Is Jagr the Greatest Right Wing of All Time?

[smokingwriter]

Given both his dominance at his peak and his incredible longevity, do you believe Jagr now has a case to be considered the best RW in the history of the NHL?

If you forget about the era he played in, Bossy's peak was better.

Howe played longer.

Lafleur was arguably more dominant during a six year period and didn't benefit from Lemieux.

Howe played longer and was more dominant relative to his peers during his peak. Gordon was more consistent, was dominant across multiple generations, and was still playing at an elite level far into his 40s. I think Jagr should be considered one of the top 5-6 forwards of all-time, but there's daylight between him and Howe. Jagr is better than Bossy and Lafleur, though; not sure why they're even in this conversation.

 

[smokingwriter]

Just asking, but frankly I'm surprised that nobody thinks it's even close. Howe played the majority of his career in a six team league. All other things being equal (I know they're not), Howe had much better odds of achieving some of the things pointed out in response than anyone of similar talent had later. For example, it's easier to finish Top 5 in scoring for 20 years when most of that time there are only 6 teams in the league. You're the leading scorer of Team X, you're likely in the Top 10 at the very least. Not so any more.
I tend to agree with the idea that he has a strong case for #2. And I feel like an idiot for leaving Richard out of my original post.

Just a thought, but do you consider the possibility that leading your team in scoring is actually rather more difficult in a 6-team league? During his time in Detroit, Howe played with Hall of Fame players such as Lindsay, Delvecchio, Sid Abel, and (though this was during the era in which the league "ballooned" to 12 teams)Frank Mahovlich. The concentration of talent is quite high in a top-end pro league that might only have around 90-100 skaters in it (I think this is also true for even a 12-team league that might have just under 200 skaters). For instance, I think I read somewhere that, at least in the early 1950s, NHL teams were only permitted to dress 15 skaters at home and 16 at home; even as late as 1960-61, I think I came across a stat which noted that NHL teams could only have 16 skaters in uniform (plus goaltenders). Just as it's hard for Crosby and Malkin to lap one another because they vie for ice-time (and share PP time) on the same team, so it would be true for many great stars of the late 1940s and 1950s: Howe would be passing the puck to the likes of Lindsay and Abel on the PP, just as Beliveau would have to share the ice with a host of greats in Montreal. If you're all being put in a position to put up points, then leading your team becomes a more challenging proposition (I would argue) than putting up points in a rather watered-down league in which elite talent is spread across more clubs and you have relatively fewer top-end performers on any one roster.

I really don't understand why there is this curious need to downplay or diminish what Howe accomplished in his career. A young Howe played with an outstanding left winger and first-ballot hall-of-famer in Ted Lindsay; he also played with Sid Abel, who was an established star at the same time as Howe was just getting started (and Abel would eventually find his way into the hall of fame, too). It's not going to be easy for any young player to vault ahead of those players as the perennial scoring leader and go-to guy. Yes, it helps to play with guys like that, but that's mitigated by virtue of the fact that he's going up against the best the rest of the league (just 5 teams) can muster each night. In short, he's playing in a league with the aforementioned total of 90-100 skaters versus one today that had nearly 1000 this past season.

Furthermore, why would it necessarily follow that it would automatically be easier to finish top-5 in league scoring every year in a smaller league when young talent is constantly coming into the league and pushing the established players? Do people today honestly think that teams didn't bother looking for promising young talent in the Six-Team Era simply because the league was smaller? The game and league stopped for no one during that period (as today), and there was always a pipeline of talent brimming with future stars who could be break-out performers of their own; Howe was at the top of his sport for an entire generation despite this. Plus, the Detroit teams he played on during the last half of that run were not great teams and opposing clubs understood that stopping Howe meant stopping Detroit; obviously, given his venomous elbows and stick work (and skill), Howe wasn't stopped too often, and rarely for very long. I don't agree with the proposition that somehow what Howe did was "easier" because he did it in a 6-team league as opposed to a 30+-team league. I am not a huge Howe fan, but he is a cut above Jagr. He is certainly not a huge cut above, by any means, but the difference is there and should be clear to anyone who looks at their respective resumes.

 

[smokingwriter]

Possibly. I just want to see him in the conversation. Makarov had comparable prime and peak and was a much more well-rounded player.

