7 Game Series 84 Oilers or 02 Wings (All Players in Prime)

[vadim sharifijanov]

Basically it is an all-star collection of one generation v. an all-star collection of two generations.

The Wings have a serious advantage turning back the clock on several all-time great players to where they were in their prime.

I'm still saying the 91 Pens, other than Goaltending line up better for in prime comparision.

can you make a case for the '91 pens' fifth and sixth defenders?

 

[Sentinel]

Oilers weren't the all-star collection of that generation. There were Bourque, Lemieux, Stasny, Potvin, and a few others, who could easily replace ANYBODY on their 3rd and 4th lines. Meanwhile, DRW02 are stacked top to bottom. Even Sakic and Selanne would have a hard time cracking the lineup of "all in their prime."

 

[charliolemieux]

can you make a case for the '91 pens' fifth and sixth defenders?

Best case scenario is ML and JJ keep the puck in the offensive zone during those 10min per game.

 

[charliolemieux]

Oilers weren't the all-star collection of that generation. There were Bourque, Lemieux, Stasny, Potvin, and a few others, who could easily replace ANYBODY on their 3rd and 4th lines. Meanwhile, DRW02 are stacked top to bottom. Even Sakic and Selanne would have a hard time cracking the lineup of "all in their prime."

Thank you for nit picking my basic annallogy.

On that team you have the #1 and #2 scorers of all-time. The 2nd most offensive D-man of All-time. The 3rd highest scoring European of all-time. Sorry if I mislabelled it as an All-star collection of a generation.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Meanwhile, what is the reason that Messier wasnt selected for the 98 Olympics? Or 02? Or the 04 Wolrld Cup? If you are going to bring up age and all, Yzerman was selected for all those being almost as old and more worn down in 02 and 04. Plus he was even guaranteed a spot in 06 by Messier's good buddy Gretzky who didnt choose him for 02. On top of that, in the 89 WC why didnt Messier make the all star team unlike Yzerman?

Messier wasn't selected in 1998 because it would have interfered with Bobby Clark's plan to make Lindros the undisputed leader of that team. By 2002, he was wasn't even close to his prime anymore.

Oilers weren't the all-star collection of that generation. There were Bourque, Lemieux, Stasny, Potvin, and a few others, who could easily replace ANYBODY on their 3rd and 4th lines. Meanwhile, DRW02 are stacked top to bottom. Even Sakic and Selanne would have a hard time cracking the lineup of "all in their prime."

IMO, Sakic and Selanne would be the best center and wing on the 2002 Wings. Even if you prefer Yzerman and Hull, pretending that Sakic and Selanne would have trouble making the lineup at all just makes you look like a full-on homer.

 

[Stephen]

Oilers weren't the all-star collection of that generation. There were Bourque, Lemieux, Stasny, Potvin, and a few others, who could easily replace ANYBODY on their 3rd and 4th lines. Meanwhile, DRW02 are stacked top to bottom. Even Sakic and Selanne would have a hard time cracking the lineup of "all in their prime."

Not really. There's no difference between Sakic and Yzerman.

 

[Sentinel]

IMO, Sakic and Selanne would be the best center and wing on the 2002 Wings. Even if you prefer Yzerman and Hull, pretending that Sakic and Selanne would have trouble making the lineup at all just makes you look like a full-on homer.

I beg to differ. Yzerman, Fedorov, and Datsyuk (in their effin' primes) were the best two-way centers in the world, Sakic would not be an improvement over them. Larionov (in his effin' prime) was not far behind, and, if I need a dispatcher to set up Hull and/or Robitaille, I take him over Sakic in a heartbeat. And Draper is the mandatory (and Selke-winning) shutdown forward.

Selanne in his prime was a force, for sure, but not better than Hull, Shanahan, or Robitaille (and they had better careers to boot). Holmstrom? We all know what he brought to the table, and with the abundance of snipers, replacing him with Selanne would not be beneficial. OK, I give you Deveraugh.

