Kucherov vs Peter Forsberg

[NigerianNightmare]

It's good to see Forsberg finally getting some well deserved and some hugely overrated feedback in this exciting thread.

Shall we start a thread about periodically superstellar Sergei Fedorov aka Federov aka Fyodorov.

When in good mood, Sergei would have both peak Forsberg and peak Kucherov for breakfast, with Gretzky and Yzerman sitting at the next table enjoying their kale and whispering: Gretzky - "Look at Sergei. He's the most dominant player I've ever seen"; Yzerman - "Yes Wayne. He's better than me".

 

[CanadienShark]

Forsberg. Not far off offensively and just an absolute machine all around - would be a worthy Selke winner and Art Ross contender year in, year out. And I'm one of Kucherov's biggest fans.

 

[sr edler]

Add in the fact forsberg didn’t play the second half of the 2001 cup winning AVS so Colorado won without forsberg…

Forsberg was the MVP of the 2nd round 7 games Kings series, and if he no-shows there, or if he's just average or absent, Colorado are very likely bounced as Sakic (I think injury problems himself) had a very weak series and the Kings (who had ousted the Red Wings in the 1st round) were in Cinderella mode. Without Forsberg doing usual Forsberg things against the Kings, then no Stanley Cup for the 2001 Colorado Avalanche.

That's an interesting thing to say about a guy with a career high of 30 goals.

30 regular season goals (in fairly low scoring environments) is very good for a primarily playmaking C who constantly makes his wingers (whether it's Owen Nolan, Milan Hejduk or Simon Gagné) score at a 50 goals clip.

When it actually mattered more, in the playoffs, Forsberg upped his goal scoring clip, out of necessity. That's the mark of a great player. Someone who's not limited by tougher circumstances or surroundings.

Forsberg was a physical possession monster who combined Kuznetsov's zone-entering game with Tom Wilson like physicality and Bäckström's playmaking. But why oh why would you need such elements on a hockey team? All you really need on a successful hockey team is someone who stands in the circle and pots one-timers, right?

 

[sdf]

Maybe the difference is that you actualy enjoed forsberg's game and highlights, and kucherov... he's just putting up points

 

[centipede2233]

Forsberg was the MVP of the 2nd round 7 games Kings series, and if he no-shows there, or if he's just average or absent, Colorado are very likely bounced as Sakic (I think injury problems himself) had a very weak series and the Kings (who had ousted the Red Wings in the 1st round) were in Cinderella mode. Without Forsberg doing usual Forsberg things against the Kings, then no Stanley Cup for the 2001 Colorado Avalanche.


30 regular season goals (in fairly low scoring environments) is very good for a primarily playmaking C who constantly makes his wingers (whether it's Owen Nolan, Milan Hejduk or Simon Gagné) score at a 50 goals clip.

When it actually mattered more, in the playoffs, Forsberg upped his goal scoring clip, out of necessity. That's the mark of a great player. Someone who's not limited by tougher circumstances or surroundings.

Forsberg was a physical possession monster who combined Kuznetsov's zone-entering game with Tom Wilson like physicality and Bäckström's playmaking. But why oh why would you need such elements on a hockey team? All you really need on a successful hockey team is someone who stands in the circle and pots one-timers, right?

And LA traded rob blake to Colorado that year to, and got hosed in that deal when Adam deadmarsh who was the main piece going back to LA retired 2 seasons later at the age of 28. That rob blake trade won it for them.

 

[Oneiro]

Even adjusting for eras, this is a good poll. Nice one OP.

I can't really decide. I don't think it's very obvious either way.

 

[sr edler]

This Peter Forsberg and hfboards so nah not really.

Forsberg was a three time 1st team all-star at C, just as many times as Sakic and more than Lindros and Fedorov combined, so someone outside of this board thought he was okay too.

This "Forsberg really wasn't a dominant player, it's just a silly narrative created by phony fanboys on a message board" thing some people are doing is really kinda boring in itself.

