Fedorov vs. Selanne

[DisgruntledGoat*]

But how many can play both defence and art ross calibre forward?

Not Fedorov.

He has one top five scoring finish. ONE.

And every time that gets brought up, the response is always 'oh well, he sacrificed offense for defense'... Which means he just flat-out wasn't as good at doing both as he is portrayed as, is he?

Look, if he really was a top-five scorer playing Selke-calibre defense... I'd be totally on the bandwagon. But he wasn't. He did that once in a season extremely comparable to Gilmour's best (without the career accomplishments of Gilmour) and never did it again.

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

The NHL goals per game in 1992-93 was much higher than in the 93/94 season:

1992/93 - 7,25 goals per game
1993/94 - 6,48 goals per game

As you can see, the overall scoring has dropped significantly, therefore Gilmour's 127 aren't better than Fedorov' 120 pts.


Here are some more facts about Fedorov:

- During the 1990s, Fedorov was third in playoff scoring behind only Lemieux and Jagr.

- Only the third player in NHL history to have four consecutive 20+ point playoffs, along with Mike Bossy and Bryan Trottier.

- Led the entire NHL in Plus-minus in the 1990s with a +221


I think we should stop this discussion in here because this is not the Gilmour vs Fedorov thread.

Cheers

Again, this isn't about Gilmour and Fedorov. YOU made the assertion that Fedorov should be talked about with Lemieux and Gretzky... Largely based on overinflating his 1994 season which was, overall, no better than Gilmour's 1993.

So please explain what universe Fedorov should be talked about with 99 and 66.

 

[Theokritos]

He has one top five scoring finish. ONE.

True, "Art Ross calibre Forward" is an exaggeration, except for the 1993-1994 season. It was the Mathieu Dandenault comparison that I took issue with. He's obviously not comparable to Fyodorov. Let's put it that way: Fyodorov was closer to the Art Ross than to Dandenault.

 

[BamBamCam*]

You were suggesting that the Hart and the Selke Fyodorov won in 93-94 were possibly given to the "flashy player" instead of the one who deserved it. But the Pearson Award you value higher suggests otherwise.

No I wasn't, I may not have explained myself well on that one, sorry for the confusion.

I was making an overall statement about all trophies; but pertaining to Fedorov, the Selke is a glorified bunch of nonsense that is being used as a trump card for him.

The fact Steve Kasper doesn't have 10 of them shows me what the trophy is really about. An excellent defensive player that also has alot of points, emphasis on points more than defense.

Fedorov deserves the accolades of that season, he deserved the Pearson and Hart. The rest of it is fluff and glorification like the Selke.

 

[quoipourquoi]

if post-'06 selanne isn't the definition of compiling (relative to his peak, the actual meat of his HHOF case), i don't know what is.

Okay, that's not a fair criticism. Everyone looks like a compiler when compared to their top-five years. I don't see why the label should be applied to a player who led his team in scoring last year, and finished #8 in league scoring (despite missing nine games) the year before that. Remember from mid-February to late-March of 2011 when the Ducks were on their playoff push, and Selanne on four occasions sent a game into overtime by scoring in the final two minutes? Calling him a compiler makes it seem like he didn't have an effect on his team. He personally robbed the 9th and 10th place finishers of points while helping to boost his team just above the playoff threshold.

which is all to say that fedorov left us wanting more. i get that. whereas we look at peak selanne, then post-lockout selanne, and we say "what if?" about the period in between. but these "what ifs"-- for a fedorov who cared and a selanne who was healthy-- seem to be held as a negative in one case and a positive in the other.

You don't even have to say "what if?" about Selanne in this case; Selanne accomplished a hell of a lot in the NHL despite peaking in the DPE, and will be crossing into the top-15 in scoring any day now. Asking "what if?" puts him in an entirely different conversation. As long as you're not using his injury years to deride him, I'm not sure why 2001-2004 should even come up, other than to point out that his injury years in San Jose had a Fedorov-level offense.

I just realized that you probably meant Selanne was a compiler after his cup win. Which i agree with.

