Is there any doubt that a Prime Jagr would have decimated this league?

[daver]

You're hilarious!

It's very unreasonable to draw any conclusions from his 06/07 season, as that was the only time he finished a year with a PPG over 1.5 and it was also a higher scoring season.

If anything, Sid's 06/07 is the exception that confirms the rule.

So there is a rule that Crosby finishes at a 1.30 something in PPG regardless of how he plays the first half of the season?

Please show your work as to this rule. What was his PPG halfway thru all those 1.3 something seasons?

 

[daver]

I don't give a damn.

Why not?

 

[Knave]

The best players from the 90's were just as athletic as the best players in the league now. Ignoring Lemieux, Gretzky and Jagr, stars like Lindros, Sakic, Bure, and Yzerman would have no issue being dropped into the modern game and succeeding.

You and a whole bunch of others don't seem to get it - yes the best players were the best and likely just as athletic as the best players now. The worst players SUCKED ASS. And the best players took advantage magnifying the differences between each other and the rest of the pack.

It's not like that anymore. The worst players don't suck ass. They're not pylons or goons who can't actually play. They're players who get powerskating lessons their whole lives to improve. They play for coaches who drill positional defense into them, keeping everyone to the outside. Everything is so much more detailed.

What does that do? It clumps the best players together in scoring races, differences are minimized.

 

[NewUser293223]

Why not?

Because it's a completely baseless pipe dream. And you have people saying outrageously dumb stuff like "hence the game is much more based on speed, he would have struggled more in his prime than he does now" and you have no one showing them up, so I beware of posting something which might result in a hopelessly long stupid conversation.

 

[daver]

Because it's a completely baseless pipe dream. And you have people saying outrageously dumb stuff like "hence the game is much more based on speed, he would have struggled more in his prime than he does now" and you have no one showing them up, so I beware of posting something which might result in a hopelessly long stupid conversation.

You mean something like "Jagr is a notch and a half above guys like Ovi, Sid, Geno and Connor?"

 

[bathdog]

His far best PPG comes just as he plays least games. So much dominant on a per game basis!

I also think it's reasonable that he'd have regressed a bit as the season went on, but not to 1.30ppg as you're suggesting as I genuinely believe that was his peak stretch. (no I don't draw references to 06/07 for obvious reasons)

Having played around 80 games, Sid barely matched Jagr's worst prime PPG three times.

If you look at their ppg's in absolute terms you also fail to account for Jagr clearly seeing more offensive TOI on a per game basis.

Crosby played 70% to 75% of the amount of games his peers did over that time period.

Honestly, I have to ask how you came up with these numbers? As far as I can see Crosby played 47% of possible games those 3 years.

You and a whole bunch of others don't seem to get it - yes the best players were the best and likely just as athletic as the best players now. The worst players SUCKED ASS. And the best players took advantage magnifying the differences between each other and the rest of the pack.

It's not like that anymore. The worst players don't suck ass. They're not pylons or goons who can't actually play. They're players who get powerskating lessons their whole lives to improve. They play for coaches who drill positional defense into them, keeping everyone to the outside. Everything is so much more detailed.

What does that do? It clumps the best players together in scoring races, differences are minimized.

Do you think teams routinely matched their 4th lines against the elite offensive players?

 

[Knave]

Do you think teams routinely matched their 4th lines against the elite offensive players?

So you're saying Gretzky never scored when a 4th line was on the ice?

It's bigger than 4th lines. I was just using the most extreme example of a bunch of goons who barely play and who suck when they do. It exposes the rest of the forwards to more minutes they probably shouldn't have been playing which compounds the issue - overall player quality was much lower in 2000, 1990, 1980.

 

[NewUser293223]

I also think it's reasonable that he'd have regressed a bit as the season went on, but not to 1.30ppg as you're suggesting as I genuinely believe that was his peak stretch. (no I don't draw references to 06/07 for obvious reasons)

Belief is irrelevant here. Last year, he was at an insane pace for a while too. It's not even a fact he was at the ideal age during that unlucky stretch. It's still a gueess. The truth is, he never did pull off what many can only claim he would have pulled off, sounding silly.

If you look at their ppg's in absolute terms you also fail to account for Jagr clearly seeing more offensive TOI on a per game basis.

