tony d
Registered User
Bossy had 9 straight 50 goal seasons, if he had played until he was 37 or 38, he could have had over 700 career goals, no way is he over-rated.
Mike Bossy overrated?
- Thread starter livewell68
- Start date
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
Ummm...the entire context and argument I made was about what a 36 year old Mario with a bad back was facing in 2001 when he potted 35 goals in 43 games.
I guess I have to be absolutely clear so you'll understand
2001
-Second lowest scoring year since the 60's
-interference was at its peak
-Goalies wore the largest equipment they could could get their hands on, biggest in the history of the game
-Mario is 36
-Mario has a bad back
-Mario still scores 35 goals in just 43 games
Please try and keep up.
Oh and BTW, goalies stopped wearing water retaining leather pads in the mid/late 80's. Hell, I bought my first set of non-leather pads right after high school (I graduated in '88), Forrester's actually.
Last edited:
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Scoring Skills
Also in 2000-01 Mario Lemieux scored at 20.5 S% pace whereas Jagr scored at a 16.4 S% rate. Regardless of the size of the equipment, the rules, systems, etc those with scoring skills kept on scoring at the elite level.
Also in 2000-01 Mario Lemieux scored at 20.5 S% pace whereas Jagr scored at a 16.4 S% rate. Regardless of the size of the equipment, the rules, systems, etc those with scoring skills kept on scoring at the elite level.
okay that's all great with your 43 game sample but of course no response to the actual full career he had and your assertion of 160-180 for at least 2 seasons no problem.
also were the pads and equipment worn last season and post lockout closer to 01 or 80's type of equipment.
Really the 160 point plateau is a 30% proposition from what we know about Mario and perhaps lower.
I'll take the larger sample 8 days out of 7 thank you.
what does shooting % tell us that we don't already know, Mario is oine of the best goal scorers of all time.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2001_skaters.html
here are the guys from 01 and their % hopefully it works.
Mario average a % of 19 for his career and it fluctuated, not the most use full stat in the world it's a ballpark stat.
Some guys take a large number of shots and have a lower % and other don't shoot often and have a higher %.
There are alot of variables going on that aren't easy to sort out form one player top another.
there has also been an indication that Jagr was more to do with the Pens success during that time period as well but once again something like that can only be guessed at and not measured in a total and complete sense.
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
Wow...you have like not read a single post in this thread it seems because all I see is you once again repeating points that were shot down 2 pages ago.
You continue to cherry pick and stubbornly hold onto a position that has been shot full of holes repeatedly.
Small sample size or not, the guy still scored 35 friggin goals in only 43 friggin games at the age of friggin 36, with a bad friggin back, in one of the lowest scoring friggin seasons, rife with friggin interference and goalie's wearing illegal friggin equipment.
How many gosh darned times do I have to friggin repeat this before it sinks into your head???
I'm done here, you're just annoying now and haven't said anything new, sufficiently countered a single argument, or added anything productive in this thread for over 4 pages now.
You continue to cherry pick and stubbornly hold onto a position that has been shot full of holes repeatedly.
Small sample size or not, the guy still scored 35 friggin goals in only 43 friggin games at the age of friggin 36, with a bad friggin back, in one of the lowest scoring friggin seasons, rife with friggin interference and goalie's wearing illegal friggin equipment.
How many gosh darned times do I have to friggin repeat this before it sinks into your head???
I'm done here, you're just annoying now and haven't said anything new, sufficiently countered a single argument, or added anything productive in this thread for over 4 pages now.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Skill Factors
Just another example of diminishing skill factors that you refuse to acknowledge because it does not fit your mantra.
Watching hockey since the lockout is rather interesting. The obstruction is down but the players cannot properly position themselves for maximum shooting efficiency. There are a few exceptions like Crosby who have the various skills like the old time players but the vast majority is seriously lacking.
Just another example of diminishing skill factors that you refuse to acknowledge because it does not fit your mantra.
Watching hockey since the lockout is rather interesting. The obstruction is down but the players cannot properly position themselves for maximum shooting efficiency. There are a few exceptions like Crosby who have the various skills like the old time players but the vast majority is seriously lacking.