 

[Stephen]

I beg to differ. Yzerman, Fedorov, and Datsyuk (in their effin' primes) were the best two-way centers in the world, Sakic would not be an improvement over them. Larionov (in his effin' prime) was not far behind, and, if I need a dispatcher to set up Hull and/or Robitaille, I take him over Sakic in a heartbeat. And Draper is the mandatory (and Selke-winning) shutdown forward.

There is no separation between Yzerman and Sakic as elite all time number one centermen, so this is a meaningless statement as saying "Yzerman probably would have had a hard time making that Red Wings team in his prime." Also, Yzerman was not an elite two way centerman in his prime, so you're basically choosing between an offensive dynamo or a two way centerman with dramatically reduced offense. If you want to get technical, Joe Sakic was able to incorporate a two way game without missing a beat offensively in his late 30s.

Prime Fedorov and prime Sakic were both league MVPS. Pavel Datsyuk is also no Joe Sakic. Larionov, meh. The Draper comment? Comical to say the least.

Selanne in his prime was a force, for sure, but not better than Hull, Shanahan, or Robitaille (and they had better careers to boot). Holmstrom? We all know what he brought to the table, and with the abundance of snipers, replacing him with Selanne would not be beneficial. OK, I give you Deveraugh.

Teemu Selanne wasn't better than Luc Robitaille in their primes? Robitaille was an ankle burning, garbage goal scoring compiler. Selanne was electric and dominated offensively with his array of elite skating, passing, sniping, stickhandling, everything. The Red Wings would piss their pants if they had the ability to put Selanne on their first line.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Prime Fedorov and prime Sakic were both league MVPS.

And Pearson winners as well, as was Yzerman.
The difference however is that Yzerman beat out a prime (albeit the declining side of his prime) 168 point Gretzky and a prime 199 point Lemieux for his.

Bottom line, I take an '89 prime Yzerman as my #1 center over anyone mentioned in this thread not named Gretzky or Lemieux period!

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

And Pearson winners as well, as was Yzerman.
The difference however is that Yzerman beat out a prime (albeit the declining side of his prime) 168 point Gretzky and a prime 199 point Lemieux for his.

Bottom line, I take an '89 prime Yzerman as my #1 center over anyone mentioned in this thread not named Gretzky or Lemieux period!

Do you really think Yzerman was even close to deserving the Pearson in 1989? That seems to be what you're arguing

 

[Sentinel]

There is no separation between Yzerman and Sakic as elite all time number one centermen, so this is a meaningless statement as saying "Yzerman probably would have had a hard time making that Red Wings team in his prime." Also, Yzerman was not an elite two way centerman in his prime, so you're basically choosing between an offensive dynamo or a two way centerman with dramatically reduced offense. If you want to get technical, Joe Sakic was able to incorporate a two way game without missing a beat offensively in his late 30s.

Prime Fedorov and prime Sakic were both league MVPS. Pavel Datsyuk is also no Joe Sakic. Larionov, meh. The Draper comment? Comical to say the least.

DRW would need Yzerman in his two-way player capacity, we've been through this before. That's how he won all those cups. Datsyuk was nominated for Hart (lost to Malkin and Ovechkin), but won multiple Selkes instead. On my chart, he is not far behind Sakic. And I would much, MUCH rather have him (and Fedorov) than Sakic when trying to contain Gretzky.

Have you even SEEN Larionov in his prime? He went against Gretzky's Oilers with CSKA in 1986 and beat him. Larionov is probably one of the most underrated superstars of all time, with incredible vision, passing skills, and defensive play. Sakic was always a sniper rather than a setup guy, and he'd be a waste with a winger like Hull. And by god I hope you don't want to put Sakic on the fourth line instead of Draper!

Teemu Selanne wasn't better than Luc Robitaille in their primes? Robitaille was an ankle burning, garbage goal scoring compiler. Selanne was electric and dominated offensively with his array of elite skating, passing, sniping, stickhandling, everything. The Red Wings would piss their pants if they had the ability to put Selanne on their first line.

Robitaille is one of the most successful left wingers of all time. Not wanting to replace him (in his prime) with anyone, even Selanne, is not a big stretch. Especially if you, like Bowman, put him on the same line with Holmstrom and Larionov, where he was a much better fit than Selanne would be.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Do you really think Yzerman was even close to deserving the Pearson in 1989? That seems to be what you're arguing

For what he accomplished that year with who who played with...lets just put it this way, i have less issue with Yzerman winning the Pearson over Lemieux than Gretzky winning the Hart over Lemieux that year.

