Detailed look at Sakic and Forsberg at Even Strength

[overpass]

The topic of Joe Sakic and Peter Forsberg gets brought up a lot around here. This thread is a good example, and it included some good points on both sides.

One thing that’s frequently mentioned is Forsberg’s huge lead in plus-minus. From 1995 through 2003-04, Forsberg was +207 in the regular season and +47 in the playoffs. Sakic was +136 in the regular season and +9 in the playoffs. Since the name of the game is outscoring the other team, this looks like a big edge for Forsberg.

Sakic’s defenders have said that his lesser plus-minus was a result of playing tougher minutes than Forsberg. Whether by being matched up against the best scorers on the other team, or by taking more than his share of defensive zone draws, Sakic had an uphill battle to match Forsberg in plus-minus, or so the story goes.

I’m going to use all the evidence available to investigate this claim, and see whether Sakic appears to have played tougher minutes than Forsberg while they were teammates over a decade. In the following comparisons, I’ll only look at even strength play. I’ll also exclude the 2001-02 regular season, as Forsberg did not play in this season. My focus is on level of play, so I’m looking at rate, not total regular season value. Fans of total value can mentally deduct points from Forsberg in the 2000-2002 period.

Quebec/Colorado had three head coaches over the decade that Sakic and Forsberg were teammates: Marc Crawford, Bob Hartley, and Tony Granato. I have chosen to break up the decade by head coach to analyze the roles that Sakic and Forsberg played. For the purposes of this project, I have included the 2002-03 season entirely under Granato, although Hartley coached a third of the season.

Huge thanks to the Hockey Summary Project for this. Their detailed data compiled for these seasons were invaluable and made this project possible.

A note on the tables below: If anyone doesn't know, Joe Sakic wore 19 and Peter Forsberg wore 21. "Both" refers to even strength goals for which both 19 and 21 were on the ice. "Neither" refers to even strength goals for which neither 19 or 21 were on the ice. "R" refers to GF/GA ratio. The key columns to look at are "19R", "21R", and "NeitherR", for a look at their on-ice results compared to each other and the rest of the team.

Marc Crawford Era – 1995 to 1997-98

On-Ice Results

Year | TmGF | TmGA | 21GF | 21GA | 19GF | 19GA | NeitherGF | NeitherGA | BothGF | BothGA | TmR | 21R | 19R | NeitherR | BothR
1995 | 131 | 93 | 39 | 24 | 43 | 36 | 53 | 34 | 4 | 2 | 1.41 | 1.62 | 1.17 | 1.54 | 2.00
1996 | 219 | 147 | 83 | 52 | 77 | 52 | 65 | 45 | 6 | 2 | 1.49 | 1.60 | 1.48 | 1.44 | 3.00
1997 | 180 | 141 | 69 | 39 | 45 | 50 | 68 | 53 | 2 | 1 | 1.28 | 1.77 | 0.91 | 1.27 | 2.00
1998 | 149 | 140 | 66 | 55 | 51 | 44 | 36 | 44 | 4 | 2 | 1.06 | 1.21 | 1.16 | 0.83 | 2.00
Crawford | 679 | 521 | 258 | 170 | 216 | 182 | 222 | 176 | 16 | 7 | 1.30 | 1.52 | 1.19 | 1.26 | 2.29

Numbers are estimated using TGF, TGA, PGF, and PGA from hockey-reference.com. Numbers together are estimated by looking at the number of points they collaborated on from the HSP, doubling that to get the GF, and picking a GA number that gives a reasonable ratio.

Forsberg gets the edge here. He was +88 to Sakic’s +34 at even strength in the regular season, and had a GF/GA ratio of 1.52 to Sakic's 1.19. In fact, the team performed similarly with Sakic on the ice as it did with neither Sakic nor Forsberg on the ice. Forsberg has clearly better on-ice results than Sakic during this time.

Context – Linemates
In 1995, Sakic played mostly with Wendel Clark and Andrei Kovalenko, and Forsberg played mostly with Owen Nolan and Bob Bassen. You might think that 30-goal scorer Nolan gave Forsberg an edge, but remember that Clark was coming off 46 goals in 64 games. Call that season even. From 1996 to 1998, Forsberg played primarily with Valeri Kamensky and Claude Lemieux, and also a bit of Martin Rucinsky and Adam Deadmarsh. Sakic played primarily with Scott Young, and his most common other linemates were Chris Simon, Eric Lacroix, and Adam Deadmarsh. Forsberg had stronger linemates over this time period.

