Jágr vs Lafleur

[Ziostilon]

Both great wingers of their time. What separates them in all-time contention.

Click to read more...

 

[jkrx]

Their haircut.

tbh talent and skills I think they are both equally good with maybe some minor differences here and there. Lafleur never ended up in the Caps situation so we will never know if he wouldve been like Jagr then.

I'd still say Lafleur over Jagr but very marginally.

 

[ozzie]

Lafleur may have had more speed down the wings and when he lost his speed his game dropped quickly.

Jagr was never the fastest player on the ice, but he was still quick. But what seperates him from Lafleaur was his skill level. This difference becomes more obvious when Jagr began to slow down, his game was not about speed. Even today he is still a great player and could if he wanted to be in the NHL.

Dead puck era of Jagr is many levels above Lefleur's prime 70's years.

 

[mco543]

I'd forgotten how absurd prime Jagr's mullet was. I bet Jagr had to feed that thing.

 

[JackSlater]

This is very close. I would put Lafleur's prime slightly ahead of Jagr's, but Jagr gets the longevity edge. Neither player was noteworthy defensively. The deciding factor for me is the playoffs, where Lafleur seemed to raise his level from his excellent regular season level of play while Jagr kept his play at the same level as the regular season. To me that's enough for Lafleur to have a slight edge.

 

[seventieslord]

Definitely Jagr. Jagr's best six seasons match up to Lafleur's just fine, and His 7th-15th-b est seasons are significantly stronger. Lafleur, due to circumstance, has a better playoff record, but it's not enough to overcome the gap.

 

[lextune]

I'd take either one.

...but if I had to pick, it would be Lafleur, by a slim margin.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Classic Double Entendre

I'd take either one.

...but if I had to pick, it would be Lafleur, by a slim margin.

Guy Lafleur - playoff performance and until his 1980 knee injury,Lafleur was one of the rare players like Beliveau, Harvey, Howe, Gretzky, Orr, Bourque, Lemieux, Bossy, Trottier, Crosby who would show you something different every game. Jagr was prolific but like Dionne, Ovechkin and others brought a predictable sameness to each game.

By a slim margin - implying that Jagr had a weight problem at various times of his career.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Lafleur may have had more speed down the wings and when he lost his speed his game dropped quickly.

Jagr was never the fastest player on the ice, but he was still quick. But what seperates him from Lafleaur was his skill level. This difference becomes more obvious when Jagr began to slow down, his game was not about speed. Even today he is still a great player and could if he wanted to be in the NHL.

Dead puck era of Jagr is many levels above Lefleur's prime 70's years.

If you think this, I can only assume you never saw Lafleur play.

 

[Reds4Life]

Lafleur has done nothing outside his 6 or so years. Jagr was slightly, but clearly better imho.

 

[begbeee]

Lafleur has done nothing outside his 6 or so years. Jagr was slightly, but clearly better imho.

This.

Lafleur has 6 superseasons and then almost nothing.
Jagr was face of the NHL of one era - dead puck era. With great seasons before and after it.

For me it is clearly Jagr and it is "not even close".

Maybe if we compare only their primes, Lafleur was better, but overall? No.

 

[Darth Joker]

I'm a bit biased as a Habs fan, but I'd take Lafleur by a slim margin.

The reason is this: Lafleur never played with an offensive talent on the level of Mario Lemieux. Yes, he played with some outstanding players, but nobody quite on Mario's level offensively.

It's telling that Jagr's best season by a 22 point margin (1995-96) came when he was playing with a resurgent Mario. Being surrounded by a Mario-led Stanley Cup powerhouse squad no doubt helped Jagr early on in his career too.

If Jagr had to lead the 70s Habs, and Guy was Mario's linemate for several years, what would the stats look like? I think they would tilt in favor of Guy.

 

[begbeee]

I'm a bit biased as a Habs fan, but I'd take Lafleur by a slim margin.

The reason is this: Lafleur never played with an offensive talent on the level of Mario Lemieux. Yes, he played with some outstanding players, but nobody quite on Mario's level offensively.

It's telling that Jagr's best season by a 22 point margin (1995-96) came when he was playing with a resurgent Mario. Being surrounded by a Mario-led Stanley Cup powerhouse squad no doubt helped Jagr early on in his career too.

If Jagr had to lead the 70s Habs, and Guy was Mario's linemate for several years, what would the stats look like? I think they would tilt in favor of Guy.

If I am playing on Backstrom line not in Ovechkin position, I would score 100 goals during season. But I am not

 

[jkrx]

I'm a bit biased as a Habs fan, but I'd take Lafleur by a slim margin.

The reason is this: Lafleur never played with an offensive talent on the level of Mario Lemieux. Yes, he played with some outstanding players, but nobody quite on Mario's level offensively.

It's telling that Jagr's best season by a 22 point margin (1995-96) came when he was playing with a resurgent Mario. Being surrounded by a Mario-led Stanley Cup powerhouse squad no doubt helped Jagr early on in his career too.

If Jagr had to lead the 70s Habs, and Guy was Mario's linemate for several years, what would the stats look like? I think they would tilt in favor of Guy.

Just disproving your point by posting a video of Jagr that season and would also like to point out that Jagr played with Francis. Lemieux played mostly with Sandström that season if I remember correctly.