2011 sure looked to be better than 2006 or 2007.

Not Fedorov.

He has one top five scoring finish. ONE.

And every time that gets brought up, the response is always 'oh well, he sacrificed offense for defense'... Which means he just flat-out wasn't as good at doing both as he is portrayed as, is he?

Look, if he really was a top-five scorer playing Selke-calibre defense... I'd be totally on the bandwagon. But he wasn't. He did that once in a season extremely comparable to Gilmour's best (without the career accomplishments of Gilmour) and never did it again.

And it's not like Fedorov broke out of his shell when he signed in Anaheim either. He's also a lesser scorer internationally than Selanne.

Pre-DPE
132 - Selanne (84 GP)
120 - Fedorov (82 GP)
108 - Selanne (79 GP)
107 - Fedorov (78 GP)
87 - Fedorov (73 GP)
86 - Fedorov (80 GP)
79 - Fedorov (77 GP)
54 - Selanne (51 GP)
50 - Fedorov (42 GP)
48 - Selanne (45 GP)

DPE
109 - Selanne (79 GP)
107 - Selanne (75 GP)
86 - Selanne (73 GP)
85 - Selanne (79 GP)
83 - Fedorov (80 GP)
72 - Selanne (73 GP)
69 - Fedorov (75 GP)
68 - Fedorov (81 GP)
65 - Fedorov (80 GP)
64 - Selanne (82 GP)
63 - Fedorov (74 GP)
63 - Fedorov (77 GP)
62 - Fedorov (68 GP)
54 - Selanne (82 GP)
32 - Selanne (78 GP)
17 - Fedorov (21 GP)

Lockout
94 - Selanne (82 GP)
90 - Selanne (80 GP)
80 - Selanne (73 GP)
66 - Selanne (82 GP)
54 - Selanne (65 GP)
48 - Selanne (54 GP)
44 - Fedorov (67 GP)
42 - Fedorov (73 GP)
41 - Fedorov (68 GP)
33 - Fedorov (52 GP)
23 - Selanne (26 GP)


How much value do we really have to place on defense from a forward to make up for the offensive gaps that have existed since Fedorov stopped playing with Paul Coffey? 30-40 points each year?

 

[pdd]

He did that once in a season extremely comparable to Gilmour's best (without the career accomplishments of Gilmour) and never did it again.

Again, this isn't about Gilmour and Fedorov. YOU made the assertion that Fedorov should be talked about with Lemieux and Gretzky... Largely based on overinflating his 1994 season which was, overall, no better than Gilmour's 1993.

It was far better than Gilmour's. It should be noted that while Fedorov was a top four Selke contender from his second year until his sixth year (he received significantly fewer votes in the first few seasons after his 1997 holdout despite no drop in play level defensively). Gilmour only reach that level is his top two scoring seasons of 127 and 111, when he finished 7th and 4th in scoring.

Fedorov only scored seven fewer points than Gilmour. He scored 24 more goals. He had worse linemates. He finished significantly higher in the scoring race. So arguing that Gilmour's offensive performance is comparable is silly. It's like saying Joe Juneau's 107 is better than Selanne's 102.

And then, Fedorov's 1995-96 season was pretty freaking good also. It doesn't get as much love because of how amazing that Wings team was, and the numbers Lemieux, Jagr, Francis, Sakic, and Forsberg put up. the Pittsburgh guys were all on the PP unit together, and Sakic/Forsberg were PP together. Fedorov (107/1st Selke) wasn't on a PP unit with Yzerman (95 points/3rd Selke). People talk down Bernie Nicholls for playing on the PP with Gretzky in his best year and scoring 150, why don't they talk down Sakic and Forsberg for having each other on the PP for so long? Or for that matter, why don't they talk down Gretzky (168 points) for having Nicholls and Robitaille in 88-89? Certainly a better set of wingers than Quinn/Brown or Gallant/MacLean. Better in that Nicholls was the fourth-best forward that season, and Robitaille arguably as high as the fifth or sixth, while only Brown of the other four were anywhere close to that, comparable to Robitaille in level.

