If Mike Bossy Was Never Injured..

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Selanne has apparently surpassed Peter Forsberg as the most historically overrated player on hfboards.

As for leading the league in goals as a rookie (really tied), it's trivia and nothing else, resting entirely on the fact that Selanne was older and therefore more developed than your average rookie.
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
Selanne has apparently surpassed Peter Forsberg as the most historically overrated player on hfboards.

As for leading the league in goals as a rookie (really tied), it's trivia and nothing else, resting entirely on the fact that Selanne was older and therefore more developed than your average rookie.

How is that when he's rated way below a player on his own team who he was clearly better than?

Anyways, Brodeur was not close to the best goalie ever, and Forsberg would kill Sakic, Stevens, and all your favorite players in a real hockey game in his prime.

That's not my opinion either.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
How is that when he's rated way below a player on his own team who he was clearly better than?

Anyways, Brodeur was not close to the best goalie ever, and Forsberg would kill Sakic, Stevens, and all your favorite players in a real hockey game in his prime.

That's not my opinion either.

Lol, off topic much? Who was clearly better than who on his own team? As for Brodeur, I rank him 5th among goalies all-time. Again, this is way off topic.
 

Infinite Vision*

Guest
Lol, off topic much? Who was clearly better than who on his own team? As for Brodeur, I rank him 5th among goalies all-time. Again, this is way off topic.

You were trolling with the Forsberg most historically overrated comment, so I was trolling back. :sarcasm:
 

1 Timer

Registered User
Aug 23, 2009
1,320
173
Howell, NJ
Since Bossy was my idol growing up I’m very biased. You hear greats like Gretzky say he was the best natural goal scorers they have ever seen. That has to hold some weight. I remember something he said in regards to always hitting the net with his shots, he said his father always told him “the net never moves only you do”, this in reference to knowing where you are on the ice in relation to the net. He was a pure goal scorer and thrived in the spotlight and produced in very big games. He was consistently great and goalies feared him. He may have scored 800 or 900 goals but that is irrelevant because he didn’t. What he did for 10 seasons was become one of the most consistence, most clutch, and most feared goal scorers the game has ever known.
 

BraveCanadian

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
14,519
3,357
Not really... he was one of the 30-40 best, which is obviously amazing, but not top 5 or close to best ever, which is overrating him.

I don't recall anyone saying he was top 5 of all time.

For one thing, scoring was much higher in Bossy's time so his international resume is not as good as Selanne's. In any year Selanne hasn't been injured in the playoffs he's done better than average, and Bossy was obviously better in the playoffs but Selanne's overall career is atleast as impressive to me if not more.

Bossy didn't have the opportunity to feast on international teams that were devoid of their best players (who were playing in the NHL).

Based on their records in the best on best Canada Cup, Bossy was clearly better. You can say scoring was up during that time, I can say excelling in a best on best tournament is better than against mediocre competition. Selanne's longevity has allowed him to compile Olympic points but again, how many of those were meaningful?

Laughable logic? Selanne lead the league in goals in his rookie season. We know that Bossy did not. Doesn't matter what freak year it was or whether it was 200 goals or 30 goals he lead the league with fact is no one scored more goals than him in his rookie season, this has nothing to do with discounting Bossy's numbers.

It is a bit of laughable logic in this instance because everyone knows that 92-93 was a very strange year for top scorers, and you're using macro environmental variables like league scoring to discount Bossy at the same time. Not to mention Lemieux missed 24 games that year or Selanne would not have tied for the league lead in goals.

I think they're obviously close overall and don't really care how much support I have in believing Selanne was better. Has nothing to do with him being a newer player either.

Virtually every time you post on these boards it is to play up how good more recent players are in comparison to older ones.

See the current Lemieux thread on these boards where you think Crosby would be hanging out within spitting distance of a prime Lemieux. Absolutely crazy to anyone who saw Lemieux in his prime.

