Favorite Penguin Tournament (Lemieux Era-Current) - FINAL (Lemieux defeats Crosby) - CLOSED

Vote for your favorite player in each pairing (not necessarily the best)


  • Total voters
    37
  • Poll closed .

Trap Jesus

Registered User
Feb 13, 2012
28,686
13,456
3620767683_3b1af93ab7_o.jpg


I populated the bracket by Hockey References' Point Shares from the 1984/85 season (Lemieux debut) to the current season. Kind of a rough estimate of impact on the team in these years.

povl78j7.svg
 

ziggyjoe212

Registered User
Oct 2, 2017
3,039
2,359
I voted Mario due to nostalgia and the fact that time increases the "legend" factor. Also, 66 is a cool and unique number while 87 is just ugly. Also Mario has a better story due to beating cancer and back surgeries and coming back from retirement. All Sid has to "hollywoodify" his story is concussions.

But I can totally see how someone younger would choose Sid. We grew up with his as the face of the franchise. Sid is a far better team player, ambassador for the NHL, and Sid's teams have accomplished far more than Mario's teams have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EightyOne

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,285
28,264
Looking back on some past results... Staal getting bounced for Kaspar in the first round kinda shocks me a bit.

I think Staal has to be one of the most overrated Penguins in the last 20ish years and even I would have had to think about that one for a while.
 

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,285
28,264
It’s Lemieux. Sid has been a better on the ice player in terms of what the team has done here, but Lemieux literally took a financial loss to save the team. He’s a thread in the quilt of Pittsburgh versus a sports legend.

I probably never would have gotten into the sport if it weren't for Lemieux.

I think Crosby is probably a better natural leader but Lemeiux is not only the most legendary Penguin but probably the most legendary Pittsburgh sports figure and that town has QUITE the history, there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EightyOne

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,333
18,761
Pittsburgh
It’s Lemieux. Sid has been a better on the ice player in terms of what the team has done here, but Lemieux literally took a financial loss to save the team. He’s a thread in the quilt of Pittsburgh versus a sports legend.

No he did not. He got back all he was owed, and it was a big bugga boo Burkle made sure happened. It's also partially why he did do what he did. He was only going to lose if he walked away do to the team going belly up. He was owed something in the 32.0/35.0 range which he has gotten back and paid in full.
 

Gurglesons

Registered User
Dec 18, 2009
92,040
74,299
San Diego, CA
last-train-tocool.blogspot.com
No he did not. He got back all he was owed, and it was a big bugga boo Burkle made sure happened. It's also partially why he did do what he did. He was only going to lose if he walked away do to the team going belly up. He was owed something in the 32.0/35.0 range which he has gotten back and paid in full.

That was not the situation he was walking into.
 

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,285
28,264
Burkle wouldn't be part of the picture for years. There was no guarantee at all that Mario's gambit would pay off and he definitely was out millions for years until the team got back on track. That team was hardly raking it in. Pretty much the opposite until they opened the new barn.
 

Don'tcry4mejanhrdina

Registered User
Aug 4, 2003
11,341
2,123
This space.
Mario is the reason why this Ontario born and raised kid became a life long Penguins fan. Nobody will ever match Lemieux as my favourite player mostly because of his immense skill and partially because I will never idolize another person as a grown man the way the kid version of myself did with Lemieux.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big McLargehuge

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,333
18,761
Pittsburgh
That was not the situation he was walking into.

Sure it was, the team was in dire straights, he got a investment group together to save the team, he also came back to play for the team while a partial owner/shared stake in the team to help save it (what was owed him). The only thing financially he gave up was playing for less than what he could have gotten on the open market (Mario's choice). At first, yes, he gave up what was owed to him, but it was never an issue he'd get it back because, from the very beginning Burkle promoted and pushed he'd get every penny owed him.

By the way, best majority owner by far. Burkle.

So, where's the finacial loss?

Him playing for less in the early 2000's is the only financial loss I see playing for just over 5.0 when his last real playing season was getting just over 11.0 in 1996/97. Mario pushed to make less while Burkle was pushing he should get what he's worth to the team. Mario won.... Ofcourse.
 

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,333
18,761
Pittsburgh
Burkle wouldn't be part of the picture for years. There was no guarantee at all that Mario's gambit would pay off and he definitely was out millions for years until the team got back on track. That team was hardly raking it in. Pretty much the opposite until they opened the new barn.

See, this was as a player, not the partial owner.

This wasn't like he owned the business and was financially in dire straights. They fought to take it over. There is a difference.