Nothing to do with Mantra I observe, analyze and comment
here are the single season % leaders alltime
http://www.hockey-reference.com/leaders/shot_pct_season.html
Not filled with the players that one would call the best goal scorers of all time is it? (stats are basically available post 67 expansion so let's include discussion on players since then and not bring in the 06 guys).
The same thing happens in all-time, active leaders ect.
There are some stars on these lists and some surprising players as well.
guys can make a mental list of the top scorers or best scorers from last year then go look at the actual % guys with more than 10 goals
http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...l=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=shot_pct
most guys won't get even 50% of the top 10 or 20 because it's not a great indicator for great goal scorers IMO.
That's why I call it a ballpark stat.
And all this talk about modern players, post lockout not being able to position themselves properly to get in better scoring opportunities there are 2 simple reasons why you might be seeing this.
Players are having to deal with better defenders who understand and play in systems that are designed to thwart goal scoring opportunities, although there still seem to be quite a few of those in most games I watch and the defending players do so at a faster pace making the time and space for offensive players less than in the past.
Just go and watch film from the 06,70,80's ect until now with post lockout and see if there is any difference in what I stated above.
Goal scorers have to deal with all of that and much better goalies in terms of technique and equipment used in stopping the puck as well.
But some will refuse to watch actual games I guess and call this a "theory" say that it isn't so and then tell me that I'm not responding to specific ideas they put forward, yes you R71, when I actually did respond directly on several occasion to his 43 game example but I get the definition of response means total agreement in some posters minds.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Far From Accurate
Post lockout offensive positioning to a large degree is artificial in a way that facilitates defense.
Take the powerplay. Common to see RHS and LHS dmen and forwards play the off wing to get a better shooting angle but this comes with a price the scoring area becomes reduced so it is easier to cover.
Likewise puck possession along the boards by offensive players in the offensive zone features the half-turn facing the boards/crowd thereby limiting the view of the offensive zone.
Defensive players will play at a faster pace if the offensive options challenging them are reduced, especially if the amount of ice they have to cover is reduced.
As for the S% lists you submitted, yes there are second tier players on the lists because shooting would be their top skill, while the elite players would have a greater number of skills at the top level. No different than players from different eras skating faster than Howe or Gretzky or Lemieux. Point is that a Charlie Simmer knew how to get in position to score off Marcel Dionne feeds while a player like Chris Kunitz does not have the ability to do so playing with Sidney Crosby.
This is multiplied throughout the league today. Too often you see forwards in the slot area facing out into the crowd when they should be facing inwards at the net. This has nothing to do with the speed of the defense, systems, the goalie equipment or other factors that you allege. Simply it reflects poor offensive technique and skills. When the puck comes their way they take a poor weak shoot or waste time getting positioned only to be denied a shot.
Post lockout offensive positioning to a large degree is artificial in a way that facilitates defense.
Take the powerplay. Common to see RHS and LHS dmen and forwards play the off wing to get a better shooting angle but this comes with a price the scoring area becomes reduced so it is easier to cover.
Likewise puck possession along the boards by offensive players in the offensive zone features the half-turn facing the boards/crowd thereby limiting the view of the offensive zone.
Defensive players will play at a faster pace if the offensive options challenging them are reduced, especially if the amount of ice they have to cover is reduced.
As for the S% lists you submitted, yes there are second tier players on the lists because shooting would be their top skill, while the elite players would have a greater number of skills at the top level. No different than players from different eras skating faster than Howe or Gretzky or Lemieux. Point is that a Charlie Simmer knew how to get in position to score off Marcel Dionne feeds while a player like Chris Kunitz does not have the ability to do so playing with Sidney Crosby.
This is multiplied throughout the league today. Too often you see forwards in the slot area facing out into the crowd when they should be facing inwards at the net. This has nothing to do with the speed of the defense, systems, the goalie equipment or other factors that you allege. Simply it reflects poor offensive technique and skills. When the puck comes their way they take a poor weak shoot or waste time getting positioned only to be denied a shot.