I think Trottier and Potvin were both better than Bossy and if let's say Selanne was paired on a team with Forsberg and Bourque for the first 9 years of his injury free career opinions would be just as in favour of Selanne as Bossy. Overall I just think Selanne was the slightly better talent and player.

Yeah, and if pigs had wings then I think they could fly.. so what?

For what it is worth, I agree that Selanne didn't play on a lot of teams with a good opportunity to win the Stanley Cup.

The problem is that his personal performances were horrible in comparison to what he is capable of.. a counter example would be another player who was a lone star with the Jets franchise: Dale Hawerchuk produced while being the focal point for the other team and playing in a division with two of the NHL powers at the time. Selanne didn't - even under better circumstances.

Selanne, while being a hockey legend in his own right, is not a better player in hockey history than Bossy. His lack of playoff performance puts several nails in that coffin.
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,042
12,663
Selanne has apparently surpassed Peter Forsberg as the most historically overrated player on hfboards.

As for leading the league in goals as a rookie (really tied), it's trivia and nothing else, resting entirely on the fact that Selanne was older and therefore more developed than your average rookie.

Yes! I don't understand that argument. If anything compare their seasons at the same age if possible (mainly to decide who had superior longevity), or better yet just look at and compare their respective best seasons, second best seasons, third best seasons and so on. That those seasons happened to be teir first in the NHL hardly matters.

As far as the original question goes, Bossy would definitely have better numbers in the absolute sense, but his career could also have gone downhill faster than people often assume, which would end up hurting his ranking a bit I would think. In any event he would never have been close to #1.
 

Hardyvan123

tweet@HardyintheWack
Jul 4, 2010
17,552
24
Vancouver
Yes! I don't understand that argument. If anything compare their seasons at the same age if possible (mainly to decide who had superior longevity), or better yet just look at and compare their respective best seasons, second best seasons, third best seasons and so on. That those seasons happened to be teir first in the NHL hardly matters.

As far as the original question goes, Bossy would definitely have better numbers in the absolute sense, but his career could also have gone downhill faster than people often assume, which would end up hurting his ranking a bit I would think. In any event he would never have been close to #1.

I have to agree, I don't think that Bossy playing longer would have affected his overall rating.

If anything his decline might have been as sharp as Trottier's was.

And to jump into the Forsberg comment, in what way is he overated?

He's a top 50 guy easily in my books and I'm a guy that values a long career as well.

The top 100 here when it was last done had Bossy at 29 and Forsberg at 62 which is too large of a gap in my books and Forsberg was the better player IMO.
 
Last edited:

VMBM

And it didn't even bring me down
Sep 24, 2008
3,797
754
Helsinki, Finland
... he would have had a couple/a few more productive seasons, but that's about it; I don't think it would have had much effect on his legacy.
 

jepjepjoo

Registered User
Dec 31, 2002
4,726
2,033
And this constant international resume crutch for Selanne is a joke.
Because he came over later, he had the opportunity to play in the Olympics. The majority of real players were in Russia or the Canada Cup up until NHLers were allowed to play the Olympics.

Bossy played very well in the 81 and 84 Canada Cups, losing one and winning one. Selanne had 9 points in 10 games played in the Canada Cup before NHLers became Olympians. Bossy, 13G and 20 points in 15 games.

Actually Selanne played in only one Canada Cup(91) and scored 1g 1a in 6 games. 96 it was called World Cup of hockey in which he scored 3g 2a in 4 games.

I can say excelling in a best on best tournament is better than against mediocre competition. Selanne's longevity has allowed him to compile Olympic points but again, how many of those were meaningful?

Selanne led 2 best on best olympics in scoring.

Nagano 98 5gp 4g 6a 10pts
Turin 06 8gp 6g 5a 11pts

His longetivity actually hurts his olympic stats since he played with a broken jaw in Vancouver and only managed 2a in 6 games. Without -10 olympics his statline would look like this 25gp 20g 15a.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->