Yzerman vs. Beliveau

[thom]

Shutt was a sixty goal season all due to Guy Lafleur.Check 1979 season in which led team by fifty pts.Shutt should not be in Hall.That'-s why when shutt was put in hall in 3rd try many argued he should not have.Jean had the privilage to play with players as good as him.Who did Steve have in his big scoring seasons?

 

[Plural]

Eva, you claim that Yzerman vs. Beliveau is a "coin flip" and tried really hard to make some argument for it.

However you don't address the laughable disadvantage Yzerman has in Hart voting.
You don't touch the scoring finishes or PPG finishes which also favor Beliveau ridiculous amount.


You try to look a little about playoff success and come to a conclusion that they were close to each other there and that Yzerman should get the nod cause he was playing in worse team. I dare you to find another poster from this forum who shares the idea you presented that Yzerman was better playoff scorer.

You "prorate" Yzerman's season but in the same time you don't do the same for his competition.

You claim Howe to having the higher offensive peak than Lemieux, but completely disregard Beliveau beating Howe in scoring race even if Yzerman never managed to do the same for Lemieux.

I really am struggling to find you'r agenda here. You obviously are fairly knowledgeable hockey fan and often seem, at least somewhat, reasonable. Are you honestly of the opinion that Yzerman is 5th best player of all-time? Or are you just trying to pimp him cause you like the guy? Please, be honest so that I can wrap my head around this.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Shutt should not be in Hall.

Dino Ciccarelli is in the Hall. If he can get in why not Shutt?

 

[toob]

And where are the playoff scoring comparisons?

In a much lower scoring era, Jean produced 1.09 PpG to Yzerman's 0.94 PpG in the playoffs and despite playing a whopping 34 less playoff games, still scored 9 more goals that Stevie did.
That's 0.49 GpG to 0.36 GpG btw, not an insignificant margin to say the least.

Yzerman played most of his playoff games from 95-04. How exactly was it a much lower scoring era? Plus Yzerman was was 30+ years old and not playing a truly offensive role at this time. But yeah i realize you give credit to players who win cups in their primes like Beliveau and Messier - except the case of Bourque/Lidstrom ofc...

You get 99% by assuming Yzerman plays every game and maintains his scoring rate, but assuming all the other players in the league miss however many games they missed in real life.

====

If I had to suggest a single argument that makes this a one sided comparison? Beliveau was top five in Hart voting nine times, Yzerman twice. Part of the difference is explained by era and competition, but certainly not all of it.

eva are you doing this exact same calculation for Beliveau too in the yrs he missed games? If so then i dont see how the outrage is really that relevant unless Beliveau stayed much healthier than Yzerman which doesnt seem like it on the face of it given that Yzerman has what 2 yrs where this would matter for him 88, 94 and then another 2 in 01, 02 if you really want to stretch it.

and i think era and competition are a big part of the difference as well as team situation. Beliveau seems to have as his primary competition at center his 2nd line centerman most of the time with Mosdell to start and Henri Richard for most of the rest. Mikita seems to take over only when Beliveau has started to fade Yzerman had aside from Gretzky and Lemieux a pretty deep list of great centermen in the late 80s and then again in the early 90s. Granted i am pretty ignorant of lesser known old timers but the ones i recognize are Ted Kennedy, Milt Schmidt, and ofc Delvecchio and Ullman and they dont show up often at all with much presence.

Beliveau also seems to be playing with wingers who are top scorers themselves. Beliveau looks like he is more consistent then them but at their best they are pretty close to him. Neither is really the case at all with Yzerman.

If the argument shifts from offense to other things well i can give you quotes about Yzerman's D and leadership from 87 onward as well so... You can also find a shift to negative things about leadership in the mid 90s as well but unless we are going to hold a standard of winning/cups = leadership, i dont see a way to authoritatively say one was better. I mean did Beliveau have to deal with the kind of adversity Yzerman did with teammate issues, coaching style changes and trade talks?