Either way, it was an absolutely incredible season that reached a height that none of Sakic, Fedorov or Dats has achieved.

 

[toob]

Messier wasn't selected in 1998 because it would have interfered with Bobby Clark's plan to make Lindros the undisputed leader of that team. By 2002, he was wasn't even close to his prime anymore.

I have a hard time believing the leadership thing is THE reason for Messier being ignored given that Gretzky was the guy perceived as the leader of Canadian hockey and historically Canada's captain in a long string of international play and he was included as was Yzerman who by that point was perceived as one of the greatest leaders.

I can understand that personal reasons could have kept Messier off the team... so why is it so hard to see that personal reasons kept Yzerman off the 87 and 91 Canada Cups esp since he always played for Canada before/during/after whenever someone else was calling the shots?

Also Yzerman was a shell of himself in 04 and 06 and still got invites... he was also past his prime in 96/98/02

Not really. There's no difference between Sakic and Yzerman.

There is no separation between Yzerman and Sakic as elite all time number one centermen, so this is a meaningless statement as saying "Yzerman probably would have had a hard time making that Red Wings team in his prime." Also, Yzerman was not an elite two way centerman in his prime, so you're basically choosing between an offensive dynamo or a two way centerman with dramatically reduced offense. If you want to get technical, Joe Sakic was able to incorporate a two way game without missing a beat offensively in his late 30s.

No actually there is a big difference in terms of Yzerman and Sakic play styles and career arcs which should be the main things that matter. Only looking simplistically at how their career totals panned out or their Canadian center wearing 19 captain of a single franchise would suggest otherwise.

As to the two way thing there is a huge difference between the two way player late Yzerman was and two way Sakic and there is quite a bit of evidence that early offensive Yzerman was at least just as two way as two way Sakic at his best was. Lastly in his late 30s post lockout id say Sakic actually regressed defensively. Before that he was more solid though almost giving him a Selke in 01 was a joke.

Do you really think Yzerman was even close to deserving the Pearson in 1989? That seems to be what you're arguing

I believe that was intended to respond to a bit of trophy counting. And given that Yzerman also won The Hockey News Player of the Year (fan vote) and was on various magazine covers along with Gretzky and Lemieux asking whos the best?/whos better?/who's MVP?/who's most valuable? and got a lot of support from players and coaches either saying he was the best or was right up their with Gretzky and Lemieux id say his ssn would be closer than most to a year by Lemeiux that could be the best all time...

But it does highlight the issue with counting awards as indicative of the best player. Lets make sure to apply this the everyone though: example in the 90 season where Lafontaine, Messier, Bourque are the Hart candidates at the halfway point (Hull would replace Lafontaine at the end) whereas the best players are still Gretzky/Lemieux/Yzerman.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

As to the two way thing there is a huge difference between the two way player late Yzerman was and two way Sakic and there is quite a bit of evidence that early offensive Yzerman was at least just as two way as two way Sakic at his best was. Lastly in his late 30s post lockout id say Sakic actually regressed defensively. Before that he was more solid though almost giving him a Selke in 01 was a joke.

I really don't feel like getting into a long argument about Yzerman with you, but the idea that early offensive Yzerman was as good defensively as Sakic at his best is a joke.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I really don't feel like getting into a long argument about Yzerman with you, but the idea that early offensive Yzerman was as good defensively as Sakic at his best is a joke.

Was the early offensive Yzerman as good defensively as later Joe...yes he was.
Did early Stevie actually play as well defensively as later Joe...no and the Wings, at that time, didn't want and couldn't afford Stevie playing that way.

When Stevie was actually asked to play defensively, whether it was later in his career or even earlier in his career when asked to kill penalties, he most definitely was better defensively than Joe was at any time in his career.
Anyone who actually paid attention to Yzerman killing penalties back in the day were a hell of a lot less surprised by his defensive play later in his career.

