Is Mario Lemieux a bit overrated?

[Rhiessan71]

We covered the part in bold with how the Karlssonless Sens are doing this year.

If you really think that Wayne ahd more overall impact the last 3 years, aside from injuires than Wayne did in his 89-91 3 year span then you are only looking at one side of the equation which in offense.

PROVE IT THEN!!!

Wayne's ESGF to ESGA is mediocre over that 3 year span period.

Hey, I'm the first one to give more credit to ES points and play than I do to PP points but at some point one has to acknowledge when a player produces as many ES points as Gretz and Mario did combined with their PP abilities, especially Mario's PP ability.
One has to conclude that PP points at that volume are winning games on their own.

9 times out of 10 the difference in winning and losing a playoff series is dependent on special teams, that's a fact.
Matching or holding a team at even strength while winning the special teams battle is a very long and time honoured practice in the playoffs.

Things like the focus on offensive stats is how guys like Wayne and Mario can get over rated, thanks for proving my point.

When one is talking about a 10 point difference like it was between Gretz and Feds in '94 is one thing but when you have a guy like Gretz or Mario lapping 99% of the field offensively, producing at a rate double and more than all but a very small handful of players, even outside of their peaks...yes, you're damned right the focus is going to be on offensive stats.
That kind of insane production overcomes any defensive lapses rather easily IMO.

And again, defensive play is not just about back checking. It involves forechecking and puck possession too.
Maybe Gretz and Mario weren't the most ardent backcheckers but puck possession and forechecking...they were masters at both.

Dats didn't win his Selke's just because he was a good backchecker, he won them because he has very good puck possession skills and is a terror on the forecheck.

So you can keep on spouting about Crosby's backchecking all you want. The reality is that in the puck possession and forechecking departments, he is NOT in either of Gretzky's or Lemieux's class.
This is evidenced quite clearly in Gretzky's and Lemieux's ridiculous SH production over the years.

Gretzky GP-1487 SHG-73 SHP-149
Lemieux GP-915 SHG-49 SHP-71

Crosby GP-470 SHG-3 SHP-8

 

[Hardyvan123]

PROVE IT THEN!!!



Hey, I'm the first one to give more credit to ES points and play than I do to PP points but at some point one has to acknowledge when a player produces as many ES points as Gretz and Mario did combined with their PP abilities, especially Mario's PP ability.
One has to conclude that PP points at that volume are winning games on their own.

Dats has in the age 28-30 line a plus 111 while playing heavy defensive minutes at ES.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

We all know about Wayne's offense, here is how he stacks up on that LA team ages 28-30.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Wayne doesn't really stand out, for two way play at ES on those Kings teams and it's not like he was playing heavy defensive minutes either.

I wonder if there is any age where you think Dats has a better season than Wayne does? I mean really your arguments work in fantasy hockey pools and scoring points but it ignores the reality of the NHL.

[/QUOTE]9 times out of 10 the difference in winning and losing a playoff series is dependent on special teams, that's a fact.
Matching or holding a team at even strength while winning the special teams battle is a very long and time honoured practice in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

That's all great and I have been focusing on Wayne and Dat's in 3 year blocks 28-30 and 31-33 for the regular season but it's not like Wayne's overall play, not just offensive stats, give him an edge over Dats in the playoffs either.

When one is talking about a 10 point difference like it was between Gretz and Feds in '94 is one thing but when you have a guy like Gretz or Mario lapping 99% of the field offensively, producing at a rate double and more than all but a very small handful of players, even outside of their peaks...yes, you're damned right the focus is going to be on offensive stats.
That kind of insane production overcomes any defensive lapses rather easily IMO.

Once again that's true if both Wayne and Mario have the team setting to do this in, which Wayne had more of and had better success but by the age of 28 these things weren't true any more for Wayne.

And again, defensive play is not just about back checking. It involves forechecking and puck possession too.
Maybe Gretz and Mario weren't the most ardent backcheckers but puck possession and forechecking...they were masters at both.

