Esposito vs Sakic

[Ziostilon]

Kinda inspired from the "How good would Espo be in today's game" thread.

Joe just recently retired, so his play is still fresher in our minds.

Who is the better player?
Philip Anthony Esposito or Joseph Steven Sakic

Click to read more...

 

[Oilers1*]

What's with the lop-sided player comparisons lately?

Phil Esposito makes Joe Sakic look like Joe Sacco (ok, its not that bad but I've always wanted to use that line)

 

[Crosbyfan]

These two players are so different that it's hard to say. Each are significantly better than he other.

 

[lextune]

Espo. And it's not very close.

 

[Reds4Life]

Espo has the hardware and all-star selections, and is the better player from historic point of view, but if I had a team I would take Sakic for sure. So clutch, great defensively and a better all-around player.

 

[Oilers1*]

Espo has the hardware and all-star selections, and is the better player from historic point of view, but if I had a team I would take Sakic for sure. So clutch, great defensively and a better all-around player.

Well, I would take Espo and my team would win

Sakic was 'better all-around' than Gretzky, too. . .would you pick him over 99? Because that's the kind of overwhelming edge Esposito has over Sakic in terms of dominance and offense.

 

[Reds4Life]

Well, I would take Espo and my team would win

Sakic was 'better all-around' than Gretzky, too. . .would you pick him over 99? Because that's the kind of overwhelming edge Esposito has over Sakic in terms of dominance and offense.

Espo was not THAT much better offensively. His best years were with Bobby Orr feeding him pucks. Espo was great shot so he scored more often than not. But, he was out of shape, took way too long shifts, even when he was not supposed to and his overall attidue is not something I admire.
I would not take the risk. Sakic is worse offensively, but he provides so many other things I would prefer him. Also, I am not a fan of Esposito tbh.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Espo was not THAT much better offensively.

Yes, he was. Espo wasn't just breaking single season scoring records, he was smashing them.

 

[Reds4Life]

Yes, he was. Espo wasn't just breaking single season scoring records, he was smashing them.

His numbers are obviously inflated thanks to Bobby Orr. That is a fact. Esposito never came even close to his best numbers when he left Boston. Orr would make Sakic's numbers better too. Maybe not as good as Esposito, but gap would be smaller than it is now.

 

[brianscot]

His best years were with Bobby Orr feeding him pucks.

Orr fed pucks to Wayne Carleton too, how come he didn't score 76?

The entire 'Esposito was great only because he played with Orr' cliche is always shameful on a history board.

That's like saying that Mike Bossy was a great goal scorer only because he played with Trottier.

Greater? Of course.

But how come nobody ever points out that Orr had greater assist totals because he played with Esposito?

 

[Reds4Life]

Orr fed pucks to Wayne Carleton too, how come he didn't score 76?

The entire 'Esposito was great only because he played with Orr' cliche is always shameful on a history board.

That's like saying that Mike Bossy was a great goal scorer only because he played with Trottier.

Greater? Of course.

But how come nobody ever points out that Orr had greater assist totals because he played with Esposito?

Because Espo was elite player. OP compares Sakic and Espo, both are elite players. I never said Orr "made" Espo, just that Orr made his numbers better than Espo would have without him.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

It's not crazy to think that in Sakic's prime offensive years, and without defensive responsibilities on the 70-75 Boston Bruins, that he would have atleast come fairly close to Esposito's overall goal/point totals.

Sakic was an elite offensive player before and after he played on a powerhouse of a team, unlike Phil. This, combined with the fact that he was substantially better defensively, leads me to believe that Sakic would be of slightly more value to an overall equal team than Esposito.

And yes, I've seen a number of full games of Esposito and recognize he wasn't just some slow plug who only racked up points because of Bobby Orr.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

The entire 'Esposito was great only because he played with Orr' cliche is always shameful on a history board.

Shameful strawman. Who here has *ever* said that Esposito was great only because he played with Orr?

Esposito was an all-time great. But we're not comparing him with Wayne Carleton; we're comparing him with Joe Sakic.

(And I'm not saying that one's greater than the other - both are quite different players)

 

[sr edler]

That's like saying that Mike Bossy was a great goal scorer only because he played with Trottier

bossy scored his goals even with trottier out

esposito could barely change on the fly and his numbers were actually inflated by orr to an extent, unkown to what extent though

alex mogilny scored 76 goals too, and in fewer games guess he must be better than espo

 

[canucks4ever]

Sakic is better, he had defensive responsibilities and put up large totals on crap nordique teams and powerhouse colorado teams. Espo had orr inflating his totals and as soon as he leaves boston, he becomes an 80 point scorer for 5 straight years. Sakic is the better player.

 

[Briere Up There*]

He was in his mid thirties by then.

 

[canucks4ever]

He was in his mid thirties by then.

so,his numbers in chicago were nothing to write home about either. Orr helped his numbers, without orr he's a 90-110 point scorer at most. he doesnt put up 152 points bu himself.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

His numbers are obviously inflated thanks to Bobby Orr. That is a fact. Esposito never came even close to his best numbers when he left Boston. Orr would make Sakic's numbers better too. Maybe not as good as Esposito, but gap would be smaller than it is now.