That said Kucherov is also a phenomenal player, and with Hedman clearly one of the two skaters really driving that team. As soon as Stamkos and Point are put with Kucherov they go bananas offensively. The difference with Forsberg though is that Forsberg wasn't just a scorer, he had a pretty nasty physical edge to his game (ask Nieuwendyk) and controlled the 200-foot game way more than Kuch.

I remember being in the States during the 98–99 season and caught some clips at a restaurant of Forsberg against the Blackhawks. It looked like as if he was toying with Japan in the World Juniors.

 

[Mickey Marner]

Tbh, Kucherov doesn't even have much of an offensive edge. 2016-17 to present Kucherov has a pts/gp of 1.33 in the regular season and 1.25 in the playoffs. Forsberg's career pts/gp is 1.25 in the regular season and 1.13 in the playoffs. So, if you cherrypick Kucherov's best years, he's about 7% better offensively than Forsberg's career average. Kucherov is a better goal-scorer, but just about everything else favours Forsberg.

 

[authentic]

"Different times, different cars..." as Bernie Ecclestone said

I’m not sure it was different enough that Forsberg wouldn’t still be right up there, but in general McDavid is a clearly better offensive player, in the regular season atleast.

 

[authentic]

Tbh, Kucherov doesn't even have much of an offensive edge. 2016-17 to present Kucherov has a pts/gp of 1.33 in the regular season and 1.25 in the playoffs. Forsberg's career pts/gp is 1.25 in the regular season and 1.13 in the playoffs. So, if you cherrypick Kucherov's best years, he's about 7% better offensively than Forsberg's career average. Kucherov is a better goal-scorer, but just about everything else favours Forsberg.

If you take Forsberg’s best 5 year stretch he’s easily on the same level offensively in the regular season and even better in the playoffs.

 

[authentic]

Forsberg was the MVP of the 2nd round 7 games Kings series, and if he no-shows there, or if he's just average or absent, Colorado are very likely bounced as Sakic (I think injury problems himself) had a very weak series and the Kings (who had ousted the Red Wings in the 1st round) were in Cinderella mode. Without Forsberg doing usual Forsberg things against the Kings, then no Stanley Cup for the 2001 Colorado Avalanche.


30 regular season goals (in fairly low scoring environments) is very good for a primarily playmaking C who constantly makes his wingers (whether it's Owen Nolan, Milan Hejduk or Simon Gagné) score at a 50 goals clip.

When it actually mattered more, in the playoffs, Forsberg upped his goal scoring clip, out of necessity. That's the mark of a great player. Someone who's not limited by tougher circumstances or surroundings.

Forsberg was a physical possession monster who combined Kuznetsov's zone-entering game with Tom Wilson like physicality and Bäckström's playmaking. But why oh why would you need such elements on a hockey team? All you really need on a successful hockey team is someone who stands in the circle and pots one-timers, right?

Lol it’s sort of funny the stark contrast Ovechkin will have over Forsberg in career rankings compared to how good these players actually were (of course because durability is a massive thing in Ovechkin’s favour). Outside of Ovechkin’s 3 season peak, which I’d argue Forsberg was atleast on the same level as him from 2002-05 on a per game basis, Forsberg was a comfortably better player similar to Crosby outside of their peak seasons. Forsberg literally never had a subpar playoff performance until his very last season on one leg.

 

[Crossfire Hurricane]

Lol it’s sort of funny the stark contrast Ovechkin will have over Forsberg in career rankings compared to how good these players actually were (of course because durability is a massive thing in Ovechkin’s favour). Outside of Ovechkin’s 3 season peak, which I’d argue Forsberg was atleast on the same level as him from 2002-05 on a per game basis, Forsberg was a comfortably better player similar to Crosby outside of their peak seasons. Forsberg literally never had a subpar playoff performance until his very last season on one leg.