Puck Possession is an offensive thing not a defensive one to most people. Even there is the time blocks comparing Wayne and Dats, Wayne doesn't win out at ES, where one would measure puck possession. for Mario the decline from 27-28 is even more steep but age 28 is an injury year.

Mario ages 29 and 30 is still elite offensively, and especially on the PP but as an ES player he no longer was.

In 96 Mario's Pens were 1st in GF (362) and 20th in GA (284). Mario lead the league in scoring with 161 points but was a measly plus 10, despite a center like Francis more likely playing heavier defensive minutes.

Quite simply put Mario's 161 points doesn't make up for that plus 10 ranking and still keep him as an elite overall player IMO.

In 97 his ES play is a bit better but his "elite lapping the field days" are over with 122 points.

This is a classic case how Mario is over rated IMO.

Dats didn't win his Selke's just because he was a good backchecker, he won them because he has very good puck possession skills and is a terror on the forecheck.

Dats can also be often found within 10 feet of his own goalie on the defensive coverage, it's a total picture for him.

His giveaway-takeaway ratio and faceoff play also helps him.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Dats has in the age 28-30 line a plus 111 while playing heavy defensive minutes at ES.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

We all know about Wayne's offense, here is how he stacks up on that LA team ages 28-30.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Wayne doesn't really stand out, for two way play at ES on those Kings teams and it's not like he was playing heavy defensive minutes either.

So what? Prove that Dats' 2-way play won more games than Gretzky's or Mario's offensive game.
JUST PROVE IT!!! With more than just weak +/- garbage.
You say Gretzky's play doesn't stand out on those Kings team. Maybe not in +/- but he sure as hell stands out in points doesn't he.
Guess what, neither does Dats on those Wings teams in the stats you just presented. Lidstrom is right there with him in +/- and Zetter is right there with him in points.

I wonder if there is any age where you think Dats has a better season than Wayne does? I mean really your arguments work in fantasy hockey pools and scoring points but it ignores the reality of the NHL.

Sure, I could take Dats over Wayne in 89/90 and after '91.
I would take Dats over Mario aged 38 and up.

That's all great and I have been focusing on Wayne and Dat's in 3 year blocks 28-30 and 31-33 for the regular season but it's not like Wayne's overall play, not just offensive stats, give him an edge over Dats in the playoffs either.

Are you honestly trying to imply that Wayne's LA teams were as good overall as Dat's Wing teams?
Those Wing teams could function quite well without Dats. Those King teams for the time frame mentioned did not function well without Gretzky or even without a 100% Gretzky in 89/90.

Once again that's true if both Wayne and Mario have the team setting to do this in, which Wayne had more of and had better success but by the age of 28 these things weren't true any more for Wayne.

PROVE IT!!!
Please show us how Wayne and Mario didn't have success.
Compared to who exactly??? Please tell us all who these players are that succeeded to a greater degree than Wayne and Mario on lesser teams.
Because all I see you doing is comparing Wayne and Mario against themselves and then calling it lacking on their part.
It's ********!

Puck Possession is an offensive thing not a defensive one to most people. Even there is the time blocks comparing Wayne and Dats, Wayne doesn't win out at ES, where one would measure puck possession. for Mario the decline from 27-28 is even more steep but age 28 is an injury year.

If by most people, you mean uneducated ones, then yes, you're right. Please tell me why then that the top defensively aclaimed coaches like Bowman, Hitchcock and Babcock preach puck possession as a defensive tactic?
Honestly dude, could please do me a favour and sign up for some volunteer work in Junior hockey. Just be a towel boy, bus driver or something, anything that gets you a chance to regularly be in the dressing room and see practices from ice level. PLEASE!

And what are you talking about, Wayne's 90/91 is ahead of Dats peak season overall quite easily.
Gretz is +30 and he outscores Dats by a large margin both at ES and special teams.

Mario ages 29 and 30 is still elite offensively, and especially on the PP but as an ES player he no longer was.

He held his own at ES, he wasn't a - player and he completely dominated on special teams.
Being a +10 means he wasn't losing games at even strength and you can bet your ass that his point per game on the PP sure as hell was winning games.

