Messier Vs Yzerman

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
Interesting to re-visit this (bumped) thread.... One thing I note is that a lot of people were earlier saying, as if it were a fait accompli, that Yzerman had the better peak/prime or whatever. My question is... Why is that?

They both had six 100+ points seasons (and Messier a seventh at 99). Messier won two Hart trophies to Yzerman's zero. We saw on about page 2 of this thread that in 1990, 12 times more NHL players would take Messier than Yzerman in a poll.

Why exactly did Yzerman have a better peak/prime?

I know I should maybe check out the HF Board rules etc Panther.....when a thread gets bumped what does that mean? Doesn't kinda become "old news" or something etc ....not something to post on because it's "too old?"
 

Killion

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
36,763
3,211
I know I should maybe check out the HF Board rules etc Panther.....when a thread gets bumped what does that mean? Doesn't kinda become "old news" or something etc ....not something to post on because it's "too old?"

"Bumped" as in brought forward from long ago, from the bottom of a page or several pages back... also known as "Necro Bump" if like 2-4-6yrs old or what have you.... There are no specific rules forbidding such... indeed, I & many others find it amusing at times as often its a thread that was deemed to be "all talked out" or "concluded". But in reality if its still open & on the menu you can post in it, play Experimental Archeologist or Necromancer, bring it back from the dead, bump it back onto the top of the menu board.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
The thing about Yzerman that he was a better scorer who then became a better defensive player than Messier. Twin peaks, if you will.
Was he really a better scorer, though? I kind of don't think he was.

Yzerman
3, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10

Messier
2, 3, 5, 5, 7, 10

What I'd say for Yzerman in this comparison is that c.1986 to 1991 he was the bread-and-butter of the Wings, and everyone else was just the salt and pepper. He had to carry a team's load at a young age for several years, which (for obvious reasons) Messier didn't, in Edmonton.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
30,844
13,628
It's been 6 years since 2012, how time flies.I was a new kid on the block.

Messier has been rising on my list for a few years.Ignoring the tricky Crosby case, I have Messier 5th greatest center of all-time, behind Morenz, Béliveau, Lemieux and Gretzky.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: quoipourquoi

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Five 50+ goal seasons vs. one. Plus Y was just a better shot than Messier.
Okay... but:

Yzerman
3, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10

Messier
2, 3, 5, 5, 7, 10

Yzerman certainly had a way better slapshot than Messier (well, Charlie Huddy probably had a better slapshot than Messier). But Messier had a better wrist-shot than Yzerman, I think. Better skater, too. Passing, they're about equal.

I certainly think Yzerman was the better goal-scorer in general. But was his peak/prime better offensively -- all things considered -- than Messier's? I dunno, I'd call it even.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,076
14,579
Okay... but:

Yzerman
3, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10

Messier
2, 3, 5, 5, 7, 10

Yzerman certainly had a way better slapshot than Messier (well, Charlie Huddy probably had a better slapshot than Messier). But Messier had a better wrist-shot than Yzerman, I think. Better skater, too. Passing, they're about equal.

I certainly think Yzerman was the better goal-scorer in general. But was his peak/prime better offensively -- all things considered -- than Messier's? I dunno, I'd call it even.

Scoring finishes don't always tell the whole story though.
Yzerman's highest point totals are: 155, 127, 137

Messier's highest point totals are: 129, 111, 107

Yzerman goal totals are: 65, 62, 58
Messier are: 50, 48, 47

Yeah i think it's fair to say Yzerman's peak/prime offensively was better than Messier.

Now if you want to throw in playoffs to try and tip the edge over to Messier....fine maybe. But in regular season, it's Yzerman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Scoring finishes don't always tell the whole story though.
Yzerman's highest point totals are: 155, 127, 137

Messier's highest point totals are: 129, 111, 107

Yzerman goal totals are: 65, 62, 58
Messier are: 50, 48, 47

Yeah i think it's fair to say Yzerman's peak/prime offensively was better than Messier.