Joe ended up as a very good 2-way player (after being one hell of a floater with the Nords) but I have to agree with Toob here, his '01 Selke was a bit of a joke imo.

 

[Sentinel]

For what he accomplished that year with who who played with...lets just put it this way, i have less issue with Yzerman winning the Pearson over Lemieux than Gretzky winning the Hart over Lemieux that year.

Either way, it was an absolutely incredible season that reached a height that none of Sakic, Fedorov or Dats has achieved.

Offensively -- without question. Overall -- Fedorov's win of Selke, while scoring 56 goals, is much more impressive. The only man ever to win a Selke and a Hart in one season.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Joe ended up as a very good 2-way player (after being one hell of a floater with the Nords) but I have to agree with Toob here, his '01 Selke was a bit of a joke imo.

Sakic didn't win the 2001 Selke, he finished second place. I agree he shouldn't have been that high in a vacuum, but based on the standards of the time (where the award often went to offensive players who backchecked), Sakic wasn't out of line. He led the NHL in +/- while taking the toughest defensive assignments for the Avs, while also being a very good penalty killer

 

[charliolemieux]

Offensively -- without question. Overall -- Fedorov's win of Selke, while scoring 56 goals, is much more impressive. The only man ever to win a Selke and a Hart in one season.

Ehh, they all should have been Gilmour's trophies.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Offensively -- without question. Overall -- Fedorov's win of Selke, while scoring 56 goals, is much more impressive. The only man ever to win a Selke and a Hart in one season.

Really? So Fedorov winning the Selke with the help of Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Howe, Chiasson along with a whole host of other defensive help is more impressive than Yzerman representing about 50% of Detroits goals in '89 with such offensive superstars like Gallant and MacLean on his wings...

Hey you're welcome to your opinion but it sure as hell ain't mine heh.

Stevie's '89 season was one of the most impressive and dominant seasons I have ever witnessed outside of Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux.

 

[JackSlater]

I beg to differ. Yzerman, Fedorov, and Datsyuk (in their effin' primes) were the best two-way centers in the world, Sakic would not be an improvement over them. Larionov (in his effin' prime) was not far behind, and, if I need a dispatcher to set up Hull and/or Robitaille, I take him over Sakic in a heartbeat. And Draper is the mandatory (and Selke-winning) shutdown forward.

Sakic at his best was in fact the best two way centre in the world. He easily makes that team (definitely ahead of Larionov and Datsyuk) and to say otherwise just discredits some otherwise legitimate opinions about the 2002 Red Wings.

Selanne in his prime was a force, for sure, but not better than Hull, Shanahan, or Robitaille (and they had better careers to boot). Holmstrom? We all know what he brought to the table, and with the abundance of snipers, replacing him with Selanne would not be beneficial. OK, I give you Deveraugh.

Come on, Selanne at his best is clearly better than Shanahan and Robitaille, and it's not hard to make a case that he was superior to Hull as well. Selanne is the top line RW for Detroit in this crazy situation.

 

[Sentinel]

Really? So Fedorov winning the Selke with the help of Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Howe, Chiasson along with a whole host of other defensive help is more impressive than Yzerman representing about 50% of Detroits goals in '89 with such offensive superstars like Gallant and MacLean on his wings...

Hey you're welcome to your opinion but it sure as hell ain't mine heh.

Do you realize what you just said? OF COURSE Stevie scored more than half of Detroit's goals when playing on a team with Gallant and MacLean! There was nobody else to score! He didn't do it again, once Feds came aboard, did he?

Where did you get a crazy idea that Selkes are won with help from defensemen? Championships are won with help from defensemen, not individual awards to forwards! Of course Konstantinov and Co. helped the end result, but the trophy went to Feds because he earned it! That's gotta be one of the craziest things I've ever read here.

Sakic at his best was in fact the best two way centre in the world. He easily makes that team (definitely ahead of Larionov and Datsyuk) and to say otherwise just discredits some otherwise legitimate opinions about the 2002 Red Wings.

No he wasn't. Never won a Selke and he is NOT ahead of Larionov and Datsyuk. The only things he was better at than these two were his speed and his overall scoring ability (mostly his wrist shot).