In 96 Mario's Pens were 1st in GF (362) and 20th in GA (284). Mario lead the league in scoring with 161 points but was a measly plus 10, despite a center like Francis more likely playing heavier defensive minutes.

Quite simply put Mario's 161 points doesn't make up for that plus 10 ranking and still keep him as an elite overall player IMO.

Not only is your opinion wrong but it's also complete jibberish.
Mario's not an Elite player because he was only +10 HAHAHAHA!!!

So by that same logic, that means when Crosby won the Art Ross, Hart and Pearson in 06/07, he wasn't Elite in your eyes because he was only +10?

In 97 his ES play is a bit better but his "elite lapping the field days" are over with 122 points.

Yeah, lets cherry pick his last year before he retires. I'm shocked!!!

This is a classic case how Mario is over rated IMO.

No, this is a classic case of arguing with someone that, IMO, doesn't seem to have a clue what they're talking about. That's just my opinion though.

Dats can also be often found within 10 feet of his own goalie on the defensive coverage, it's a total picture for him.

Back on the backchecking thing again eh.

His giveaway-takeaway ratio and faceoff play also helps him.

Of course it does and it's just a shame we don't have those stats for Wayne and Mario. THAT would open some eyes I'm sure.

 

[shazariahl]

Dats has in the age 28-30 line a plus 111 while playing heavy defensive minutes at ES.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

We all know about Wayne's offense, here is how he stacks up on that LA team ages 28-30.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Wayne doesn't really stand out, for two way play at ES on those Kings teams and it's not like he was playing heavy defensive minutes either.

I wonder if there is any age where you think Dats has a better season than Wayne does? I mean really your arguments work in fantasy hockey pools and scoring points but it ignores the reality of the NHL.

9 times out of 10 the difference in winning and losing a playoff series is dependent on special teams, that's a fact.
Matching or holding a team at even strength while winning the special teams battle is a very long and time honoured practice in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

That's all great and I have been focusing on Wayne and Dat's in 3 year blocks 28-30 and 31-33 for the regular season but it's not like Wayne's overall play, not just offensive stats, give him an edge over Dats in the playoffs either.





Once again that's true if both Wayne and Mario have the team setting to do this in, which Wayne had more of and had better success but by the age of 28 these things weren't true any more for Wayne.



Puck Possession is an offensive thing not a defensive one to most people. Even there is the time blocks comparing Wayne and Dats, Wayne doesn't win out at ES, where one would measure puck possession. for Mario the decline from 27-28 is even more steep but age 28 is an injury year.

Mario ages 29 and 30 is still elite offensively, and especially on the PP but as an ES player he no longer was.

In 96 Mario's Pens were 1st in GF (362) and 20th in GA (284). Mario lead the league in scoring with 161 points but was a measly plus 10, despite a center like Francis more likely playing heavier defensive minutes.

Quite simply put Mario's 161 points doesn't make up for that plus 10 ranking and still keep him as an elite overall player IMO.

In 97 his ES play is a bit better but his "elite lapping the field days" are over with 122 points.

This is a classic case how Mario is over rated IMO.



Dats can also be often found within 10 feet of his own goalie on the defensive coverage, it's a total picture for him.

His giveaway-takeaway ratio and faceoff play also helps him.[/QUOTE]

+/- is still a team stat. Dats plays for a team that has never missed the playoffs in two decades and has won several championships over that time. Gretzky was playing for a mediocre team that had never won a championship ever, and wouldn't during his tenure either. It shouldn't be surprising that the guy on the good team has a good +/- while the guy on the struggling team often had a poor +/-.

If you are going to say that +/- is somehow indicative of defensive skill, then you have to concede that Gretzky was one of the greatest defensive forwards ever, based on his career and single season +/- numbers. He also led the league in that stat multiple times. You can't ignore the good years and pretend it was the team, then focus on his bad years and say that was all him and not the team.

