In their first 7 seasons in Denver from 1996-2002, the Avalanche made the conference finals 6 times, winning them twice, and winning the cup afterwards both times. Here's a detailed look in terms of how Sakic and Forsberg did scoring wise. The general takeaway is Sakic was better in their cup winning years, and Forsberg in the years they lost in game 7 in Dallas or Detroit. Because Forsberg was a strong playoff performer who won 2 cups, people often assume those 2 things are connected, but as we'll see here, that wasn't exactly the case. Meanwhile, Sakic rightly has a reputation as a great and clutch playoff performer for being great in the playoffs both years the Avs won it, but he also had some consistent struggles against the other 2 western powerhouses of the time.
1996 22 GP each
Sakic: 18+16=34 (10-8-8-16 vs Canucks and Panthers, 12-10-8-18 vs Hawks and Wings)
Forsberg: 10+11=21 (10-7-8-15 vs Canucks and Panthers, 12-3-3-6 vs Hawks and Wings)
Sakic was the easy CS winner, but the gap gets bigger when factoring in their tougher competition. Both dominated the over matched Canucks and Panthers in R1 and the SCF, but against the formidable Hawks and elite Wings, Sakic greatly outperformed Forsberg, who had a 5 game scoring drought in that span. By the time they made it to the finals, Sakic already had the CS clinched if the Avs won, which was basically a forgone conclusion playing the Cinderella Panthers.
1997
Sakic: 17 GP 8+17=25 (6-4-2-6 vs Wings)
Forsberg: 14 GP 5+12=17 (5-0-1-1 vs Wings)
Against the heavy underdog Oilers, who had just upset the Stars in R1, Forsberg dominated, with 10 points (3g, 7a) in the first 3 games before a concussion made him miss the last 2 games of the series. If his performance against the Wings is any indication, he wasn't over it by the next round, and also missed game 5 of that series.
1999 total 19 GP
Sakic: 6+13=19
Forsberg: 8+16=24
vs San Jose 6 GP
Sakic: 3+9=12
Forsberg: 2+6=8
vs Detroit 6 GP
Sakic: 1+1=2
Forsberg: 4+5=9
vs Dallas 7 GP
Sakic: 2+3=5
Forsberg: 2+5=7
This postseason was the reverse of 1996. When the Avs were heavy favorites against the Sharks, Sakic had a huge series. But he struggled against the other 2 elite West teams the next 2 series. Against Dallas, his 3 assists all came in a wild 7-5 game 5 win, and one of his goals was scored in garbage time in game 7 when they were down 4-0. Forsberg, meanwhile, got hot after they fell down 2-0 to the Wings, having 8 points (4g, 4a) in the 4 games they won in a row, then was a PPG against a stifling Dallas D. Funny enough, the leading scorer this series was neither of them nor even Modano, but actually Nieuwendyk with 9 points (3g, 6a), which I think is an underrated reason why he won the CS this year. Combining the 2 series, Forsberg was 13-6-10-16, and Sakic was 13-3-4-7.
2000
Sakic: 17 GP 2+7=9 (5-1-1-2 vs Wings, 7-0-3-3 vs Stars)
Forsberg: 16 GP 7+8=15 (5-4-2-6 vs Wings, 7-2-3-5 vs Stars)
Forsberg once again carried a much bigger load than Sakic against the Wings and Stars, having more goals than Sakic even had points. Totals for those 2 combined series were 12-6-5-11 for Forsberg and 12-1-4-5 for Sakic. While Belfour outdueling Roy is the narrative around the Stars back to back WCF victories over the Avs, the Stars essentially shutting down Sakic (14-2-6-8) has been lost in the fold about these 2 series.
2001 first 2 rounds
Sakic: 9-5-4-9 (4-4-3-7 vs Van, 5-1-1-2 vs LA)
Forsberg: 11-4-10-14 (4-2-4-6 vs Van, 7-2-6-8 vs LA)
Last 2 rounds
Sakic: 12-8-9-17 (5-4-4-8 vs Blues, 7-4-5-9 vs Devils)
Like 1996, Sakic scored over 50 goals this season. In the first 2 rounds against the 2 lowest seeds in the West, Forsberg was dominant. His LA series was his most important in either cup year since the heavy underdog Kings might've pulled off the upset if not for it. A large reason they came close was because Sakic was held to 2 points and missed 2 games in the series with a shoulder injury. But when the series ended, Forsberg had to have emergency surgery, putting him out for the playoffs and the entire following RS. But Sakic, who won the Hart that year, regained his MVP form, and the Avs won the cup without Forsberg in large reason due to that, plus this was their best team in these 7 years. Against the Blues and Devils, who each had a pair of HOF d-men on their teams, Sakic dominated, with 8 points (4g, 4a) in their 5 game series win over the Blues, and 9 points (4g, 5a) in their 7 game finals win over the Devils. This was the best either of them ever played in the playoffs, as Sakic did this with a bad shoulder and opponents able to focus on him more with Forsberg out.