Context – Matchups
I don’t have detailed matchup numbers here. But consider that Crawford used Forsberg more often on the penalty kill. Forsberg was on the ice for 64 PPGA to Sakic’s 40 PPGA over this time period. Also, consider that Scotty Bowman always matched Sergei Fedorov, his best defensive and overall forward, against Forsberg. Although there is not enough information to be sure, my guess is that Forsberg played tougher minutes.

Bob Hartley Era – 1998-99 to 2000-01

On-Ice Results

Year | TmGF | TmGA | 21GF | 21GA | 19GF | 19GA | NeitherGF | NeitherGA | BothGF | BothGA | TmR | 21R | 19R | NeitherR | BothR
1999 | 161 | 130 | 67 | 41 | 73 | 50 | 61 | 57 | 40 | 18 | 1.24 | 1.63 | 1.46 | 1.07 | 2.22
2000 | 167 | 140 | 40 | 28 | 74 | 43 | 74 | 76 | 21 | 7 | 1.19 | 1.43 | 1.72 | 0.97 | 3.00
2001 | 171 | 118 | 50 | 29 | 81 | 38 | 49 | 54 | 9 | 3 | 1.45 | 1.72 | 2.13 | 0.91 | 3.00
Hartley | 499 | 388 | 157 | 98 | 228 | 131 | 184 | 187 | 70 | 28 | 1.29 | 1.60 | 1.74 | 0.98 | 2.50

From 1998-99 on, I used the actual count of even strength goals taken directly from the HSP, and also the actual count of GF and GA while Sakic and Forsberg played together.

Sakic had slightly better on-ice numbers in the regular season, with a GF/GA ratio of 1.74 to Forsberg’s 1.60. Forsberg made that up in the playoffs, with a +21 to Sakic’s -1. Sakic played two rounds against tough opposition in 2001 that Forsberg missed…but then Forsberg was +8 to Sakic’s -2 in the 2002 playoffs. Call it even on a per-game basis for this time period. (Notice how much the numbers while Sakic and Forsberg are off the ice have dropped off in this time period, compared to Crawford's tenure.)

Context – Linemates
In 1999, Forsberg and Sakic played together quite a bit. When apart, Forsberg and Sakic each played with a mix of linemates, including Kamensky, Lemieux, Milan Hejduk, and Deadmarsh. Theo Fleury joined the team late in the year and played with Sakic, giving Sakic the slightly better linemates. In 2000, Sakic and Forsberg also spent some time together. While separated, Sakic’s primary linemates were Hejduk and Alex Tanguay, and Forsberg’s were a mix, most frequently Deadmarsh. In 2001, Sakic and Forsberg rarely played together. Sakic mostly played with Hejduk and Tanguay, and Forsberg was with Chris Drury and Ville Nieminen. On the whole, Sakic had stronger linemates under Hartley.

Context – Matchups
Detailed plus-minus information is available from the Hockey Summary Project for these seasons. I selected 22 checkers, 22 scorers, and 22 shutdown defencemen for each season. I counted the number of times Sakic and Forsberg were on the ice for a goal against each of those groups, to get an idea the opposition each player faced. I'll post the lists I used for each season in a later post.

Year | 19Shutdown | 19Scorers | 19Checkers | 21Shutdown | 21Scorers | 21Checkers
1999 | 42% | 32% | 25% | 50% | 36% | 27%
2000 | 38% | 28% | 20% | 37% | 26% | 16%
2001 | 34% | 24% | 21% | 24% | 22% | 18%
Hartley | 38% | 28% | 22% | 38% | 29% | 21%

It appears that Forsberg started off by playing tougher minutes, but by 2001 he was playing easier minutes than Sakic. Both appear to have played tougher minutes in 1999 and then gotten easier through 2001 – this may have been a result Stephane Yelle gaining a more prominent role. On the whole, I estimate their average strength of opposition under Hartley as essentially identical.

Tony Granato Era – 2002-03 and 2003-04

On-Ice Results

Year | TmGF | TmGA | 21GF | 21GA | 19GF | 19GA | NeitherGF | NeitherGA | BothGF | BothGA | TmR | 21R | 19R | NeitherR | BothR
2003 | 174 | 118 | 90 | 33 | 46 | 37 | 56 | 57 | 18 | 9 | 1.47 | 2.73 | 1.24 | 0.98 | 2
2004 | 148 | 120 | 33 | 17 | 57 | 34 | 61 | 69 | 3 | 0 | 1.23 | 1.94 | 1.68 | 0.88 | 0
Granato | 322 | 238 | 123 | 50 | 103 | 71 | 117 | 126 | 21 | 9 | 1.35 | 2.46 | 1.45 | 0.93 | 2.33

Forsberg had incredible on-ice results in this time period. He was on the ice for 2.5 times as many GF and GA. It’s not surprising that the Hockey News ranked him as the best player in the world after each of these seasons. Sakic’s on ice numbers were good, but not comparable. Big edge to Forsberg.

Context – Linemates

Forsberg played primarily with Hejduk and Tanguay over this time. Sakic had a number of linemates. In 2003, he played with a combination of Steve Reinprecht, Forsberg, Hedjuk, and Drury. In 2004, he played with Paul Kariya, Teemu Selanne, Steve Konowalchuk, Hejduk, and Tanguay. Forsberg had better linemates, primarily because of continuity.

Context – Matchups

Year | 19Shutdown | 19Scorers | 19Checkers | 21Shutdown | 21Scorers | 21Checkers
2003 | 35% | 30% | 17% | 37% | 24% | 23%
2004 | 32% | 16% | 35% | 36% | 16% | 24%
Granato | 33% | 23% | 26% | 36% | 22% | 23%

Granato handled Sakic and Forsberg very differently in 2003 as compared to 2004. In 2003, Stephane Yelle and Chris Drury had just left, and the Avalanche were lacking strong defensive options in the bottom 6. By the numbers, this is the one season in which the narrative of Sakic vs scorers and Forsberg vs checkers really holds up. Sakic played the tougher matchups in this season, allowing Forsberg to go postal on the league. In 2004, the Avs added Andrei Nikolishin and Steve Konowalchuk, giving them options to play against the other team’s best and in defensive situations. Both Sakic and Forsberg played easier minutes this year, especially Sakic – probably in part because he was playing with Kariya and Selanne. But, if you look at the two seasons together, I think they faced roughly equal strength of opposition, maybe a slight edge to Sakic’s.

Summary of Eras

Marc Crawford era: Forsberg had better linemates, probably played tougher matchups, and got better results.

Bob Hartley era: Sakic had better linemates, they played similar matchups, and they had similar regular season results (on a per-game basis – Sakic played more games and provided more value).

Tony Granato era: Forsberg had better linemates, on average their strength of opposition was similar, and Forsberg had far better regular season results than Sakic.

Note: One thing that I didn't cover was faceoffs. There is no data available on whether Sakic and Forsberg were more likely to take offensive zone draws or defensive zone draws during the time period I have examined. But if you look at behindthenet.ca's numbers for 2007-08, Sakic had the most favourable faceoff ratio of any Colorado centre, taking 1.26 offensive zone faceoffs for every defensive zone faceoff he took. Make of that what you will. But looking back on earlier seasons for which no data is available, I can't believe that a coach would choose use Joe Sakic as his first defensive option with Stephane Yelle (a fellow LHS) available, if for nothing else than to give Sakic better offensive opportunities.

Conclusion
The narrative that Peter Forsberg consistently played easier minutes than Joe Sakic during their time together in Colorado appears to be false. At the most, Forsberg's incredible peak numbers from 2002-03 are a bit less impressive because they came against easier competition, but otherwise the narrative doesn't hold up. As a result, their plus-minus numbers can be fairly compared as a measure of even strength effectiveness. While both were great hockey players, Peter Forsberg was the better even strength player.

Click to read more...

 

[overpass]

Gotta run now, but I'll be back later to answer any questions and post the lists of shutdown D, checkers, and scorers I used if people want to see them. I'd also be interested in getting feedback from Avalanche fans who watched the team over this time.

Here is the list of players I used to run the matchup numbers.