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yzerman played most of his playoff games from 95-04. How exactly was it a much lower scoring era? Plus Yzerman was was 30+ years old and not playing a truly offensive role at this time. But yeah i realize you give credit to players who win cups in their primes like Beliveau and Messier - except the case of Bourque/Lidstrom ofc...

Take a second and think about what you just wrote here.
You are making up excuses for why Yzerman wasn't as good offensively as Beliveau was later in their careers.
You say it's because he played a defensive first role later on after playing an offensive first role early.
So please explain to me how that truly fares against Beliveau, who excelled at both ends of the ice for his ENTIRE career?
Beliveau didn't have to give up his offense to play defense, nor did he have to give up his defense to play offense.

As far as Bourque vs Lidstrom goes, there's just too many apples to oranges going on there in team strength, support and competition.
There's a hell of a lot more apples to apples going on with Yzerman vs Beliveau. At least a decade worth for Stevie. Bourque has all of a season and a quarter of apples to apples vs Lidstrom.

eva are you doing this exact same calculation for Beliveau too in the yrs he missed games? If so then i dont see how the outrage is really that relevant unless Beliveau stayed much healthier than Yzerman which doesnt seem like it on the face of it given that Yzerman has what 2 yrs where this would matter for him 88, 94 and then another 2 in 01, 02 if you really want to stretch it.

and i think era and competition are a big part of the difference as well as team situation. Beliveau seems to have as his primary competition at center his 2nd line centerman most of the time with Mosdell to start and Henri Richard for most of the rest. Mikita seems to take over only when Beliveau has started to fade Yzerman had aside from Gretzky and Lemieux a pretty deep list of great centermen in the late 80s and then again in the early 90s. Granted i am pretty ignorant of lesser known old timers but the ones i recognize are Ted Kennedy, Milt Schmidt, and ofc Delvecchio and Ullman and they dont show up often at all with much presence.

Beliveau also seems to be playing with wingers who are top scorers themselves. Beliveau looks like he is more consistent then them but at their best they are pretty close to him. Neither is really the case at all with Yzerman.

If the argument shifts from offense to other things well i can give you quotes about Yzerman's D and leadership from 87 onward as well so... You can also find a shift to negative things about leadership in the mid 90s as well but unless we are going to hold a standard of winning/cups = leadership, i dont see a way to authoritatively say one was better. I mean did Beliveau have to deal with the kind of adversity Yzerman did with teammate issues, coaching style changes and trade talks?

The problem is that he is not doing for eithers competition which inflates Yzerman's finishes.
He knows that if he does indeed do so, that Beliveau's stronger PpG finishes will bury Yzerman.

Oh and as far as pressure goes...
Do you even have the slightest clue what it was like to play for the Habs back then?
I don't care what trade rumours or coaching style changes or teammate issues Yzerman went through. It's pales in comparison to what Beliveau dealt with on a daily basis. Hockey was a religion in Montreal, you either won the Cup or you were bums that might as well have finished in last place.
Fan is short for fanatic and that term was never more apt than in Montreal.

 

[Epsilon]

Alright, let's test this hypothesis.

Lemieux was named on every ballot, with 49 first-place votes and 1 second place vote.

Turgeon put up a fifth-place finish, (0-2-6) for 12 points.
Selanne was sixth with (0-0-5) for 5 points.
Chelios was seventh with (0-0-3) for 3 points.
Yzerman was eighth with (0-0-2) for 2 points.

Now throw into the mix Lemieux's 248 points. We can assume a large number of them are scooped up by Gilmour and LaFontaine. But there would still be a significant number of points left. Is it such an impossible suggestion that Yzerman (who would then be the ES points leader by a wide margin) could have passed Chelios, Selanne, Turgeon, or even Oates?

Well, for one thing you seem to care a lot more about even strength points than the awards voters have ever given an indication they do.

