I don't think Lafleur was actually better at his peak in the playoffs, although I know I'm practically on an island on this one. I can see that viewpoint, mainly because Lafleur was THE offensive lynchpin on a dynasty. So it's a matter of knowing that Lafleur could THE dominant offensive star on a dynasty, whereas there is uncertainty as to whether Jagr could. There is also uncertainty as to whether Lafleur could have carried a weak defense and rotating goalies to the playoffs each and every year, even big upsets (#2 & #1 seed) a couple years in a row... but I certainly understand why that is held is less esteem as what Lafleur did, although it was pretty important to a near-bankrupt team that may have been on the verge of moving to Kansas City without the extra playoff revenue each year. When looking at individual performance of each player in their playoff primes, in the context of the strength of ones team and that of the opposition (particularly defensively), I don't see an edge for Lafleur.
The main arguments for Jagr being to carry the load offensively on a powerhouse team:
* He had it all as far as the eye test: size, strength, reach, speed, skill, shot, etc.
* His peak/prime offensive production is only eclipsed by Gretzky, Lemieux, and Howe (one can make arguments for his peak being at/above Howe based on era, and below Espo if you ignore era/Orr).
* His performance during his playoff prime ('92-'08) is actually excellent on a per-game basis, but outside of '92, '93 and perhaps '96 (the first two of which were fringe years of his playoff prime) his team was never of Cup-contending quality.
* His playoff performance is only strengthened by each study I've done or seen others do: How he performed against strong defensive teams compared to weak ones, consistency in having few bad series (he had very few, esp. outside of two in '01 & '06 where he was severely injured), his plus-minus (esp. compared to that of the team w/o him on ice), and clutch play (as was clearly shown by someone else's recent study on the main forum of goals/points that were game-tying or go ahead goals in 3rd period or OT ).
* When Mario was injured in '92 playoffs, it was he (along with Francis) that carried the load offensively against strong overall/defensive teams and scored several key goals, many in spectacular fashion.
I previously replied to someone that claimed Jagr never had a playoff like Crosby's 2008 playoffs, and did so with Jagr's own 2008 playoffs at age 36. Jagr turned 20 just a couple months prior to the '92 playoffs (Crosby was 20, going on 21 in the 2008 playoffs), so let's look at how he did with Mario out and just after Mario returned:
vs. NYR (no Lemieux... #1 seed Rangers with #4 defense in NHL have momentum after injuring Lemieux and winning game 2)
Game 3 : 2 assists... as Pens go down 2-1 in series
Game 4: 1 assist... a primary assist to tie the game with < 9 min. left, which Pens won in OT
Game 5: 2 goals... one a penalty shot, the other the GWG with < 6 min. left in 3-2 win
Game 6: 1 goal... to put the Pens ahead for good past the game's midway point in series-clincher
vs. BOS (consistently good, experience Bruins team w/ Bourque)
Game 1: 1 goal... in OT
Game 2: 1 goal, 2 assists... one assist tied game, the goal gave Pens lead for good
Game 3: 3 assists
Game 4: 1 goal... first goal of game, Pens never gave up lead
vs. CHI (had won 11 in a row leading up to SCF, #2 defense in NHL)
Game 1: 1 goal... skates through most of team with everyone in the same zone for "the greatest goal I ever saw" according to Lemieux, ties game with < 5 min left, Pens win in final seconds
During that stretch, Jagr was 9-7-8-15 (+6)... against the #1 seed & #4 defense with Messier... Bourque's Bruins... and the #2 defensive team that had won 11 straight playoff games. These weren't garbage goals or meaningless points. These were often spectacular goals... often goals few other players were capable of scoring... at crucial times... in games and series where the momentum could swing at any time... mostly against tough defenses and quality teams with legendary players. Yeah, I think that's more impressive than what Crosby did in 2008 or at any time in his playoff career, frankly.
Somehow we should believe that a player that... :
* was capable of that sort of leading performance, shortly after turning 20 and in his second year after coming to America
* had consistently great numbers in the playoffs (incl. plus-minus data) throughout his playoff peak/prime
* ended his playoff prime (before going to Russia) by, at age 35, enabling Nylander to have the highest PPG in playoffs in 2007 then himself having the highest playoff PPG in 2008 at age 36...
would be incapable of leading a great team to success? Furthermore, we should believe he wasn't even a very good playoff player? To me, that's what listening to a false narrative created by others and/or creating one's own false narrative, along with putting extremely high value on the opinions of fellow fans, sportwriters, etc. can do. It can lead you to ignore the objective evidence that's right in front of you.