Yzerman vs Sakic

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
This really shouldn't be a debate but a matter of personal preference. If there are two players who are as close as you can get its these two. Trying to argue one over the other with opinions about defense or adjusted stats is a bit of an insult.

Both players have incredibly well-rounded legacies.
 

Admiral Awesome

Registered User
Jun 8, 2015
384
162
Yzerman finished in 3rd behind Gretzky and Lemieux exactly once.

Is that really more impressive than Sakic, who finished 2nd behind only Jagr in 2001?

It's also worth mentioning that Sakic probably wins the Art Ross in 2001 if Lemieux doesn't come back mid-season.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,516
3,352
I was at Boston Garden for the first game Yzerman ever played there and I thought he was the fastest skater I had ever seen,and I had seen a lot of Orr.

Yzerman was a waterbug out there before his knee problems.

He could really accelerate explosively, cut and turn on a dime etc.

He had a bunch of great seasons but the 1989 season was extraordinary.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
I've read this thread so many times and I still can't decide. I lean towards Sakic by the slightest of margins, but would be very happy with Yzerman if the other GM picked Sakic ahead of him.

You see, I'm usually a peak guy. So I look at Yzerman's big season and it's hard for me to go the other way. Alternatively, I see Sakic as a guy who meant more to his team's success. A tough one between these two for sure.
 
Last edited:

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
I've read this thread so many times and I still can't decide. I lean towards Sakic by the slightest of margins, but would be very happy with Yzerman if the other GM picked Sakic ahead of him.

You see, I'm usually a peak guy. So I look at Yzerman's big season and it's hard for me to go the other way. Alternatively, I see Sakic as a guy who meant more to his team's success. A tough one between these two for sure.
I've seen you and others mention Yzerman's 1988-89 season as his "peak", which is (probably) higher than Sakic's offensive ceiling.

While I agree that a 155-point season is beyond Sakic's ability in any scenario, I'm not so sure that 1988-89 is actually Yzerman's 'peak' season. I know it sounds crazy, but hear me out:

- He scored 5 more points than Bernie Nicholls (whom I love, btw). While Nicholls was indeed a gifted player, Yzerman's peak should be better than 5 points over Nicholls.

- The Red Wings fell 13 points in the standings from the year before to play only .500 hockey. Since the Norris division was so weak, the Wings still finished in 1st, but it was a very disappointing season in Motown (they also crapped out in the first round in the playoffs, after two straight Conference Finals' appearances).

- Defensively, the Wings fell from 6th-best in 1988 to 13th in 1989, allowing 47 more goals against. At even-strength, Yzerman's plus/minus fell from +30 (in just 64 games) in 1988 to +17 in 1989. The goals-against he was on the ice for jumped from 75 the year before (in 64 games, albeit) to 152 in 1989 (4th 'worst' in the League, and he would 'fall' to 2nd worst the next two seasons). Now, obviously his increased role, vis-a-vis penalty-killing especially, would account for a large proportion of those increased goals-against, but then again not all of them. He was on the ice for about 1 goal per game against his team more in 1989 than in 1988.


Anyway, there's no doubt that 1988-89 was Yzerman's peak offensive season, but overall I think I'd be inclined to pick 1987-88 or 1992-93. Those were more successful team seasons, all things considered.

I guess what I'm saying is, by scoring the 155 points, Yzerman likely was slightly losing some other parts of his game, and it's debatable whether he was helping his team by adding that extra emphasis on offense.

My own guess is that after the very successful 1987-88 season and playoffs, Demers told Yzerman something like this: "I've now taught the team how to play defense and we have a stronger core, so you're now free to play more all-out offense and take shorthanded chances," etc. But I think in the end this approach arguably didn't work out for them.
 

K Fleur

Sacrifice
Mar 28, 2014
15,381
25,491
It's also worth mentioning that Sakic probably wins the Art Ross in 2001 if Lemieux doesn't come back mid-season.

Alternatively, if Lemieux returns in October(instead of late December) Sakic probably doesn't win any individual trophies in 2001.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
Good points all Panther. In simplistic terms, his 155 year is the highest non-you-know-who year, which is pretty cool when you think about it. Without G & L, we might be talking about Howe/Orr/Yzerman. Or is that a stretch?
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Good points all Panther. In simplistic terms, his 155 year is the highest non-you-know-who year, which is pretty cool when you think about it. Without G & L, we might be talking about Howe/Orr/Yzerman. Or is that a stretch?

