Forsberg Versus Fedorov!

[JackSlater]

It's very hard to choose, Fedorov literally should have won Norris trophies because he was so adept when used as a defenceman while Forsberg literally willed his teams to Stanley Cup victories with his icy gaze.

 

[Pominville Knows]

It's very hard to choose, Fedorov literally should have won Norris trophies because he was so adept when used as a defenceman while Forsberg literally willed his teams to Stanley Cup victories with his icy gaze.

One time, you mean? Sweeping Florida in the final and with Sakic having a truly dominant spring?

 

[JackSlater]

One time, you mean? With Sakic having a truly dominant spring?

Yes, and with literally no spleen or ankles in or on his body.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Yes, and with literally no spleen or ankles in or on his body.

I'm just saying it never happened. But he willed them in many other years.

 

[Sentinel]

Peak: Forsberg (and no, one season isn't a "peak", but even if it were, Forsberg's 2002-03 is better than Fedorov's 1993-94)

No.

Playoffs:

Forsberg (but it's close)

VERY close

Two-way play

: Even

No.

Skating

: Fedorov (though he fell off a lot in latter career)

No. "He fell off" far less than Forsberg.

Performance on 2nd NHL teams

: Forsberg

If cherry-picking had an award, your name would be on it.

Longer NHL career

: Fedorov (though this nothing to do with being a better player)

Yes it does.

It's an easy win for Forsberg.

No

Everything else is equally bad. Really bad.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Two way play is offense also. Something that tends to be forgotten. Forsberg was clearly superior offensively.

 

[Sentinel]

Two way play is offense also. Something that tends to be forgotten. Forsberg was clearly superior offensively.

That's called "having your cake and eating it too."

Fedorov was a far superior two-way player.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

No. "He fell off" far less than Forsberg.
Everything else is equally bad. Really bad.

 

[Dingo]

Fedorov could actually play defense...

So can Brendan Smith... kinda.
(Fedorov was better defensively than Pete, not arguing that)
It’s a good thread. I think a Fedorov was a bit more talented, but Pete brought it harder every shift. In the end they were both exceptional all around players who did it as good as just about anyone when it matters, in the playoffs.

 

[Dingo]

That's called "having your cake and eating it too."

Fedorov was a far superior two-way player.

I think ‘far superior’ is an exaggeration. In order for that phrase to work, Forsberg would have to have a lot of room between his two way game and what is possible. It implies that he was way off of an all around totally complete player.
I personally think Fedorov was perfectly adept at both ends and all aspects of the game, but Forsberg was not far off, and he brought more intensity and a much more consistent per game production.
Even goal scoring, once we get into the years they shared, which means when Pete started and coincidentally the scoring levels flattened out, Sergei was only just a 30 goal guy.
Anyways, two great players. Even though I agree that Fedorov was better defensively, it isn’t staggering enough to make up for his detriment in offensive production, which in turn doesn’t allow me to see ‘far superior’ as a term to be used in comparing these two.

 

[Dingo]

My memory is that Forsberg did kill penalties. Can any Avs' experts comment on this...? (Although he may have done less so in 2002-03, since I see he has 0 short-handed points that season.)

Short-handed points-per-game:
0.054 - Fedorov
0.045 - Forsberg
(The difference here is likely attributable to Fedorov's having scored 43% of his career SH points in his first four seasons in a higher-scoring League, prior to Forsberg joining the League.)

Good for Fedorov for winning a Selke award or two, but Forsberg was also up in the top-5 or 6 Selke nominees a few times. Does anyone seriously think being 1st in Selke voting makes you a better player than someone else who finished, say, 4th? I don't. Sorry, but Fedorov's slight (if any) advantage in penalty-killing and defensive play (something completely subjective) does not compensate for the clear difference between the players in on-ice goal differential or scoring level.