Outside of 79-94, I would argue that Forsberg was even better than Gretzky.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Lol it’s sort of funny the stark contrast Ovechkin will have over Forsberg in career rankings compared to how good these players actually were (of course because durability is a massive thing in Ovechkin’s favour). Outside of Ovechkin’s 3 season peak, which I’d argue Forsberg was atleast on the same level as him from 2002-05 on a per game basis, Forsberg was a comfortably better player similar to Crosby outside of their peak seasons. Forsberg literally never had a subpar playoff performance until his very last season on one leg.

Forsberg was on a team that was so good it won a cup without him.

And LOL @ pretending he was as good as Ovie. Forsberg was the best player in the world for 1 season.

 

[authentic]

Forsberg was on a team that was so good it won a cup without him.

And LOL @ pretending he was as good as Ovie. Forsberg was the best player in the world for 1 season.

We already know if a player doesn’t play 70 games in a season it doesn’t count according to you but that’s not how I judge players and it isn’t how anyone should if they’re looking at the ability of said players, yes Ovechkin brought much more value to his team overall and will rank 30-40 places higher on most all time lists so you don’t have much to worry about there.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Kucherov is probably a slightly better offensive player, mainly due to his PP prowess and better goalscoring ability. Forsberg was a much better defensive and possession player though and combined with his similar offense, was a clearly better 5v5 player. I don’t think Kucherov’s PP ability makes up for that

Pretty much where I'm at with it.

Kucherov has a pair of seriously beastly playoff runs though.

 

[authentic]

Outside of 79-94, I would argue that Forsberg was even better than Gretzky.

I would go a bit earlier than that but I’d still take 2002-05 Forsberg on my team over 2007-10 Ovechkin if he was healthy.

 

[K Fleur]

I think right now I’d take Peter Forsberg on my NBA team over Steph Curry.

 

[sr edler]

Forsberg was on a team that was so good it won a cup without him.

You can't play in the 3rd and 4th rounds in the playoffs if you're already bounced in the 2nd round. An Ovi fan should know this, quite candidly. Colorado without Forsberg in the tight 2001 Kings series (where Sakic underperformed heavily, I think due to some injury problems of his own) doesn't advance further than the 2nd round.

All players who won Cups played on strong teams. 80s Oils had such a strong group they won another Cup in 1990 after Gretzky had left. Pittsburgh during the 1992 playoffs finished off the Presidents' Trophy New York Rangers without Lemieux for a majority of the series after Graves had broken his hand, due to Jagr and Francis stepping up. None of Crosby or Ovechkin ever won a Cup without being outscored by one of their teammates. Et cetera.

 

[PensandCaps]

Kucherov very underrated here. I get alot of people have nostalgia bias, but it's literally a toss up.

 

[geoo9]

dont know much about historical stats but did Foppa outscored such a taliented generation of players in whole decade at playoffs like kucherov did ?
in 10 years he outscored whole generationals , alltimers nextones etc - did he have such opponents to outscore in his era?

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Floppa was certainly the better diver.

 

[SillyRabbit]

dont know much about historical stats but did Foppa outscored such a taliented generation of players in whole decade at playoffs like kucherov did ?
in 10 years he outscored whole generationals , alltimers nextones etc - did he have such opponents to outscore in his era?

Forsberg was second in playoff points between 1995-2005.

The only player with more points was Sakic.

Forsberg played 14 fewer games than Sakic and scored 9 fewer points. His PPG was 1.15 to Sakic’s 1.10.

This period covers the entire dead puck era where scoring was very hard to come by yet he still scored at an incredible pace during the playoffs.

Who are the players he had to outscore? Yzerman, Fedorov, Lidstrom, Jagr and Hull.

 

[sdf]

The drunk guy

 

[Lemonlimey]

Floppa was certainly the better diver.

BS narrative about the toughest man I’ve ever seen play hockey. Were there some? Sure. But every single highlight you see (and there honestly aren’t enough on YouTube) are preceded by 1-3 blatant penalties today’s players go down on at the drop of a hat.

Post automatically merged: May 1, 2022

Outside of 79-94, I would argue that Forsberg was even better than Gretzky.

this gentlemen gets it

 

[spiny norman]

Lopsided result.