Personally, I have Makarov ahead of Lafleur on my all-time list. It's very close between Jagr and Makarov. Jagr was the more imposing physical talent (size and strength and explosive skating ability), but a team might win more with Makarov as its starring winger. It's amazing how Makarov and Fetisov get downplayed on all-time lists. I believe Makarov was the best winger in the world from 1981 to 1987 (maybe even a bit longer, since Mario was really a center at heart), and he was the second-best forward in the world for about half-a-dozen years, too. Yeah, he played in a great situation, but he exploited that situation to the full and was arguably the engine of the Soviet teams of the 1980s.

 

[The Panther]

I think a good way to look at elite players who played with other elite players is how much the one guy "dominated" (if that's the right word) his teammates.

To take the obvious example, Gretzky played with a handful of elite players from c.1981-82 to 1988, but was he ever overshadowed or out-competed by a peer? The answer is no. That is, he was outscoring other Hall of Fame forwards by 80 points per season and winning the Hart trophy every year. When young Gretzky went to Toronto and 100 media sources requested interviews each time, they only wanted Gretzky -- not Messier, Kurri, Coffey (certainly not Anderson or Fuhr, lol!).

It's similar with players like Orr and Lemieux. But I think it's different with players like Makarov, Jagr, Lafleur, Crosby and others. There were times when they were out-competed by teammates for attention and major awards.

And the Gordie Howe baiting really must stop. The era had less teams so it was easier? What?? If anything, the exactly opposite is logically true. In Howe's salad days, the six NHL teams dressed, collectively, about 90-95 players, basically all Canadian. And then the professional minor Leagues dressed hundreds who couldn't make the NHL. So, take today's pool of Canadian players (say, 375 or something) and sift them until the best 90 players are left. In other words, 285 of today's Canadian NHL players weren't good enough to play in Howe's day. Yet against that competition level, Howe dominated the 1949 to 1955 period, and then kept up at the very top until 1969.

 

[daver]

It's similar with players like Orr and Lemieux. But I think it's different with players like Makarov, Jagr, Lafleur, Crosby and others. There were times when they were out-competed by teammates for attention and major awards.

Shouldn't the names and the quality of seasons by the "competition" be relevant?

On the one hand, only Wayne would have challenged Mario in scoring in 95/96. Saying Jagr got "outcompeted" that year is misleading. On the other hand, it is hard to completely separate Jagr's production that year from Mario's influence. IMO, Jagr proved unequivocally in 98/99 and 99/00, that he could produce at a rate sans Mario that was among the best all-time other than Wayne, Mario and Howe but I don't think you afford him the same credit in 95/96 or give him 100% credit for his Art Ross win in 00/01.

This is why Howe has the superior resume of high end seasons vs. Jagr even after you get past Howe's clearly better peak season.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Howe played longer and was more dominant relative to his peers during his peak. Gordon was more consistent, was dominant across multiple generations, and was still playing at an elite level far into his 40s. I think Jagr should be considered one of the top 5-6 forwards of all-time, but there's daylight between him and Howe. Jagr is better than Bossy and Lafleur, though; not sure why they're even in this conversation.

Lafleur and Bossy were front and center offensive leaders on dynasty, 4 consecutive SC championship teams. Jagr never was.

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

Lafleur and Bossy were front and center offensive leaders on dynasty, 4 consecutive SC championship teams. Jagr never was.

Bossy scored .762 goals for every game he played. Short career or not, this record will stand. Only Lemieux comes close.
I am not saying he is #1, but he is being undersold here. Best RW for the decade he played.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Bossy scored .762 goals for every game he played. Short career or not, this record will stand. Only Lemieux comes close.
I am not saying he is #1, but he is being undersold here. Best RW for the decade he played.

for perspective, Gretzky's best 10 year stretch was .822 gpg, or only 0.06 gpg more than Bossy's career # (10 year career)

 

[madinsomniac]

I think a good way to look at elite players who played with other elite players is how much the one guy "dominated" (if that's the right word) his teammates.