I think Forsberg and Sakic had their roles swapped over time. In the mid and late 90s Forsberg did kill a lot of penalties (to my eye he was very good at it... he was a hustler between the points), at some point Sakic began being used more for this, and Forsbergs role became more of the 1a center variety. I don’t know if Sakic being older had something to do with this or not. I do think that Sakic being injured in 2003 opened the door for Peter to really become THE guy that year.
However, I wasn’t an Avs fan. A Canucks fan who couldn’t get enough of Red Wings vs Avs, and soon became a Wings fan.... with Forsberg coming out of the mess as my favorite player, lol.

 

[Troubadour]

Not that close.

I don't think Fedorov is overrated, but Forsberg was such a superior competitor Fedorov's ten games on defense just can not make up for that, ever.

Forsberg was a better passer, playmaker, thinker, stickhandler and possession player. Fedorov could fly on his skates and he had a better slapper.

It's an easy pick. Once Forsberg was in the league, Fedorov was clearly better for one and a half postseason.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

All I can say is if Forsberg has a great peak, it better be off-the-chain in order to offset the 500+ more NHL games that Fedorov played.

And hey, if you want to say Forsberg's better, I'm not going to gainsay that- but to claim there's some sort of chasm between the two-- well, if you try to lead there, I just cannot follow...

 

[Thenameless]

I like Fedorov's tools - apart from the obvious skating, Lindros once said that Fedorov was the only player whose stick he couldn't knock away on a face-off because he had such strong wrists. But, the results would come out sporadically - in 5 goal games, in Selke years. He would drive me mad as a coach when he looked like he didn't care - he left a lot on the table. Forsberg was more consistent during his prime, and just seemed to have a bigger engine. I still like Fedorov's defensive game better than Forsberg's physicality.

I like having a guy like a Francis or a Fedorov playing behind a clear 1C like Lemieux. Francis and Fedorov could still score, but they would be a nightmare for an opposing 1C. I do believe that Forsberg would make the better 1C in general.

I know I'm in the minority here, but I'd take Fedorov. Just gimme a pass on this one guys.

 

[Jim MacDonald]

Peak: Forsberg (and no, one season isn't a "peak", but even if it were, Forsberg's 2002-03 is better than Fedorov's 1993-94)
Prime: Forsberg
Playoffs: Forsberg (but it's close)
Goal scoring: Fedorov (but Forsberg in playoffs)
Playmaking / Passing: Forsberg
Two-way play: Even
Physicality: Forsberg
Skating: Fedorov (though he fell off a lot in latter career)
Performance on 2nd NHL teams: Forsberg
Longer NHL career: Fedorov (though this nothing to do with being a better player)
Longevity at elite level: Forsberg

It's an easy win for Forsberg.

Look, there has never been a more over-rated player on these forums than Sergei Fedorov. He was a great player from 1990 or 1991 to 2003. He was an elite player from 1991-ish to 1998. Let's give him his due. He was also -- esp. around early/mid-90s -- a fabulous skater, one of the top few in the sport, with a strong two-way style.

Forsberg was at a higher level, however. I would say from his rookie season (1995), he was already out-performing Fedorov, who was then in his prime. Forsberg would have had eight or nine 100-point seasons -- in a row -- during the dead-puck era, but for injuries. And the ice was far more tilted when Forsberg was on it. From beginning to the very end of his career, Forsberg was a huge plus when on the ice, including with Philly and including even his 17 games with Nashville and his failed comeback in Colorado. By contrast, Fedorov was doing nothing of note in Anaheim, Columbus, or Washington.

The Fedorov-crowd (and it's large, because there are a lot of Red Wing fans in the hockey world) need to stop claiming that a 2nd-in-scoring season plus a Selke is some monumental achievement. It isn't. The Selke is a media-narrative award that is entirely subjective and in any season could easily go to any of about 12 players with nobody batting an eyelid. And Forsberg would have won it in '97 if he hadn't missed some games.

Don't get me wrong, Fedorov in his prime was awesome and clearly a Hall of Famer, great playoff performer, etc. But he wasn't consistently in the conversation for best player in the world, as Forsberg was from about 1996 to 2005.