Now if you want to throw in playoffs to try and tip the edge over to Messier....fine maybe. But in regular season, it's Yzerman.
Well, we've already determined that Yzerman (in prime) was the better goal-scorer. That's a done deal, I agree.

But about point totals, consider:

PPG 1987 to 1993 (Yzerman's peak):
1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Yzerman

PPG 1986 to 2000 (Yzerman's "extended" prime):
1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Lindros
4. Jagr
5. Selanne
6. Yzerman

**************************************
PPG 1986 to 1992 (Messier's peak):
1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Yzerman
4. Messier
(the diff. between Yzerman and Messier here is 0.08 PPG)

PPG 1982 to 1996 (Messier's "extended" prime):
1. Gretzky
2. Lemieux
3. Yzerman
4. Messier
(I'm discounting both Bossy and Lindros here as they don't have enough seasons inclusive)



So, again, very similar results over peak and extended periods. Yzerman did reach an offensive level briefly during about 1987-1989 that Messier never quite did, but then again Messier finished 2nd in scoring, which Yzerman never did, and Messier won two Hart trophies, which Yzerman never did.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,076
14,579
And raw point totals do?

Since scoring level changes from season to season, scoring finishes probably tell us more than 155 points vs 129 points does.

I think Raw point totals absolutely should hold a lot of importance. They played during the same years, why shouldn't we consider those?

It's one thing to adjust raw totals across eras, but from season to season i think it's fine to look at those.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,076
14,579
Well, we've already determined that Yzerman (in prime) was the better goal-scorer. That's a done deal, I agree.

But about point totals, consider:

PPG 1987 to 1993 (Yzerman's peak):
1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Yzerman

PPG 1986 to 2000 (Yzerman's "extended" prime):
1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Lindros
4. Jagr
5. Selanne
6. Yzerman

**************************************
PPG 1986 to 1992 (Messier's peak):
1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Yzerman
4. Messier
(the diff. between Yzerman and Messier here is 0.08 PPG)

PPG 1982 to 1996 (Messier's "extended" prime):
1. Gretzky
2. Lemieux
3. Yzerman
4. Messier
(I'm discounting both Bossy and Lindros here as they don't have enough seasons inclusive)



So, again, very similar results over peak and extended periods. Yzerman did reach an offensive level briefly during about 1987-1989 that Messier never quite did, but then again Messier finished 2nd in scoring, which Yzerman never did, and Messier won two Hart trophies, which Yzerman never did.

Your initial questioning was about Yzerman's peak/prime being offensively better than Messier. When I saw you say "peak/prime" I take that as the best 3-5 years or so.

Yzerman declined a lot offensively (or at least started playing more defensively minded) in the 90s. So sure - if you include those years too to bring his average down maybe Messier catches up. But when I think of Yzerman's prime offensive years i tend to look at 1988-1994. And I think those years are a clear step above Messier's best offensively (without playoffs )
 

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,538
4,911
I think Raw point totals absolutely should hold a lot of importance. They played during the same years, why shouldn't we consider those?

If they literally put those numbers up in the very same seasons, then yes. But then I'd would be helpful if you pointed this out specifically resp. made a direct comparison between those seasons to show that the difference wasn't that small when one was 2nd in scoring and the other 3rd.
 

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
"Bumped" as in brought forward from long ago, from the bottom of a page or several pages back... also known as "Necro Bump" if like 2-4-6yrs old or what have you.... There are no specific rules forbidding such... indeed, I & many others find it amusing at times as often its a thread that was deemed to be "all talked out" or "concluded". But in reality if its still open & on the menu you can post in it, play Experimental Archeologist or Necromancer, bring it back from the dead, bump it back onto the top of the menu board.

lol...play "Dr. Frankenstein" in a sense..."it's alive!!! it's alive!!!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killion

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
Okay... but:

Yzerman
3, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10

Messier
2, 3, 5, 5, 7, 10

Yzerman certainly had a way better slapshot than Messier (well, Charlie Huddy probably had a better slapshot than Messier). But Messier had a better wrist-shot than Yzerman, I think. Better skater, too. Passing, they're about equal.