To take the obvious example, Gretzky played with a handful of elite players from c.1981-82 to 1988, but was he ever overshadowed or out-competed by a peer? The answer is no. That is, he was outscoring other Hall of Fame forwards by 80 points per season and winning the Hart trophy every year. When young Gretzky went to Toronto and 100 media sources requested interviews each time, they only wanted Gretzky -- not Messier, Kurri, Coffey (certainly not Anderson or Fuhr, lol!).

It's similar with players like Orr and Lemieux. But I think it's different with players like Makarov, Jagr, Lafleur, Crosby and others. There were times when they were out-competed by teammates for attention and major awards.

And the Gordie Howe baiting really must stop. The era had less teams so it was easier? What?? If anything, the exactly opposite is logically true. In Howe's salad days, the six NHL teams dressed, collectively, about 90-95 players, basically all Canadian. And then the professional minor Leagues dressed hundreds who couldn't make the NHL. So, take today's pool of Canadian players (say, 375 or something) and sift them until the best 90 players are left. In other words, 285 of today's Canadian NHL players weren't good enough to play in Howe's day. Yet against that competition level, Howe dominated the 1949 to 1955 period, and then kept up at the very top until 1969.

This is dramatically flawed..... less people played hockey back in the day so there were fewer high end talents overall... the best 90 in that era might have a dozen who could play hockey in this era... its true of all sports... there are a few high end supertalents that translate, but the reality is before the 60's making a living as a professional sports player wasnt lucritive enough and most people found other careers.

think of it this way... if you wanted to find the best 90 players looking in a pool of 10,000 is not as good as looking in a pool of 1,000,000. the best 90 out of the 1,000,000 is probably going to be better than the 90 out of the 10,000...

Jagr was probably the most talented RW ever... but he didnt have the overall impact others did... its one of those things that really needs to factor in perspective and definitions of what "the best ever" means to an individual... he might be... he may not... he certainly isnt in the same tier as Gretzky, lemieux, and Orr... but none of them were wingers

 

[Big Phil]

Given both his dominance at his peak and his incredible longevity, do you believe Jagr now has a case to be considered the best RW in the history of the NHL?

If you forget about the era he played in, Bossy's peak was better.

Howe played longer.

Lafleur was arguably more dominant during a six year period and didn't benefit from Lemieux.

Not a chance considering Mr. Hockey will always hold this position. Even today, what all-time player will challenge Howe and take his place let alone right wingers?

You can certainly make a respectable comparison with Jagr and Richard though. It is a weird comparison, because while most of us give Jagr the edge in the regular season it is Richard that blows the doors open in the playoffs. Hard to go against a guy who still sits near the top of the playoff goals list despite playing in a low scoring two-round playoff format. Throw in the better all around game Richard had and you really have to rely on the dominant offense for Jagr to beat him. There is always that nagging feeling that Jagr could mail it in from time to time. True or not, it still is there.

I can listen to a debate between those two but Jagr would lose badly vs. Howe.

However, he has surpassed the likes of Bossy and Lafleur by now. Neither of them did anything in their 30s. Jagr did and I heard he was pretty darn good in his 20s too.

 

[BenchBrawl]

You can certainly make a respectable comparison with Jagr and Richard though. It is a weird comparison, because while most of us give Jagr the edge in the regular season it is Richard that blows the doors open in the playoffs. Hard to go against a guy who still sits near the top of the playoff goals list despite playing in a low scoring two-round playoff format. Throw in the better all around game Richard had and you really have to rely on the dominant offense for Jagr to beat him. There is always that nagging feeling that Jagr could mail it in from time to time. True or not, it still is there.

To add, Richard's longevity as a top player is probably better.

Jagr usually wins that battle but not against Richard or Howe.

14 consecutive 1st or 2nd AST is impressive, playing against peak Gordie Howe for half of it.

 

[Big Phil]

To add, Richard's longevity as a top player is probably better.

Jagr usually wins that battle but not against Richard or Howe.

Yeah, quite possibly. Richard was good right from start to finish. His first full season he is a 2nd team all-star. Then I would say a top flight player right up until 1958. Only until his last two seasons does he start to falter. In reality there is little that separates a 1945 or a 1955 Richard. While Jagr was doing things in his 40s I don't think it adds a whole lot to his legacy to be toiling around in his mid 40s and being waived off of a non-playoff team.

