Forsberg vs Mackinnon
- Thread starter avsfan9
- Start date
- Jan 18, 2016
- 34,191
- 25,362
Too soon to tell. But matching Forsbergs legacy would be might impressive for Mack. He has the chance to though.
Agreed, I still think Forsberg was the better player as of now, but MacKinnon definitely has the potential to at least match up to him.
I just don't know if Nate's IQ is as good as Foppa was, sure both have this impressive ability to make big moments happen during crunch time. However, Forsberg just seemed to be more consistent in terms of generating offence out of nothing in terms of both playmaking or scoring. MacKinnon can do it as well, but he's more individual in this aspect relying on his athletic ability (can say he's a way better skater than Peter was though).
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,563
- 52,736
Saying this thread is premature would be an understatement.
MaKarter
Big Game Bo
Easy. How many Lady Byng's was Forsberg nominated for? 
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,563
- 52,736
I think Mack is better relatively to the current NHL than Forsberg was relatively to the NHL back then.
IMO Mack is the clear cut 2nd best player in the league...while Forsberg had a legit fight for that spot with the likes of Jagr, Lindros, Sakic, etc.
avsfan9
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2011
- 4,070
- 2,899
Forsberg also had a better supporting cast to work with at the time. The avs had some pretty potent offensive players at the time with Tanguay, Hejduk, Drury and Sakic
Ararana
Registered User
Northern Avs Fan
Registered User
- May 27, 2019
- 21,970
- 29,648
Right now. Forsberg, rather easily.
I do think MacKinnon is going to end his career with a lot more points than Forsberg because of Foppa’s injuries.
I’ve always felt that Forsberg and Sakic were a just little bit better than MacKinnon. But, MacK is really just getting started. He’s 24-years old. He’s entering a 4-5 year window in his career that is going to define his legacy. Same goes for Mikko and Cale.
Ultimately I do think he’ll at least match Forsberg’s legacy when it’s all said and done.
I do think MacKinnon is going to end his career with a lot more points than Forsberg because of Foppa’s injuries.
I’ve always felt that Forsberg and Sakic were a just little bit better than MacKinnon. But, MacK is really just getting started. He’s 24-years old. He’s entering a 4-5 year window in his career that is going to define his legacy. Same goes for Mikko and Cale.
Ultimately I do think he’ll at least match Forsberg’s legacy when it’s all said and done.
That's where I respectively disagree, imagining Forsberg in this era where tiny stick infractions and half a bear-arms are now considered penalties, he would have a field day with so much open space. I do agree though that the 90s era had some insane star power to fight against with Sakic, Jagr, Lindros, and Mario (can't forget him). You can say that McDavid is one player who wouldn't survive in the 90s.
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,563
- 52,736
We can't compare players today with players from a different era. We can only compare where they are/were vs their peers. In this case Mack is higher in the NHL food chain than Forsberg was back then.
wayninja
Bednar's Tailor
- Mar 24, 2017
- 26,417
- 36,245
If I'm starting a hockey club and I'm given the option of taking prime Foppa vs prime Mack, I'm taking Forsberg and it's not close.
Will I still feel the same way at the end of Nate's career? Unclear.
Will I still feel the same way at the end of Nate's career? Unclear.
Richard88
John 3:16
- Jun 29, 2019
- 19,178
- 20,807
Prime healthy Forsberg was unstoppable so it has to be him. The guy lit up the 2002 playoffs and finished top scorer despite playing only 3 rounds. 2x Stanley Cups, 2x Olympic Gold, 2x World Champtionship gold medalist, Hart trophy x1, Art Ross trophy x1. That's some CV to match, but I suppose that Mackinnon has the potential to do it.
- Aug 25, 2006
- 9,421
- 7,546
I think it’s too early too say, although Forsberg is probably my favorite player of all time so I vote for him.
I said this earlier, though, that Mackinnon is the first player I think we’ve had since that’s has the pure entertainment value of Forsberg and also can take over games like he did.
Hopefully this is a legit debate in ten years after Mackinnon as much or more hardware.
I said this earlier, though, that Mackinnon is the first player I think we’ve had since that’s has the pure entertainment value of Forsberg and also can take over games like he did.
Hopefully this is a legit debate in ten years after Mackinnon as much or more hardware.
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,347
- 31,516
Definitely Forsberg right now, and as good as Nate is, he's got a bit to go before matching Peter's career.
Assists/Game All Time
1st - Wayne Gretzky - 1.320
2nd - Mario Lemieux - 1.129
3rd - Bobby Orr - 0.982
4th - Peter Forsberg - 0.898
8th All Time in Regular Season Points Per Game - 1.250
9th All Time in Playoff Points Per Game - 1.133
19th All Time in Playoff Points - 171 in 151 games
2 Stanley Cups
2 World Championships
2 World Junior Championships
Hart Tropy
Art Ross
Assists/Game All Time
1st - Wayne Gretzky - 1.320
2nd - Mario Lemieux - 1.129
3rd - Bobby Orr - 0.982
4th - Peter Forsberg - 0.898
8th All Time in Regular Season Points Per Game - 1.250
9th All Time in Playoff Points Per Game - 1.133
19th All Time in Playoff Points - 171 in 151 games
2 Stanley Cups
2 World Championships
2 World Junior Championships
Hart Tropy
Art Ross
Last edited:
klozge
Avs
Easily MacKinnon (not now but after his career has ended). And Forsberg is my 3rd favorite player of all time.
Edit: No, it won't be easy at all. I think MacKinnon will be THE face of the Avs next to Sakic, though. Forsberg's injury problems can't be ignored.
Edit: No, it won't be easy at all. I think MacKinnon will be THE face of the Avs next to Sakic, though. Forsberg's injury problems can't be ignored.
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,347
- 31,516
Forsberg was the clear best player in the league for a few years IMO.
It would have been longer if injuries hadn't taken him out for so many games. That's the only reason his rein over the NHL wasn't longer.
- Apr 25, 2006
- 49,563
- 52,736
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,347
- 31,516
It was four years actually. From 2002-03 - 2005-06.
Forsberg was 1st in points per game over that period, on top of the crazy physical game he brought to the table to take over games.
Here's the other guys stats, including Sakic for comparison too. Peter had more points in much less games than Joe on the same team. This was post concussion for Lindros too, he was at the end of his career.
Forsberg - 174 games - 236 points - 1.36 pts/gm
Jagr - 234 games - 274 points - 1.17 pts/gm
Sakic - 221 games - 232 points - 1.05 pts/gm
Lindros - 153 games - 107 points - 0.70 pts/gm
NHL.com Stats
Last edited:
The Kingslayer
Registered User
As great as Mackinnon is Forsberg was on another level. Mackinnon doesn't dominate at will. Peter Forsberg never took a shift off in the NHL and played both sides of the puck well especially early in his career. In the playoffs Forsberg was even more of a problem. There really is no comparison here and this is very unfair to Mackinnon.
The Kingslayer
Registered User
The Kingslayer
Registered User
Forsbergs injuries might muddy that last question and rightfully so. This thread should really come up if Mackinnon wins a cup in Denver. As of now its to early to talk legacy. If we are talking whose a better hockey player its Peter Forsberg.
AvsCOL
Registered User
- Jul 16, 2013
- 4,854
- 5,209
Legacy is Forsberg for sure, but there’s a legitimate argument to be made about how effective each player was in their respective eras. MacKinnon is a top-3 player in the league for sure, Forsberg was at times, so I think it’s close.
By the end of their careers, maybe MacKinnon.
By the end of their careers, maybe MacKinnon.