So please explain what universe Fedorov should be talked about with 99 and 66.

He dominated the league in 93-94 to a similar degree that Lemieux and Gretzky dominated it; that is why people a) call his best season one of the best ever, and b) say he was lazy in other years.

It's a similar situation with Ovechkin; he was indisputably the best offensive player in the league in his prime, and now he's a good first line player on a team that doesn't provide him much offensive support. People say "he turned to crap" or "got complacent" because he was much better than Crosby, and now people consider Crosby the "consensus best player in the world" because of his offensive ability. People consider Claude Giroux, Corey Perry, and Ilya Kovalchuk elite scorers; yet they are only slightly ahead of Ovechkin's PPG mark. Finally, the big killer of Ovechkin's stats? Over the past couple years either a) his shots on goal have dropped or b) he has had a significantly low shooting percentage compared to his historical average of 12.5. This year, both have occurred. Were he at 12.5, his 82-game projection for goals (at his current shot rate) would be 43. With his current goal/sh% rate, it is 31. Add in the assist projection of 38, and it's 69pts or 81 points. His current stats would be 13-11-24 (1.00 PPG) at ~12.5%.

 

[quoipourquoi]

He dominated the league in 93-94 to a similar degree that Lemieux and Gretzky dominated it

That's it; I'm out.

 

[pdd]

Pre-DPE
132 - Selanne (84 GP) (Housley)

86 - Fedorov (80 GP)
79 - Fedorov (77 GP)
54 - Selanne (51 GP)
48 - Selanne (45 GP)

DPE
83 - Fedorov (80 GP)
69 - Fedorov (75 GP)
68 - Fedorov (81 GP)
65 - Fedorov (80 GP)
64 - Selanne (82 GP)
63 - Fedorov (74 GP)
63 - Fedorov (77 GP)
62 - Fedorov (68 GP)
54 - Selanne (82 GP)
32 - Selanne (78 GP)
17 - Fedorov (21 GP)

Lockout
94 - Selanne (82 GP)
90 - Selanne (80 GP)
80 - Selanne (73 GP)
66 - Selanne (82 GP)
54 - Selanne (65 GP)
48 - Selanne (54 GP)
44 - Fedorov (67 GP)
42 - Fedorov (73 GP)
41 - Fedorov (68 GP)
33 - Fedorov (52 GP)
23 - Selanne (26 GP)

Let's consider this. Take away Paul Coffey. Let's consider linemates after that. Steve Rucchin and Paul Kariya against... Slava Kozlov and Doug Brown?

I don't know, I don't think that's very fair. And when Selanne played with Phil Housley, he seemed to do pretty well.

I've edited your above list to remove any full or partial "Coffey years" or "Kariya years". I've also noted the "Housley year".

It's notable that Fedorov, who is older, moves into a defensive center role permanently after the lockout, and that is when Selanne truly takes over as the more dominant scorer - if you discount elite scoring help. And that is combined with Selanne using the lockout to recuperate from injury; had Selanne not returned to form, Fedorov would have remained as the more effective individual player.

 

[pdd]

That's it; I'm out.

Ok, give me a REASONED argument that explains how Fedorov's 56 goals and 120 points plus defensive domination was not better than what Gretzky did in 88-89?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To answer the last question first, I think this qualifies: http://statshockey.homestead.com/alltimegoals.html

Gartner was one of, if not the, most consistent goalscorers in NHL history. I look at Fedorov's playoff performances in a similar light. He is one of the most consistent playoff scorers in history. But he never won a Conn Smythe. And if you sort the chart you posted by points/gm rather than raw points, Fedorov drops out of the top 10. Very respectable, but not what I would call outright dominating.

Hopefully I'm not coming off as a Fedorov basher. I've been a Wings fan for over 20 years, and the guy gave me plenty of highlights and was a key factor in 3 Cups. But Fedorov's legend around here sometimes oversteps what he was actually doing, so I sometimes feel the need to put the brakes on.

I think Fedorov wins the 1997 Conn Smythe if there wasn't still lingering anti-Russian sentiment at that point. I thought he was pretty clearly the best Red Wing those playoffs.