1999 Shutdown D: Desjardins, Bourque, Stevens, Smehlik, Quintal, Johansson, Svehla, Wesley, Yushkevich, Leetch, Jonsson, Chelios, Ohlund, Lidstrom, Hatcher, Blake, MacInnis, Pronger, Salei, Hamrlik, Numminen, Houlder

1999 Scorers: Oates, Gretzky, Primeau, Whitney, Satan, Sykora, Allison, Sundin, Yashin, Lindros, Palffy, Ronning, Amonte, Guerin, Fleury, Naslund, Roenick, Kariya, Robitaille, Modano, Demitra, Yzerman

1999 Checkers: Pandolfo, J. Hull, Sundstrom, Lapointe, Arvedson, Axelsson, Poulin, Dvorak, Nikolishin, Zamuner, Ward, Marchant, Eastwood, Fitzgerald, Scatchard, Gilmour, Shantz, Corkum, Ricci, Draper, Conroy, Carbonneau

2000 Shutdown D: Chelios, Ohlund, Lidstrom, Hatcher, Blake, Morris, Pronger, Salei, Hamrlik, Numminen, Rathje, Johansson, Bourque, Wesley, Svehla, Weinrich, Stevens, Chara, Leetch, Redden, Desjardins, Yushkevich

2000 Scorers: Amonte, Weight, Iginla, Naslund, Roenick, Kariya, Palffy, Modano, Turgeon, Yzerman, Nolan, Sakic, Jagr, Bure, Recchi, Sundin, Francis, Elias, Allison, Oates, Satan, Alfredsson

2000 Checkers: Marchant, Eastwood, Fitzgerald, Scatchard, Gilmour, Shantz, Laperriere, Ricci, Draper, Conroy, Carbonneau, Arvedsson, Axelsson, Madden, Lapointe, Nikolishin, Buchberger, Battaglia, Valk, Taylor, Darby, Ward

2001 Shutdown D: Odelein, Ohlund, Lidstrom, Hatcher, Blake, Regehr, Pronger, Salei, Houlder, Numminen, Rathje, Johansson, McLaren, Wesley, Svehla, Weinrich, Stevens, Chara, Leetch, Redden, Desjardins, Yushkevich

2001 Scorers: Amonte, Weight, Iginla, Naslund, Roenick, Kariya, Palffy, Modano, Demitra, Yzerman, Nolan, Sakic, Jagr, Bure, Recchi, Sundin, Francis, Elias, Allison, Oates, Satan, Yashin

2001 Checkers: Marchant, Eastwood, Johnson, Cooke, Aubin, Shantz, Buchberger, Ricci, Draper, Walz, Keane, Arvedsson, Axelsson, Madden, Lapointe, Nikolishin, Brown, Battaglia, Valk, Johnson, Darby, Beranek

2003 Shutdown D: Lidstrom, MacInnis, Skrastins, Numminen, Ohlund, Mitchell, Smith, Regehr, Hatcher, Carney, Norstrom, Stevens, Desjardins, Aucoin, Kasparaitis, Chara, Svehla, Gill, McKee, Johansson, Majesky, Hedican

2003 Scorers: Gaborik, Iginla, Naslund, Smyth, Modano, Kariya, Fedorov, Demitra, Whitney, Palffy, Selanne, Elias, Jokinen, Hossa, Sundin, Heatley, Jagr, Thornton, Yashin, Lemieux, Koivu, Satan

2003 Checkers: Walz, Draper, Drake, Cooke, Yelle, Kapanen, Laperriere, Buchberger, Ricci, Wright, Yachmenev, Madden, Handzus, Peca, Dvorak, Arvedson, Novoseltsev, Axelsson, Juneau, Taylor, Grier, Adams

2004 Shutdown D: Lidstrom, Pronger, Timonen, Hannan, Ohlund, Mitchell, Smith, Regehr, Matvichuk, Salei, Norstrom, Niedermayer, Desjardins, Aucoin, Kasparaitis, Chara, McCabe, O'Donnell, Zhitnik, Witt, Van Ryn, Hill

2004 Scorers: Gaborik, Iginla, Naslund, Smyth, Guerin, Fedorov, Datsyuk, Tkachuk, Nash, Doan, Marleau, Elias, Jokinen, Hossa, Sundin, Recchi, Lang, Thornton, St. Louis, Kovalchuk, Koivu, Briere

2004 Checkers: Walz, Draper, Drake, Cooke, Yelle, Barnes, Belanger, Gratton, Ricci, Marchant, G. Johnson, Madden, Handzus, Peca, Eastwood, Schaefer, M. Nilson, Axelsson, Juneau, Taylor, Grier, Adams

 

[Canadiens1958]

Excellent Work

Excellent work as usual. Enjoyed the breakdown by coaches.