2002
Sakic: 21-9-10-19 (7-2-3-5 vs Wings)
Forsberg: 21-9-18-27 (7-2-6-8 vs Wings)
After missing the entire regular season, Forsberg had the best postseason of his career, leading the playoffs in assists and points despite the Avs losing in the WCF. If ever there was a CS case for a player who didn't even make the finals, this was it. Forsberg was much better once again vs Detroit. In the first 5 games before the Avs got shut out in the last 2 by Hasek, Forsberg had 8 points, including 4 in their game 2 win and the OT goal in game 5. Sakic, meanwhile, had 5 points this series. This could've been an all time great postseason for Forsberg had the Avs won the WCF, which was the true SCF that season.
I'm not saying this to say Sakic being the better player made the Avs better than if Forsberg was. Sakic also had his 2 best RS's the same seasons the Avs won both cups, and his play simply carried over to the playoffs. Also, in neither of their cup wins did they have to play a road game 7 in Dallas or Detroit of all places (though worth pointing out they had a chance to eliminate Dallas at home in 99, and had to stay alive by winning on the road in NJ in 01). Just an interesting pattern I noticed about their postseason performances in specific seasons.
Looking at their playoff scoring performance during these runs provided nuance for me. Against elite teams, both were rarely on at the same time. Taking a look at Forsberg in the playoffs has showed me that despite people viewing playoff performance as ultra sacred, the small sample size can lead to unsustainable things occurring. Forsberg's goal rate increasing and assist rate decreasing in the playoffs were examples of unsustainable small sample size variance. Likewise, the Avs winning the final 2 rounds of the 2001 playoffs without him wasn't able to sustain itself the following RS. Sure, they finished #2 in the West, but they were 17 points behind the Wings, and only 5 ahead of the #8 Canucks, who beat the Oilers by 2 points for the last spot. And this was with Dallas having an off year and missing the playoffs.
I do think Forsberg was the more consistent playoff performer, in spite of Sakic's greatest performances resulting in their cups. Forsberg was consistently better against the Wings and Stars. Though as I said earlier, I do think Sakic's last 2 rounds in 2001 with Forsberg out were the peak for either of them. Overall I'd give the edge to Sakic with his record 8 OT playoff goals, and he grew his legacy more post 2002 than Forsberg. But Forsberg did have some of the greatest playoff runs that didn't result in winning the cup.
1996 22 GP each
Sakic: 18+16=34 (10-8-8-16 vs Canucks and Panthers, 12-10-8-18 vs Hawks and Wings)
Forsberg: 10+11=21 (10-7-8-15 vs Canucks and Panthers, 12-3-3-6 vs Hawks and Wings)
Sakic was the easy CS winner, but the gap gets bigger when factoring in their tougher competition. Both dominated the over matched Canucks and Panthers in R1 and the SCF, but against the formidable Hawks and elite Wings, Sakic greatly outperformed Forsberg, who had a 5 game scoring drought in that span. By the time they made it to the finals, Sakic already had the CS clinched if the Avs won, which was basically a forgone conclusion playing the Cinderella Panthers.
1997
Sakic: 17 GP 8+17=25 (6-4-2-6 vs Wings)
Forsberg: 14 GP 5+12=17 (5-0-1-1 vs Wings)
Against the heavy underdog Oilers, who had just upset the Stars in R1, Forsberg dominated, with 10 points (3g, 7a) in the first 3 games before a concussion made him miss the last 2 games of the series. If his performance against the Wings is any indication, he wasn't over it by the next round, and also missed game 5 of that series.
1999 total 19 GP
Sakic: 6+13=19
Forsberg: 8+16=24
vs San Jose 6 GP
Sakic: 3+9=12
Forsberg: 2+6=8
vs Detroit 6 GP
Sakic: 1+1=2
Forsberg: 4+5=9
vs Dallas 7 GP
Sakic: 2+3=5
Forsberg: 2+5=7
This postseason was the reverse of 1996. When the Avs were heavy favorites against the Sharks, Sakic had a huge series. But he struggled against the other 2 elite West teams the next 2 series. Against Dallas, his 3 assists all came in a wild 7-5 game 5 win, and one of his goals was scored in garbage time in game 7 when they were down 4-0. Forsberg, meanwhile, got hot after they fell down 2-0 to the Wings, having 8 points (4g, 4a) in the 4 games they won in a row, then was a PPG against a stifling Dallas D. Funny enough, the leading scorer this series was neither of them nor even Modano, but actually Nieuwendyk with 9 points (3g, 6a), which I think is an underrated reason why he won the CS this year. Combining the 2 series, Forsberg was 13-6-10-16, and Sakic was 13-3-4-7.