Executive Bios
Ron Burkle, one of the preeminent investors in retail, hospitality, technology and distribution industries, is also a three-time Stanley Cup champion as co-owner of the Pittsburgh Penguins.
Burkle teamed with Mario Lemieux to buy the team out of bankruptcy in September 1999, and together they have become one of the most outstanding ownership duos in professional sports, winning three Cups from 2009-2017
 

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,285
28,264
Huh... I stand corrected. I forgot Burkle was part of the original ownership group that Mario was involved in.

Look... Mario Lemieux doesn't need ME to pump his image up. I think he's good. But I don't completely agree with the way you are painting the picture here regardless of Burkle... the team was far from a sure bet at the time and the new arena deal was nowhere close to sealed. Mario was never in danger of completely losing his ass but he absolutely stuck his neck out to help. As I understand it, Lemieux was owed 10s of millions and instead of collect took a ownership stake in the team. Was he paid that money back all up front right away when he assumed a stake in ownership?
 

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,333
18,761
Pittsburgh
Huh... I stand corrected. I forgot Burkle was part of the original ownership group that Mario was involved in.

Look... Mario Lemieux doesn't need ME to pump his image up. I think he's good. But I don't completely agree with the way you are painting the picture here regardless of Burkle... the team was far from a sure bet at the time and the new arena deal was nowhere close to sealed. Mario was never in danger of completely losing his ass but he absolutely stuck his neck out to help. As I understand it, Lemieux was owed 10s of millions and instead of collect took a ownership stake in the team. Was he paid that money back all up front right away when he assumed a stake in ownership?

Oh fore sure, not trying to slight Mario here, but let's not all pretend it's "all" for just saving the team. I'm sure that's the majority of his intentions, just not all.

To answer your question: He was paid over a number of years and was caught up with what was owed before 2010. IIRC. Don't remember exactly when, but remember it being stated he was caught up with in full of past $$$ owed him.

Must give Burkle his due.
PG exclusive: Ron Burkle opens up on Penguins ownership, Mario Lemieux and the future | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Even Mario states it himself:
“Ron is one of the main reasons we still have hockey in Pittsburgh,” Lemieux said. “If I was not able to buy the Penguins and have Ron as our top investor, I don’t think the Penguins would be here today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlindWillyMcHurt

BlindWillyMcHurt

ti kallisti
May 31, 2004
34,285
28,264
Well yeah... Burkle is the real man behind the money. And I appreciate him because he keeps his fingers out of the pie, by and large.

I'm just saying that while Lemieux certainly saw the potential upsides of doing what he did (he is far from a dummy), he also took a risk.

Not terribly important, either way. Cheers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ugene Malkin

gopens66

Hop in the Cordoba, Baby, we're goin' bowlin!
May 25, 2006
3,464
395
Altoona,Pa
My town is exactly a two hour drive from Pittsburgh. Football and basketball dominated youth sports here from the '50's through the '90's. The first hockey game I ever watched was the 1980 "Miracle" game. I remember asking my dad why the TV doesn't show this sport more(Because that was the first). Around 95-96 the local rollerskating rink built an outdoor roller-hockey rink. In 1999, we got our first ice rink.
Sam Lafferty came from that rink. My son got to play scholastic hockey in that rink, when in contrast, I was the only kid at the local frozen lake with hockey skates and a stick and no one to pass to.

None of this happens without Lemieux.

For once I agree with pixiesfanyo when he said "he's a thread in the quilt of Pittsburgh."

Carnegie- Rooney- Lemieux
 

Pens1566

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
18,409
7,249
WV
Ace, in a walk.

And about Mario's financial gamble with jumping into ownership ... he wasn't really guaranteed anything near what he was really owed at the time. If he did nothing, however, he would have made pennies on the dollar (at best) out of any bankruptcy settlements. He really did the only thing he could have, and still hope to see anywhere near what the team owed him at the time. Not that I fault him in any way for it. If it was about the money, he'd have been out years ago.

edit:

IIRC, his salary after coming out of retirement had something to do with the NHLPA and not skewing the #s post lockout/CBA/cap. I want to say it had some relation to league avg and pro-rated somehow. Something about ownership conflict was baked in as well. He couldn't take too little and piss off the PA and he couldn't take too much because he was an owner as well. Unique situation all around.
 
Last edited:

Al Smith

Registered User
Apr 28, 2012
7,228
3,820
Mario put people in the empty seats at the Igloo and then - especially in his early days - had them standing up nearly every time he touched the puck basically playing 1 v. 5. Man, I love 87, and I've felt fortunate to watch him play for the Pens at such a high level for so long.. He's just not Mario.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad