafleur at this point, but I have a hard time believing he had a better playoff “peak” than Guy. Heck, there are very few IMO who did.

JaymzB 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 12:48 AM.

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.