For another, all you are doing is using pure speculation and making it in favor of "your guy". One could easily suggest any of the players who finished ahead of Yzerman would stay ahead and/or jump some of the others. One could even start bringing up players who didn't get any votes and just as easily claim they would have pulled in a bunch and someone who got two measly 3rd place votes.

Personally I think Chelios (the best defenseman that year) and Selanne (goal-scoring leader, set all kinds of rookie records) would have been more likely to benefit from any vote-redistribution than Yzerman.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Oh and as far as pressure goes...
Do you even have the slightest clue what it was like to play for the Habs back then?
I don't care what trade rumours or coaching style changes or teammate issues Yzerman went through. It's pales in comparison to what Beliveau dealt with on a daily basis. Hockey was a religion in Montreal, you either won the Cup or you were bums that might as well have finished in last place.
Fan is short for fanatic and that term was never more apt than in Montreal.

They called the 60s the "forgotten decade" for the Canadiens due to their lack of success. They had a four year Stanley Cup drought after winning in 1960 and still managed to win four more in the decade...

 

[Plural]

They called the 60s the "forgotten decade" for the Canadiens due to their lack of success. They had a four year Stanley Cup drought after winning in 1960 and still managed to win four more in the decade...

Wow. Talking about high expectations. But it also shows how different the league was at that time.

 

[pdd]

Eva, you claim that Yzerman vs. Beliveau is a "coin flip" and tried really hard to make some argument for it.

However you don't address the laughable disadvantage Yzerman has in Hart voting.
You don't touch the scoring finishes or PPG finishes which also favor Beliveau ridiculous amount.

Ok fine. Want awards? Nicklas Lidstrom is better than Ray Bourque, Eddie Shore, etc. because he was named best defenseman more often. He's better than Doug Harvey because while both have seven wins, Lidstrom has been top-six 16 times to Harvey's 11.

You try to look a little about playoff success and come to a conclusion that they were close to each other there and that Yzerman should get the nod cause he was playing in worse team. I dare you to find another poster from this forum who shares the idea you presented that Yzerman was better playoff scorer.

You "prorate" Yzerman's season but in the same time you don't do the same for his competition.

I did do the same for Beliveau. Here is a list of all of the seasons I listed with the pro-rated finish:

Player|Season|%1st
Yzerman*|93-94|0.99
Yzerman*|87-88|0.97
Beliveau*|67-68|0.93
Beliveau*|57-58|0.89
Beliveau*|53-54|0.81
Yzerman*|01-02|0.79
Beliveau*|61-62|0.79
Yzerman*|00-01|0.67
Beliveau*|64-65|0.60
Beliveau*|69-70|0.60
Yzerman*|02-03|0.39
Yzerman*|05-06|0.37

I count Beliveau 6 seasons, Yzerman 4.

EDIT: I noticed I had left off Yzerman's last couple of seasons when I built the table (it took a while). They are added here, and it is even at 6-6

You claim Howe to having the higher offensive peak than Lemieux, but completely disregard Beliveau beating Howe in scoring race even if Yzerman never managed to do the same for Lemieux.

Yzerman matched Lemieux at ES offensively in 87-88 (Lemieux Hart, Pearson, Ross, 1AS) and 88-89 (Lemieux Ross, 1AS; Yzerman Pearson). That was peak/prime Lemieux.

Also, here's the top four when Beliveau won his Art Ross:

Beliveau, MTL, C 88
Howe, DET, RW 79
M.Richard, MTL, RW 71
Olmstead, MTL, LW 70

Howe's highest-scoring teammate was Dutch Reibel at 56 points. Bernie Geoffrion scored 62 in 59 games for Montreal.

Strangely, it was Richard named to the 1st team RW, and Ted Lindsay (only 50 points) named to the 1st team on the LW. Odd year indeed.

