Kane vs P.Forsberg

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Forsberg in every metric. Peak, prime, playoffs etc.

Kane is great - Forsberg was better.

Kane’s 2016 season is better than any Forsberg season. He also has superior scoring finishes

 

[22FUTON9]

Kane has the best season between them, better (and more) top 10 pt finishes, way better goal finishes (Forsberg never scored more than 30), better hart finishes and a better playoff resume (extra cup and smythe).

by that logic I guess Justin Williams is better than Forsberg. More cups/smythe and an extra 30 goal season!

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

by that logic I guess Justin Williams is better than Forsberg. More cups/smythe and an extra 30 goal season!

Does Justin Williams also have more top 10 pt finishes, better hart finishes and a 17pt ross win? It helps if you read the whole post!!

 

[shelf]

At this point it's close. By the end of Kanes career it won't be close.

 

[SotasicA]

Kane is overrated. More overrated than Toews.

 

[tucker3434]

Remove Lemieux and Jagr and Forsberg still never comes close to that margin of victory. Lemieux and Jagr were actually non factors the year Forsberg won the ross. Nice excuse though.

Nobody was winning an art ross except for those two for the first 6 years Forsberg played. One year Forsberg had 116 points, the highest single season total of either he or Kane, and Lemieux had 161.

Forsberg had a 1.3ppg while in Colorado which is a higher average that Kane had in his best year in ‘15-16. Injuries robbed him of putting up gaudy single-season totals. He didn’t even play a full 82 the year he won the Art Ross. Incidentally, scoring was nearly identical in 02-03 as it was in 15-16. Forsberg and Kane had the same number of points but Forsberg did it in less games. And Forsberg finished 4th for the Selke that year.

I could get on board with Kane having the better career. He’s already got more games played and points, and he isn’t done yet. But if I’m choosing between a healthy prime Forsberg, and a 15-16 Kane for a 7 game series, I don’t even think twice before choosing Forsberg.

 

[missionAvs]

I see this as one of those topics comparing a player that had a better peak over one that had a better career. This is not too dissimilar from polls comparing Foppa to Sakic. Foppa wins because he was the better player but there is no doubt Sakic and even Kane had/will have the better careers.

Edit: Also please stop comparing point totals between players that played in different eras. It's stupid which means that you're stupid if you do so.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Nobody was winning an art ross except for those two for the first 6 years Forsberg played. One year Forsberg had 116 points, the highest single season total of either he or Kane, and Lemieux had 161.

Forsberg had a 1.3ppg while in Colorado which is a higher average that Kane had in his best year in ‘15-16. Injuries robbed him of putting up gaudy single-season totals. He didn’t even play a full 82 the year he won the Art Ross. Incidentally, scoring was nearly identical in 02-03 as it was in 15-16. Forsberg and Kane had the same number of points but Forsberg did it in less games. And Forsberg finished 4th for the Selke that year.

I could get on board with Kane having the better career. He’s already got more games played and points, and he isn’t done yet. But if I’m choosing between a healthy prime Forsberg, and a 15-16 Kane for a 7 game series, I don’t even think twice before choosing Forsberg.

OK now go check the GPG and PPOs in 95/96. Also I don't really care if Lemieux got 161pts, like I said you can remove him. Forsberg finished 5th in pts that season so clearly Lemieux wasn't the reason he didn't win. He wasn't good enough, end of story.

They had the same # of pts sure. But Forsberg only had 8pts more than his closest team mate and a fluke 2pt ross win over Naslund. Kane had 30pts more than his closest team mate and a dominant 17pt ross win over prime Crosby. See the difference there?

 

[tucker3434]

OK now go check the GPG and PPOs in 95/96. Also I don't really care if Lemieux got 161pts, like I said you can remove him. Forsberg finished 5th in pts that season so clearly Lemieux wasn't the reason he didn't win. He wasn't good enough, end of story.

They had the same # of pts sure. But Forsberg only had 8pts more than his closest team mate and a fluke 2pt ross win over Naslund. Kane had 30pts more than his closest team mate and a dominant 17pt ross win over prime Crosby. See the difference there?

2 of the guys he was behind were Lemieux and Jagr. A third was one of their teammates who isn’t where he is without them. Then Sakic.

So what? Average scoring was the same. When Forsberg did it there was a wider bell curve, but they still outpaced average scoring by roughly the same amount (with Forsberg playing great D to boot). Why should Crosby having a down year make Kane’s season more impressive? That doesn’t make any sense.