Hi!

Both great hockey players and strong persons.

Career: Selänne
Peak: Selänne
Season: Selänne

Fedorov was during his career also Duck. The way Ducks who have the experience of having both guys decided awhile ago when Fedorov was let go and Selänne ... ok. Sergei is a nice guy and doing great work with Moscow CSKA as a GM today, but I go with Teemu in all categories. The support cast Feds had in DRW and Flash in the Mighty Ducks is not comparable. Also one was centerman another wing does not help this comparison.

I think Fedorov definitely wins peak if you cherry pick his 1993-94 season and combine it with his best playoffs.

Ok, give me a REASONED argument that explains how Fedorov's 56 goals and 120 points plus defensive domination was not better than what Gretzky did in 88-89?

You're the one who made a general statement that you knew was unpopular - you said Fedorov dominated to the same degree as Gretzky and Lemieux. You never said you were talking about one of Gretzky's weaker Hart Trophies specifically, nor did you offer any support as to why this was so. So why should the burden be on him to figure out what you are actually talking about and refute a position that has never been supported?

 

[Theokritos]

Ok, give me a REASONED argument that explains how Fedorov's 56 goals and 120 points plus defensive domination was not better than what Gretzky did in 88-89?

Fyodorov's very best season vs a random Gretzky season.

 

[pdd]

I think Fedorov wins the 1997 Conn Smythe if there wasn't still lingering anti-Russian sentiment at that point. I thought he was pretty clearly the best Red Wing those playoffs.



I think Fedorov definitely wins peak if you cherry pick his 1993-94 season and combine it with his best playoffs.

Because Selanne has ever had a season close to Fedorov's 1993-94, where he was a top scorer AND top defensive player?

You're the one who made a general statement that you knew was unpopular - you said Fedorov dominated to the same degree as Gretzky and Lemieux. You never said you were talking about one of Gretzky's weaker Hart Trophies specifically, nor did you offer any support as to why this was so. So why should the burden be on him to figure out what you are actually talking about and refute a position that has never been supported?

Ok, that's fair. But Fedorov that season was arguably the best offensive player in the league. He was also one of the best defensive players in the league. People say Datsyuk shouldn't be compared to Crosby because defense isn't worth nearly the gap in their offense. Fedorov's defense was significantly better than Datsyuk's.

 

[Yamaguchi*]

It was far better than Gilmour's. It should be noted that while Fedorov was a top four Selke contender from his second year until his sixth year (he received significantly fewer votes in the first few seasons after his 1997 holdout despite no drop in play level defensively). Gilmour only reach that level is his top two scoring seasons of 127 and 111, when he finished 7th and 4th in scoring.

Fedorov only scored seven fewer points than Gilmour. He scored 24 more goals. He had worse linemates. He finished significantly higher in the scoring race. So arguing that Gilmour's offensive performance is comparable is silly. It's like saying Joe Juneau's 107 is better than Selanne's 102.

And then, Fedorov's 1995-96 season was pretty freaking good also. It doesn't get as much love because of how amazing that Wings team was, and the numbers Lemieux, Jagr, Francis, Sakic, and Forsberg put up. the Pittsburgh guys were all on the PP unit together, and Sakic/Forsberg were PP together. Fedorov (107/1st Selke) wasn't on a PP unit with Yzerman (95 points/3rd Selke). People talk down Bernie Nicholls for playing on the PP with Gretzky in his best year and scoring 150, why don't they talk down Sakic and Forsberg for having each other on the PP for so long? Or for that matter, why don't they talk down Gretzky (168 points) for having Nicholls and Robitaille in 88-89? Certainly a better set of wingers than Quinn/Brown or Gallant/MacLean. Better in that Nicholls was the fourth-best forward that season, and Robitaille arguably as high as the fifth or sixth, while only Brown of the other four were anywhere close to that, comparable to Robitaille in level.



He dominated the league in 93-94 to a similar degree that Lemieux and Gretzky dominated it; that is why people a) call his best season one of the best ever, and b) say he was lazy in other years.