I really am struggling to find you'r agenda here. You obviously are fairly knowledgeable hockey fan and often seem, at least somewhat, reasonable. Are you honestly of the opinion that Yzerman is 5th best player of all-time? Or are you just trying to pimp him cause you like the guy? Please, be honest so that I can wrap my head around this.[/QUOTE]

Well, for one thing you seem to care a lot more about even strength points than the awards voters have ever given an indication they do.

For another, all you are doing is using pure speculation and making it in favor of "your guy". One could easily suggest any of the players who finished ahead of Yzerman would stay ahead and/or jump some of the others. One could even start bringing up players who didn't get any votes and just as easily claim they would have pulled in a bunch and someone who got two measly 3rd place votes.

Personally I think Chelios (the best defenseman that year) and Selanne (goal-scoring leader, set all kinds of rookie records) would have been more likely to benefit from any vote-redistribution than Yzerman.

Shutt was a sixty goal season all due to Guy Lafleur.Check 1979 season in which led team by fifty pts.Shutt should not be in Hall.That'-s why when shutt was put in hall in 3rd try many argued he should not have.Jean had the privilage to play with players as good as him.Who did Steve have in his big scoring seasons?

I agree that Shutt is one of the worst players in the Hall. But the fact is, Steve Shutt was far more offensively talented than anyone Yzerman had for a linemate with in his prime. The best point total for one of Yzerman's linemates in his prime was 93, done three times by three different guys. Gerard Gallant and Ray Sheppard each had career years (89 and 94), and Dino Ciccarelli had his last notable season (and he was a passenger on Yzerman's line for large stretches that season).

 

[Westcoasthabsfan]

There is no comparision....its not even close....sorry Stevie Y.....

 

[Plural]

Ok fine. Want awards? Nicklas Lidstrom is better than Ray Bourque, Eddie Shore, etc. because he was named best defenseman more often. He's better than Doug Harvey because while both have seven wins, Lidstrom has been top-six 16 times to Harvey's 11.

Well, Nicklas Lidstrom being better than Bourque is not out of the question. Altough I think Bourgue holds the edge there. It is 10 1st team all-star selections against 13. But nevertheless the difference between Bourque and Lidstrom is a lot smaller than difference between Beliveau and Yzerman. I wont dig in to Harvey since I have too little knowledge on him.

I'd rather you address the reason why Yzerman has so much less accolades than listing players who are close to each other in terms of awards and accomplishments. It has no barring in this conversation.

I did do the same for Beliveau. Here is a list of all of the seasons I listed with the pro-rated finish:

Player|Season|%1st
Yzerman*|93-94|0.99
Yzerman*|87-88|0.97
Beliveau*|67-68|0.93
Beliveau*|57-58|0.89
Beliveau*|53-54|0.81
Yzerman*|01-02|0.79
Beliveau*|61-62|0.79
Yzerman*|00-01|0.67
Beliveau*|64-65|0.60
Beliveau*|69-70|0.60

I count Beliveau 6 seasons, Yzerman 4.

But you did not give the same to their competition. Which you should. Beliveau has a lot stronger PPG record which would be clearly indicated if you pro-rate all players seasons not only Yzerman/Beliveau.

Or am I getting something wrong here? Beliveau led the league in PPG three times. Why doesn't he have 3 first place finishes?

Yzerman matched Lemieux at ES offensively in 87-88 (Lemieux Hart, Pearson, Ross, 1AS) and 88-89 (Lemieux Ross, 1AS; Yzerman Pearson). That was peak/prime Lemieux.

But Yzerman did not match Lemieux offensively. No matter how you twist and turn it.

Also, here's the top four when Beliveau won his Art Ross:

Beliveau, MTL, C 88
Howe, DET, RW 79
M.Richard, MTL, RW 71
Olmstead, MTL, LW 70

Howe's highest-scoring teammate was Dutch Reibel at 56 points. Bernie Geoffrion scored 62 in 59 games for Montreal.

