Jarome Iginla vs Pavel Bure

[The Grim Reaper]

I took the guy that regularly threw around 9-10 more kg of muscle, Iginla.

 

[Regal]

Iginla had the fuller career and won the top awards, but I think Bure was the better hockey player without hesitation

 

[Play]

Would've been a terrible fit and total waste.

Bure was the opposite of the sort of player that the Twins thrived with.

How about Quinn Hughes and Bure?

 

[Felidae]

Iginla had the fuller career and won the top awards, but I think Bure was the better hockey player without hesitation

Was he clearly the better hockey player though?


Look, neither of these 2 were among the best when it came to playmaking. But I think it's worth noting Iginla has the clear edge in this category, and a reason why their overall point finishes are as close as they are.


From 1996 to 2005, Iginla was 9th in goals and 47th in assists with a stat total of 708 games played, 285 goals and 285 assists.

Bure from 1991 to 2002-03 is 53rd in assists, 5th in goals. 342 assists in 702 games.

The reason I picked this timeframe is obvious, it's the closest match to Bure's games played. But it's actually very disadvantageous to Iginla.

3 of his 4 best, most productive seasons are missing from the picture, including 1 season where he finished top 10 in assists, and another where he was 7th in APG. (Bure was never top 10 in assists or APG)

Yet despite all of that left out, Iginla still ranks higher in assists in their respective timeframes than Bure in their first 700 games.

I have no issue with people ultimately picking Bure. But the fact that Iginla's point and goalscoring finishes are comparable despite Bure so clearly having the better physical tools like skating, stickhandling and shot arsenal suggests to me that Iginla compensated by having a better mind for the game, and the evidence seems to point that way given Iginla's assist totals were better throughout their careers.

I think Bure is only "clearly" the better hockey player in the sense that nearly every skill jumps out much more. Which of course matters, since its the reason Bure has a clear edge in goalscoring. But the results are still pretty close, overall production in particular.

 

[Faceboner]

Would've been a terrible fit and total waste.

Bure was the opposite of the sort of player that the Twins thrived with.

He might have looked good next to kesler

 

[bobholly39]

Bure is defintely the better player.

If you want to argue Iginla had the better career - that's possible. I still would slot Bure ahead here too, but at least that's closer

 

[lipstickjunkie]

Really tough. These are two of my all-time favourite players. I voted Bure though, dude was just off the charts electric.

 

[Regal]

Was he clearly the better hockey player though?


Look, neither of these 2 were among the best when it came to playmaking. But I think it's worth noting Iginla has the clear edge in this category, and a reason why their overall point finishes are as close as they are.


From 1996 to 2005, Iginla was 9th in goals and 47th in assists with a stat total of 708 games played, 285 goals and 285 assists.

Bure from 1991 to 2002-03 is 53rd in assists, 5th in goals. 342 assists in 702 games.

The reason I picked this timeframe is obvious, it's the closest match to Bure's games played. But it's actually very disadvantageous to Iginla.

3 of his 4 best, most productive seasons are missing from the picture, including 1 season where he finished top 10 in assists, and another where he was 7th in APG. (Bure was never top 10 in assists or APG)

Yet despite all of that left out, Iginla still ranks higher in assists in their respective timeframes than Bure in their first 700 games.

I have no issue with people ultimately picking Bure. But the fact that Iginla's point and goalscoring finishes are comparable despite Bure so clearly having the better physical tools like skating, stickhandling and shot arsenal suggests to me that Iginla compensated by having a better mind for the game, and the evidence seems to point that way given Iginla's assist totals were better throughout their careers.

I think Bure is only "clearly" the better hockey player in the sense that nearly every skill jumps out much more. Which of course matters, since its the reason Bure has a clear edge in goalscoring. But the results are still pretty close, overall production in particular.

I think the difference in their goal scoring is bigger than any difference in playmaking. Iginla had some big goal scoring seasons, but they were never as big as Bure’s despite having more kicks at the can due to health. He also had a lot of mediocre goal scoring seasons in there as well, and while Bure had some as well, it was usually due to health

 

[AvroArrow]

Iginla was a physical presence, he truly did it all. Elite goal scorer, great fighter, extremely physical, great leader, when I think of a complete hockey player, Iginla comes to mind. He really did it all, and did it all at a high level. I think Pavel Bure was the better offensive player, obviously the better skater, but Iginlas physicality can't be ignored. Probably the 2nd best power forward of the last 20 years, behind only Ovechkin.