And I’m still not sure why you’re calling his Art Ross a fluke. Forsberg played less games than anyone in the top 14 that year. Naslund had an extra 7 games that year and finished with 2 less points. A fluke would have been the other way around.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Imagine if Kane had Crosby's strength on the puck, was a center, and was a plus defensive player...that was essentially Peter Forsberg.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I love Kane but....Forsberg.

The 90s really had the greatest talent that the NHL has ever seen after the E. Europeans were allowed to come play in the NHL.

 

[GreatGonzo]

OK now go check the GPG and PPOs in 95/96. Also I don't really care if Lemieux got 161pts, like I said you can remove him. Forsberg finished 5th in pts that season so clearly Lemieux wasn't the reason he didn't win. He wasn't good enough, end of story.

They had the same # of pts sure. But Forsberg only had 8pts more than his closest team mate and a fluke 2pt ross win over Naslund. Kane had 30pts more than his closest team mate and a dominant 17pt ross win over prime Crosby. See the difference there?

How can you call his Art Ross winning season a “fluke” but still expected to have a valid opinion? It wasn’t a fluke, that was a healthy Forsberg. If he had remained healthy, he most likely walks away with the same kind of season in ‘04.

Forsberg was arguably the best offensive player and more dangerous player on the Avs. Sakic said himself, that teams would focus more on Forsberg, enabling him to have more room to play and do his thing. He also didn’t benefit from being deployed purely for offensive purposes like Kane has most of his career. He had Kane’s offensive talent while being better defensively.

Forsberg only played 70 or more games 5 times through out his career, and within those 5 times he has 5 top 10 finishes(4 in the top 5), a Hart, Art Ross, and 3x First team AS honors at center.

For Playoffs, of course Kane has the edge, but again Forsberg was no slouch either. He lead all playoffs in scoring twice without reaching the finals.

peak season I would give to Kane, playoffs Kane has the edge too, but everything in between is Forsberg. He didn’t have “fluke” seasons, he just was rarely healthy enough to put together better high end ones.

 

[TheGuiminator]

Forsberg was the better player but Kane had the better career

 

[ahmon]

2 excellent players. 2 of favourite players, 2 players who also performed extremely well in playoffs/tournaments/big moments.

Kane has better hands and a better shot. But Forsberg was obviously bigger and played a physical brand of hockey.

Can't go wrong with either.

 

[wetcoast]

At this point it's close. By the end of Kanes career it won't be close.

How long do you expect Kane to be elite for?

It's foppa right now and by quite a bit.

It is an interesting question though to see how much Kane can close the gap and if he can actually over take Foppa.

Foppa has an 12 year consecutive prime that simply blows Kane out of the water in this poll.

True Kane has the higher best peak season but his prime is quite a bit lower than foppa's

And as good as Kane has been in the playoffs Foppa has him beat there as well.

 

[newfy]

I think right now Kane has the best single season, Forsberg might have the best 3 season type peak and Kane has the better career. For a single series I might pick Forsberg but to build a team knowing what I know I pick Kane.

Stayin healthy is part of the game. You dont help your team by being out hurt. Forsbergs physical play and shiftiness led to a lot of his injuries. Take away that physical play and shiftiness and hes not the same player.

 

[bobbyking]

forsbergs playoffs push him over

 

[nowhereman]

I prefer Forsberg, as he was more physical and played a more complete 200ft game. I think Kane has the offensive edge but Forsberg's all-around games more than makes up for it, since they're quite close.

 

[newfy]

forsbergs playoffs push him over

Not sure how people can say this in a poll against Kane. Forsbergs playoffs are great, but Kane has an actual Smythe which Forsberg does not have. I would say thats a wash with Forsbergs 02 playoffs. Kane has years like 2010 as well which were ridiculous. Kane is second in playoff points the last decade with a generational Crosby barely having an edge on him, beating Malkin in less games played. Cup winning OT goal and a ridiculous amount of points in game 7s. I wouldnt have a huge issue with saying Forsberg might have a slight edge in the playoffs (its really close either way) but the classic vote for Forsberg over people because hes a playoff beast which is a classic on HF doesnt apply to this poll.

If theres anyone in the league right now with an argument as being as clutch as Forsberg come playoff time, Patrick Kane might have that title

 

[GreatGonzo]

Not sure how people can say this in a poll against Kane. Forsbergs playoffs are great, but Kane has an actual Smythe which Forsberg does not have. I would say thats a wash with Forsbergs 02 playoffs. Kane has years like 2010 as well which were ridiculous. Kane is second in playoff points the last decade with a generational Crosby barely having an edge on him, beating Malkin in less games played. Cup winning OT goal and a ridiculous amount of points in game 7s. I wouldnt have a huge issue with saying Forsberg might have a slight edge in the playoffs (its really close either way) but the classic vote for Forsberg over people because hes a playoff beast which is a classic on HF doesnt apply to this poll.

