Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by PapaBear*, Feb 13, 2005.
Larionov for me, by a slight edge.
Craig Janney for me.
I'd say Larionov, he's won a heck of a lot more.
Hockey career or NHL career?
The Professor, hands down...
Larionov fairly easily (since 'career' should include International competition).
Larionov, no question.
I think every one know the answer. It's one of those 99% vs 1% polls. Larionov.
San Jose first upset Detroit in the playoffs a decade ago in large part because of the play of Larionov. After that, the Red Wings decided to buy his services. I stopped watching him then because I can't stand Detroit.
Earlier in his career, in Vancouver, Larionov played great.
And internationally in the eighties he was one of the Soviet greats.
So, in terms of Hall of Fame votes, Larionov will out garner Oates.
But we are talking about two of the great passers in the history of the game, (though junior cousins to Grets).
If we're talking just NHL, it's Oates by a HUGE margin. if we're talking entire career, it would be very close, flip of a coin.
why? because he has more points? I'd love to hear your reasoning.
If we're just speaking about NHL careers:
Oates is more physical, was a great face-off man, a better goal scorer, and a slightly better passer.
I dont think its Oates by a HUGE margin if judging just NHL careers. Larionov does have 3 Stanley Cup rings, and the fact that he put up decent numbers in his NHL career despite playing all of his prime years in Russia is pretty impressive.
Its Larionov by a huge margin if you judge both players entire careers. And I think its pretty close if judging only what they did in the NHL.
Slightly better passer? Are you serious? People have talked for years how Larionov was only behind Gretzky in on ice vision and passing ability. Apparently you didnt watch enough of the man to fully appreciate his passing. It was sick. Oates is terrific, dont get me wrong...one of the best. But Larionov is the best passer I have seen other than Gretzky.
And Oates is more physical? Big deal. Thats like saying Rosie O'Donnell is fatter than Roseanne. Who cares?
Kirk Maltby has 3 stanley Cups, that doesn't make him better than Oates with none. Larionov was a good player for the Red Wings, but he was never one of their 4 or 5 most important players on the Cup winning teams.
Larionov did exactly what you said, he put up decent numbers in the NHL, while Oates has put up great numbers.
Also Larionov did come over at 29, so I wouldn't say all his prime years were spent in Russia.
Oates by a huge margin, and rightly so as he played his entire career in the NHL, and flip a coin overall.
A better goal scorer? :lol
Neither players are goal scorers, but Oates benefited on the stats sheet from not playing 7 or 8 years in russia at the begining of his career.
Neither players are physical at all and I'd bet they're just about the same on faceoffs.
Larionov is an excellent passer, no doubt, but I'll take Oates, as one of the games 3 best passers of the last 25 years.
I'm not just talking about throwing bodychecks, but willing to play in traffic, and take hits to make a play.
So explain to me why the way Oates still put up the numbers until a couple of years ago and Larionov didn't produce at his level?
This is really a tricky debate, but I've always maintained Larionov gets more credit that he deserves, and Adam Oates has never been garnered the respect he deserves. This is actually a great "v." debate.
Neither are known for goal scoring, but Oates was better at it.
My whole point was just speaking about NHL career, than Oates is clearly better, what about that is so hard to understand ???
Oates is more physical and more willing to play in traffic that Larionov has. You guess on face-offs would be wrong. Oates has been a great face-off man, always among the league leaders in face-off %.
Please explain how the Red Wings "bought" his services.
I still pick Oates.
Ok here are the points and Points per game averages of both men and to be fair I chose the seasons of Oates starting when he was 29 which is when Larionov got to the nhl.
P GP PPG
44 in 74- 0.59
34 in 64- 0.53
65 in 72- 0.90
56 in 60- 0.93
24 in 33- 0.72
73 in 73- 1
54 in 64- 0.84
47 in 69- 0.68
63 in 75- 0.84
47 in 79- 0.59
40 in 65- 0.61
43 in 70- 0.61
43 in 74- 0.58
11 in 49- 0.22
30 in 26- 1.15
142 in 84- 1.69
112 in 77- 1.45
53 in 48- 1.10
92 in 70- 1.31
82 in 80- 1.02
12 in 17: 0.70
76 in 82- 0.92
54 in 59- 0.91
71 in 82- 0.86
82 in 81- 1.01
78 in 80- 0.97
45 in 67- 0.67
18 in 60- 0.30
Oates is definately better. Larionov has had only 1 season where he has put up a point per game while Oates has had 7. Oates' highest assist mark is 98 while Larionov's is 50! And people think Larionov is the best passer since Gretzky
Of the past 25 years heres who I would rank better then Larionov.
Larionov sure is in the top 10 but definately not the best since Gretzky. Oates is a better passer, better point producer, tougher player as mentioned in this thread and has had the better career. So I would definately go with Oates.
and you came to this conclusion how?
Based on numbers, yes, Oates had a better career. I bet he would trade some of his points for a stanley cup though. Had Igor played in the NHL his entire career, he'd probably have over 1000 points and this wouldn't even be a debate who's better.
What does "more willing to play in traffic" mean exactly? Why does this even matter?