Strangely, it was Richard named to the 1st team RW, and Ted Lindsay (only 50 points) named to the 1st team on the LW. Odd year indeed.

I don't get this. Why are you showing me these scoring finishes?

 

[toob]

Take a second and think about what you just wrote here.
You are making up excuses for why Yzerman wasn't as good offensively as Beliveau was later in their careers.
You say it's because he played a defensive first role later on after playing an offensive first role early.
So please explain to me how that truly fares against Beliveau, who excelled at both ends of the ice for his ENTIRE career?
Beliveau didn't have to give up his offense to play defense, nor did he have to give up his defense to play offense.

No the 1st thing i wrote was a factual statement contradicting your assertion. Yzerman played almost 3/4ths of his playoff games from 95-04 which is not at all a much lower scoring era than whenever Beliveau played his playoffs. Forget that on top of that Beliveau's teams were so far ahead of any team offensively basically every year. Yzerman also did play these majority of playoffs after he was 30. And he was hurt often which i didnt even bring up.

I love how you bring up Beliveau excelling at both ends of the ice and never giving up defense for offense even though you can find basically exactly the same statements for Yzerman in the late 80s as well. Yzerman playing more defensively from the mid 90s on doesnt even change that it just means he added even another level to his defensive game.

But i know your general way of posting is to assert something incorrect and then when called out on it go on another tangent so this is why i will end with Yzerman playing almost 3/4ths of his playoff games from 95-04 which is not "much lower scoring" than Beliveau from the 50s to the 70s

As far as Bourque vs Lidstrom goes, there's just too many apples to oranges going on there in team strength, support and competition.
There's a hell of a lot more apples to apples going on with Yzerman vs Beliveau. At least a decade worth for Stevie. Bourque has all of a season and a quarter of apples to apples vs Lidstrom.

No because Detroit at its best was never as stacked as Beliveau's teams were and if you are going to actually try and call that apples to apples then quite a few of Bruins that Bourque played on that are more than easily called apples to apples with the late 90s early 00s Wings.

The problem is that he is not doing for eithers competition which inflates Yzerman's finishes.
He knows that if he does indeed do so, that Beliveau's stronger PpG finishes will bury Yzerman.

he just showed how it has 6 of Beliveau's years vs 4 of Yzerman's years but ok eva can you not do your pro rating and see how much Beliveau gains like some are saying?

Oh and as far as pressure goes...
Do you even have the slightest clue what it was like to play for the Habs back then?
I don't care what trade rumours or coaching style changes or teammate issues Yzerman went through. It's pales in comparison to what Beliveau dealt with on a daily basis. Hockey was a religion in Montreal, you either won the Cup or you were bums that might as well have finished in last place.
Fan is short for fanatic and that term was never more apt than in Montreal.

um yeah so like 5ish years of not winning the cup was worse than the adversity Yzerman had to face with a team that didnt win the cup for 40 years among all the other things like teammate drug and legal problems and personal trade rumors...

apples to apples?

 

[Plural]

he just showed how it has 6 of Beliveau's years vs 4 of Yzerman's years but ok eva can you not do your pro rating and see how much Beliveau gains like some are saying?

Seriously guys, am I missing something here?

If we are talking about prorating seasons we are essentially using said players PPG to determine how his production would have looked with that PPG and all games played?

If that is the case:


PPG finishes

1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th and 5th against:
1st, 2nd, 2nd, 4th and 5th

Now, are we basically saying that prorated these would be the top-5 scoring finishes these two players have? Or I am still missing something?

These are actual scoring finishes with the "Big 4" removed:

Beliveau:
1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th and 5th

Yzerman:
1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th

I don't see any way how Yzerman comes on par at this.

Edit: I edited PPG finishes and PPG without the big 4.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I really am struggling to find you'r agenda here.

