Yzerman vs Sakic

[vadim sharifijanov]

The fact that Markus Naslund and Luc Robitaille are the very next in line in these periods suggests to me that raw points over a stretch of years is not going to produce an accurate list of the best forwards of the era. Especially in Sakic's case. I mean, 1999-2004... there's a 900-pound elephant in the room drawing tougher defensive matchups.

well not that i super want to go into this again, i mean forsberg missed two and a half seasons during sakic's six year peak stretch, and sakic himself missed one half season (forsberg's best).

but as forsberg/sakic softer/tougher matchups has been discussed endlessly before does anyone know of or remember a study of whether sakic scored more with or without forsberg in the lineup? (i think it's safe to say that forsberg scored more with sakic out of the lineup, citing his '03 season.)

Well last I checked half means half so Joe's first half is the 10 years from 88/89-97/98 and Yzerman's first half is the 11 years from 83/84-93/94.

Regardless, ...

if it were me, i'd use the natural breaks in their careers rather than literally splitting it down the middle. but as you say, "regardless..."

I don't think he "made the NHL" sooner. My memory of it is that Sakic made a personal choice/preference to stay in the Western Hockey League one more year.

contract dispute. obviously not his last. funny how sakic became known as such a company man. he wasn't adam oates, but he certainly had his share of ownership/$$$ drama.

And yet, to no one's surprise at the time, and despite the existence of the "generationals", Yzerman appears in Hart talk yearly over the stretch, which can't be said for Sakic.

this is where talking about young yzerman is interesting to me. i started watching hockey in the late 80s, but i was 7-9 years old so who the hell knows what i thought i was watching. but what i do know/remember with some degree of certainty is "the temperature of the room," so to speak. in '88 or '89 if you asked me or anyone else who the third best player in the world was, the answer would be yzerman, almost unquestionably. and the answer would remain yzerman in '90 and '91, but with successively less certainty.

a contemporary analogy: looking at the era between the lockouts, let's pretend crosby is gretzky and ovechkin is mario, and that both guys are healthy and beyond generational and killing not just their peers but their historical competition year in, year out. that's your clear top two of the era between lockouts. so yzerman would be malkin, the guy that basically everyone acknowledges is the third best player. messier is in the conversation as your "toews-tangibles" option, obviously louder starting in 1990, and then hull starting in '90 as your stats-y/"omg goals" stamkos corollary.

but then i go back and look at his hart voting and his stats and it's not as impressive as i would have guessed, going by his rep at the time. that suggests to me that either his rep was inflated, relative to hawerchuk, savard, stastny, and the other elite scoring centers (savard vs. yzerman in '88 seems like a legit question to ask), or that the rep is right and for whatever reason(s) the stats and award voting is deceiving. which one is true, i don't know.

but anyway, going by what i remember being the "temperature of the room," his hart record of 4, 3, 7, x, 7, 8 and scoring finishes of 12 (4th in PPG), 3, 3, 7, 7, 4 surprises me. by reputation, late 80s/early 90s yzerman should have been winning multiple harts and art rosses in a gretzky/mario-less league. as it stands, just the one year.


EDIT: getting to my real point here, what i suspect might be happening in this thread, though, is an overcorrect on yzerman. as time goes by, i don't think we all necessarily remember the esteem peak yzerman was held in. he'd left dionne, perreault, stastny, savard, and hawerchuk and those guys behind. but i don't think he was quite as good as how some are making him out to be in this thread.

 

[86Habs]

a contemporary analogy: looking at the era between the lockouts, let's pretend crosby is gretzky and ovechkin is mario, and that both guys are healthy and beyond generational and killing not just their peers but their historical competition year in, year out. that's your clear top two of the era between lockouts. so yzerman would be malkin, the guy that basically everyone acknowledges is the third best player. messier is in the conversation as your "toews-tangibles" option, obviously louder starting in 1990, and then hull starting in '90 as your stats-y/"omg goals" stamkos corollary.

but then i go back and look at his hart voting and his stats and it's not as impressive as i would have guessed, going by his rep at the time. that suggests to me that either his rep was inflated, relative to hawerchuk, savard, stastny, and the other elite scoring centers (savard vs. yzerman in '88 seems like a legit question to ask), or that the rep is right and for whatever reason(s) the stats and award voting is deceiving. which one is true, i don't know.

but anyway, going by what i remember being the "temperature of the room," his hart record of 4, 3, 7, x, 7, 8 and scoring finishes of 12 (4th in PPG), 3, 3, 7, 7, 4 surprises me. by reputation, late 80s/early 90s yzerman should have been winning multiple harts and art rosses in a gretzky/mario-less league. as it stands, just the one year.

EDIT: getting to my real point here, what i suspect might be happening in this thread, though, is an overcorrect on yzerman. as time goes by, i don't think we all necessarily remember the esteem peak yzerman was held in. he'd left dionne, perreault, stastny, savard, and hawerchuk and those guys behind. but i don't think he was quite as good as how some are making him out to be in this thread.

