Is Jagr the greatest European player of all time?

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

yes, hes #3

Nope Lidstrom will always be behind him.

 

[Avsboy]

Jagr or Hasek first

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

Your career is a fluke if you have no cup according to some people here but they tend to completely ignore it when it's convenient. Lidstrom has 4 cups - more than Hasek, more than Jagr, more than Orr.

And also...
7 Norrises, Conn Smythe, over 1000 points as a defender, triple-gold club, never missed playoffs... He's far above Jagr (and certainly above Bourque)

Funny because Bourque was certainly the better player so I don't know how Lidstrom can be "certainly above" Bourque.

And are you arguing that Lidstrom was better than Orr only because the latter won "only" 2 Stanley Cups?

 

[Laveuglette]

I think so. I would take Jagr over Lidstrom and Hasek.

 

[Laveuglette]

yes, hes #3

If Bourque is #3, it's behind Harvey, not Lidstrom. Bourque has had a much better career than Lidstrom.

 

[TT1]

this thread

@Laveuglette @Claude Pepe Lemieux @Mrb1p @Mean Gene @bluesfan94 @The Macho Man @DaveG @UConn126

Sure Ray had better offensive production than Lidstrom but he also played in a different era, he was also more physical than Lid obviously. That said, Lidstrom had way more impact than Bourque did in a game, his defensive play (positional play/stickwork/defensive IQ) was better and he was more consistent. Based on era adjusted points Bourque would have ~5 more points a season than Lidstrom which doesn't make up for all the other elements that Lidstrom brought to a game (defensive game, made the players around him better, insanely high hockey IQ).

The game also started evolving by the time Lidstrom stepped into the league, he pretty much started his career during the dead puck era (~97). The game modernized and teams started playing way more systematic than they did in the past. Factoring all those aspects, that's why Lidstrom is the clear #2 for me.

Also let's not disregard the fact that Bourque never won a cup in Boston (or Team Canada) regardless of him playing on some insanely strong teams (1st place finishing teams).

NHLPA Player Poll 2017-18

 

[Nadal On Clay]

this thread

@Laveuglette @Claude Pepe Lemieux @Mrb1p @Mean Gene @bluesfan94 @The Macho Man @DaveG @UConn126

Sure Ray had better offensive production than Lidstrom but he also played in a different era, he was also more physical than Lid obviously. That said, Lidstrom had way more impact than Bourque did in a game, his defensive play (positional play/stickwork/defensive IQ) was better and he was more consistent. Based on era adjusted points Bourque would have ~5 more points a season than Lidstrom which doesn't make up for all the other elements that Lidstrom brought to a game (defensive game, made the players around him better, insanely high hockey IQ).

The game also started evolving by the time Lidstrom stepped into the league, he pretty much started his career during the dead puck era (97). The game modernized and teams started playing way more systematic than they did in the past. Factoring all those aspects, that's why Lidstrom is the clear #2 for me.

Also let's not disregard the fact that Bourque never won a cup in Boston (or Team Canada) regardless of him playing on some insanely strong teams (1st place finishing teams).

NHLPA Player Poll 2017-18

Isn’t this the poll Forsberg was voted one of the top 5 forwards of all time?

EDIT: Nvm he was voted 1st by 2% of the voters

 

[Dustin]

this thread

@Laveuglette @Claude Pepe Lemieux @Mrb1p @Mean Gene @bluesfan94 @The Macho Man @DaveG @UConn126

Sure Ray had better offensive production than Lidstrom but he also played in a different era, he was also more physical than Lid obviously. That said, Lidstrom had way more impact than Bourque did in a game, his defensive play (positional play/stickwork/defensive IQ) was better and he was more consistent. Based on era adjusted points Bourque would have ~5 more points a season than Lidstrom which doesn't make up for all the other elements that Lidstrom brought to a game (defensive game, made the players around him better, insanely high hockey IQ).

The game also started evolving by the time Lidstrom stepped into the league, he pretty much started his career during the dead puck era (~97). The game modernized and teams started playing way more systematic than they did in the past. Factoring all those aspects, that's why Lidstrom is the clear #2 for me.

Also let's not disregard the fact that Bourque never won a cup in Boston (or Team Canada) regardless of him playing on some insanely strong teams (1st place finishing teams).

NHLPA Player Poll 2017-18

While I have no problem in people choosing either Bourque or Lidstrom why are you bringing up a lack of cups? Seems disingenuous to use a team stat to reflect poorly on a player.