 

[Fantomas]

Richard is a playoff legend. Jagr is a playoff dud. 'Nuff said.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Yeah, quite possibly. Richard was good right from start to finish. His first full season he is a 2nd team all-star. Then I would say a top flight player right up until 1958. Only until his last two seasons does he start to falter. In reality there is little that separates a 1945 or a 1955 Richard. While Jagr was doing things in his 40s I don't think it adds a whole lot to his legacy to be toiling around in his mid 40s and being waived off of a non-playoff team.

Yeah, anything Jagr did after 06-07 is meaningless in the comparison.Then you have the Washington years and Richard comes out on top easily in longevity as a top player.

I'd say it's about 14 years for Richard vs. 10 or 11 for Jagr.Plus some extra credit to Richard for doing it consecutively and not wasting golden years questionably like Jagr did in Washington.

 

[Big Phil]

Yeah, anything Jagr did after 06-07 is meaningless in the comparison.Then you have the Washington years and Richard comes out on top easily in longevity as a top player.

I'd say it's about 14 years for Richard vs. 10 or 11 for Jagr.Plus some extra credit to Richard for doing it consecutively and not wasting golden years questionably like Jagr did in Washington.

Yeah, that's the thing, Richard was consistent. That Washington disaster hurt him. He's 29 and coming off a 121 point season and he goes to the wrong team. Then he leaves after 2008 to play overseas. He had an alright year with 71 points and maybe he wasn't ever going to top that anyway but he had a pretty good playoff before bowing out to Pittsburgh.

The only thing you have to ask yourself is do his Art Ross years make up for it? Richard didn't have a year like 1999 or 2000. Jagr did.

It at least makes it interesting. Of course, you've got the physical side of Richard that Jagr didn't have.

Richard is a playoff legend. Jagr is a playoff dud. 'Nuff said.

I wouldn't call him a "dud" by any means. He has 201 playoff points. Crosby and Malkin are likely to pass him but the truth is no one outside of the Oiler dynasty has more. He just doesn't have that year where he carried a non-deserving team on his back past the 2nd round. Can you blame him? Even the Rocket only had 3 Cups up until 1956.

 

[Sentinel]

Bossy scored .762 goals for every game he played. Short career or not, this record will stand. Only Lemieux comes close.
I am not saying he is #1, but he is being undersold here. Best RW for the decade he played.

Makarov was better and for longer.

 

[The Panther]

Richard is a playoff legend.

That's exactly right.

Jagr is a playoff dud.

That's completely false.

 

[Fantomas]

Jagr in '01 is one of the worst playoff performances I've seen from a superstar player.

 

[bobbyking]

Yeah, anything Jagr did after 06-07 is meaningless in the comparison.Then you have the Washington years and Richard comes out on top easily in longevity as a top player.

I'd say it's about 14 years for Richard vs. 10 or 11 for Jagr.Plus some extra credit to Richard for doing it consecutively and not wasting golden years questionably like Jagr did in Washington.

There was a measly 2 rounds in Richards era

 

[bobbyking]

Jagr in '01 is one of the worst playoff performances I've seen from a superstar player.

Is it worse then crosby against Boston

 

[Artorius Horus T]

No one has mentioned Teemu Selänne....quite odd.

 

[Pominville Knows]

you're leaving out that in the smaller league, the competition level was that much higher.

For example, 4 out of the 5 goalies Howe routinely faced are in the HOF.

The smaller rosters meant every line and every D pair was loaded. Imagine the rosters if you shrunk the 2018 NHL down to only 6 teams.

It would be like an Average World Cup of Hockey roster.
What is that right now, Team USA? I know they are gaining big time but i think it would be a disservice to say Finland when Team Canada leaves loads of All-Star merited players at home at these events.

 

[Neutrinos]

I think you could make a case that Jagr is the best offensive RW in history, but Howe is clearly the "greatest"

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I think you could make a case that Jagr is the best offensive RW in history, but Howe is clearly the "greatest"

It would be a pretty poor case.

 

[quoipourquoi]

No one has mentioned Teemu Selänne....quite odd.

It took a decade to get most of HOH to think he was better than Johnny Bucyk; let’s not aim for Gordie Howe and Jaromir Jagr.