I really like your breakdown/analysis Panther, you didn't say anything though about being able to put Sergei on defense. The fact you could put him at two positions, does that (in your opinion) make this bit more of a "split" than a "unanimous" decision to Forsberg?

 

[Jim MacDonald]

It's interesting to see in a way that a lot of people marvel over Forsberg's two-way play like they did Fedorov's. I'm thinking out loud here, but to me what I remember of Forsberg as a guy taking the key defensive zone faceoff, having a high faceoff percentage, being an effective shot-blocker etc.....but to go +52 or whatever like he did in 02-03...he's doing something excellent defensively. Is the idea Foppa's defensive game was more of being physical/hitting guys, the reverse shoulder checks etc....almost as if you can be excellent defensively without necessarily being a good faceoff guy and being out on the penalty kill?

 

[Jim MacDonald]

Fedorov literally should have won Norris trophies because he was so adept when used as a defenceman

I don't know how much stock you put in Wikipedia Jack, but on Sergei's "Wikipedia" page it's indicated Jimmy Devellano was convinced if Bowman left Fedorov on D that Sergei would've won a Norris Trophy. I thought of that after reading your post!

 

[The Panther]

No. "He fell off" far less than Forsberg.

I don't know how you can possibly argue that.

Here's Fedorov's stats + awards after April 1996 (end of his 6th NHL season), when he was 26-and-half years old:
Stats
1996-2001 (five seasons):
Points = 47th
PPG = 36th
Plus/minus = 19th

2001-2007 (five seasons):
Points = 42nd
PPG = 59th
Plus/minus = 88th

"Awards"
Top 10 scoring finishes = 0
Top 10 PPG scoring = 0
All-Star = 5th in centers (2003)

Now, compare to Forsberg, also after six seasons and from the same age:
Stats
2001-2008 (five seasons):
Points = 53rd
PPG = 4th (2nd among players with 3+ seasons)
Plus/minus = 6th

"Awards"
Top 10 scoring finishes = 2 (9th and 1st)
Top 10 PPG scoring = 2 (1st and 1st)
All-Star = 1st in centers (2003)
Hart = 1 (2003)
Art Ross =1 (2003)


There can be no doubt who aged better from ages 26 through the early-30s; I mean, it's not even close. The difference, obviously, is that Fedorov had better durability, fewer injuries, and played longer.

If cherry-picking had an award, your name would be on it.

I'm not clear why you think how each player performed away from their Cup-champ, strong teams is "cherry picking". I think it's important to look at in comparisons, especially since these two went to new teams at around the same age.

Forsberg, however, played a mere 117 games with Philly and Nashville. Nevertheless, in those 117 games he was equally as dominant as on Colorado:
130 PTS / 117 G = 1.11PPG
Plus/minus = plus 28
Goal differential = 163 for, 63 against: +2.59 ratio (that's incredible!)

Fedorov's first 147 games after leaving Detroit (two seasons' total with the Ducks & Blue Jackets):
109 PTS / 147 G = 0.74PPG
Plus/minus = minus 7
Goal differential = 160 for, 151 against: +1.06 (that's mediocre)


So, no, I'm not cherry-picking, I'm pointing out the obvious -- Forsberg was an equally dominant player removed from his original, very-strong team, while Fedorov was a decent 2nd-liner.

Of course, full marks to Fedorov for having a much longer and ultimately more productive career.

 

[VanIslander]

Fedorov was like a souped-up version of a young Mike Fisher in Ottawa: speed, checking, stickhandling but LIMITED VISION, eager to shoot, not a playmaking, passing center.

Forsberg was a playmaking passer who protected the puck until the perfect opportunity arose to pass or shoot, at times waiting too long, just cycling over and over.

Put Foppa's hockey vision, puck management and grit with Feds' wheels, stickwork and propensity to shoot... and you'd have a complete player.

 

[The Wizard of Oz]

Wasn't just Kournikova in 98 and the DUI stuff in 99, Fedorov had his contract holdout in 97/98 and that's pretty much what ended his prime, at just 27 years old. He could have another Selke or Conn Smythe that season if he hadn't missed out the majority of that season. When he came back late in that season he was very rusty and not the same player.