I'm probably the exact same age as you, and remember things slightly differently. I like your analogy, but I clearly remember Messier as the #3 guy back then behind Wayne & Mario. While Messier is not exactly analogous to Malkin (I agree with you that him and Toews share many similarities, though Messier was largely more productive in terms of scoring), I do see him as the #3 guy in that era and Yzerman as instead analogous to Tavares (or maybe Giroux) - a young, highly-regarded, emerging high-scoring center with the ability (and need) to carry the team on his back. A strong season would have him place in the top 3-5 in the scoring race.

In terms of the poll it's really a coin flip for me, though the "eye test" tells me that Yzerman was probably the more talented and gifted of the two.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I think we've all gotten enough mileage out of the "Yzerman checked Gretzky in 1987" headline. Are we going to ascribe defensive greatness to 22/23-year-old Yzerman because of 5-games in 1987 (4 of which his team lost)?

Last time I checked, the Wings lost that series in 5 games, so what did anything that Yzerman do really matter?

C'mon dude, it matters and you know it.
It puts large holes in the whole "Yzerman wasn't very good defensively" narrative from that time and it damned well shows how much further ahead Stevie was as an overall player to Joe at the same age.

You haven't "showed" anything. You've simply repeated -- ad infinitum -- that Yzerman became a superstar suddenly in 1986-87. What I'm wondering is: where's your evidence? I mean, I like Yzerman as much as anyone, but my memory of it is that he wasn't at "superstar" level until 1987-88. Demers gave him more responsibilities (as captain, obviously) and he might have killed some penalties, etc., but that hardly necessitates his being superior to a 100+ point player on a terrible team (Sakic).

What we're down to here is your impression (memory) vs. stats. Both are possibly legit, but you certainly haven't convinced me that Yzerman was this behemoth of power in 1986-87, when he was 12th in NHL scoring and -1.

Because despite only finishing 12 in scoring, he grew into his new role and added responsibilities as that season went on, finished strong and ended up with some Hart votes.

Or do you believe that Yzerman just simply flipped a switch over the summer between 86/87 and 87/88?
Sorry no, that's not generally how it works and most certainly not how it did here.

I'm not interesting in arguing, but I'd seriously like to know why you think Yzerman in year 4 (1986-87) was so vastly superior to Sakic in year 3 or 4?

I don't think Yzerman was better in year 3. If fact they were very similar at that point.
It was year 4 when Yzerman starting evolving past just being a one-way scoring threat. He was killing penalties and doubling up as the checking center.

In year 4, Sakic was just a one-way scoring threat.
In year 6, Sakic was still just a one-way scoring threat.
In year 7, Sakic, under new coaches that preached accountability and instituted a better system, finally took his first steps towards his own evolution.

 

[Rhiessan71]

contract dispute. obviously not his last. funny how sakic became known as such a company man. he wasn't adam oates, but he certainly had his share of ownership/$$$ drama.

Yeah it's funny how many people forget about the summer or '97, how close Joe came to being a Ranger and how pissed off fans and management were with him at the time.

And yeah, he "chose" to remain in the WHA for another season because he hadn't actually signed with the Nords yet.

 

[The Panther]

C'mon dude, it matters and you know it.
It puts large holes in the whole "Yzerman wasn't very good defensively" narrative

Gretzky was probably severely concussed during that series. In the last game of round two, Hawerchuk grabbed Gretzky's head from behind and slammed him, head-first, into the ice. Probably a 25-game suspension now. Ref missed it.

I don't think Yzerman was better in year 3. If fact they were very similar at that point.
It was year 4 when Yzerman starting evolving past just being a one-way scoring threat. He was killing penalties and doubling up as the checking center.

In year 4, Sakic was just a one-way scoring threat.
In year 6, Sakic was still just a one-way scoring threat.
In year 7, Sakic, under new coaches that preached accountability and instituted a better system, finally took his first steps towards his own evolution.

OK, thanks. I understand what you're saying now.

 

[Voight]

contract dispute. obviously not his last. funny how sakic became known as such a company man. he wasn't adam oates, but he certainly had his share of ownership/$$$ drama.

A big part of it was him wanting to stay in Swift Current after the big bus crash. Didn't want to leave the team just 6-8 months after the incident and felt he had to stay behind to help them recover. Wasnt always about the $$.

 

[cole von cole]

I take Yzerman, but it's really a coin flip, because it really is that close.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I take Yzerman because I'm a Wings fan so yeah..

 

[bobholly39]

Yzerman peaked and nothing happened.

Sakic peaked and the Avs won championships.


honestly - that's why I pick Sakic. Not a very good reason maybe, as they're very close, but it's my reason.

 

[blogofmike]

C'mon dude, it matters and you know it.
It puts large holes in the whole "Yzerman wasn't very good defensively" narrative from that time and it damned well shows how much further ahead Stevie was as an overall player to Joe at the same age.