If theres anyone in the league right now with an argument as being as clutch as Forsberg come playoff time, Patrick Kane might have that title

This is true. Although Forsberg sits 2nd in playoff points from ‘95-‘04 while being first in assists, while sitting 10 points behind Sakic in 14 less games. He also sits 2nd in PPG behind Jagr who played 50 less games. He doesn’t have the hardware like Kane does but his production is actually better than Kane’s playoff wise while still leading all playoffs in scoring twice.

 

[newfy]

This is true. Although Forsberg sits 2nd in playoff points from ‘95-‘04 while being first in assists, while sitting 10 points behind Sakic in 14 less games. He also sits 2nd in PPG behind Jagr who played 50 less games. He doesn’t have the hardware like Kane does but his production is actually better than Kane’s playoff wise while still leading all playoffs in scoring twice.

Yeah that looks like a pretty comparable resume to me with Kane. Defnitely not one that anyone in this thread should be saying pushes Forsberg over the top on Kane. I also think Forsbergs competition at forward at that time wasnt close to what Kane went up against the last decade. The only legit all timer was Jagr like you said who has him beat in points per game. Jagr wasnt on teams that had playoff success really though. Especially around 2000-2004 the competition for forwards in the NHL wasnt anything special. The teams that were going on deep runs at that time had an aged Yzerman, Modano on a ridiculous defensive oriented team (and he wasnt the player Forsberg was) and New Jersey who was completely built in net and on D.

Compare that to Kane going directly against 2 generational players in their primes the entire decade basically with teams that went deep several times and it does take the shine off a bit from Forsberg leading the playoffs and things like that.

I think their playoffs are really comparable. I dont see how anyone could say one has enough of an edge to push the other over the top

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Forsberg doesn't have a smythe, has less cups and, the big one, his team won a cup without him playing 1 game of the 01 WCF or SCF. Still amazes me how some people try to say he was the main guy on those avs teams lol. Let me know if a team has ever won the cup with their main guy missing the CF and SCF. Not sure in what world his playoffs are better than Kane.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Yeah that looks like a pretty comparable resume to me with Kane. Defnitely not one that anyone in this thread should be saying pushes Forsberg over the top on Kane. I also think Forsbergs competition at forward at that time wasnt close to what Kane went up against the last decade. The only legit all timer was Jagr like you said who has him beat in points per game. Jagr wasnt on teams that had playoff success really though. Especially around 2000-2004 the competition for forwards in the NHL wasnt anything special. The teams that were going on deep runs at that time had an aged Yzerman, Modano on a ridiculous defensive oriented team (and he wasnt the player Forsberg was) and New Jersey who was completely built in net and on D.

Compare that to Kane going directly against 2 generational players in their primes the entire decade basically with teams that went deep several times and it does take the shine off a bit from Forsberg leading the playoffs and things like that.

I think their playoffs are really comparable. I dont see how anyone could say one has enough of an edge to push the other over the top

I wouldn’t say Kanes competition was the best of the best personally. He wasn’t in the running for being the best player until around 2015. He beat out Crosby in 2016 but he wasn’t really in the running outside of that year. 2017 and 2019 were monster seasons for him but I wouldn’t say he was in competition for being THE best, and like you said, the same goes for Forsberg....I think the difference is Forsberg had more competition at the center position and still secured 3 first team AS honors. But I feel both weren’t exactly year in and year out up there, but their consistency had them close to the pack.

Forsberg doesn't have a smythe, has less cups and, the big one, his team won a cup without him playing 1 game of the 01 WCF or SCF. Still amazes me how some people try to say he was the main guy on those avs teams lol. Let me know if a team has ever won the cup with their main guy missing the CF and SCF. Not sure in what world his playoffs are better than Kane.

Well Sakic said himself that teams focused more on shutting down Forsberg because even he felt he was more of a threat. I mean I wouldn’t say Kane was the MAIN guy in Chicago. It’s kind of contradicting. Kane played behind Toews a majority of those playoff runs, benefited from an offensive only deployment. His whole role was to score while Toews line had the shut down role. Both Forsberg and Kane benefited from playing behind someone but of course that doesn’t take away their impact.

I don’t think anyone is saying Forsberg has a better playoff resume or career but given their stats, I think it’s fair if someone would want to pick Forsberg for a playoff run. Same goes for Kane, both proven warriors in the post season, both had lead playoffs in scoring twice, both have had playoff success.

 

[CokenoPepsi]

Kane is overrated. More overrated than Toews.

Lol not a chance