The fact that one guy can lead the league in +/- four times and set records for the highest +/- of any forward ever (both single season and career) and yet go on to be a - player for most the last 8 years of his career should tell you how heavily influenced that stat is by the team you play for. Trying to compare it between teams AND eras is absolutely pointless. Even more pointless than comparing +/- is usually, I mean. I'm not sure why you are still trying.

 

[madinsomniac]

If anyone is argueing that any player in this era is even close to mario or gretzky in value, they really need to watch tapes of the 80's and 90's... No one, not Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Datsyuk, Zetterburg, Stamkos, or any other player playing now, has the utter dominance those guys brought. You are talking about two of the greatest goal scorers, and playmakers ever. Their dominance directly led to the clutch and grab era, because they were pretty much unstoppable. Yes they would often play lax in the defensive zone at times, but when they were playing defensively there was no one better there either. Go watch lemieux penalty kill, which he did often, or when he went into shutdown mode in a close game or the playoffs... They were both every bit as good at every aspect of the game when they wanted to be, its just that their teams could afford to play run and gun, because they were that much better than anyone else. No one in this era is close.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I don't understand how anyone could have watched Mario play and come to the conclusion that he is "overrated" based on something like +/-. A lot of this conversation is just nuts.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

I don't understand how anyone could have watched Mario play and come to the conclusion that he is "overrated" based on something like +/-. A lot of this conversation is just nuts.

Tell me about it. It just blows my mind: This is the first time in about 20 years I've seen someone try to make an argument about an individual player based on +/-. I mean really, people have known for ages that +/- is a team stat that's basically meaningless in regards to individual players.

 

[Sentinel]

Tell me about it. It just blows my mind: This is the first time in about 20 years I've seen someone try to make an argument about an individual player based on +/-. I mean really, people have known for ages that +/- is a team stat that's basically meaningless in regards to individual players.

Yeah, but it's not like Mario played on a crappy team! Penguins were one of the best teams in the league, year after year! His +10 in 96 is a little weird.

 

[KickHimPedro]

"Quite simply put Mario's 161 points doesn't make up for that plus 10 ranking and still keep him as an elite overall player IMO."

Hardyvan123, How can you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you post stuff like this?

Mario won the hart and scoring title, but you would argue that he wasn't even "elite" simply because of a +\- stat line. WOW! I guess his teammate Nedved's +37 tells us who the true great "overall" player was.

What a joke. The problem with making statements like that is it totally invalidates any other valid points you may come up with. The name Hardyvan123 is permanently tarnished by that post.

 

[pdd]

Dats has in the age 28-30 line a plus 111 while playing heavy defensive minutes at ES.

Zetterberg was doing the defensive heavy lifting in 2009 while Dats played with Hossa, and Z was always the defensive presence on their line until it was separated in 2007-08, and he did the defensive chores then too. Those Selkes should be his.

In 96 Mario's Pens were 1st in GF (362) and 20th in GA (284). Mario lead the league in scoring with 161 points but was a measly plus 10, despite a center like Francis more likely playing heavier defensive minutes.

Francis was second to Fedorov in Selke voting that season, and Jagr (who flanked Francis) led the league in ES points.

Quite simply put Mario's 161 points doesn't make up for that plus 10 ranking and still keep him as an elite overall player IMO.

This is a ridiculous position. Lemieux was second in ESP/60 at 1.04, and third in total ESP with 73 in 70 (Jagr had 95 in 82 for 1.16, Lindros had 75 in 73 for 1.03) and was one of only three players to break the PPG mark on ESP alone (Lindros and Jagr as the other two, obviously). Fourth was Mogilny (71 in 79, 0.90), fifth was Forsberg (70 in 82, 0.85), and sixth was Selke-winner Fedorov (65 in 78, 0.83). Hart finalist Messier was tenth in total ESP, and eighth in ESP/60 (58 in 74, 0.78). Selke finalist Francis was seventh (63 in 77, 0.82), and Selke finalist Yzerman was 15th in ESP and 16th in ESP/60 (50 in 80, 0.63).

In 97 his ES play is a bit better but his "elite lapping the field days" are over with 122 points.

