Nathaniel Skywalker
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2013
- 13,851
- 5,426
Not only longevity. Longevity as an elite scorer. There's quite a lot of discussion about these two in the projects and the general consensus among older hockey fans was that Selanne was better/greater. Not by much though. Teemu beats Kurri and Hull who were neck and neck in discussions.The only reason I can think to give Selanne the nod would be longevity. Hull has him beat in points per game (1.10 to 1.0), goals per game (.58 to .47), playoff points per game (.94 to .68). And I have nothing against Selanne, he is one of my favorite non-Blues of all time.
And Bernie Federko (1.13 regular season, 1.11 playoffs ppg) beats both as you may be aware.The only reason I can think to give Selanne the nod would be longevity. Hull has him beat in points per game (1.10 to 1.0), goals per game (.58 to .47), playoff points per game (.94 to .68). And I have nothing against Selanne, he is one of my favorite non-Blues of all time.
HoH sub-forum (that has mostly history nerds and old timers) ranked Selanne quite clearly ahead of Hull in each of their collective rankings.
Hull scored 24, 39, 30, 39 and 25 goals as aged 35-39I would say Hull - and I’m a Ducks fan.
Hull was able to stay healthier and have a longer peak of a career than Selanne
And Bernie Federko (1.13 regular season, 1.11 playoffs ppg) beats both as you may be aware.
Hull debuted in '86 and Selänne in '92, relative to the emergence of the DPE that's a major difference.How is that relevant in a Hull vs. Selanne debate? Pointless comment.
Scoring was obviously higher in the 80s, and while Hull's career started a bit earlier than Selanne's they still played in close to the same era. I loved Selanne, but I'm going with the guy who's 5th all-time in goals and outscored Teemu by 57 goals in 188 fewer games. Call me crazy I guess.
Not only longevity. Longevity as an elite scorer. There's quite a lot of discussion about these two in the projects and the general consensus among older hockey fans was that Selanne was better/greater. Not by much though. Teemu beats Kurri and Hull who were neck and neck in discussions.
Not really sure what more Hull could do in terms of longevity. From the ages of 23-39 Hull was basically at a PPG or higher almost every season, there were only 3 years where he wasn't above or very close to a point per game. Selanne may have played into his 40s but he also had more "non-elite" seasons over the course of his career.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I feel recency bias is giving Selanne the edge here.
Yeah, still very good at 39. I really think the lockout is what finished his career. A whole year off, you know Hull didn’t stay in shape that year. Guarantee it - ha. So now he comes back at 41 and the legs weren’t there and he retired 5 games into season. No strike, and I think he still plays a couple more years and definitely plays well at 40.Not really sure what more Hull could do in terms of longevity. From the ages of 23-39 Hull was basically at a PPG or higher almost every season, there were only 3 years where he wasn't above or very close to a point per game. Selanne may have played into his 40s but he also had more "non-elite" seasons over the course of his career.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I feel recency bias is giving Selanne the edge here.
HoH sub-forum (that has mostly history nerds and old timers) ranked Selanne quite clearly ahead of Hull in each of their collective rankings.
I'm often on the HoH and I can see the rationale behind having Selanne where he is on the list, but personally I think that prime Hull has become very underrated. Although they were fantastic together, too much credit is given to Oates when you consider people have done the work to show that Hull was a lock for 70+ without him.
People who were around during those big time seasons of Hull will probably agree that, as great as Selanne was, Hull was on another level during his peak seasons, at least. If you're someone who values playoff performance that would also heavily slant your ranking of these two players.
Selänne had a huge role taking the Ducks to their first cup. Arguably bigger than Hull in either Dallas or Detroit despite his memorable OT goal in '99. As for stats watching, he played more playoff hockey in his 40s than his 20s yet was still very solid.If you're someone who values playoff performance that would also heavily slant your ranking of these two players.
Hull never scored 60 without Oates, how was he a lock for 70+? Hull played 18 seasons (not including 05/06), 15 without Oates. In those 15 seasons he scored 50 "only" 2x and finished top 5 in goals only 1x, despite playing his entire peak and prime before the DPE. He also never finished top 5 in hart voting or made an AST. That's a pretty average looking resume without Oates.
I’ll take the guy that didn’t peak in his rookie season by 24 goals