 

[Tuna Tatarrrrrr]

this thread

@Laveuglette @Claude Pepe Lemieux @Mrb1p @Mean Gene @bluesfan94 @The Macho Man @DaveG @UConn126

Sure Ray had better offensive production than Lidstrom but he also played in a different era, he was also more physical than Lid obviously. That said, Lidstrom had way more impact than Bourque did in a game, his defensive play (positional play/stickwork/defensive IQ) was better and he was more consistent. Based on era adjusted points Bourque would have ~5 more points a season than Lidstrom which doesn't make up for all the other elements that Lidstrom brought to a game (defensive game, made the players around him better, insanely high hockey IQ).

The game also started evolving by the time Lidstrom stepped into the league, he pretty much started his career during the dead puck era (~97). The game modernized and teams started playing way more systematic than they did in the past. Factoring all those aspects, that's why Lidstrom is the clear #2 for me.

Also let's not disregard the fact that Bourque never won a cup in Boston (or Team Canada) regardless of him playing on some insanely strong teams (1st place finishing teams).

NHLPA Player Poll 2017-18

Lidstrom overrated? Confirmed here.

 

[TT1]

While I have no problem in people choosing either Bourque or Lidstrom why are you bringing up a lack of cups? Seems disingenuous to use a team stat to reflect poorly on a player.

Elite players (talking about GOATs here) are considered elite based on what they did with their teams as well, it's another aspect you have to evaluate. Sure Lidstrom played on some stacked teams but so did Bourque. I promise you Ovi would be viewed differently had he not won a cup with Washington, especially because they're perennial cup contenders.

 

[Dustin]

Elite players (talking about GOATs here) are considered elite based on what they do with their teams as well, it's another aspect you have to evaluate. Sure Lidstrom played on some stacked teams but so did Bourque.

And Gretzky never won a cup after Edmonton so I guess he sucks then? Or Lemieux only won 2 so why is he even in the top 5. Cups are a team award and should have no bearing on who is the better player. Furthermore if that's what we are doing Lidstrom played his whole career for a team that many consider to be the best of its generation. Boston while having some great years was never in contention over NYI or Edmonton. Ever!

If you want to use playoff stats or Conn Smythe's, I have no problem with that. Using the Stanley Cup as some arbitrary declaration that Bourque is worse is non sensical.

I think there are plenty of arguments for both that don't include using team stats to indicate who the better player was

 

[Future GOAT]

IMO it's between Jagr and Hasek.

 

[JJ68]

you cannot rate players from a different position so far apart like pure offensive machine to goalie.

Jagr is the greatest euro forward of all time, by far.

Hasek the greatest Goalie, by far.

Lidstrom the greatest Dman by far.

 

[Laveuglette]

this thread

@Laveuglette @Claude Pepe Lemieux @Mrb1p @Mean Gene @bluesfan94 @The Macho Man @DaveG @UConn126

Sure Ray had better offensive production than Lidstrom but he also played in a different era, he was also more physical than Lid obviously. That said, Lidstrom had way more impact than Bourque did in a game, his defensive play (positional play/stickwork/defensive IQ) was better and he was more consistent. Based on era adjusted points Bourque would have ~5 more points a season than Lidstrom which doesn't make up for all the other elements that Lidstrom brought to a game (defensive game, made the players around him better, insanely high hockey IQ).

The game also started evolving by the time Lidstrom stepped into the league, he pretty much started his career during the dead puck era (~97). The game modernized and teams started playing way more systematic than they did in the past. Factoring all those aspects, that's why Lidstrom is the clear #2 for me.

Also let's not disregard the fact that Bourque never won a cup in Boston (or Team Canada) regardless of him playing on some insanely strong teams (1st place finishing teams).

NHLPA Player Poll 2017-18

The bold makes me wonder if you even know who Raymond Bourque is. One of the rares who beat Lidstrom at this, especially consistency. 20 years of consistency. Lidstrom was great too, but it's not close in terms of consistency.

 

[JJ68]

Jagr did nothing against Lemieux or Gretzky. In fact if Lemieux never retired or missed seasons due to health jagr has no art rosses. Not a bad thing as no player in history besides Gretzky could compete with Lemieux. Just saying

So then what's your point? Lets play it this way then....if Jagr couldnt win a art with a healthy mario around(which would be true of any other player, ever) then nobody other then Maro or Wayne would beat a healthy and prime Jagr for the art.