Lemieux scored 79 ESP in 76 games, for 1.04 ESP/60. The exact same rate he scored the previous season. The difference was his power play scoring. Also different in 1996-97? Jaromir Jagr missed 19 games. In 1995-96, the power play unit was Lemieux/Francis/Jagr. With Jagr missing a quarter of the season, that unit obviously can't be run. So obviously losing a PP linemate of that quality will significantly reduce his production. Even the greatest players of all-time are affected by the loss of elite players from their lines/PP units.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yeah, but it's not like Mario played on a crappy team! Penguins were one of the best teams in the league, year after year! His +10 in 96 is a little weird.

Heh and Zubov was +28, his career high btw.
And that was the early Zubov, the one that you couldn't even call average defensively.
It's a meaningless stat most of the time.

That Pens team relied on its special teams to win games and Mario was the reason.
The only reason they didn't go to the Cup Final was because the Panthers stayed out of the box and Johnny Van played out of his mind.

The Pens led the League in PP goals with [email protected]% and shorthanded goals with 18.
Mario produced 79 of those 109 goals (remember he missed 10 games as well) and 9 shorthanded.

 

[pdd]

Mario ages 29 and 30 is still elite offensively, and especially on the PP but as an ES player he no longer was.

I haven't yet done the tables for years prior to 87-88 (this is a condensed version of what I put together for the Yzerman v. Sakic thread) but here are some ESP/60 leaders so you can get an idea of how well Lemieux compares to other players. I've made sure to include the leaders, relevant players close to Lemieux, and Lemieux's most "career competitors" in Gretzky, Messier, and Yzerman.

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1987-88|Wayne Gretzky|C|64|91|1.42
1987-88|Mario Lemieux|C|77|74|0.96
1987-88|Steve Yzerman|C|64|61|0.95
1987-88|Mark Messier|C|77|70|0.91
1987-88|Pat LaFontaine|C|75|61|0.81
1987-88|Jari Kurri|R|80|61|0.76
1987-88|Paul Coffey|D|46|21|0.46

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1988-89|Mario Lemieux|C|76|102|1.34
1988-89|Wayne Gretzky|C|78|100|1.28
1988-89|Steve Yzerman|C|80|101|1.26
1988-89|Bernie Nicholls|C|79|87|1.10
1988-89|Rob Brown|R|68|68|1.00
1988-89|Luc Robitaille|L|78|74|0.95
1988-89|Jari Kurri|R|76|65|0.86
1988-89|Jimmy Carson|C|80|65|0.81
1988-89|Mark Messier|C|72|46|0.64

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1989-90|Wayne Gretzky|C|73|96|1.32
1989-90|Mario Lemieux|C|59|71|1.20
1989-90|Steve Yzerman|C|79|79|1.00
1989-90|Mark Messier|C|79|71|0.90
1989-90|Brett Hull|R|80|69|0.86
1989-90|Pat LaFontaine|C|74|63|0.85
1989-90|Luc Robitaille|L|80|67|0.84

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1990-91|Wayne Gretzky|C|78|103|1.32
1990-91|Adam Oates|C|61|73|1.20
1990-91|Mario Lemieux|C|26|31|1.19
1990-91|Brett Hull|R|78|86|1.10
1990-91|Cam Neely|R|69|61|0.88
1990-91|Luc Robitaille|L|76|68|0.89
1990-91|Joe Sakic|C|80|71|0.89
1990-91|Steve Yzerman|C|80|68|0.85
1990-91|Alexander Mogilny|F|62|51|0.82
1990-91|Mark Messier|C|53|42|0.79

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1991-92|Mario Lemieux|C|64|74|1.16
1991-92|Kevin Stevens|L|80|81|1.01
1991-92|Brett Hull|R|73|64|0.88
1991-92|Adam Oates (STL)|C|54|46|0.85
1991-92|Wayne Gretzky|C|74|63|0.85
1991-92|Steve Yzerman|C|79|66|0.84
1991-92|Mark Messier|C|79|65|0.82