2000
Sakic: 17 GP 2+7=9 (5-1-1-2 vs Wings, 7-0-3-3 vs Stars)
Forsberg: 16 GP 7+8=15 (5-4-2-6 vs Wings, 7-2-3-5 vs Stars)
Forsberg once again carried a much bigger load than Sakic against the Wings and Stars, having more goals than Sakic even had points. Totals for those 2 combined series were 12-6-5-11 for Forsberg and 12-1-4-5 for Sakic. While Belfour outdueling Roy is the narrative around the Stars back to back WCF victories over the Avs, the Stars essentially shutting down Sakic (14-2-6-8) has been lost in the fold about these 2 series.
2001 first 2 rounds
Sakic: 9-5-4-9 (4-4-3-7 vs Van, 5-1-1-2 vs LA)
Forsberg: 11-4-10-14 (4-2-4-6 vs Van, 7-2-6-8 vs LA)
Last 2 rounds
Sakic: 12-8-9-17 (5-4-4-8 vs Blues, 7-4-5-9 vs Devils)
Like 1996, Sakic scored over 50 goals this season. In the first 2 rounds against the 2 lowest seeds in the West, Forsberg was dominant. His LA series was his most important in either cup year since the heavy underdog Kings might've pulled off the upset if not for it. A large reason they came close was because Sakic was held to 2 points and missed 2 games in the series with a shoulder injury. But when the series ended, Forsberg had to have emergency surgery, putting him out for the playoffs and the entire following RS. But Sakic, who won the Hart that year, regained his MVP form, and the Avs won the cup without Forsberg in large reason due to that, plus this was their best team in these 7 years. Against the Blues and Devils, who each had a pair of HOF d-men on their teams, Sakic dominated, with 8 points (4g, 4a) in their 5 game series win over the Blues, and 9 points (4g, 5a) in their 7 game finals win over the Devils. This was the best either of them ever played in the playoffs, as Sakic did this with a bad shoulder and opponents able to focus on him more with Forsberg out.
2002
Sakic: 21-9-10-19 (7-2-3-5 vs Wings)
Forsberg: 21-9-18-27 (7-2-6-8 vs Wings)
After missing the entire regular season, Forsberg had the best postseason of his career, leading the playoffs in assists and points despite the Avs losing in the WCF. If ever there was a CS case for a player who didn't even make the finals, this was it. Forsberg was much better once again vs Detroit. In the first 5 games before the Avs got shut out in the last 2 by Hasek, Forsberg had 8 points, including 4 in their game 2 win and the OT goal in game 5. Sakic, meanwhile, had 5 points this series. This could've been an all time great postseason for Forsberg had the Avs won the WCF, which was the true SCF that season.
I'm not saying this to say Sakic being the better player made the Avs better than if Forsberg was. Sakic also had his 2 best RS's the same seasons the Avs won both cups, and his play simply carried over to the playoffs. Also, in neither of their cup wins did they have to play a road game 7 in Dallas or Detroit of all places (though worth pointing out they had a chance to eliminate Dallas at home in 99, and had to stay alive by winning on the road in NJ in 01). Just an interesting pattern I noticed about their postseason performances in specific seasons.
Looking at their playoff scoring performance during these runs provided nuance for me. Against elite teams, both were rarely on at the same time. Taking a look at Forsberg in the playoffs has showed me that despite people viewing playoff performance as ultra sacred, the small sample size can lead to unsustainable things occurring. Forsberg's goal rate increasing and assist rate decreasing in the playoffs were examples of unsustainable small sample size variance. Likewise, the Avs winning the final 2 rounds of the 2001 playoffs without him wasn't able to sustain itself the following RS. Sure, they finished #2 in the West, but they were 17 points behind the Wings, and only 5 ahead of the #8 Canucks, who beat the Oilers by 2 points for the last spot. And this was with Dallas having an off year and missing the playoffs.
I do think Forsberg was the more consistent playoff performer, in spite of Sakic's greatest performances resulting in their cups. Forsberg was consistently better against the Wings and Stars. Though as I said earlier, I do think Sakic's last 2 rounds in 2001 with Forsberg out were the peak for either of them. Overall I'd give the edge to Sakic with his record 8 OT playoff goals, and he grew his legacy more post 2002 than Forsberg. But Forsberg did have some of the greatest playoff runs that didn't result in winning the cup.
