Jeremy Roenick
- Thread starter Danny46
- Start date
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
very good player who gets underrated because of his final 5 seasons being weak.
although his "hanging on" seasons are no worse than what Marleau has put up
although his "hanging on" seasons are no worse than what Marleau has put up
ted2019
History of Hockey
Never a great player. Only 2x in the top 10 in points and 2x in goals. Very good player who hung on way too long.
tony d
Registered User
Say Hey Kid
Bathory
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,795
- 16,535
if the implication here is that today's players are boring because they are too smart... well that would be a first
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Skilled player. Maybe should have been able to make a little more out of his talent than he did. A major injury hurt his cause.
Not a good analyst...also not his job, he's just there to stir the pot, but he does so hamhandedly...doesn't have a great feel for the game itself, but like Don Cherry, does hit on some interesting points from time to time despite obviously not having a great mind for the tactical nuance of the game or the evaluation of players on the whole...
Not a good analyst...also not his job, he's just there to stir the pot, but he does so hamhandedly...doesn't have a great feel for the game itself, but like Don Cherry, does hit on some interesting points from time to time despite obviously not having a great mind for the tactical nuance of the game or the evaluation of players on the whole...
mrhockey193195
Registered User
By my count, he's the last player (until McDavid likely does it this year) to have three consecutive 100 point seasons.
At the end of 93-94, I'm fairly confident that most people would have said that Roenick would have the better career than Sakic. JR leveled off after that (albeit as a very good 1C), and Sakic took the next step.
At the end of 93-94, I'm fairly confident that most people would have said that Roenick would have the better career than Sakic. JR leveled off after that (albeit as a very good 1C), and Sakic took the next step.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Neutrinos
Registered User
- Sep 23, 2016
- 8,604
- 3,610
Seems like a guy who's trying too hard to showoff that "great personality" that so many fans crave in their sports heroes
Personally, I find him more annoying than entertaining
Personally, I find him more annoying than entertaining
The Panther
Registered User
Kaners Bald Spot
Registered User
The fact that Roenick and Turgeon have 1200+ and 1300+ pts respectively and aren't in the HHOF is one of hockey's greatest mysteries. Mike Modano is in and he has 1374. Does he get special treatment because he's American? Is there any American player that has more points than Roenick and fewer than Modano?
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,535
- 5,169
Both Roenick and Modano are american in this example, making it a bit hard to follow.
Kaners Bald Spot
Registered User
Yes. I was talking about Modano having roughly 50 more points than Turgeon. Why does Modano get in and Turgeon doesn't?
Also I was wondering if Roenick is 2nd on the All-Time American-born scoring list.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,535
- 5,169
NHL.com let you filter by nationality;
http://www.nhl.com/stats/player?agg...r=gamesPlayed,gte,1&sort=points,goals,assists
It depend if you consider Brett Hull American or Canadian, but it seem to be
Hull
Modano (first US born)
Housley
Then Roenick.
has for Modano in versus Turgeon, highest US born scorer is a nice trivia that go to is favor for sure, but also
- Cup
- First team all star
- International play
- More Selke and Hart vote than Turgeon
- Face of a Franchise
The Panther
Registered User
That "face of a franchise" aspect is meaningful, to me, when looking at potential Hall of Famers. That's one reason (not the only reason) that guys like Mats Sundin and probably Alfredsson are clear Hall of Famers to me, whereas guys like Roenick and Lecavalier are not.
To be fair, Roenick had kind of bad-luck in terms of his profile. His youthful scoring peak was on an "O6" franchise that was peaking at the time, and then he sort of played out the rest of his prime in obscurity in Phoenix. And by the time he got to Philly he had maybe lost a step, and put in only three years there. It creates this collective memory that he crashed and burned quickly from his young days in Chicago, but really the "Phoenix obscurity" + "Dead-puck era" kind of did the job for him.
All the same, he was not (to my memory) ever the "face of a franchise" after about 1996 at the latest, when he was just 26 (and in '95 and '96 he missed some games and was outscored by old-men like Nicholls and Chelios).
To be fair, Roenick had kind of bad-luck in terms of his profile. His youthful scoring peak was on an "O6" franchise that was peaking at the time, and then he sort of played out the rest of his prime in obscurity in Phoenix. And by the time he got to Philly he had maybe lost a step, and put in only three years there. It creates this collective memory that he crashed and burned quickly from his young days in Chicago, but really the "Phoenix obscurity" + "Dead-puck era" kind of did the job for him.
All the same, he was not (to my memory) ever the "face of a franchise" after about 1996 at the latest, when he was just 26 (and in '95 and '96 he missed some games and was outscored by old-men like Nicholls and Chelios).
ted2019
History of Hockey
McGarnagle
Yes.
- Aug 5, 2017
- 28,805
- 38,321
I feel like if he just stayed in one place for an extended period of time, he'd be better remembered and perhaps a HOFer.
In the second half of his career, he hopped around from team to team. Phoenix, Philly, LA, Phoenix again, finally SJ. The deepest he ever took any of those teams was Philly's 2004 run.
In the second half of his career, he hopped around from team to team. Phoenix, Philly, LA, Phoenix again, finally SJ. The deepest he ever took any of those teams was Philly's 2004 run.
Hobnobs
Pinko
- Nov 29, 2011
- 8,907
- 2,265
A very good regular season player. Narcissist in every shape and form. Never his fault. Always found someone to blame losses on. Didn't score a point in a philly playoff run and blamed the goalie. Overrated by a few. Never really elite. Mostly a leader for underachieving teams. Has never won anything. He has no awards, no championships, no cups, nothing.
Thats Roenick.
Thats Roenick.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,535
- 5,169
Not even 90-91 to 93-94 ?
#3 in goal with 190, only Hull& Robitaille were ahead during that time frame, #6 in point those 4 season with 411 points ahead of Sakic & Gilmour
Marotte Marauder
Registered User
- Aug 10, 2008
- 8,587
- 2,442
As a Hawk fan before, during and after Roenick, I always wished we had Modano.