Two questions.

Do you have home and away break downs? This might paint an interesting picture about the coaching and match-ups, especially the ability to sustain the desired match-ups on the road when the coach does not have the last change.

1999 when Forsberg and Sakic spent playing time together. Would it be possible to determine which assumed the center role? If so did it vary depending on circumstance such as opposing center, game situation and context. Both were LHS but doubt that traditional assumptions would hold.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Excellent work as usual. Enjoyed the breakdown by coaches.

Two questions.

Do you have home and away break downs? This might paint an interesting picture about the coaching and match-ups, especially the ability to sustain the desired match-ups on the road when the coach does not have the last change.

1999 when Forsberg and Sakic spent playing time together. Would it be possible to determine which assumed the center role? If so did it vary depending on circumstance such as opposing center, game situation and context. Both were LHS but doubt that traditional assumptions would hold.

I'm 90% sure from just watching them play that when they played together, Sakic assumed the center role. I'm pretty sure this is because he was much better than Forsberg on faceoffs. (Also why I suspect he had more defensive zone draws than Forsberg over the years,though I don't specifically remember this).

 

[Infinite Vision*]

Thanks a bunch for doing this. The overall results don't surprise me one bit.

I think this argument was something that was blown out of proportion and used as the only logical way for most people to explain how their could be such a difference between them in +/-. I always thought the reason was not neccessarily that Forsberg was better defensively than Sakic, but he controlled the puck far more, and was a physical force a lot as well. I know physicality doesn't equal defense like many say, and of course it doesn't, but it has some effect for sure. Players don't hit for nothing after all. Some good examples are Lindros and Ovechkin as they are top 6 I believe with Forsberg in adjusted +/- per season.

I find this similar to the Datsyuk and Zetterberg situation. One may be purely better defensively (Zetterberg), but the other is better overall and a lot of it has to do with puck possession, and just strictly being better offensively, which I've always thought Forsberg was.

People always say how adjusted stats overrate Forsberg, but he was one of the main reasons I started using them 3 years ago. I had a strong hunch that he was much better offensively than given credit for.

 

[overpass]

Excellent work as usual. Enjoyed the breakdown by coaches.

Two questions.

Do you have home and away break downs? This might paint an interesting picture about the coaching and match-ups, especially the ability to sustain the desired match-ups on the road when the coach does not have the last change.

1999 when Forsberg and Sakic spent playing time together. Would it be possible to determine which assumed the center role? If so did it vary depending on circumstance such as opposing center, game situation and context. Both were LHS but doubt that traditional assumptions would hold.

No home and away breakdowns, sorry. I agree they would be interesting. I may do that in the future.

The HSP data has no information on who played the centre role. From nhl.com, it's obvious that Sakic took the faceoffs. In 1998-99 he took 1723 faceoffs to Forsberg's 895.

 

[reckoning]

Thanks to overpass for posting the results of yet another well-researched interesting project of his.

This is the type of statistical analysis that I would gladly purchase if it was in a book. It's extremely nice of you to share it with us for free

 

[quoipourquoi]

I'm 90% sure from just watching them play that when they played together, Sakic assumed the center role. I'm pretty sure this is because he was much better than Forsberg on faceoffs. (Also why I suspect he had more defensive zone draws than Forsberg over the years,though I don't specifically remember this).

Sakic centered them. In the 2002 playoffs, Forsberg let Sakic and Drury take almost all of the draws and instead played on their wings (Drury's more than Sakic's). He was said to not have the strength to win physical draws consistently.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

1999-2000 was the first season Sakic received any Selke votes.

This lines up perfectly with what you've shown here statistically, given that Selke voting usually lags behind actual results, as a player needs to build up a reputation to get Selke votes.

From the data and my memory, I would say that Forsberg entered the league as a complete player, whereas Sakic was more or less all-offense until the late 90s, when he was able to become one of the better defensive scoring line players in the league, without sacrificing his scoring.