Come on, Selanne at his best is clearly better than Shanahan and Robitaille, and it's not hard to make a case that he was superior to Hull as well. Selanne is the top line RW for Detroit in this crazy situation.

No, he wasn't! Faster doesn't mean better! In order to stand up to Oilers' goons you need Shanahan more than Selanne! For a better chance against Gretzky you need Fedorov and Datsyuk on your top line, not Selanne (or Sakic, for that matter)! I guess you could probably insert him for Luc on the line with Larionov and Holmstrom. Although if Luc's 600+ goals don't mean anything to you, that's your problem. You will need garbage goals in a series against Edmonton.

The only unquestionable improvement would be inserting him for Deveraugh, but Deveraugh would probably get very limited IT anyway.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Do you realize what you just said? OF COURSE Stevie scored more than half of Detroit's goals when playing on a team with Gallant and MacLean! There was nobody else to score! He didn't do it again, once Feds came aboard, did he?

Aside from 92/93 when he had 137 points

Where did you get a crazy idea that Selkes are won with help from defensemen? Championships are won with help from defensemen, not individual awards to forwards! Of course Konstantinov and Co. helped the end result, but the trophy went to Feds because he earned it! That's gotta be one of the craziest things I've ever read here.

What part of player A had almost no help accomplishing what he did while player B had lots of help accomplishing what he did is crazy to you???

 

[Sentinel]

What part of player A had almost no help accomplishing what he did while player B had lots of help accomplishing what he did is crazy to you???

Selke is awarded based on the individual defensive accomplishments of the forward, not on how much help he received from his defensemen. Otherwise it would be awarded every time to a player on a team with great defensive corps. Francis on 94-95 Pens, Peca on 01-02 Isles, and Kesler on 10-11 Canucks did not have great defensemen, IIRC.

 

[JackSlater]

No he wasn't. Never won a Selke and he is NOT ahead of Larionov and Datsyuk. The only things he was better at than these two were his speed and his overall scoring ability (mostly his wrist shot).

It's so obvious that Sakic was the best two way centre in the world, at his best, that it's ridiculous to even argue about it. Sakic won a dominant Hart, while finishing second in Selke voting to a one dimensional defensive centre. Ultimately Sakic reached the level of best player in the world, which never happened for Datsyuk or Larionov (arguably it happened for Yzerman or Fedorov for short periods if you remove Gretzky and Lemieux). I'm a Detroit fan and definitely think they would win this series, but you are massively overrating the Detroit players here.

No, he wasn't! Faster doesn't mean better! In order to stand up to Oilers' goons you need Shanahan more than Selanne! For a better chance against Gretzky you need Fedorov and Datsyuk on your top line, not Selanne (or Sakic, for that matter)! I guess you could probably insert him for Luc on the line with Larionov and Holmstrom. Although if Luc's 600+ goals don't mean anything to you, that's your problem. You will need garbage goals in a series against Edmonton.

Shanahan's physicality would be helpful in this series, but there is no doubt that Selanne was the better player. Selanne was one of the best players in the world for a few years, Shanahan never was. Robitaille brings no physicality and is quite simply an inferior player to Selanne. It's laughable if you think that it's going to be difficult for Selanne as he isn't great at scoring garbage goals. He scored tons of goals, many more than Robitaille in fact, in the dead puck era. There is also the reality that the Oilers were not particularly structured defensively and gave up a lot of goals of all varieties.

You can put Fedorov or Datsyuk on the top line as a winger (I would consider Yzerman at winger) but that has nothing to do with what I said. Selanne is better than any winger on Detroit.

The only unquestionable improvement would be inserting him for Deveraugh, but Deveraugh would probably get very limited IT anyway.

Any player is a definite improvement over Boyd Devereaux.

 

[Sentinel]

Any player is a definite improvement over Boyd Devereaux.

That's about the only thing I agree with in your post. Sakic was NEVER the best two-way player in the world. His 2nd place Selke voting was a joke. Let's just agree to disagree there.

Plus, you are not hearing what I'm saying. If you're looking for a scoring machine, Sakic is your man. If you're looking for a setup man, go with Larionov or Datsyuk.