Discussion in 'Philadelphia Flyers' started by MiamiScreamingEagles, Nov 1, 2017.
I'm surprised he finished higher than Crosby.
nhl network where they blow the pens rangers islanders and devils and most of their expert commentators either grew up a fan played for or worked for those teams? i'm shocked and appalled lol
Won't it be hilarious when the only Flyers top 3 finalist for anything is Hakstol?
Personally I don't know how Giroux doesn't win the hart. Somehow you can justify one candidate for the team making the playoffs but that doesn't matter for Giroux? Couturier almost doubles his record point production and people act like it isn't due to Giroux.
If by hilarious you mean a slow building chuckle that crescendoes into a full-blown hysteric shriek as we smack face-first with the cosmic absurdity and meaninglessness of existence itself.......then yes.
Yes, that's exactly what I meant, word for word.
You guys were just setting yourselves up for disappointment by thinking he even had a chance.
This is Giroux we're talking about... he gets zero respect.
There's absolutely no reason whatsoever to have Kucherov over Giroux. There's also no justification for Kopitar ahead of Giroux either, but it's not AS egregious.
Either way, I expect to be pissed off.
but...like true flyers fans we always hope
I think Kucherov is a reasonable candidate by the longstanding tradition/precedent of giving the Hart to the something roughly resembling the best player on roughly the best team.
Dave Isaac had an informal poll on Twitter yesterday, asking where fans rank Giroux among the Flyers greats. I think most had him too low, I said. No. 5 (behind Clarke, Lindros, Parent, Howe).
Isaac said he thinks he absolutely can end up in top 3 and that no player with his peak and prime has ever not made the Hall. Said that he compares favorably with Modano and Sundin (based on era adjustments); that feels about right to me.
With 102 points season G is already in tier with Lindros and Howe. If he win SC with us, he will be in tier with Clarke and Parent.
yeah I agree basically. I saw one guy who said he's about even with LeClair and Desjardins and I thought that was ridiculous; he's clearly better than both.
I think it is almost certain Giroux will end up as #2 all time as you can make an argument already now for it assuming Lindros is #2.
Lindros was my favorite player ever and his peak was unreal but he only played 8 seasons here. Now he was incredible over those 8 seasons, possibly the best 8 seasons of any flyer individually, but he never won a cup and his health issues negatively impacted his teams performance. Still his 659 points(290 goals) in 480 games is just an unbelievable stretch of hockey. He added another 57 points in 50 playoff games. He was just on another level when he was on the ice but he also only averaged roughly 60 games played per year due to health so roughly 1/4 of the season his team was missing him ever year. But when healthy, there was likely no one more important to their teams success at the time.
Giroux has just finished his 9th full NHL season here(10th overall; only played half of 08-09) and has amassed 677 points(214 goals) in 738 games. Additionally he has 62 points in 63 playoff games. He already has surpassed lindros in points and assists(nearly 100 more assists than Lindros) and is only 75 goals short of Lindros despite hitting 30 goals only once. Also, possibly the most impressive thing in his 9 full seasons is that he only missed 10 regular season games total.
Right now, Lindros' PPG being significantly higher than G's is the main strike against Giroux. (1.37 PPG vs .92 PPG) and the fact Lindros has more goals in less seasons. However, does the fact Giroux averaged 20 more games per year make up for his lower PPG since those were 20 games every season that his team had him to play as opposed to Lindros? I think Lindros was the better player and had more physical gifts than G but when it comes down to ranking their impact on the Flyers, it isn't as clear cut because of how much time Lindros missed while G missed basically no time. I think I would still rank Lindros over Giroux for now because I believe Lindros was definitely better in the same time period of their careers despite missing time but this post was more to show how close he already is to being considered #2 and he still has at least a few more seasons of elite production. If he plays out his contract here in Philly(last year would be 2021-2022), he's definitely a lock to be #2 all time. I hope we get him a cup win before his time is up here so that he can finally get the respect he deserves for being one of the greats of this era.