Guys like Ovi, sid etc are lucky they never played in a time when a guy like Jagr was competing at his best.

 

[TT1]

The bold makes me wonder if you even know who Raymond Bourque is. One of the rares who beat Lidstrom at this, especially consistency. 20 years of consistency. Lidstrom can't say the same.

Game to game consistency, Bourque had way more ups and downs than Lidstrom did during a season. Lidstrom was captain consistency throughout the year.

 

[MadLuke]

you cannot rate players from a different position so far apart like pure offensive machine to goalie.

Jagr is the greatest euro forward of all time, by far.

Hasek the greatest Goalie, by far.

Lidstrom the greatest Dman by far.

Pure offensive machine versus goaltender could do well, it is relatively "easy" to evaluate how much a goaltender saved goal versus the average league starter, and how many goal created by the elite pure offensive machine versus the average league first liner.

Player that bring more than pure offensive or pure defensive (like a goaltender will mostly do) get harder to compare than those 2.

Jagr was so strong on the puck that he could have brought more than pure offense too, he bring good puck possession (the best defense there is).

 

[Evincar]

1. Jagr
2. Hasek

3. Lidstrom

 

[Kunta Kinte]

At their prime, Jagr was the best. Even if Hasek carried a deadbeat team. Jagr was just on another level imo.

 

[authentic]

At their prime, Jagr was the best. Even if Hasek carried a deadbeat team. Jagr was just on another level imo.

Kind of an odd opinion considering Hasek won more Hart trophies than Jagr as a goalie and they both were in their prime and healthy at the same time. Hasek is like widely considered to be the best goalie of all-time and Jagr is usually barely considered a top 10 forward if at all, even though I think he is.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

If Bourque is #3, it's behind Harvey, not Lidstrom. Bourque has had a much better career than Lidstrom.

A.) I disagree
B.) But even if you want to argue Bourque over Lidstrom or Lidstrom over Bouque it is a close argument and much better doesn't seem to apply. Lidstrom won every single award Bourque did, he also dominated over Pronger as a contemporary which has to be a pretty big deal, he forced guys to win Hart Trophies to beat him for the Norris. Lidstrom is a little unlucky that his career didn't stretch into heavy analytics because he controlled a game and dominated the pace of the game being played like few players I have ever seen. He controlled that, it is what all of his peers talked about when he retired, he didn't need to over handle the puck and he would always make the right reads that was the beauty of Lidstrom. Bourque is one of the most gifted offensive players in league history, not just D-man but players period. They are at the same level, I will never pick a D-man not named Orr over Lidstrom but I have that bias and I know what he did for my team. But the argument cannot be much better for anyone, it dismisses how incredible Lidstrom was.

 

[MadLuke]

At their prime, Jagr was the best. Even if Hasek carried a deadbeat team. Jagr was just on another level imo.

NHL & WHA Single Season Leaders and Records for Goals Saved Above Average | Hockey-Reference.com

In Hasek peak (96-97 to 98-99) domination he was preventing around 54 goals a year (he was quite dominant and constant).

During the DPE 54 goals was really a lot of goal.

Jagr had the best season around that time in term of goal creation, is big 1998-1999, played 17 more games than hasek score 127 points, 20 more points than anyone else. Around 46 goals created, 8 less than the goal Hasek prevented in 17 more games.

Those estimate are from perfect, but not many offensive machine player were a level above the impact Hasek had on is team during those 3 year's imo. Gretzky, Lemieux.

 

[SEALBound]

I think it's a 3 way tie between Jagr, Hasek, and Lidstrom.

Forward, dman, goalie...this.

Pick one? Jagr

 

[Son Goku]

Forward, dman, goalie...this.

Pick one? Jagr

If I had to pick one it's the dominator. Mind boggling goalie. Stole some harts from jags too.

 

[MadLuke]

this thread

NHLPA Player Poll 2017-18

If the pool was made like I think it was made, with player's answering by naming only one defenceman and not a top 5 or something like that, there is a bit of an issue here. The opinion of the players that do not consider Bobby Orr to be the best defenceman of all time risk of being a strange one, you will have player's choosing a defenceman they actually played against over those they didn't putting Lidstrom with a big advantage to go numbers 2 (not many will pick a defenceman from the past not name Orr for the number 1),