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
What I put in bold is wrong.
Since the 60's, 1997-98, 1998-99 and 1999-00 were all lower scoring than 2000-01.
Janson
fireSNOW
Bossy has the heart to win 4 cups. He has a Conn Smythe, how many does Jags have? Its all about PO's when they make these lists, because you need heart in the playoffs. Jagr just signed with Philly over the Guins for a few dollars more... no heart. Bossy > Jagr.
The scoring area, in terms of what % of the net any shooter sees has diminished as well.
PK units can now play more aggressively as scoring on a straight shot is less.
A player could position himself facing the net if it was a useful way to score but defenders crowd the space of guys in the slot now and are more adept of closing the gap and with his back to the goalie a deflection is sometimes a better alternative.
Quite simply back in 06 and even more recently than that offenses had more time and space to set up, less defensive players blocked shots or took away passing lanes, and quite frankly everyone plays defense today compared to the past when it was a specialty and defensive guys really stood out.
To me it comes down to goaltending and I'll agree with R71 here it has the largest impact on the differences in the game and how systems and defensive players play, with goalie pads and goalies from the 70's all the other strategies would not be as effective IMO.
Maybe shooting % of some players we are surprised to see in the leaders is their best skill, it's debatable as these things fluctuate from year to year but as a stat % isn't as useful as goals or assists or plus/minus in some cases as there are a ton of different reasons behind guys with high % especially with smaller total goals and luck does come into play as well with it even to a small degree.
Put another way we are going to see "better" and more skilled players in the leaders of goals, assists and points and even better defensive players from good teams with plus/minus more so than from shooting %.
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
How old was Jagr when the Penguins won the Cup?
Bossy won 1 Conn Smythe out of 4 Stanley Cups.
Had the Penguins or the Rangers had better teams when Jagr was in his prime, Jagr would have had at least 1 Conn Smythe.
Bossy played his whole prime with someone named Trottier who actually won an Art Ross. How many Art Ross trophies did Bossy win?
Jagr's PPG in the playoffs during a much lower scoring era is still above 1.10 PPG and Jagr had the 3rd best PPG in the playoffs between 1996 and 2006. The other 2 players are Forsberg and Sakic.
It takes a team to win the Cup not just one player. Bossy was a great player but he played on a dynasty and played with 2 of the greatest players of all time in Potvin and Trottier.
BTW Jagr could have signed with the highest bidder if it was all about money as you say. The Flyers offered the second lowest amount (the Penguins being the lowest) of any teams.
You mean winning the Cup wasn't Jagr's reason to sign with the Flyers?
You mean this players lacks heart?
... I think that one of the definitive moments for Jagr (and the Pittsburgh Penguins) took place on April 5, 1991.
The Penguins had not won a Cup in their franchise history at that time. They had only made the playoffs once in the six years that Mario Lemieux had played for them, and went down in the second round.
Pittsburgh faced New Jersey in round one of the '91 playoffs, and lost game one at home, 3-1. Game two went to overtime tied 4-4. If the Penguins lost it, they would be heading to New Jersey down 0-2. There's a good case to be made that the series was hanging in the balance for the Penguins.
And then, this happened:
Is that an example of a "heartless" player, there? I see a guy fighting off a hook and a hold, coming in from the wing, driving to the net ... and scoring an overtime winner to put his team on the winning track in the playoffs. And that team won it all for the first time ever.
Janson
fireSNOW
Bossy PO #'s
games goals assists points
129 85 75 160
Jagr PO #'s
games goals assists points
169 77 104 181
Jagr's points are huge but don't come close to Bossy. How badly does Jagr want another Cup when he was collecting paychecks the last 3 years in the KHL. Truth hurts, no heart.
games goals assists points
129 85 75 160
Jagr PO #'s
games goals assists points
169 77 104 181
Jagr's points are huge but don't come close to Bossy. How badly does Jagr want another Cup when he was collecting paychecks the last 3 years in the KHL. Truth hurts, no heart.