One thing you have to look at is scoring finishes, because scoring is way down compared to the era Lindros' peak took place in. Let's look at their 5 best seasons for Points Per Game.
1994-1995 - 1.52 PPG - 1st in NHL
1996-1997 - 1.52 PPG - 2nd in NHL
1995-1996 - 1.58 PPG - 3rd in NHL
1998-1999 - 1.31 PPG - 4th in NHL
1997-1998 - 1.13 PPG - 7th in NHL
2011-2012 - 1.20 PPG - 3rd in NHL
2017-2018 - 1.24 PPG - 6th in NHL
2013-2014 - 1.05 PPG - 7th in NHL
2014-2015 - 0.90 PPG - 17th in NHL
2012-2013 - 1.00 PPG - 18th in NHL
So relative to his peers, Lindros was more productive/dominant at his peak. That's pretty clear.
I think Girouxs career will be considered better though when all is said and done and longetivity (and the Cup he will win here!) is factored in.
Thing to remember about Lindros is that he was arguably the most dominant physical player in the history of the game, almost certainly among the great forwards.
There was a series-clinching game where he was named 1st star without scoring a point. He had a hat trick and a game-winning goal with 7 seconds left in the ECF vs. the Rangers, and NY beat writers were saying he was more dangerous without the puck.
I believe it is a marathon as opposed to a sprint... therefore it must encompass the entire careers... as well as lengthy careers -- so Players like Recchi, just as an example, are immediately eliminated... and sadly Lindros, although a great Player is also -- so, IMO, all-time records have to come into play.
Including Skaters alone... excluding Goalies... I think Giroux must play out his Flyers career before he can be slotted.
Clarke much, much, MUCH more likely than not will never be approached... Barber and Propp are the Players who are in Giroux's sites... and the ones we must consider here... as I see it.
Both Barber and Propp had great Stats, but could have had even greater Stats had their bodies allowed... We have no idea at this point in time what is ahead on that respect for Giroux... nor what his future Stats will be.
The way I look at it is that if Giroux can surpass both Propp and Barber, he has to be considered the Second Greatest Skater in Flyers History.
FWIW... I'm not sure how many people in here lived through Propp's great Seasons here... let alone Barber's... they were both great and prolific... and I'm not sure if their Stats do them justice. Barber especially could have ended with fantastic numbers to go along with his HHoF status had his back held up... and even with that bad back, his career was nothing short of great.
We all I'm sure agree that different Eras yield different Stats... but I believe we can all agree that even factoring in the different Eras, Barber and Propp were great.
In my mind... Giroux's final placement among Flyers Skaters rest on what he does going forward... and how long... and in his health... clearly, if he catches and passes Barber, Giroux must be able to claim Second Greatest... and have a good argument against all the what could have beens with Billy Barber.
... IMO G has a real good shot... and a much better one based on this rebound Season.
I know you have alternative opinions on the historical perception of Flyers players, but very few outside of yourself would say that Propp or Barber had better Flyers careers than Lindros.
For me Giroux has already passed Barber, MacLeish and Propp.
He has had a better peak and prime than all three quite comfortably as an individual.
Lindros's peak was insane. As good as Clarke's. But it was so short in terms of games that is is hard to compare to Giroux really.
Lindros was a better player. No doubt. Lindros is maybe TOP5 forward of all-time. But he was here for only 8 seasons. Giroux can be here for cca 15 seasons at least. Mega difference.
If you watched lindros compared to his contemporaries it was no comparison. IN terms of most talented guys ive ever seen or guys who have dominated, the only one that i have seen that impacted the game the same was Mario.
Yeah I agree. I think it will be totally fair to say..
Better peak: Lindros
Better career: Giroux
Roo will go down as flyers 2nd best forward all time.
So much for the prediction by a certain outspoken poster back at the outset of G's career that G would perform similarly to Scott Gomez....lol
Separate names with a comma.