It's a similar situation with Ovechkin; he was indisputably the best offensive player in the league in his prime, and now he's a good first line player on a team that doesn't provide him much offensive support. People say "he turned to crap" or "got complacent" because he was much better than Crosby, and now people consider Crosby the "consensus best player in the world" because of his offensive ability. People consider Claude Giroux, Corey Perry, and Ilya Kovalchuk elite scorers; yet they are only slightly ahead of Ovechkin's PPG mark. Finally, the big killer of Ovechkin's stats? Over the past couple years either a) his shots on goal have dropped or b) he has had a significantly low shooting percentage compared to his historical average of 12.5. This year, both have occurred. Were he at 12.5, his 82-game projection for goals (at his current shot rate) would be 43. With his current goal/sh% rate, it is 31. Add in the assist projection of 38, and it's 69pts or 81 points. His current stats would be 13-11-24 (1.00 PPG) at ~12.5%.

eva unit zero,

thank you very much for answering the question about Fedorov.

 

[overg]

I think Fedorov wins the 1997 Conn Smythe if there wasn't still lingering anti-Russian sentiment at that point. I thought he was pretty clearly the best Red Wing those playoffs.

I don' t think so in this case. A lot of Wings played very well throughout the playoffs, but no one stood head and shoulders above the rest (in Game 4 ESPN (I know, I know) even tossed McCarty's name into the ring). That's a textbook recipe for a goalie getting it. If any skater deserved it I would have gone with Lidstrom, as at the time there was pretty much no bigger feat than stopping Lindros. Lidstrom didn't just stop him, he dominated him. But Vernon was very good throughout the entire playoffs, and I don't begrudge him his win.

Fedorov was in the conversation for the Smythe for all three Wings Cups, but I don't think he was robbed of any of them.

 

[Plural]

I think Fedorov definitely wins peak if you cherry pick his 1993-94 season and combine it with his best playoffs.

By that analogy, Fedorov wins easily.

Selanne's best year gives him 122 adjusted points in 72 games. That is debatable in the same tier as Fedorov's best year. But still a notch below. Now, if we add Feds best post-season to it, it is basically no contest.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don' t think so in this case. A lot of Wings played very well throughout the playoffs, but no one stood head and shoulders above the rest (in Game 4 ESPN (I know, I know) even tossed McCarty's name into the ring). That's a textbook recipe for a goalie getting it. If any skater deserved it I would have gone with Lidstrom, as at the time there was pretty much no bigger feat than stopping Lindros. Lidstrom didn't just stop him, he dominated him. But Vernon was very good throughout the entire playoffs, and I don't begrudge him his win.

Fedorov was in the conversation for the Smythe for all three Wings Cups, but I don't think he was robbed of any of them.

Lidstrom was great in the finals; but up until then, he really didn't stand out all that much. 8 points in 20 games isn't going to get you the Conn Smythe, unless you were as physically and defensively dominant as Scott Stevens was in 2000, and Lidstrom was not yet at that level in his own end on a consistent basis. (And even Stevens got 11 points in 23 games when he won it). I followed the 1996-97 playoffs closely and was shocked when Vernon won Conn Smythe - I thought Fedorov was clearly the most dominant player on the ice those playoffs, but at the time, there was a pretty strong perception that Europeans, especially Russians didn't really care about winning the Stanley Cup (or worse, didn't have the heart for the playoffs) because they didn't grow up watching NHL hockey as children.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

And Doug Gilmour was runner-up in '93 to a Mario Lemieux season that no ordinary human was ever going to touch. Oh yeah, and Gilmour won the Selke too. . . while putting up 127 points (more than Fedorov in 1994, on a less offensive talented team).

And Gilmour is then better in his follow-up season (1994) then Fedorov was defending his Hart in 1995. Oh yeah, and Gilmour also has two playoffs during that time better than anything Fedorov ever did.

AT BEST, Fedorov is comparable to Gilmour. . . they're both defensively-capable offensive centers with strong playoff resumes. . . but Gilmour beats him on career value. Lemieux and Gretzky? No. Just. . . no.

