You can do all of those things while still putting more emphasis on the offensive side of the game. Hustling and backchecking doesn't make a guy especially good defensively either. Lots of guys do that but don't have the positioning or play the style needed to be any more than average defensively. I think you must think that I am saying that Yzerman was 100% a bad defensive player who only cared about the offensive side of the game. I don't believe I ever said that, I said he focused more on scoring because his team needed him to. I still think that is an accurate description.
Your whole position has been debunked twice already. So what exactly are you trying to prove?
We get it, Yzerman wasn’t THAT great defensively for your liking. You know why and what position he was in to HAVE to be a main offensive threat.....so why are you arguing his defensive capabilities back then?
Again, I have no idea why you think your correct on what you say. He “didn’t care” about defense? He was “100% bad defensively”? Both statements have been proven wrong....why you continue to argue them is beyond me.
And like I said, its rose coloured glasses. You are remembering it the way you choose to. I watched the games in the 1980's as well, and while Yzerman may have been just as capable defensively in the 80's, he certainly didn't play that way all of the time. It's like Gretzky - he was always capable of being an elite scorer, but he figured out along the way that he was more valuable to his teammates as an elite set up man so he chose to play differently. Yzerman was the same. In his younger years, he focused a lot on his offense, you can tell if you go back and re-watch the games. Perhaps he wasn't "incapable" of playing defensive hockey, but that certainly wasn't his primary role as often, his team needed him to score. There certainly weren't many others who could do it consistently without him basically gift wrapping goals for them at that time.
we remember Yzerman being one of the best offensive players during his prime, carrying around some really bad wing teams, and being among the best in the league during all this.....you are the one who seems to think that means he was “bad” defensively because he chose to be the teams top offensive threat, which again, he had no choice in the end. He was the reason that team stayed afloat.
Your Gretzky reference has nothing to do with what your arguing. Gretzky was always a top set up guy, his goal scoring totals continued to soar as the years went on...:and even before that he was an elite scorer regardless. He didn’t “choose”, he is the best playmaker to ever play.....that was his main weapon...his anticipation, vision, possession, and ability to know where his teammates were going to be. He was one of the best goal scorers ever as well, but his playmaking was beyond comprehension.
You can’t claim that he didn’t care about the defensive side of things(knowing the context), and that he was 100% bad defensively, only to then say that it wasn’t like he wasn’t capable of that he had a choice......yes, his primary role was to score....because he was the only one who could lead that team offensively at the time. Notice how things shifted later on?