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1992-93|Mario Lemieux|C|60|96|1.60
1992-93|Steve Yzerman|C|84|87|1.04
1992-93|Alexander Mogilny|R|77|79|1.03
1992-93|Pat LaFontaine|C|84|83|0.99
1992-93|Teemu Selanne|R|84|83|0.99
1992-93|Kevin Stevens|L|72|67|0.93
1992-93|Adam Oates|C|84|78|0.93
1992-93|Luc Robitaille|L|84|76|0.90
1992-93|Jaromir Jagr|R|81|71|0.88
1992-93|Wayne Gretzky|C|45|38|0.84
1992-93|Pavel Bure|R|83|68|0.82
1992-93|Joe Juneau|L|84|65|0.77
1992-93|Mark Messier|C|75|57|0.76
1992-93|Doug Gilmour|C|83|63|0.76

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1993-94|Eric Lindros|C|65|67|1.03
1993-94|Mario Lemieux|C|22|22|1.00
1993-94|Sergei Fedorov|C|82|81|0.99
1993-94|Cam Neely|R|49|47|0.96
1993-94|Steve Yzerman|C|58|52|0.90
1993-94|Jaromir Jagr|R|80|70|0.88
1993-94|Adam Oates|C|77|62|0.81
1993-94|Wayne Gretzky|C|81|62|0.77
1993-94|Pavel Bure|R|76|58|0.76
1993-94|Doug Gilmour|C|83|60|0.72
1993-94|Mark Messier|C|76|39|0.51

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1995-96|Jaromir Jagr|R|82|95|1.16
1995-96|Mario Lemieux|F|70|73|1.04
1995-96|Eric Lindros|C|73|75|1.03
1995-96|Alexander Mogilny|R|79|71|0.90
1995-96|Peter Forsberg|C|82|70|0.85
1995-96|Sergei Fedorov|C|78|65|0.83
1995-96|Ron Francis|C|77|63|0.82
1995-96|Mark Messier|C|74|58|0.78
1995-96|Wayne Gretzky|C|80|54|0.68
1995-96|Steve Yzerman|C|80|50|0.63

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
1996-97|Eric Lindros|C|52|56|1.10
1996-97|Jaromir Jagr|R|63|67|1.06
1996-97|Mario Lemieux|C|76|79|1.04
1996-97|John Leclair|L|82|81|0.99
1996-97|Teemu Selanne|R|78|76|0.97
1996-97|Paul Kariya|L|69|61|0.88
1996-97|Peter Forsberg|C|65|53|0.82
1996-97|Wayne Gretzky|C|82|66|0.80
1996-97|Mark Messier|C|71|55|0.77
1996-97|Steve Yzerman|C|81|57|0.70

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
2000-01|Mario Lemieux|C|43|43|1.00
2000-01|Jaromir Jagr|R|81|78|0.96
2000-01|Joe Sakic|C|82|66|0.80
2000-01|Steve Yzerman|C|54|31|0.57
2000-01|Mark Messier|C|82|32|0.39

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
2001-02|Alexei Kovalev|F|67|53|0.79
2001-02|Jaromir Jagr|R|69|54|0.78
2001-02|Jarome Iginla|R|82|64|0.78
2001-02|Todd Bertuzzi|R|72|55|0.76
2001-02|Markus Naslund|L|81|59|0.73
2001-02|Mario Lemieux|C|24|17|0.71
2001-02|Steve Yzerman|C|52|24|0.46
2001-02|Mark Messier|C|41|14|0.34

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
2002-03|Peter Forsberg|F|75|73|0.97
2002-03|Joe Thornton|C|77|65|0.84
2002-03|Milan Hejduk|R|82|63|0.77
2002-03|Glen Murray|R|82|63|0.77
2002-03|Mario Lemieux|C|67|46|0.69
2002-03|Joe Sakic|C|58|39|0.67
2002-03|Markus Naslund|L|82|50|0.61
2002-03|Steve Yzerman|F|16|5|0.31
2002-03|Mark Messier|C|78|23|0.29