Gilmour, in his follow up '94 season, couldn't hold Fedorov's jock that year, and Fedorov's follow up season was hardly bad itself. 50 points put him ahead of Gretzky and Selanne, tied with Forsberg (albeit a 21 year old rookie, and a year before his career high) and Hull, and led the playoffs in scoring, and assists for the first of consecutive years, despite making the Cup Final neither time.

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

It was far better than Gilmour's. It should be noted that while Fedorov was a top four Selke contender from his second year until his sixth year (he received significantly fewer votes in the first few seasons after his 1997 holdout despite no drop in play level defensively). Gilmour only reach that level is his top two scoring seasons of 127 and 111, when he finished 7th and 4th in scoring.

Ah, the old moving target strategy. We are not talking about the merits of Selke voting vis a vis Gilmour vs Fedorov. We're talking about the fact that: despite Fedorov's 1994 season being THE linchpin that his alleged 'greatness' is tied to. . . it simply wasn't as exceptional as some fanboys would like to believe. Gilmour did exactly the same thing, at exactly the same time.

Fedorov only scored seven fewer points than Gilmour. He scored 24 more goals.

There's nothing in here that remotely suggests, 'better season'.

He had worse linemates.

No he did not. It is really funny how you penalize everybody for the strength of their team (Lafleur, Messier, for example) but Fedorov and Yzerman (according to you, two of the best players EVER) completely get a pass on that. Your bias is approaching the point of ridiculousness. Fedorov played on stacked teams and had great linemates.

He finished significantly higher in the scoring race.

True. Six players finished ahead of Gilmour. Here's their games played for 1994:

Mario Lemieux- 22 games
Pat Lafontaine- 16 games
Adam Oates- 77 games (1.45 PPG)
Steve Yzerman- 58 games
Teemu Selanne- 51 games
Pierre Turgeon- 69 games (1.36 PPG)

Soooo. . . was Fedorov that much better than Gilmour or was he competing against a field decimated by injury? The two guys on that list that played something close to a full season (Oates, Turgeon) are in Fedorov's neighbourhood in PPG (Sergei had 1.46PPG) and played with far inferior linemates either all season (Turgeon) or for significant portions (that was the year Neely only played 49 games but admittedly still put up an insane 50 goals on Oates' wing).

So arguing that Gilmour's offensive performance is comparable is silly. It's like saying Joe Juneau's 107 is better than Selanne's 102.

You've tried this tact before: cherry-picking partial stats while leaving out any context or information that works against your argument. It never works, and it makes your homerism more obvious than ever.

Having said that; Selanne never had a 102 point season. I'm assuming you meant his 107 point season which happened at the height of the DPE and was good for second in the league that year. Juneau's 102 points, on the other hand, came at the height of the high-scoring early 90s, and was good for eighteenth in scoring.

To even suggest that is in any way comparable to Gilmour OUTSCORING Fedorov on an INFERIOR team the year BEFORE is just. . .well, its either absurd or its trolling.

And then, Fedorov's 1995-96 season was pretty freaking good also. It doesn't get as much love because of how amazing that Wings team was, and the numbers Lemieux, Jagr, Francis, Sakic, and Forsberg put up. the Pittsburgh guys were all on the PP unit together, and Sakic/Forsberg were PP together. Fedorov (107/1st Selke) wasn't on a PP unit with Yzerman (95 points/3rd Selke). People talk down Bernie Nicholls for playing on the PP with Gretzky in his best year and scoring 150, why don't they talk down Sakic and Forsberg for having each other on the PP for so long? Or for that matter, why don't they talk down Gretzky (168 points) for having Nicholls and Robitaille in 88-89? Certainly a better set of wingers than Quinn/Brown or Gallant/MacLean. Better in that Nicholls was the fourth-best forward that season, and Robitaille arguably as high as the fifth or sixth, while only Brown of the other four were anywhere close to that, comparable to Robitaille in level.

Fedorov never played with any talent, huh? Stuck on those dead-end 90s Red Wing teams? Poor guy.