1997 was a funny year. He played a large chunk of the season as a defenceman, which lowered his regular season numbers. He then went PPG in the playoffs (the only Red Wing who did) despite starting the playoffs as a full-time defenceman and getting no points in the first 4 games. Many argue he deserved the Conn Smythe trophy for his play as a forward and as a D in that Cup run, so clearly was still an absolutely elite player at that point in time. This is also supported by the fact that he led the Russian NT in scoring over Mogilny/Zhamnov/Larionov at the World Cup earlier that season.

Forgive my avatar in this discussion but I’d just like to point out this was an informative post about Fedorov’s mysterious “lost peak” years. A lot of these details get lost in time when looking at the counting stats. It’d be a ton of work but it’d be interesting to see if anyone could isolate Sergei’s games as a defensemen and figure out his stat line. As for this thread you can’t really go wrong with either. Forsberg wins out offensively and aged more gracefully whenever he managed to play, that’s for sure.

 

[Troubadour]

Sentinel said: ↑
No. "He fell off" far less than Forsberg.

I don't know how you can possibly argue that.

I think he was talking/reacting to you talking about speed.

 

[Sentinel]

I think ‘far superior’ is an exaggeration. In order for that phrase to work, Forsberg would have to have a lot of room between his two way game and what is possible. It implies that he was way off of an all around totally complete player.

It's not an exaggeration. Can you imagine Forsberg playing defense? No.

Forsberg was not far off, and he brought more intensity and a much more consistent per game production.

I will give you this: Forsberg was far more intense. In fact, this is the only aspect of the game where he was clearly superior to Fedorov, who only brought his intensity in playoffs. That said, Fedorov's skating was so effortless, it gave the false impression that he wasn't trying hard.

Even goal scoring, once we get into the years they shared, which means when Pete started and coincidentally the scoring levels flattened out, Sergei was only just a 30 goal guy.

Which is something Peter never did. Sorry, you walked right into it.

Anyways, two great players. Even though I agree that Fedorov was better defensively, it isn’t staggering enough to make up for his detriment in offensive production, which in turn doesn’t allow me to see ‘far superior’ as a term to be used in comparing these two.

See my first point. Forsberg was competent defensively. Fedorov was sublime.

And yes, the talking point that all Wings players sacrificed their offense under Bowman is 100% true. From Yzerman to Shanahan, from Fedorov to Hull. Fedorov played whatever position he was put in, whatever role he was asked. It hurt his offensive stats. Luckily, there is more to life than that.

 

[Sentinel]

Fedorov was like a souped-up version of a young Mike Fisher in Ottawa: speed, checking, stickhandling but LIMITED VISION, eager to shoot, not a playmaking, passing center.

Forsberg was a playmaking passer who protected the puck until the perfect opportunity arose to pass or shoot, at times waiting too long, just cycling over and over.

Put Foppa's hockey vision, puck management and grit with Feds' wheels, stickwork and propensity to shoot... and you'd have a complete player.

Other than this picture, your post is so off, it's nuts. In the 1996 playoffs Fedorov had 2 goals and 18 assists. Does this sound like somebody who was "eager to shoot"? Plus, he had a 100 MPH shot, why WOULDN'T he shoot? In fact, Wings fans wanted him to shoot MORE (just like they wanted Datsyuk to shoot more later on). "Limited vision" my ass.

 

[Sentinel]

I don't know how you can possibly argue that.

I was talking about their relative speed. Post-prime Forsberg essentially played on one foot and was missing half of his organs. Fedorov remained an elite skater (as evidenced at the 08WHC, where he was Russia's best player). There is indeed no comparison.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Seriously, how do you think Fedorov would do if he did not play during the DPE? Like 1980-1997 or 2005-now? Would he gain from having his main skills being less clutched and grabbed?
That said, maybe Forsberg could have had a more injury free career during the same circumstances which Fedorov did not suffer as much from, hmm... The swede played injured quite a bit so maybe he would have scored more like he did when turning it up in the playoffs.