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
2003-04|Peter Forsberg|C|39|30|0.77
2003-04|Alex Tanguay|L|69|53|0.77
2003-04|Markus Naslund|L|78|58|0.74
2003-04|Joe Thornton|C|77|57|0.74
2003-04|Patrik Elias|L|82|57|0.70
2003-04|Mario Lemieux|C|5|10|0.50
2003-04|Mark Messier|C|76|35|0.46
2003-04|Steve Yzerman|F|75|33|0.44

Year|Player|Pos|GP|ESP|ESPPG
2005-06|Joe Thornton|C|81|72|0.89
2005-06|Jaromir Jagr|R|82|71|0.87
2005-06|Steve Yzerman|F|61|23|0.38
2005-06|Mario Lemieux|F|22|7|0.32

As you can see, Lemieux doesn't drop from the league leaders in ES offense until his mid-30s. Given that he often scored half or more than half of his points on the PP (Lemieux is arguably the greatest PP player ever), that's pretty significant with regards to overall domination; ES is the most important situation as it's the most common, but a guy who is insanely effective on the PP as well as being one of the league's top three ES scorers is extremely valuable.

 

[habsfanatics*]

I really can't believe this thread, yet again, has turned into this sideshow. Arguing Lemieux's effectiveness based on +/-. I heard some pretty ludicrous arguments before, but this one takes the cake.

Hardy, surely your position isn't this weak. Please tell me you have something else? You are making yourself look extremely foolish to everyone who has read it.

The mods should really put a halt on this Gibberish.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yeah, but it's not like Mario played on a crappy team! Penguins were one of the best teams in the league, year after year! His +10 in 96 is a little weird.

"A little weird" is a far cry from some of the things being argued here.

 

[Hardyvan123]

"Quite simply put Mario's 161 points doesn't make up for that plus 10 ranking and still keep him as an elite overall player IMO."

Hardyvan123, How can you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you post stuff like this?

Mario won the hart and scoring title, but you would argue that he wasn't even "elite" simply because of a +\- stat line. WOW! I guess his teammate Nedved's +37 tells us who the true great "overall" player was.

What a joke. The problem with making statements like that is it totally invalidates any other valid points you may come up with. The name Hardyvan123 is permanently tarnished by that post.

Sorry but if a player id dominating and is 10th on his team with a plus 10 and has an ESGF of 95 (on the PP it was 102) and an ESGA of 85, then yes he was extremely dominant on the PP, at even strength it's hard to make the argument that he was dominant in 96.

we use the term for Dmen in that teh great ones can play in all situations but really for Mario at ES in 96, is the ESGF/ESGA ratio of 95/85 domianant on a team that had 362 GF to 284 GA and nine other players on his team with a better plus/minus?

People say that plus/minus is meaningless and maybe evens strength play is to them, I won't call that assessment a joke but it is an incomplete assessment then, but to me it's all part of the equation of evaluating a NHL hockey player.

The focus on simple counting stats for Mario is over rating him, as is the comment that his offense always made up for his lack of defense.

In 96 and beyond this simply isn't the case.

In 96 it's fair to say that Mario was average, maybe slightly above average at ES and a monster on the PP.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I really can't believe this thread, yet again, has turned into this sideshow. Arguing Lemieux's effectiveness based on +/-. I heard some pretty ludicrous arguments before, but this one takes the cake.

Hardy, surely your position isn't this weak. Please tell me you have something else? You are making yourself look extremely foolish to everyone who has read it.

The mods should really put a halt on this Gibberish.

So play at ES doesn't count?

There sure is alot of focus on ES scoring, ie total points for, but a complete ignoring the ESGA like it was the other 5 guys on the ice to blame for all of Mario's ESGA.

Is this a fantasy hockey review of a discussion on a player overall game?

Just because Mario is a monster on the PP ion 96 doesn't negate his less than elite play at ES does it?

 

[Rhiessan71]

Sorry but if a player id dominating and is 10th on his team with a plus 10 and has an ESGF of 95 (on the PP it was 102) and an ESGA of 85, then yes he was extremely dominant on the PP, at even strength it's hard to make the argument that he was dominant in 96.

we use the term for Dmen in that teh great ones can play in all situations but really for Mario at ES in 96, is the ESGF/ESGA ratio of 95/85 domianant on a team that had 362 GF to 284 GA and nine other players on his team with a better plus/minus?