You would expect the better offensive player to get more offensive ice time. This is one of the asinine arguments around here. Whenever Jagr / Lemieux comparison comes up, "it was not even close", but you never see it mentioned that Lemieux was getting even more offensive ice time than Jagr and truckloads of the PP time. When we drag Jagr down to the level of the less gifted ones, and we do, ice time always comes up. Suddenly, ice time considered, it's closer than it might seem looking at their PPG in absolute terms. In other words: LOL

Honestly, I have to ask how you came up with these numbers? As far as I can see Crosby played 47% of possible games those 3 years.

DON'T!

 

[deckercky]

I think the increased interference in the dead puck era probably compensated for a lot of the difference in quality of 3rd pairing defencemen and 4th liners now compared to then. Designated fighters aside, most 4th liners were still pretty good in the dead puck era, just they were better suited for that era than for today's faster game.

 

[NewUser293223]

If you look at their ppg's in absolute terms you also fail to account for Jagr clearly seeing more offensive TOI on a per game basis.

I just looked and noticed that prior to Sid's and Jagr's last respective games, Sid had the PPG of 0.68 while playing 20:39 minutes a night and Jagr had 0.62 PPG playing 12:30 minutes a game. What are we doing with that, captain genius? Is it the age? Small sample? What is it this time?

 

[Ace Card Bedard]

Prime Jagr would crush this league. No doubts for me.
120pts

 

[daver]

Honestly, I have to ask how you came up with these numbers? As far as I can see Crosby played 47% of possible games those 3 years.

From 2009/10 to 2013/14 is the time period. Over that 5 year period, Crosby's per game performance was similar to Jagr's best 5 year stretch. Crosby played 70% or so of possible games and was only 22 points behind the leading scorer.

 

[daver]

If you look at their ppg's in absolute terms you also fail to account for Jagr clearly seeing more offensive TOI on a per game basis.

So did the players that Jagr was beating. I don't see this as being relevant in a performance vs. peers analysis.

 

[daver]

Belief is irrelevant here. Last year, he was at an insane pace for a while too. It's not even a fact he was at the ideal age during that unlucky stretch. It's still a gueess. The truth is, he never did pull off what many can only claim he would have pulled off, sounding silly.

He was at a 1.60 PPG halfway thru his 06/07 season and finished with a 1.52 PPG. Never say never. You sound completely silly thinking he would play at a 1.00 in the second half of those seasons.

 

[Riddum]

I just looked and noticed that prior to Sid's and Jagr's last respective games, Sid had the PPG of 0.68 while playing 20:39 minutes a night and Jagr had 0.62 PPG playing 12:30 minutes a game. What are we doing with that, captain genius? Is it the age? Small sample? What is it this time?

Imagine a 45 year old Sid playing today.

 

[Passchendaele]

You can't really argue people who think 25-year old Jagr would score as much as 45-year old Jagr on the basis of his 'experience', disregarding that his body and stamina are going downhill.

 

[Knave]

You can't really argue people who think 25-year old Jagr would score as much as 45-year old Jagr on the basis of his 'experience', disregarding that his body and stamina are going downhill.

Who is arguing that? You can't really use 45 year old Jagr to claim here is what 25 year old Jagr would do either.

Imagine a 45 year old Sid playing today.

There's a theme running through this thread "imagine the perfect scenario that makes my guy look good and your guy look bad". Why exclude the last game? I wonder why.

 

[Regal]

This gets glossed over because it's not that big of a deal.

He was 33/34 in that season. We have seen St. Loius, Sakic, and Thornton put up impressive seasons at older ages. Obviously the guy has longevity given he is still playing but that doesn't mean we start exaggerating his abilities beyond what they were.

His best season (98/99) translates to about 110 points or so last season.

Side note, but it gets glossed over because he didn't end up winning the Art Ross or Hart, but with the dominance over the rest of the scoring race after Thornton, along with his possession game still strong as ever, and relatively weaker help around him, it was the best season by a forward that age or older since Howe's '63 season. Though I'm not sure that's overly relevant to what he'd be at his best.

 

[Regal]

Who is arguing that? You can't really use 45 year old Jagr to claim here is what 25 year old Jagr would do either.
.

There is at least one guy who argues that Jagr in a literal sense is actually better today than at 25 due to experience and gaining skills along the way. It's painful to read.

 

[TheAngryHank]

Imagine a 45 year old Sid playing today.

He is playing like that now

 

[bathdog]

So you're saying Gretzky never scored when a 4th line was on the ice?

It's bigger than 4th lines. I was just using the most extreme example of a bunch of goons who barely play and who suck when they do. It exposes the rest of the forwards to more minutes they probably shouldn't have been playing which compounds the issue - overall player quality was much lower in 2000, 1990, 1980.