He dominated the league in 93-94 to a similar degree that Lemieux and Gretzky dominated it; that is why people a) call his best season one of the best ever, and b) say he was lazy in other years.

When you have to resort to cherry-picking stats to prove Fedorov's best is better than Gilmour's. . . like I said before in this thread, that's pretty clear-cut evidence that he isn't even in the conversation with Gretzky and Lemieux.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Gilmour, in his follow up '94 season, couldn't hold Fedorov's jock that year, and Fedorov's follow up season was hardly bad itself. 50 points put him ahead of Gretzky and Selanne, tied with Forsberg (albeit a 21 year old rookie, and a year before his career high) and Hull, and led the playoffs in scoring, and assists for the first of consecutive years, despite making the Cup Final neither time.

Wait- what? Are you saying that the Detroit Red Wings didn't make the Finals in 1995?

 

[DisgruntledGoat*]

Red Wing scoring finishes during Fedorov's career:

1990-91: 10th (3 below league average)
1991-92: 4th
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 1st
1994-95: 3rd
1995-96: 3rd
1996-97: 6th
1997-98: 2nd
1998-99: 3rd
1999-00: 1st
2000-01: 5th
2001-02: 2nd
2002-03: 1st

So please. . . let's stop with this idea that Fedorov was somehow hurting for talent or linemates.

Also, before anyone says that Fedorov is responsible for all that offense. Here's the Wings finishes after he left:

2003-04: 2nd
2005-06: 2nd
2006-07: 10th
2007-08: 3rd
2008-09: 1st

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Red Wing scoring finishes during Fedorov's career:

1990-91: 10th (3 below league average)
1991-92: 4th
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 1st
1994-95: 3rd
1995-96: 3rd
1996-97: 6th
1997-98: 2nd
1998-99: 3rd
1999-00: 1st
2000-01: 5th
2001-02: 2nd
2002-03: 1st

So please. . . let's stop with this idea that Fedorov was somehow hurting for talent or linemates.

Also, before anyone says that Fedorov is responsible for all that offense. Here's the Wings finishes after he left:

2003-04: 2nd
2005-06: 2nd
2006-07: 10th
2007-08: 3rd
2008-09: 1st

Despite all this, I think that playing for the Wings hurt Fedorov's overall regular season numbers. When healthy, Steve Yzerman got the better wingers, and once Bowman came in, that team rolled 4 lines and none of the players could cheat on D to create more O (not that Fedorov necessarily would have anyway).

That said, I agree with you that Gilmour (and Selanne!) are much better comparables for Feds than Gretzky or Lemieux.

 

[Hardyvan123]

The fact, that these facts aren't widely recognized is argument for or against Fedorov? Because that tells something about him. Mike Garnter also scored more goals during 1980s than Bossy.

Gartner is 4th in goals and 14th in points in the 80's.

Rick Vaive was 6th in goals

How does that even compare to what Fedorov did in the 90's?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

That said, I agree with you that Gilmour (and Selanne!) are much better comparables for Feds than Gretzky or Lemieux.

I might tend to agree, but if it were possible to subjectively create a clear and distinct level between Gilmour/Selanne and Gretzky/Lemieux - regardless of which one was "closer" as a result - I'd reserve it for guys like Fedorov. And Lindros. And Crosby, while we're at it.

 

[pdd]

That said, I agree with you that Gilmour (and Selanne!) are much better comparables for Feds than Gretzky or Lemieux.

I don't disagree with this statement overall; however Fedorov's peak season was much closer in overall quality to anything Gretzky or Lemieux did than Gilmour or Selanne. I would rank them like such:

Gretzky
Lemieux

Fedorov

Selanne

Gilmour

 

[Hardyvan123]

Between seasons 80-81 and 89-90 Gartner scored 413 goals good for 4th and Bossy scored 400 good for 5th.

You were looking it from 79-80 to 88-89 seasons which is basically the "wrong" way to do it.

you have it right but most people do the mistake like below, it's the whole 1999 end of the millennium thing again when it was really the end of 2000

More games are played in the 80s during the 79/80 season than would be 89/90.

Either way the Gartner issue is misguided