 

[TMLife17]

"Better" is quite subjective.

Who would I take on my team right now? Iginla and it's not even close.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Bure in todays league would be unstoppable much like McDavid

 

[HolyHagelin]

Since OP specified peak, i have to say Bure.

Of course Iginla was awesome for a lot of years Bure’s career didn’t have, he was a stud - but peak was the Russian Rocket.

 

[Siignal]

It's difficult because there are the tangibles outside of skill and production like Iginla's strength, but Iginla had the entire Flames fanbase and team behind him for so long. That man put more than the team on his back. I'm a Calgarian though.

I can't speak to Bure in this because I'm too young, so I am abstaining from voting, but it's interesting to see Bure slightly ahead.

 

[biturbo19]

He might have looked good next to kesler

Yeah. I think Bure with Kesler would've worked a lot better than with the Sedins. Kesler was always flying a little bit of a "helicopter line" (ain't got no wings), but i think that probably would've worked alright with Bure who didn't really need the greatest "playmaking" Center to do his thing either. I'd imagine it'd work similarly to the way Mason Raymond worked there for a long time as a vaguely goal-scoring speedster...but orders of magnitude better obviously.

 

[Ben White]

The question is “better player” but the OP shows achievements and placements. That’s two different things and therefore misleading. This is Bure without any doubt.

 

[trentmccleary]

Was he clearly the better hockey player though?


Look, neither of these 2 were among the best when it came to playmaking. But I think it's worth noting Iginla has the clear edge in this category, and a reason why their overall point finishes are as close as they are.


From 1996 to 2005, Iginla was 9th in goals and 47th in assists with a stat total of 708 games played, 285 goals and 285 assists.

Bure from 1991 to 2002-03 is 53rd in assists, 5th in goals. 342 assists in 702 games.

The reason I picked this timeframe is obvious, it's the closest match to Bure's games played. But it's actually very disadvantageous to Iginla.

3 of his 4 best, most productive seasons are missing from the picture, including 1 season where he finished top 10 in assists, and another where he was 7th in APG. (Bure was never top 10 in assists or APG)

Yet despite all of that left out, Iginla still ranks higher in assists in their respective timeframes than Bure in their first 700 games.

I have no issue with people ultimately picking Bure. But the fact that Iginla's point and goalscoring finishes are comparable despite Bure so clearly having the better physical tools like skating, stickhandling and shot arsenal suggests to me that Iginla compensated by having a better mind for the game, and the evidence seems to point that way given Iginla's assist totals were better throughout their careers.

I think Bure is only "clearly" the better hockey player in the sense that nearly every skill jumps out much more. Which of course matters, since its the reason Bure has a clear edge in goalscoring. But the results are still pretty close, overall production in particular.

Using the ranks for cumulative scoring statistics will favor Iginla because he played 96% of his potential games, while Bure only played 74% of his in the samples you chose.

Maybe I didn't explain that well. It would be something like this:
Player 1 - averages 61 GP and 67 Pts per year for 1.10 PPG over a long term sample
Player 2 - averages 79 GP and 79 Pts per year for 1.00 PPG over a long term sample

Are you measuring the better player or the one who played the most games?

Bure's 12 year career compared to Iginla's best 12 year stretch (per game ranks, min 50% of GP):

Years	Player	GPG	APG	PPG
1991-2003	Bure	1st	47th	7th
2000-2012	Iginla	3rd	35th	8th

 

[Felidae]

Using the ranks for cumulative scoring statistics will favor Iginla because he played 96% of his potential games, while Bure only played 74% of his in the samples you chose.

Maybe I didn't explain that well. It would be something like this:
Player 1 - averages 61 GP and 67 Pts per year for 1.10 PPG over a long term sample
Player 2 - averages 79 GP and 79 Pts per year for 1.00 PPG over a long term sample

Are you measuring the better player or the one who played the most games?