The agenda is pretty obvious. Eva is a massive Wings homer and is trying to find a way that Yzerman can, in a single stroke, vault over about 30 players on the all-time list. Hence the statistical acrobatics to make him somehow appear to be a "coin flip" with Beliveau.

 

[toob]

Seriously guys, am I missing something here?

If we are talking about prorating seasons we are essentially using said players PPG to determine how his production would have looked with that PPG and all games played?

If that is the case:


PPG finishes

1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd and 3rd against:
3rd, 4th, 4th, 5th

hes comparing against a benchmark here after removing Gretzky/Lemieux/Howe/Orr so first the ppg finishes are going to be changed based on who is removed and then one third may be some percentage of the benchmark while another third would be yet another

if he doesnt do this prorating it should give a boost to Beliveau so i want to see how much

 

[Plural]

hes comparing against a benchmark here after removing Gretzky/Lemieux/Howe/Orr so first the ppg finishes are going to be changed based on who is removed and then one third may be some percentage of the benchmark while another third would be yet another

if he doesnt do this prorating it should give a boost to Beliveau so i want to see how much

I realize that he is removing the big 4.

What do you mean by the bolded part?

He is not using just PPG? What else could it possibly be?

 

[tombombadil]

I am ashamed as a Wings' fan. Please, someone, axe this monstrosity of a thread.

Hang on, to add - I am probably stronger in feelings than even Hardy that the newer generations are better, as athletes, than the older ones. If anyone has ever bothered to read my posts, this is obvious. But to try to put Yzerman on Beliveau's level in a peer-comparison/awards/points-per-game/whatever-the-hell-this-is...... get rid of it. It is insane.

 

[Plural]

The agenda is pretty obvious. Eva is a massive Wings homer and is trying to find a way that Yzerman can, in a single stroke, vault over about 30 players on the all-time list. Hence the statistical acrobatics to make him somehow appear to be a "coin flip" with Beliveau.

I kinda knew that, but I was hoping that he would admit it. Cause I fail to see how even the most biggest fan can actually believe that what he wrote is somehow a proof of Yzerman being Beliveau's equal.

 

[toob]

I realize that he is removing the big 4.

What do you mean by the bolded part?

He is not using just PPG? What else could it possibly be?

Here this should help. i cleaned up eva's table for the ones 80% and better. If you think im cutting it off for a reason check the lower than 80% for yourself.

I got rid of the prorated asterix entries and showed who was the benchmark and who eva had removed. I also listed names in alphabetical when percentages were tied to not make the names give some impression. I also showed when Beliveau was 1st in ppg as you were wondering about that.

Beliveau 55-56 1.00
Beliveau 56-57 1.00 - (Removed Howe/Lindsay)
Yzerman 88-89 1.00 - (Removed Gretzky/Lemieux)
Yzerman 89-90 0.98 - Messier (Removed Gretzky)
Beliveau 54-55 0.97 - Geoffrion
Beliveau 58-59 0.95 - Moore (Beliveau 1st ppg 1.42to 1.37 Moore)
Beliveau 60-61 0.95 - Geoffrion
Yzerman 91-92 0.94 - Hull (Removed Gretzky, Stevens, Lemieux)
Yzerman 92-93 0.93 - Lafontaine (Removed Lemieux)
Beliveau 59-60 0.91 - Hull (Beliveau 1st ppg 1.23 to 1.20 Geoffrion)
Beliveau 63-64 0.88 - Mikita
Yzerman 86-87 0.86 - Gilmour (Removed Gretzky, Kurri, Lemieux, Messier)
Beliveau 62-63 0.83 - Bathgate (removed Howe)
Yzerman 90-91 0.82 - Hull (Removed Gretzky)
Yzerman 99-00 0.82 - Jagr

So eva had removed at least one of Gretzky/Lemieux for Yzerman all but once time because they outscored him all the time in his prime. Sometimes Gretzky/Lemieux teammates were removed. This basically didnt affect the 87 entry much as Kurri would be a 83% instead of 86% but it did affect the 92 entry as Stevens would be a 84% instead of 94%. Up to you to decide which is the better comparison

eva didnt have to remove as much for Beliveau as Howe and other Detroit players didnt finish ahead of him as much. Howe peaked in the early 50s.