 

[Padan]

From the data and my memory, I would say that Forsberg entered the league as a complete player, whereas Sakic was more or less all-offense until the late 90s, when he was able to become one of the better defensive scoring line players in the league, without sacrificing his scoring.

Agreed. People seem to think that Sakic was a great two-way player during his entire career, but he reached his defensive peak about 1998-2007. Actually, he had one of his strongest seasons defensively as late as 06/07 in my opinion (and his two-way game quickly fell off after that).

 

[matnor]

Very interesting analysis! As for the linemates, I'll add (hope that's fine!) the two forwards with most even strength points together with Sakic or Forsberg by season which should give a clear picture of who played with whom. It pretty much confirms what you said.

Sakic:

Season|Player 1|EV points together|Player 2|EV points together|Total EV points
94/95 | Clark | 17 | Kovalenko | 10 | 34
95/96 | Young | 27 | Simon | 16 | 63
96/97 | Deadmarsh | 8 | Lacroix | 8 | 32
97/98 | Deadmarsh | 8 | Lacroix | 6 | 31
98/99 | Hejduk | 26 | Forsberg | 19 | 56
99/00 | Hejduk | 19 | Tanguay | 16 | 58
00/01 | Tanguay | 41 | Hejduk | 31 | 64
01/02 | Hejduk | 17 | Tanguay | 16 | 50
02/03 | Forsberg | 12 | Hejduk | 10 | 38
03/04 | Hejduk | 16 | Tanguay | 13 | 48

Forsberg:

Season|Player 1|EV points together|Player 2|EV points together|Total EV points
94/95 | Nolan | 20 | Bassen | 10 | 32
95/96 | Lemieux | 31 | Kamensky | 25 | 64
96/97 | Kamensky | 19 | Lemieux | 7 | 49
97/98 | Kamensky | 19 | Lemieux | 15 | 44
98/99 | Sakic | 19 | Hejduk | 11 | 54
99/00 | Sakic | 12 | Deadmarsh | 11 | 36
00/01 | Drury | 19 | Nieminen | 8 | 44
02/03 | Hejduk | 35 | Tanguay | 27 | 71
03/04 | Tanguay | 13 | Hejduk | 9 | 26

 

[quoipourquoi]

Actually, he had one of his strongest seasons defensively as late as 06/07 in my opinion (and his two-way game quickly fell off after that).

He didn't really play a whole lot after 2007 (phenomenal second-half), and certainly not healthily. He was out by November with injuries in 2007-08 and 2008-09.

 

[nik jr]

thanks very much overpass

Thanks a bunch for doing this. The overall results don't surprise me one bit.

I think this argument was something that was blown out of proportion and used as the only logical way for most people to explain how their could be such a difference between them in +/-. I always thought the reason was not neccessarily that Forsberg was better defensively than Sakic, but he controlled the puck far more, and was a physical force a lot as well. I know physicality doesn't equal defense like many say, and of course it doesn't, but it has some effect for sure. Players don't hit for nothing after all. Some good examples are Lindros and Ovechkin as they are top 6 I believe with Forsberg in adjusted +/- per season.

I find this similar to the Datsyuk and Zetterberg situation. One may be purely better defensively (Zetterberg), but the other is better overall and a lot of it has to do with puck possession, and just strictly being better offensively, which I've always thought Forsberg was.

People always say how adjusted stats overrate Forsberg, but he was one of the main reasons I started using them 3 years ago. I had a strong hunch that he was much better offensively than given credit for.

another reason is that when they play separately, datsyuk usually plays with lidstrom and rafalski, while zetterberg more often plays with kronwall and stuart.

it seems to me whichever one plays with lidstrom and rafalski, has an increase in scoring and +/-.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

thanks very much overpass



another reason is that when they play separately, datsyuk usually plays with lidstrom and rafalski, while zetterberg more often plays with kronwall and stuart.

it seems to me whichever one plays with lidstrom and rafalski, has an increase in scoring and +/-.

True enough. In the playoffs I'm always convinced Zetterberg is better as well. They're almost as close as you can get though. Closer than Sakic and Forsberg IMO.

 

[alanschu]

Does it make sense to compare these players without factoring in special teams though?

 

[overpass]

Does it make sense to compare these players without factoring in special teams though?