I certainly think Yzerman was the better goal-scorer in general. But was his peak/prime better offensively -- all things considered -- than Messier's? I dunno, I'd call it even.

Offense-only, give it to Yzerman or he'd have almost nothing on Messier. We really need to consider the teams that they played for. Imagine switching the teams that they started their careers in. I'm sure you can see the same thing. Imagine Yzerman with Gretzky, Kurri, Anderson, and Coffey. I see some pretty gaudy numbers here. I know you like to say that having lots of scorers on one team doesn't always end up getting more points for the individuals, but I think that in this particular case it would have. Yzerman was a better passer than Messier, he just didn't have the guys to pass to during his early career.

Messier was obviously the more complete player. Better skater, better wrist-shot, better forechecker, better defender (for most of his career), more physical would already be wrong (as Yzerman wasn't even physical), and just plain scary. Better for Edmonton, as they already had Gretzky.
 

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
A couple of other hockey fans/posters (the homey Panther being one I believe) mentioned Moose as a better skater then Stevie Y......I don't know about that gang....pre knee-injury Stevie was more of the fun/flashy player....I think you have to be pretty good on skates to do that...Joey Kocur said his teammates nicknamed Yzerman "Silk" because he was such a smooth skater....The skating category has to be a checkmark to Stevie Y.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Offense-only, give it to Yzerman or he'd have almost nothing on Messier. We really need to consider the teams that they played for. Imagine switching the teams that they started their careers in. I'm sure you can see the same thing. Imagine Yzerman with Gretzky, Kurri, Anderson, and Coffey.
Just to nitpick, Messier finished 2nd in NHL scoring without Gretzky or Coffey on his team.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Your initial questioning was about Yzerman's peak/prime being offensively better than Messier. When I saw you say "peak/prime" I take that as the best 3-5 years or so.

Yzerman declined a lot offensively (or at least started playing more defensively minded) in the 90s. So sure - if you include those years too to bring his average down maybe Messier catches up. But when I think of Yzerman's prime offensive years i tend to look at 1988-1994. And I think those years are a clear step above Messier's best offensively (without playoffs )
I see where you're coming from.

I guess I will concede that Yzerman had a higher peak than Messier.

(It still seems odd to say that the guy who finished 2nd in scoring and won two Hart trophies in three years had a lower peak than the guy who did none of those things.)
 

ThreeLeftSkates

Registered User
Nov 20, 2008
4,937
1,994
[QUOTE="BenchBrawl, post: 144623021, member: 106885]"Messier has been rising on my list for a few years.Ignoring the tricky Crosby case, I have Messier 5th greatest center of all-time, behind Morenz, Béliveau, Lemieux and Gretzky.[/QUOTE]
You must be kidding, right?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
I think Sakic vs Messier is a better conparison. I'd still take Messier, but at least Sakic has an argument based on his longevity as a top offensive player. Yzerman was a step below both.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BenchBrawl

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
I see where you're coming from.

I guess I will concede that Yzerman had a higher peak than Messier.

(It still seems odd to say that the guy who finished 2nd in scoring and won two Hart trophies in three years had a lower peak than the guy who did none of those things.)

Higher peak offensively, yes. Higher peak overall, though?
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
30,844
13,628
You must be kidding, right?

No

Who do you think is better than Messier? Mikita? Clarke? Trottier? Sakic? Esposito? Nighbor? Yzerman?! Messier has a clear case against all of them, and IMO a strong one.

Messier managed to stamp his name into mega-superstardom despite peaking in the intersection of Gretzky's and Lemieux' prime.To accumulate that much star power in this situation says a lot (in fairness, this is a great spot to make a name for yourself if you come out looking good beside those guys in their prime).He has great longevity, great all-around and heart-and-soul style of play, and really great playoffs.

Crosby might be better, but my post was excluding him from the conversation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->