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
Do you know the reason Jagr left for the KHL? He was asking for a multi year deal, not more money from the Rangers. He loved the city, the fans and had promised that the Rangers would be the only team he would play for at the time in the NHL. Sather decided to move in another direction and only wanted to offer Jagr 7 million for 1 year, Jagr wanted 5 million a year for the 3 years. So Sather doesn't give him a contract and instead decides to pay Naslund, Redden, Gomez and Drury all multi year 7 million contracts. So Jagr decided to keep his promise and not play for any other NHL team at the time. Omsk (where he played during the lockout and where he forged great relationships) offered 2 years and he took the contract.
Learn about the facts before you spew this nonsense. The blind fan says Jagr is all about money, doesn't have work ethic... blah... blah... blah
True Ranger fans know what he was really about.
As for the scoring averages;
One played in the 80's when scoring was higher, the other played in the 90's, 2000's when scoring was lower.
In fact as scoring started to go down, Jagr's PPG in the playoffs started to go up. I know adjusted stats won't mean anything to you but adjusted points would have Jagr blow Bossy right out of the water.
Let's see Bossy score 16 Pts in just 11 games in the 1999-00 playoffs playing with Beranek and Hrdina as linemates instead of Trottier and Potvin.
Last edited:
Janson
fireSNOW
So when is anyone going to address the fact that he signed with his draft teams rival. If he was serious about another cup he would have signed with the Guins, Philly has too many question marks this year. He is just in it for one more payday.
The fact that he goes to play in the prime of his career (according to him and his father) in Russia only to come crawling back to the NHL. Does anyone even know why he wears #68? The playing in the KHL thing is a complete farce and shows how much of a merc Jagr is.
The fact that he goes to play in the prime of his career (according to him and his father) in Russia only to come crawling back to the NHL. Does anyone even know why he wears #68? The playing in the KHL thing is a complete farce and shows how much of a merc Jagr is.
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
What is in bold is very interesting. Everyone slams Jagr for never leading the Penguins passed the 2nd round without Lemieux yet the same can be said of Lemieux. All of Lemieux' playoff success came while Jagr was in the lineup with him.
The Penguins made the playoffs once in 6 seasons with Lemieux before Jagr joined the team but then as a Penguin Jagr never missed the playoffs in 11 seasons.
Janson
fireSNOW
Your right, Bossy would have scored more and won the Cup. I deal in reality not what if scenarios.
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
Your true colors are showing. Are we 1985 still? Russia is not the Soviet Union. Jagr wears #68 in honor of freedom. Russia in fact cheered Jagr wherever Omsk went to play. Maybe he was just showing that in the end freedom was the victor.
As for the paycheck crap, the Flyers offered 3.3 million. The Jets offered 6 million, the Panthers offered 6 million. If it really was about the money, Jagr would have gone to the highest bidder.
I'm not here to start fights but I can guarantee you that Jagr and the Flyers will be very successful this year and Jagr will lead that team in scoring.
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
Bossy played his whole career with Trottier and Potvin.
Jagr won 4 Art Ross trophies, 1 Hart and 3 Pearson awards without Lemieux.
In fact the only Hall of Fame players who played with Jagr during that impressive run of 4 Art Ross trophies, 1 Hart and 3 Pearsons was Francis who was only there in 1994-95 and 1997-98.
Bossy was a great player and I'm not going to spew crap like you so I won't negate what he could have done but I'm 100% confident that Bossy couldn't have done half as much as Jagr playing with 1998-99, 1999-00 Penguins or the post-lockout Rangers.
As for the Cup argument.
Ask even the biggest Bossy fans and the biggest Jagr haters if this scenario would be true and I'm sure everyone would agree that Bossy would have had no chance at all to win a Cup with the 1998-99, 1999-00 Penguins or the post-lockout Rangers.
Bossy was great but he wasn't a player that can carry the offense like Jagr or Lafleur could.
Jagr was not that FAR behind in goal scoring ability and was a far greater playmaker than Bossy.
Jagr was an offensive catalyst, Bossy played off of Potvin and Trottier.
Last edited:
???
Hasn't Jagr scored more points than Bossy? Hasn't Jagr managed to play more playoff games? Isn't Jagr's point production actually better than Bossy's? Isn't his adjusted PPG better?
