blundluntman
Registered User
- Jul 30, 2016
- 2,655
- 2,851
As great as the 79 and 03 classes are, I think there may be an argument for 91 having more concentrated talent.
Besides Messier and Bourque, I don't think there are any players from either draft you can argue are better than Lindros, Forsberg, Niedermeyer and Kovalev. Along with those 4, Naslund had a great peak and Palffy was one of the most offensively productive players in the Dead Puck Era (was top 5 in ppg 5 times I believe). Osgood may have compiled a bit with those Red Wings teams but he's at least Fleury's equal imo (Lindbergh was better than both imo though).
79 likely has the 2 greatest players among all 3 classes, but as far as quantity, 91 isn't too far off.
03 is definitely the deepest of the 3, but I'd argue there isn't a single player in that class that you would take over Lindros, Niedermeyer, Forsberg and Kovalev.
Thoughts?
Besides Messier and Bourque, I don't think there are any players from either draft you can argue are better than Lindros, Forsberg, Niedermeyer and Kovalev. Along with those 4, Naslund had a great peak and Palffy was one of the most offensively productive players in the Dead Puck Era (was top 5 in ppg 5 times I believe). Osgood may have compiled a bit with those Red Wings teams but he's at least Fleury's equal imo (Lindbergh was better than both imo though).
79 likely has the 2 greatest players among all 3 classes, but as far as quantity, 91 isn't too far off.
03 is definitely the deepest of the 3, but I'd argue there isn't a single player in that class that you would take over Lindros, Niedermeyer, Forsberg and Kovalev.
Thoughts?