This comparison was aimed at addressing a specific point that's been brought up in several other threads. But in an overall comparison, absolutely you would include special teams. And I think it would be interesting to break down their special teams roles by coach/era.

Going into this, I've always figured that Sakic and Forsberg were roughly equal performers on special teams, which is one reason I didn't focus on that.

Power play performance

Era | 21PPTOI/G | 19PPTOI/G | Forsberg PPP | Sakic PPP | Forsberg PPP/60 | Sakic PPP/60
Crawford (95-98) | 4.07 | 4.89 | 117 | 136 | 6.48 | 6.47
Hartley (99-01) | 4.56 | 4.86 | 88 | 102 | 5.8 | 5.86
Granato (03-04) | 4.47 | 4.42 | 57 | 55 | 6.7 | 5.37
Overall (95-04) | 4.32 | 4.77 | 262 | 293 | 6.28 | 6.02

PPTOI=power play time on ice. For the years 1995 through 1997 this is estimated using on ice PGF. PPP=power play points, PPP/60=power play points per 60 minutes.

While Marc Crawford was coaching, Sakic clearly had a larger role on the power play. He played more minutes and scored more points. Sakic and Forsberg produced at a similar per-minute rate.

This difference wasn't constant over the whole time period. In 1995, Forsberg was only the fourth option at forward on the power play, behind Sakic, Nolan, and Kamensky. But by 1998, Forsberg passed Sakic in power play points (37 to 28).

Under Bob Hartley, Joe Sakic played slightly more minutes on the power play per game than Forsberg. He scored at a similar per-minute rate as Forsberg, and since he played more games and minutes he scored more points.

Under Tony Granato, Sakic and Forsberg played similar power play minutes, and Forsberg produced at a higher rate.

Penalty Killing

Era | 21SHTOI/G | 19SHTOI/G
Crawford (95-98) | 2.57 | 1.56
Hartley (99-01) | 1.86 | 2.30
Granato (03-04) | 0.45 | 1.67
Overall (95-04) | 1.91 | 1.85

SHTOI=shorthanded time on ice. For the years 1995 through 1997 this is estimated using on ice PGA.

Under Marc Crawford, Forsberg was a primary penalty killer and had a much larger role than Sakic in this area. Hartley used Sakic a little more often. Under Granato, post-injury Forsberg rarely killed penalties. Sakic also killed fewer penalties, but had a much larger role than Forsberg.

It's interesting to see how Sakic's and Forsberg's roles reversed. Forsberg began his career in a more defensive role, and by the end of his time in Colorado was clearly in a less defensive role. But overall, I think they were about equal on special teams.

If, however, you are comparing their peak seasons (00-01 for Sakic, 02-03 for Forsberg), you would want to note that Forsberg did not kill penalties and didn't play against the top scorers on the other team.

 

[Padan]

If, however, you are comparing their peak seasons (00-01 for Sakic, 02-03 for Forsberg), you would want to note that Forsberg did not kill penalties and didn't play against the top scorers on the other team.

And he still finished 4th in Selke voting.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

One of the most clear, concise, and yet extensive and interesting reports/displays of research I have seen in a while. Cheers overpass.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Context – Linemates
From 1996 to 1998, Forsberg played primarily with Valeri Kamensky and Claude Lemieux, and also a bit of Martin Rucinsky and Adam Deadmarsh. Sakic played primarily with Scott Young, and his most common other linemates were Chris Simon, Eric Lacroix, and Adam Deadmarsh. Forsberg had stronger linemates over this time period.

I distinctly remember Sakic playing with Kamensky and Lemieux during parts of these years, such as their 1997 playoff run.

 

[canucks4ever]

I do find it interesting that in 1995, 1996 and 1999 Joe Sakic recieved no selke votes at all, while Forsberg was getting them nearly every year. When people say Joe Sakic was always better defensively, i think thats a myth. 2000-2004 was the only time Sakic recieved support from selke voters.

 

[jkrx]

I distinctly remember Sakic playing with Kamensky and Lemieux during parts of these years, such as their 1997 playoff run.

Claude Lemieux played mostly with Forsberg but I do think Kamensky played with Sakic most of the time.

Kamensky - Sakic - Deadmarsh/Young
Rucinsky - Forsberg - Lemieux

If I remember correctly. Forsberg having stronger linemates would be wrong as I do remember there were much talks about Kamensky and Sakic having great chemistry. Before the trades Sakic played with Kovalenko and Forsberg with Nolan.