Just adding that when pens topped their lines it was Lemieux, Jagr and Francis/Nedved

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Guy Lafleur - playoff performance and until his 1980 knee injury,Lafleur was one of the rare players like Beliveau, Harvey, Howe, Gretzky, Orr, Bourque, Lemieux, Bossy, Trottier, Crosby who would show you something different every game. Jagr was prolific but like Dionne, Ovechkin and others brought a predictable sameness to each game.

By a slim margin - implying that Jagr had a weight problem at various times of his career.

Jagr can be called a lot of things, certainly not all of them flattering, but I don't think "predictable" is one of them.

 

[Reds4Life]

I'm a bit biased as a Habs fan, but I'd take Lafleur by a slim margin.

The reason is this: Lafleur never played with an offensive talent on the level of Mario Lemieux. Yes, he played with some outstanding players, but nobody quite on Mario's level offensively.

It's telling that Jagr's best season by a 22 point margin (1995-96) came when he was playing with a resurgent Mario. Being surrounded by a Mario-led Stanley Cup powerhouse squad no doubt helped Jagr early on in his career too.

If Jagr had to lead the 70s Habs, and Guy was Mario's linemate for several years, what would the stats look like? I think they would tilt in favor of Guy.

Lafleur had far better defenders feeding him puck. He played against inferior goalies (equipment-wise at the very least).

 

[revolverjgw]

I'm a bit biased as a Habs fan, but I'd take Lafleur by a slim margin.

The reason is this: Lafleur never played with an offensive talent on the level of Mario Lemieux. Yes, he played with some outstanding players, but nobody quite on Mario's level offensively.

It's telling that Jagr's best season by a 22 point margin (1995-96) came when he was playing with a resurgent Mario. Being surrounded by a Mario-led Stanley Cup powerhouse squad no doubt helped Jagr early on in his career too.

If Jagr had to lead the 70s Habs, and Guy was Mario's linemate for several years, what would the stats look like? I think they would tilt in favor of Guy.

Jagr played his best hockey without Mario, don't be fooled by raw numbers. His dominance of the post-trap NHL was insane. This was after Lemieux retired. Jagr put up 127 points on a mediocre Penguins team, put up 120+ with Micheal Nylander (who was useless once leaving the Rangers), won an Art Ross playing only 63 games, won an Art Ross when Mario missed a season, etc.

Prime for prime, Jagr was better, beating Lafleur's offensive dominance with nowhere near the support, in a deeper era with more European talent (Forsberg, Bure and Selanne finishing runner-up in different years). And of course he had far and away better longevity.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Predictable Sameness

Jagr can be called a lot of things, certainly not all of them flattering, but I don't think "predictable" is one of them.

Had his favourite spots on the ice where he would like to set-up. Right wing boards etc.The players I listed would execute equally well from any point on the ice. Jagr required a comfort zone.

 

[revolverjgw]

Had his favourite spots on the ice where he would like to set-up. Right wing boards etc.The players I listed would execute equally well from any point on the ice. Jagr required a comfort zone.

Jagr was predictable as the sun is predictable... you can't stop the sun rising from the east and you couldn't stop Jagr coming from the right half-boards. You can predict it, you can tell three guys to go clutch him and hitch a ride, but it's not going to matter.

 

[Axxellien]

Jagr vs Lafleur:

Overall, very close..Lafleur in his 6, 7 year prime was flashier, had more impact... Both looked good.. Jagr had a longer high octane output career prime...Situational differences....Lafleur would have flown, shone in Pitts. with Mario...Jagr would have done quite well with late 70s Habs...Never compared them...

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Jagr was predictable as the sun is predictable... you can't stop the sun rising from the east and you couldn't stop Jagr coming from the right half-boards. You can predict it, you can tell three guys to go clutch him and hitch a ride, but it's not going to matter.

Unless you were Hal Gill.

That in itself has to put Jagr behind Lafleur.

 

[Jungosi]

Unless you were Hal Gill.

That in itself has to put Jagr behind Lafleur.

I am fairly sure that you could find some obscure defenseman that always seemed to stop Lafleur.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Up to You

I am fairly sure that you could find some obscure defenseman that always seemed to stop Lafleur.

However it is up to you to find this obscure defenseman - a task at which you seem to have failed.

Hal Gill stops forwards that are predictable because he studies films and tendencies then executes the appropriate game plan.

Lafleur's game was unpredictable and spontaneous. In many ways he was to forwards what Hasek was to goaltending - refined talent, no defined style, unique understanding of the geometry of his position plus time and space combined with the required skills to execute.

 

[Darth Joker]

Just disproving your point by posting a video of Jagr that season and would also like to point out that Jagr played with Francis.

That video does not disprove my point at all.

And Jagr skating a different regular shift than Mario actual helps Jagr in that Mario would draw the best defense pairings, freeing things up a bit for Jagr.

Mario and Jagr played on the PowerPlay together in 95/96, IIRC.

 

[goalsversusthreshold*]

Guy Lafleur - playoff performance and until his 1980 knee injury,Lafleur was one of the rare players like Beliveau, Harvey, Howe, Gretzky, Orr, Bourque, Lemieux, Bossy, Trottier, Crosby who would show you something different every game. Jagr was prolific but like Dionne, Ovechkin and others brought a predictable sameness to each game.

By a slim margin - implying that Jagr had a weight problem at various times of his career.

You'd think if Jagr were so predictable he wouldn't have scored 123 points after the league had already had fifteen years to study him.

How many of those players have you watched and how many are you categorizing based on stereotypes and cliches?

I remember everyone saying Ovechkin "only" scored 5 goals in the Habs series because he was shut down because he was predictable. Then Crosby goes and scores 1...