It's a huge stretch, considering Yzerman would have exactly one Art Ross without G&L.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,946
It's a huge stretch, considering Yzerman would have exactly one Art Ross without G&L.

but to take it a little seriously, let's look at yzerman's offensive prime and the company he kept:

'88 -- 2nd in PPG, 10th in points (64 games)
'89 -- 1st (raw points record)
'90 -- 2nd (2 points behind peak messier)
'91 -- 6th (behind a 21 year old sakic, cough cough)
'92 -- 4th (tied with roenick)
'93 -- 3rd

goals

'88 -- 4th (easily 1st in GPG)
'89 -- 1st
'90 -- 2nd
'91 -- 2nd (tied with neely and fleury)
'92 -- 5th
'93 -- 5th (tied with turgeon)

assists

'88 -- 23rd (10th in APG)
'89 -- 1st
'90 -- 8th (tied with bourque)
'91 -- 14th (tied with larmer)
'92 -- 11th (tied with coffey, but coffey only played 64 games)
'93 -- 6th


so he has a three year peak that is mikita/dionne/beliveau level, then a very good three more years where he was stastny/savard/hawerchuk level.

i didn't realize that yzerman was both such an elite goal scorer relative to his peers, and such an unremarkable playmaker.

no, he is nowhere close to howe and orr, even in a mario/wayneless alternate reality. he also is clearly behind the mikita/beliveau/bobby hull group, who sustained yzerman's '88-'90 level for at least twice as long. i think we all already knew that, but i think i needed to see it to drive the point home. cf my comments (way) upthread about the perception about yzerman circa 1990 vs. the reality.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,131
Regina, SK
I remember the whole "there's wayne and mario, then there's yzerman, then there's everyone else" mindset that existed around the time. I believed it too. But looking back, it seems overblown.
 

Sentinel

Registered User
May 26, 2009
12,758
4,588
New Jersey
www.vvinenglish.com
If you completely disregard everything but offensive numbers. Yzerman was practically the breathing definition of "intangibles" that catapulted certain Jonathan Toews into NHL's Top 100 players.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,946
If you completely disregard everything but offensive numbers. Yzerman was practically the breathing definition of "intangibles" that catapulted certain Jonathan Toews into NHL's Top 100 players.

...in 1990?

or am i mistaking whom/what you're responding to?
 

GMR

Registered User
Jul 27, 2013
6,067
5,038
Parts Unknown
but to take it a little seriously, let's look at yzerman's offensive prime and the company he kept:

'88 -- 2nd in PPG, 10th in points (64 games)
'89 -- 1st (raw points record)
'90 -- 2nd (2 points behind peak messier)
'91 -- 6th (behind a 21 year old sakic, cough cough)
'92 -- 4th (tied with roenick)
'93 -- 3rd

goals

'88 -- 4th (easily 1st in GPG)
'89 -- 1st
'90 -- 2nd
'91 -- 2nd (tied with neely and fleury)
'92 -- 5th
'93 -- 5th (tied with turgeon)

assists

'88 -- 23rd (10th in APG)
'89 -- 1st
'90 -- 8th (tied with bourque)
'91 -- 14th (tied with larmer)
'92 -- 11th (tied with coffey, but coffey only played 64 games)
'93 -- 6th


so he has a three year peak that is mikita/dionne/beliveau level, then a very good three more years where he was stastny/savard/hawerchuk level.

i didn't realize that yzerman was both such an elite goal scorer relative to his peers, and such an unremarkable playmaker.

no, he is nowhere close to howe and orr, even in a mario/wayneless alternate reality. he also is clearly behind the mikita/beliveau/bobby hull group, who sustained yzerman's '88-'90 level for at least twice as long. i think we all already knew that, but i think i needed to see it to drive the point home. cf my comments (way) upthread about the perception about yzerman circa 1990 vs. the reality.

Hard to be a great playmaker when you have enforcers playing on your line. A great playmaker does make people around him better, but there are limits to everything.
 

mrhockey193195

Registered User
Nov 14, 2006
6,507
1,994
Denver, CO
I don't have much to contribute here, all I have to say is - how awesome is it that we have Sakic and Yzerman to compare against each other? Two of the greatest centers of all time, incredibly similar players, both who were early captains of underperforming teams and helped lead them to Stanley Cup success. And then the cherry on top - their teams were two of the fiercest rivals we've ever seen in the game, and yet, at the heart of it, both these guys were gentlemen and their opponents respected the hell out of them. Hell, Sakic wore #19 in honor of Steve. They will forever be linked together, for a multitude of reasons, and to me that's awesome.