Beliveau did finish some years behind his own teammates. Beliveau's teammates also make a very strong showing in the top scorers lists perenially with about 3-5 top 10 Habs each year. The closest Yzerman teammate do so is Shanahan 1 point behind him at 11th in 00.

Beliveau's 56 year looks by far to be his most impressive as he outscored Howe by quite a bit. Howe didnt have nearly as much help as Beliveau though but Beliveau also outscored his teammates by a lot here.

1. Jean Beliveau*-MTL 88
2. Gordie Howe*-DET 79
3. Maurice Richard*-MTL 71
4. Bert Olmstead*-MTL 70
5. Andy Bathgate*-NYR 66
Tod Sloan-TOR 66
7. Bernie Geoffrion*-MTL 62
8. Dutch Reibel-DET 56
9. Dave Creighton-NYR 51
Bill Gadsby*-NYR 51
Alex Delvecchio*-DET 51
12. Ted Lindsay*-DET 50
Dickie Moore*-MTL 50
Red Kelly*-DET 50
15. George Armstrong*-TOR 48
16. Danny Lewicki-NYR 45
17. Ron Murphy-NYR 44
Doug Harvey*-MTL 44
19. Dean Prentice-NYR 42
20. Wally Hergesheimer-NYR 40
Red Sullivan-CBH 40
Henri Richard*-MTL 40

 

[Plural]

Oh, thanks. I am starting to get a hold of this.

 

[Hobnobs]

Well, for one thing you seem to care a lot more about even strength points than the awards voters have ever given an indication they do.

For another, all you are doing is using pure speculation and making it in favor of "your guy". One could easily suggest any of the players who finished ahead of Yzerman would stay ahead and/or jump some of the others. One could even start bringing up players who didn't get any votes and just as easily claim they would have pulled in a bunch and someone who got two measly 3rd place votes.

Personally I think Chelios (the best defenseman that year) and Selanne (goal-scoring leader, set all kinds of rookie records) would have been more likely to benefit from any vote-redistribution than Yzerman.

So does Rhiessan, when it suits him

 

[Rhiessan71]

So does Rhiessan, when it suits him

It‘s not when it suits me, it‘s when it‘s close between 2 players and there‘s a noticeable difference.

By all means, show me players I have cited “when it suits me“.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Beliveau may have played with better players, but his average opposition was also better than Yzermans.

 

[Hobnobs]

Beliveau may have played with better players, but his average opposition was also better than Yzermans.

Beliveau is better than Yzerman but its good that there is people questioning it because a) some ppl will try to prove it otherwise and u can see how close or far away it really is
b) we get to see the hacks, posing as historians going "omg, its not even close" and so on.

Also when u say that he played with better teammates and were facing better opposition, this is true BUT it should be noted that Beliveau joined a team that already made the cup finals twice and played in the finals 8 more times all in a row then they had 4 down years before going to the finals five years in a row losing once...

Now compare that to Yzermans Red Wings in the 80s or Sakics Nordiques (Sakic might aswell be brought into the discussion)

 

[Pominville Knows]

Also when u say that he played with better teammates and were facing better opposition, this is true BUT it should be noted that Beliveau joined a team that already made the cup finals twice and played in the finals 8 more times all in a row then they had 4 down years before going to the finals five years in a row losing once...

Now compare that to Yzermans Red Wings in the 80s or Sakics Nordiques (Sakic might aswell be brought into the discussion)

Yes, but personally i dont put much weight into the very common dynasties of the past. What we need to do is to compare Beliveaus play during his many cup games to Yzermans dito. We need to be aware that cups overall is a very relative way to compare players in a team sport.