Phil was 33 years old when he was traded to New York, which would be like a 36/37 year old getting traded nowadays.

Obviously he was past his prime. Still a good player, but not the player he was from 25-32 like he was in Boston.

Did Orr help Espo's numbers ?? Certainly. Did Espo help Orr's numbers ?? Absolutely.

 

[Briere Up There*]

so,his numbers in chicago were nothing to write home about either. Orr helped his numbers, without orr he's a 90-110 point scorer at most. he doesnt put up 152 points bu himself.

Oh so playing with the greatest defenseman of all-time helped his numbers. Cool.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Espo was better, but it is NOT by a huge margin.

 

[VMBM]

I'd like to remind that Espo - unlike, say, Bossy and Bobby Hull - has easily more career assists (873) than goals (717), and sure, that tells he had good players around him but also that he did contribute more than just garbage goals. I'm not saying he was a great playmaker, but pretty good one anyway...

Esposito for me. In his time, he dominated clearly more than Sakic in his.

 

[tarheelhockey]

It's not crazy to think that in Sakic's prime offensive years, and without defensive responsibilities on the 70-75 Boston Bruins, that he would have atleast come fairly close to Esposito's overall goal/point totals.

Out of curiosity, what leads you to believe that Sakic could have broken the all-time goal scoring record by 32%? The guy was great, but he played on a powerhouse team too, largely in a higher-scoring era, and never came within 22 goals of Esposito's mark.

 

[livewell68]

Out of curiosity, what leads you to believe that Sakic could have broken the all-time goal scoring record by 32%? The guy was great, but he played on a powerhouse team too, largely in a higher-scoring era, and never came within 22 goals of Esposito's mark.

The vast majority of Sakic's career was actually played during the "dead puck era".

I don't understand this strange misconception of guys like Jagr, Selanne, Bure, Forsberg playing in a higher scoring era?

They played in the lowest scoring era since the mid 60's.

Esposito played in a time when scoring was well above 6.00 GPG (goals per game).

Sakic was playing in a time when scoring was in the low to mid 5.00 GPG. Big difference.

I would rank Sakic's 2000-01 season ahead of Esposito's best years.

Again from 1995 and on scoring was actually quite low in the NHL contrary to Hfboards popular belief.

 

[Big Phil]

What's with the lop-sided player comparisons lately?

Phil Esposito makes Joe Sakic look like Joe Sacco (ok, its not that bad but I've always wanted to use that line)

Hang on there, look, I'll take Esposito as well but Burnaby Joe would fit on a lot of people's top 25 list also.

 

[Big Phil]

Comparing top 10 scoring finishes is a good start:

Esposito - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 7

Sakic - 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9, 10

No doubt about that, Espo wins this in a landslide. It isn't even close to be honest, the only thing is that Joe beats him in the longevity department. Sakic was much more relevant in the NHL in his older age than Espo was. But prime vs. prime it's Espo without even thinking about it

Hart Trophies:
Espo - 2
Sakic - 1

I don't think Sakic was ever robbed of another one either. Maybe Espo wasn't either, but it wouldn't have been a bad thing if he got another one in 1971.

Both won two Cups. Both were HUGE parts of their Cup wins. Sakic could be described as the better clutch player in the postseason, but Espo isn't too far behind. Sakic won a Conn Smythe and could have arguably won another. Esposito never won a Smythe, but led the playoffs in points three times in his career.

Defensive play goes to Sakic for sure

International play is practically even. Sakic played in more best on best tournaments but he was never as good as Esposito was in the 1972 Summit Series

So does Sakic's intangibles make him the better player? No, because Espo dominates him offensively and has some decent intangibles himself. Both were great leaders too.

By the way, Esposito DOES get underrated around here in case you haven't read the previous 25 posts. That should never happen. Rule #1 when evaluating an all-time great is to never ever penalize him for playing with another all-time great. If someone wanted to dismiss Esposito because he played with Orr let's take a closer look at Sakic. In his prime he played with Forsberg, Kamensky, Hejduk, Tanguay (he was good then) and had stalwarts like Foote, Blake and for a little bit Bourque on the blueline. He also had Roy in net. Let's not assume Esposito is the only one that played with good players - HHOF players.

Rule #2, never give credit to a player for something he didn't do. I've read in this thread "If Sakic played with Orr.........." well he didn't. Like I said he had his fair share of players too and I personally don't penalize him for that, nor should anyone. I don't think Sakic hits 76 goals in a season anytime, or even 60. The point is Esposito did this multiple times. And someone hit the nail on the head earlier, if we are to inflate Esposito's goal totals then why not Orr's assist totals? Exactly. This is why I refuse to penalize a player for who he played with.

Lastly, Esposito was 33 when he was traded to NYR. No doubt the abscence of Orr hurt him but he was also getting older and he carried a mediocre team to the final in 1979, something he never gets credit for. Plus in 1967 he was a Blackhawk and was 7th in scoring. No one remembers that. No one also gives credit to him for being 2nd in scoring in '68 (with a teenage Orr missing half a year) or getting 126 points in '69 with Orr "only" notching 64 points. Esposito is an all-time great. He didn't NEED anyone to score goals