Picking between the two is splitting hairs, as far as I'm concerned..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim MacDonald

NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS

Registered User
Feb 28, 2006
13,542
5,771
Good points all Panther. In simplistic terms, his 155 year is the highest non-you-know-who year, which is pretty cool when you think about it. Without G & L, we might be talking about Howe/Orr/Yzerman. Or is that a stretch?

Why not Jagr as up there? No Lemieux to overshadow him.
 

cole von cole

Registered User
Mar 1, 2016
289
249
I've seen you and others mention Yzerman's 1988-89 season as his "peak", which is (probably) higher than Sakic's offensive ceiling.

While I agree that a 155-point season is beyond Sakic's ability in any scenario, I'm not so sure that 1988-89 is actually Yzerman's 'peak' season. I know it sounds crazy, but hear me out:

- He scored 5 more points than Bernie Nicholls (whom I love, btw). While Nicholls was indeed a gifted player, Yzerman's peak should be better than 5 points over Nicholls.

- The Red Wings fell 13 points in the standings from the year before to play only .500 hockey. Since the Norris division was so weak, the Wings still finished in 1st, but it was a very disappointing season in Motown (they also crapped out in the first round in the playoffs, after two straight Conference Finals' appearances).

- Defensively, the Wings fell from 6th-best in 1988 to 13th in 1989, allowing 47 more goals against. At even-strength, Yzerman's plus/minus fell from +30 (in just 64 games) in 1988 to +17 in 1989. The goals-against he was on the ice for jumped from 75 the year before (in 64 games, albeit) to 152 in 1989 (4th 'worst' in the League, and he would 'fall' to 2nd worst the next two seasons). Now, obviously his increased role, vis-a-vis penalty-killing especially, would account for a large proportion of those increased goals-against, but then again not all of them. He was on the ice for about 1 goal per game against his team more in 1989 than in 1988.


Anyway, there's no doubt that 1988-89 was Yzerman's peak offensive season, but overall I think I'd be inclined to pick 1987-88 or 1992-93. Those were more successful team seasons, all things considered.

I guess what I'm saying is, by scoring the 155 points, Yzerman likely was slightly losing some other parts of his game, and it's debatable whether he was helping his team by adding that extra emphasis on offense.

My own guess is that after the very successful 1987-88 season and playoffs, Demers told Yzerman something like this: "I've now taught the team how to play defense and we have a stronger core, so you're now free to play more all-out offense and take shorthanded chances," etc. But I think in the end this approach arguably didn't work out for them.

Overall, I agree with you, but simply saying that Yzerman finished with only 5 more points than Bernie Nicholls is kinda unfair to Yzerman, because Nicholls had Gretzky.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Overall, I agree with you, but simply saying that Yzerman finished with only 5 more points than Bernie Nicholls is kinda unfair to Yzerman, because Nicholls had Gretzky.
It's an imperfect comparison, but when 4 players got 150+ points, there's something strange in the water and merely getting 150 points isn't quite as impressive as it would be otherwise.

And yes, Nicholls had Gretzky (on the power-play, not at ES), but then again Nicholls presumably got less ice-time than Yzerman since Nicholls was the 2nd-line center.

To put it another way: in even higher-scoring seasons on higher-scoring teams, none of Paul Coffey, Jari Kurri, or Mark Messier got anywhere near 150 points despite playing with a Gretzky superior to 1989-Gretzky. But Nicholls did. It doesn't follow that Nicholls was better than Coffey, Kurri, or Messier. He clearly wasn't as good as Jari Kurri, who never scored 150 points despite being on Gretzky's line (which Nicholls wasn't).

Clearly Yzerman was way better than Bernie Nicholls. So I just point out that Yzerman's offensive peak being merely 5 points better than Bernie Nicholls' offensive peak doesn't necessarily lead to my placing that season as Yzerman's overall peak. It was kind of a weird season, offensively, in 1988-89 (see also 1992-93).
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
It's an imperfect comparison, but when 4 players got 150+ points, there's something strange in the water and merely getting 150 points isn't quite as impressive as it would be otherwise.

Not when two of them are Mario and Wayne.

Hard not to view Nicholls season as an anomaly that was influenced by Wayne when looking at his other seasons (100 points was his 2nd best) and as Yzerman's season as his peak and fully deserving of whatever accolades go with it. It was a more dominant season offensively than Sakic's 2000/01 season when comparing their separation from the pack.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->