People say that plus/minus is meaningless and maybe evens strength play is to them, I won't call that assessment a joke but it is an incomplete assessment then, but to me it's all part of the equation of evaluating a NHL hockey player.

The focus on simple counting stats for Mario is over rating him, as is the comment that his offense always made up for his lack of defense.

In 96 and beyond this simply isn't the case.

In 96 it's fair to say that Mario was average, maybe slightly above average at ES and a monster on the PP.

Except your criteria for your entire line of reasoning had to do with a players ability to influence team wins.
Just how us how Mario‘s +10 and enormous special teams dominance didn‘t win games.

Give‘r!
We all look forward, especially me, to where the goal posts end up on this one

 

[Hardyvan123]

Except your criteria for your entire line of reasoning had to do with a players ability to influence team wins.
Just how us how Mario‘s +10 and enormous special teams dominance didn‘t win games.

Give‘r!
We all look forward, especially me, to where the goal posts end up on this one

Mario is a monster on the PP which scores 109 GF, Mario is on for 102 of them.

The league average for PP is 75 in 96.

Mario ESGF 95 ESGA 85 and plus 10 is 10th on his own team.

Does Pittsburgh scoring 34 more PP GF than the average team make up for average to slightly above average play at ES?

It's not like Mario was on the PP by himself either, some pretty good offensive players on that 96 Pens team.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Mario is a monster on the PP which scores 109 GF, Mario is on for 102 of them.

The league average for PP is 75 in 96.

Mario ESGF 95 ESGA 85 and plus 10 is 10th on his own team.

Does Pittsburgh scoring 34 more PP GF than the average team make up for average to slightly above average play at ES?

It's not like Mario was on the PP by himself either, some pretty good offensive players on that 96 Pens team.

So let me get this straight: When the Penguins score on the PP it's Mario's teammates that get the credit; but when the Penguins give up a goal at ES it's all on Mario? REALLY?!?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!

 

[Hardyvan123]

So let me get this straight: When the Penguins score on the PP it's Mario's teammates that get the credit; but when the Penguins give up a goal at ES it's all on Mario? REALLY?!?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!

Where exactly did I say that?

I start off the post with Mario was a monster on the PP, did i need to high lite it?

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Where exactly did I say that?

I start off the post with Mario was a monster on the PP, did i need to high lite it?

You're holding Mario's +/- against him which is an ES TEAM stat, while at the same time you're trying to mitigate his his role on the PP with statements like

It's not like Mario was on the PP by himself either, some pretty good offensive players on that 96 Pens team.

 

[Hardyvan123]

You're holding Mario's +/- against him which is an ES TEAM stat, while at the same time you're trying to mitigate his his role on the PP with statements like

Oh I missed where all the Pens where at plus 10 in 96.

The fact that some people can't even acknowledge the ES level on Marios' own team is pretty much proof that some people really do over rate him at certain points in his career.

 

[KickHimPedro]

So Hardy, why do you think Nedved was a + 37 that year?

A career minus player.

 

[Hardyvan123]

So Hardy, why do you think Nedved was a + 37 that year?

A career minus player.

Well knowing how Nedved played and looking at his ESGF ESGA stats for 96 (plus 37) and 97 (minus 2) it looks like he was on for a career his ESGF in 96 and probably played with some of the other 8 guys besides Mario that finished on the plus side of the plus/minus equation.

More stats and game tape would tell us more but no Nedved wasn't a defensive Juggernaut either.

 

[Killion]

Saint P, Rhiessan? Im about to come down on Hv's side in a wave of bricks from 10 stories high. A lot of gravity involved. You wanna keep it up? I can guaran-eff'n- t that Baby, the rain falls hard. Like the skys' over Pittsburgh, the post apocalyptic wasteland of a downtown Detroit. No mistake, I shall be relentless. Might wanna cut it out before it happens yes? Let. Him. Speak. His right. Your wrong.