In 97 its harder to say who played with who as there were alot of injuries. At one point I believe their first line was compiled of Lacroix - Yelle - Jones. They also shifted linemates ALOT. But Forsberg still primarly played with Lemiex and Sakic with Kamensky.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Claude Lemieux played mostly with Forsberg but I do think Kamensky played with Sakic most of the time.

Kamensky - Sakic - Deadmarsh/Young
Rucinsky - Forsberg - Lemieux

If I remember correctly. Forsberg having stronger linemates would be wrong as I do remember there were much talks about Kamensky and Sakic having great chemistry. Before the trades Sakic played with Kovalenko and Forsberg with Nolan.

In 97 its harder to say who played with who as there were alot of injuries. At one point I believe their first line was compiled of Lacroix - Yelle - Jones. They also shifted linemates ALOT. But Forsberg still primarly played with Lemiex and Sakic with Kamensky.

You are porbably right, though I did see the Kamensky-Sakic-Lemieux line on a few nights that playoffs. As you said, they switched up the lines quite a bit that year.

Kamensky by the way is a very underrated player. He was the last Soviet League MVP before entering the NHL and had some big nights in the palyoffs.

Deadmarsh was also a 30 something goal scorer in 97 if memory serves.

 

[Padan]

I do find it interesting that in 1995, 1996 and 1999 Joe Sakic recieved no selke votes at all, while Forsberg was getting them nearly every year. When people say Joe Sakic was always better defensively, i think thats a myth. 2000-2004 was the only time Sakic recieved support from selke voters.

That's probably because Sakic had a rather poor +/- rating in the late 90's while Forsberg had better numbers. We know how much the writers love that statistic.

I think that Forsberg's defensive game was quite overrated, in terms of pure defense. He played physical in the defensive zone and often had impressive +/-, which lead people to think that he was "great" defensively.

Kamensky by the way is a very underrated player. He was the last Soviet League MVP before entering the NHL and had some big nights in the palyoffs.

Agreed. I recall people saying that he was the most talented left winger in the entire league, save Kariya. Quite strange that he didn't produce more points considering whom he played with in Colorado.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Claude Lemieux played mostly with Forsberg but I do think Kamensky played with Sakic most of the time.

Kamensky - Sakic - Deadmarsh/Young
Rucinsky - Forsberg - Lemieux

If I remember correctly. Forsberg having stronger linemates would be wrong as I do remember there were much talks about Kamensky and Sakic having great chemistry. Before the trades Sakic played with Kovalenko and Forsberg with Nolan.

In 97 its harder to say who played with who as there were alot of injuries. At one point I believe their first line was compiled of Lacroix - Yelle - Jones. They also shifted linemates ALOT. But Forsberg still primarly played with Lemiex and Sakic with Kamensky.

Thinking it over again, those lines dont seem right. Rucinsky was gone before the 1997 season began.

 

[overpass]

I think that Forsberg's defensive game was quite overrated, in terms of pure defense. He played physical in the defensive zone and often had impressive +/-, which lead people to think that he was "great" defensively.
.

In the late 90s, Forsberg was playing against the best on the other team, killing penalties, and "had impressive +/-". How exactly was he not "great" defensively? In the ways that don't help to win hockey games?

Claude Lemieux played mostly with Forsberg but I do think Kamensky played with Sakic most of the time.

Kamensky - Sakic - Deadmarsh/Young
Rucinsky - Forsberg - Lemieux

If I remember correctly. Forsberg having stronger linemates would be wrong as I do remember there were much talks about Kamensky and Sakic having great chemistry. Before the trades Sakic played with Kovalenko and Forsberg with Nolan.

In 97 its harder to say who played with who as there were alot of injuries. At one point I believe their first line was compiled of Lacroix - Yelle - Jones. They also shifted linemates ALOT. But Forsberg still primarly played with Lemiex and Sakic with Kamensky.

Looking back on game summaries it was pretty clear that the Avalanche shifted linemates a lot. Rucinsky played with Forsberg in 95-96, but he was traded fairly early in that season. Matnor's numbers posted make it clear that Kamensky played more often with Forsberg than with Sakic, although he played with Sakic at times too.