If Yzerman checking Gretzky is a thing, it isn't. It was discussed here with YouTube clips around post 22 : http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1457173

In short, if Yzerman gains any credit for checking a concussed Gretzky, he loses it from all of those Messier points he was on-ice as a spectator for, and probably from the 88 run where Gretzky bottomed out at 2 points against Detroit.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

Yzerman peaked and nothing happened.

Sakic peaked and the Avs won championships.


honestly - that's why I pick Sakic. Not a very good reason maybe, as they're very close, but it's my reason.

Was Sakic ever on a good team that didn't also have Forsberg on it?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Was Sakic ever on a good team that didn't also have Forsberg on it?

the second half of '01 playoffs?

 

[Hardyvan123]

Was Sakic ever on a good team that didn't also have Forsberg on it?

the second half of '01 playoffs?

Sure that was the case but Foppa was excellent in the 11 games he played and it does have Blake/Bourque/Foote and a guy named Roy anchoring the back end too.

PeakYzerman never had that kind of team around him.

Also peak Sakic is spread out over 11 years with soem injuries and down years between the great ones.

Yzerman's peak is consecutive and earlier on as well.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Yeah, I don't see the timing of their championships being a factor. But there are a lot of other things that go in Sakic's favor. I couldn't believe how well he fared against Messier, Mikita, and Esposito in some of the comparisons we ran in the Centers project.

 

[cole von cole]

Yzerman peaked and nothing happened.

Sakic peaked and the Avs won championships.


honestly - that's why I pick Sakic. Not a very good reason maybe, as they're very close, but it's my reason.

Not a shot at you, but that isn't a good reason. If you see the kind of team Yzerman had at his peak, you'd understand why.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Not a shot at you, but that isn't a good reason. If you see the kind of team Yzerman had at his peak, you'd understand why.

not exactly. yzerman's marquee teammates in his three best regular seasons:

1989: adam oates, paul maclean, gerard gallant, petr klima, young adam graves

1990: gerard gallant, old bernie federko, still decent jimmy carson, old borje salming

1993: sergei fedorov, paul coffey, young nicklas lidstrom, vladimir konstantinov, dino ciccarelli, ray sheppard, steve chiasson, old brad mccrimmon, old mark howe, young slava kozlov, young keith primeau, old gerard gallant, old john ogrodnick

decent group in '89, garbage group in '90, murderer's row in '93.

 

[Neutrinos]

Team success is absolutely irrelevant in a player comparison thread

 

[cole von cole]

not exactly. yzerman's marquee teammates in his three best regular seasons:

1989: adam oates, paul maclean, gerard gallant, petr klima, young adam graves

1990: gerard gallant, old bernie federko, still decent jimmy carson, old borje salming

1993: sergei fedorov, paul coffey, young nicklas lidstrom, vladimir konstantinov, dino ciccarelli, ray sheppard, steve chiasson, old brad mccrimmon, old mark howe, young slava kozlov, young keith primeau, old gerard gallant, old john ogrodnick

decent group in '89, garbage group in '90, murderer's row in '93.

Fair, but he rarely, if ever, played with Oates, and while those others were okay, it doesn't exactly jump out at anyone as a competitive team. In 93, when they were a lethal team, they were still plagued by Tim Cheveldae.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

In 93, when they were a lethal team, they were still plagued by Tim Cheveldae.

true, but in the conference finals and SCF in 2001, colorado's second line was ville nieminen, chris drury, and dan hinote.

sakic's teams had their holes too.

 

[quoipourquoi]

true, but in the conference finals and SCF in 2001, colorado's second line was ville nieminen, chris drury, and dan hinote.

sakic's teams had their holes too.

Those guys had three different timely highlight reel goals against the Devils and a whole lot of nothing else in those rounds. Classic Drury.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

My opinion hasn't changed since 2013... Yzerman.

 

[seventieslord]

My opinion hasn't changed since 2013... Yzerman.

some people change their opinions when presented with facts, some don't

 

[Datsyukian Deke]

Tough call, but I'm bias, gotta go with the Captain.

Nothing against Sakic, one of the best at his position and all around class act. There was always a mutual understanding I found, during the Wings/Avs rivalry days, between the fans, that either Captain were always off limits. They were the same kind of player, well respected, and great leaders on and off the ice.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

some people change their opinions when presented with facts, some don't

Love Sakic and agree he was better for longer. But at his best I'll take Yzerman. I'm not going to hold his knee problems against him when he was already a well established superstar.

Sakic was fantastic and stayed healthy. I'd rather have him later in his career than Yzerman, but I'll take Yzerman in his prime.

 

[cole von cole]

true, but in the conference finals and SCF in 2001, colorado's second line was ville nieminen, chris drury, and dan hinote.

sakic's teams had their holes too.

Ouch, I didn't know it was that serious.

I think that is mostly made up for by the fact that Bourque, Blake, and Foote were on the ice most of the time.