I think the increased interference in the dead puck era probably compensated for a lot of the difference in quality of 3rd pairing defencemen and 4th liners now compared to then. Designated fighters aside, most 4th liners were still pretty good in the dead puck era, just they were better suited for that era than for today's faster game.

^

Daxi, you may be mixing up DPE and the 80s, elite players hardly had a walk in the park late 90s to mid 00s.

Belief is irrelevant here. Last year, he was at an insane pace for a while too. It's not even a fact he was at the ideal age during that unlucky stretch. It's still a gueess. The truth is, he never did pull off what many can only claim he would have pulled off, sounding silly.

If belief is is irrelevant here, then why are you implicitly suggesting Crosby would have finished with 1.30 "something"? Isn't that belief too?

You would expect the better offensive player to get more offensive ice time. This is one of the asinine arguments around here. Whenever Jagr / Lemieux comparison comes up, "it was not even close", but you never see it mentioned that Lemieux was getting even more offensive ice time than Jagr and truckloads of the PP time. When we drag Jagr down to the level of the less gifted ones, and we do, ice time always comes up. Suddenly, ice time considered, it's closer than it might seem looking at their PPG in absolute terms. In other words: LOL

But of course. Coaches, roles and usages surely can't vary between different era.

Lets look.

The best offensive forwards post lockout are:

Kovalchuk
MSL
B. Richards

Good to know.

Lets look.

These players "earned" higher TOI than Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin career high, and the lists are only this short because Ovechkin had high TOI during his peak.

In 97/98.

Fleury
Oates
Jagr
Bure
Selanne
Lindros

In 98/99.

Jagr
Sakic
Kariya
Straka
Forsberg
Fleury

In 99/00.

Bure
Kariya
Straka
Sakic
Jagr

I just looked and noticed that prior to Sid's and Jagr's last respective games, Sid had the PPG of 0.68 while playing 20:39 minutes a night and Jagr had 0.62 PPG playing 12:30 minutes a game. What are we doing with that, captain genius? Is it the age? Small sample? What is it this time?

Yes, this season makes a good benchmark. It's not like it deviates from Crosby's norm. It's not like it's an extremely small sample size. Lets use it as benchmark.

So did the players that Jagr was beating. I don't see this as being relevant in a performance vs. peers analysis.

If you look at their ppg's in absolute terms you also fail to account for Jagr clearly seeing more offensive TOI on a per game basis.

Keyword absolute, which is how their PPG's were initially listed.

Did they really? Forsberg generally saw pretty low TOI. In 97/98 Jagr beat Forsberg by 11 points while playing 5 games more, and while also seeing 1 minute more ES TOI and 1:15 minutes more PP TOI.

 

[daver]

Did they really? Forsberg generally saw pretty low TOI. In 97/98 Jagr beat Forsberg by 11 points while playing 5 games more, and while also seeing 1 minute more ES TOI and 1:15 minutes more PP TOI.

We already agree to disagree that TOI matters in a peer vs. peer comparison and is not relevant to the OP. As for the OP, I would fully expect that Jagr would be getting the same relative icetime he did at his peak vs. his peers and show the same relative level of dominance production-wise.

I actually think we should look to 97/98 which was the toughest scoring environment during Jagr's peak. There were 15 players at a PPG that year. We have to go back to 2010/11 to see an amount close to that.

In 97/98, Jagr's PPG was 28% better than the average PPG of the next best 19 scorers. That translates to 104 points last year.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

That's quite a hot take. Guy who is second all-time in scoring would score a lot? No kidding...

That being said, if I'm Jagr I'm happy with the time period I played in. It's risky to shift it. For one, he almost certainly would not win an Olympic gold medal.

 

[NewUser293223]

He was at a 1.60 PPG halfway thru his 06/07 season and finished with a 1.52 PPG. Never say never. You sound completely silly thinking he would play at a 1.00 in the second half of those seasons.

No sir, you sound completely silly thinking it would have ended up any other way.

During 10/11, Sid scored 51 out of 66 points within his great 25-game point streak, at obviously unsustainable PPG of 2.04. In those other 16 games, he scored at very human 0.93 PPG. Can you imagine Kane's 15/16 ending by January?

 

[daver]

No sir, you sound completely silly thinking it would have ended up any other way.

During 10/11, Sid scored 51 out of 66 points within his great 25-game point streak, at obviously unsustainable PPG of 2.04.

In those other 16 games, he scored at very human 0.93 PPG.

You mean he put up more points in the games he played really well and not so many points in the games he didn't play as well?

You just blew my mind.