Bure's 12 year career compared to Iginla's best 12 year stretch (per game ranks, min 50% of GP):

Years	Player	GPG	APG	PPG
1991-2003	Bure	1st	47th	7th
2000-2012	Iginla	3rd	35th	8th

I specifically chose Iginla's first 700 games to match Bure's games played, his entire career. I fail to see how that is advantageous to Iginla considering I omitted some of his most productive seasons, while including all of Bure's prime.

And also, it doesn't matter all that much. Whether its the timeframe I used or the stats you posted, both show that they are very close as players.

@Regal I don't know if that's true. Look at trentmccleary's table. It shows that the goalscoring edge Bure has and the playmaking edge Iginla has ultimately rounds out to nearly identical PPG placements in their best 12 years.

Fair point about injury. I do think had he played more healthy seasons and replicated his previous years, the gap would be pretty clear. That's probably the likely outcome, but ultimately we'll never know.

Either way, I dont think Iginla's "mediocre" seasons have much relevance here since we're talking about peak/prime.

 

[Regal]

I specifically chose Iginla's first 700 games to match Bure's games played, his entire career. I fail to see how that is advantageous to Iginla considering I omitted some of his most productive seasons, while including all of Bure's prime.

And also, it doesn't matter all that much. Whether its the timeframe I used or the stats you posted, both show that they are very close as players.

@Regal I don't know if that's true. Look at trentmccleary's table. It shows that the goalscoring edge Bure has and the playmaking edge Iginla has ultimately rounds out to nearly identical PPG placements in their best 12 years.

Fair point about injury. I do think had he played more healthy seasons and replicated his previous years, the gap would be pretty clear. That's probably the likely outcome, but ultimately we'll never know.

Either way, I dont think Iginla's "mediocre" seasons have much relevance here since we're talking about peak/prime.

I’m not a fan of looking at large timelines like that as one chunk because so much of it can be affected by timelines for competition. Iginla’s prime started in a weak period and then a lot of the top players changed after the lockout.

Also, if we’re looking at peaks, then this is too large a sample imo. To me it comes down to the fact that Bure only played 5 full seasons and finished 1,1,1,3,5 in goals. Iginla had 19 seasons where he played at least 70 games and he has worse goals finishes at 1,1,3,3. When I talk about mediocre seasons I mean the ones that were in between Iginla’s peak years. He wins the Art Ross and Richard, then has down season. Then he wins the Richard again (three way tie), but is down in points. Then has another down season after the lockout, before two strong years, then another two down goal years. To me it seems that if he was close to as good as Bure as a goal scorer he’d be able to be at the top more consistently. The only real down year Bure had that wasn’t injury related or while a rookie was the 94-95 lockout season

 

[sr edler]

Iggy was a great all around player

Iginla was close as a goal-scorer. And he brought so many other things to the table

when I think of a complete hockey player, Iginla comes to mind. He really did it all, and did it all at a high level.

People pretending Iginla had these great depths to his game outside of his scoring is pretty funny.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Bure was super fun to watch but this is Iginla pretty clearly. He did more than just the numbers.

Outside of his early career, Bure didn’t even know where his own end of the rink was..

 

[Primary Assist]

I voted Bure, but am starting to doubt myself.

If I was building a team that had to win one game, and I knew I was going to get the peak version of either player, I think I would choose Bure... But then again this hypothetical basically happened in 2010 when Iggy assisted on the Golden Goal

 

[Regal]

People pretending Iginla had these great depths to his game outside of his scoring is pretty funny.

He was strong on the boards as a great cycle player and provided a level of physicality both in terms of hitting and fighting that hasn’t been as common among top scorers in the 2000s and beyond. I do tend to agree that it’s a bit overrated. He wasn’t a stand out defensive winger like a Hossa and he wasn’t a scary physical presence like a Lindros. He also became much less of a power forward in his 30s, presumably to preserve himself more.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

Iginla way more well-rounded plus, a great captain!

 

[DFF]

People pretending Iginla had these great depths to his game outside of his scoring is pretty funny.

It’s more funny for people pretending Iginla provided just scoring

 

[Miller Time]

Bure was the better pure talent, but if I'm building a team, I take Iginla over Bure...

Better overall player and leader.