Jagr definitately was a better player (1 Hart, 3 Ted Lindsay, 5 Art Ross, 8 All Star first team), and had a better career, than Bossy (0,0,0,5). Bossy did win more Stanley Cups, and got one Conn Smythe, but it doesn't my opinion that Jagr had the better career. Strange to even see people actually putting Bossy ahead of Jagr.
Some people seem to put too much weight on winning Stanley Cup. There is no correlation between greatness and number of Stanley Cup wins.
If you list player's based on number of Stanley Cup wins, you don't exactly get like:
1. Gretzky 12 SC, 2. Mario, Orr 11 SC, 4. Gordie Howe 10, etc. (Edited: Bourque 7, Salming 3. etc.)
Also, there is no automatic rule that the best, or the 20 or so best, players each season wins the Stanley Cup.
Winning Stanley Cup is usually a team effort, rather than single player effort.
By the way, Hart is in my opinion bigger than Conn Smythe. Hart is about the whole regular season. Conn Smythe is dependent on playing on a team strong enough to reach the final, and most often on the team winning the final.
Had Boston lost 4 games vs Montreal this year (they won 4-3), Tim Thomas surely wouldn't have won the Conn Smythe. It wasn't exactly thanks to him they got through that round. A combination of many factors, probably including luck and circumstances, made them win the series, and eventually the cup.
Edit: 3 Lindsay's instead of 2.
Last edited:
livewell68
Registered User
- Jul 20, 2007
- 8,680
- 52
I agree with this but Jagr won 3 Pearsons/ Lindsays, not 2.
Also Bourque and Dionne were not poor players, they are top 30 all-time players.
I agree with the Conn Smythe argument. Brad Richards won a Conn Smythe, so did Cam Ward, are they better players than Jagr?
The Conn Smythe is a great award but it's very dependent on the strength of a team. Outside of the Lemieux years, Jagr was never surrounded with teams good enough to win the Cup especially in comparison to the likes of the Red Wings, Avs, Devils, Stars, Flyers, Blues and Senators who were the elite teams of that time (1997-2008).
Last edited:
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Interesting..........
Interesting ................. but contradictory.
With his back to the net an offensive player sees 0% of the open space.Hard to score. Plus it is just as easy to deflect a shot facing the net as facing away. Easier in certain situations. Conversely reacting to rebounds is more difficult when not facing the net.
In the O6 era thru today the number of defensive players in any given situation did not change, PK 4 against 5 is still the same. Problem today is that the offenses are not varied - you will not see an offense give 3 or 4 different looks during 1 PK, nor are they spread out forcing the defense to adjust. Wingers no longer take the wide angle to the net so the defense can cluster to the slot while the goalie is limited in his movements.
Interesting ................. but contradictory.
With his back to the net an offensive player sees 0% of the open space.Hard to score. Plus it is just as easy to deflect a shot facing the net as facing away. Easier in certain situations. Conversely reacting to rebounds is more difficult when not facing the net.
In the O6 era thru today the number of defensive players in any given situation did not change, PK 4 against 5 is still the same. Problem today is that the offenses are not varied - you will not see an offense give 3 or 4 different looks during 1 PK, nor are they spread out forcing the defense to adjust. Wingers no longer take the wide angle to the net so the defense can cluster to the slot while the goalie is limited in his movements.
Janson
fireSNOW
No one is trying to start a fight, I'm just stating facts. More Cups, better Playoff record = why Bossy is better.
Jagr played with alot of talent too, don't give me the bs that the Guins didn't have great players besides Lemiuex or Francis. Barasso, Coffey, Mullen, Stevens, Murphy...perrenial all-stars. Jagr's career ain't over, if he brings a cup or 2 to Philly maybe he will be better than Bossy.
Jagr played with alot of talent too, don't give me the bs that the Guins didn't have great players besides Lemiuex or Francis. Barasso, Coffey, Mullen, Stevens, Murphy...perrenial all-stars. Jagr's career ain't over, if he brings a cup or 2 to Philly maybe he will be better than Bossy.
