My HoH Top 50 Players Of All Time!

[ImporterExporter]

Clancy, Pilote, Seibert over Park?

Why?

Park often is blanketed with statements like "he'd have 6 Norris trophies if it weren't for Orr". I think it's important to also go beyond just his Norris record.

I built a pretty ridiculous excel spreadsheet with many categories and used them to form a conglomerate analysis of these players. Couple that with reading up on Park as much as possible simply doesn't get me to the point where I can put him over any of those 3. He and Seibert are pretty close.

Yes, Park has SIX 2nd place Norris finishes, plus a 3rd. Besides that, he's not really close.

But you can say the same thing about a guy like King Clancy in the late 20's and 30's. He was going up directly against Eddie Shore (in other words very stiff competition). And its been suggested that Clancy would have actually won a pair of Norris trophies in 1930 and 1934. http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=561775

A look at AS nods, doesn't paint a compelling picture for Park over any of the others. Now I do understand Park had stiff company for getting 1st and 2nd team nods, but the others can argue the same, although to a bit less fan fare.

King Clancy was a 1st team AS twice as well as a 2nd team twice. BUT the official AS voting didn't happen until 1931, when Clancy was already 27. By that point he was already a star and had 4 different placements in the Hart voting prior to 1931. Its pretty safe to say Clancy would have had at least another 4 AS nods prior to 31. Clancy also has a better Hart record, better scoring finishes by a wide margin (remember he was going head to head with Shore).

Pierre Pilote is similar. He actually won 3 Norris trophies (to be fair against older stars) but during his 3 runner ups he lost to Doug Harvey, and Jacques Laperriere twice, the latter 2 coming when Pilote was in his mid 30's. Pilote has a slightly better AS record. Pilote's offensive numbers don't get enough love either. He pretty much owned 1960's hockey in terms of leading pack offensively. Even if you remove Bobby Orr, Park doesn't come close to Pilote. There is plenty of evidence that PP was a very good defender as well, incredibly tough/physical, while being a big shot blocker.

It's also important to note that Park was used on the PK only 43% of the time, a big chunk less than most other players ranked (post O6 era). I'd be interested to understand why the smaller number compared to other greats from that time period and beyond.

AT the end of the day I don't think Park was better defensively than any of the 3 you listed and offensively he wasn't either, other than Seibert.

Nice to get away from the main board and seeing Crosby ranked around where he should be. I don't know exactly where to put him, but 13th is not that bad. I don't accept that Crosby separated himself enough from Malkin and Ovechkin to warrant one omission and one at 36 though.

I have one problem and that is also very common around here. Its that Roy is that much ahead of Hasek when I actually think its the other way around. And also, Brodeur shouldn't be close to them - he might not even make my list.

I LOVE Geno (I'm a Pens fan) but he's not top 50. Top 100, yes, absolutely. The issue with Malkin, really boils down to injuries. He's consistently missed to many chunks of to many seasons and its probably cost him more accolades.

People will probably accuse me of bias against Ovechkin, being a Pens fan, but I assure you, I'm not punishing 8. I built an excel spreadsheet with many different areas in which to compile data on. Ovechkin looks incredibly great as a goal scorer. No question about that. He's got a great Hart resume, great AS finishes (although context is needed given the lack of any real depth at LW in the cap era).

Where Ovechkin loses ground is obviously postseason as a I pointed out in his write up. It's no longer a blame others around him. Or blame the team. He's been on some of the absolutely best teams of the cap era (3 President trophy winners) and has never even made a Conference final. Ever. And over his last 60 playoff games (which is 2/3rds of his career) he has 40 points and is a negative player. That's Marcel Dionne bad, and Marcel Dionne never had teams like Ovechkin has.

Plus he's become increasingly one dimensional. He was never a play maker but pre 2010 he routinely created his own space and time with his speed and skill. That's all but gone now. He doesn't play D (for example he was pathetic in game 7 vs Pittsburgh this past year in kind of a huge game). And I think its perfectly fine to question is leadership abilities at this point and probably has been for some time.

What does he have over a guy like Guy Lafleur for example other than slightly more longevity? Guy L was a much more potent all around offensive weapon for the better part of 7 years. And he has incredible peak scoring numbers both regular and postseason, without Cup counting. Yes, I'm aware that those 70's Habs are some of the best all time, but individually he performed at an extremely high level in crunch time. For this era, Ovechkin has had at least 3 dominant teams, with a high end C (Backstrom) as his pivot.

The thinking is this: They have similar peaks relative to their peers, but Roy has a clearly superior record of playoff performances.

Exactly right. Roy played the bulk of his career in a much higher scoring era and had very stellar numbers. There is no doubt Hasek is the cream of the crop when it comes to regular season play, but I think it is important to remember that Hasek's Hart's and final 4 Vezina's also came after the strike, and when offensive numbers started to plummet, relative to the 80's and early 90's.

See these studies: Hockey Outsider and Q do a tremendous job with these types of number crunching projects and Roy holds up extremely well to Hasek in the regular season. And blows everybody away in the postseason.

Adjusted Save % (regular season)
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=718221

Playoff Save Percentage vs. Average Opponent Shooting Percentage
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1726821

Goalies: Adjusted Playoff Save Percentage
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1185967

 

[Michael Farkas]

Good effort. Nice to see Brodeur appreciated for the all-time great that he is.

It felt weird to see Crosby ranked there (*gazing up at the Sidney Crosby jersey that hangs in my living room*)...I guess that's starting to become more right than just "potential" at this point...cool.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

A fine effort you have made.

I do believe you're underrating Howie Morenz's playoff career though. I went into further detail in the Top 40 playoff project, but in my estimation the counting stats really sell him short. I would agree he falls short of Messier (most do), but I would easily rate him above Mikita in the playoffs, and I think him and Crosby are very close.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Interesting List

Interesting list but underlines the fact that the 1930s to the O6 Red Line era is very under researched and under appreciated.

Specifically:
1.) the 1929-30 season saw the introduction of the forward pass in all zones. Spike in scoring appreciated by anyone who can count but the changes in goaltending and the role of defencemen has never been explored.

2.) the 1932-33 introduction of the original NHL Salary Cap with the reduction in roster sizes. Multi-position players increased This has to be looked at as well as the composition of rosters reflecting the value of players. Two coach / GMs winning consecutive SCs - Gorman and Adams have to be appreciated for the approaches they brought to the game.

3.) the introduction of icing changed the way defensive hockey was played. This has never been examined closely.

Until then discussing 1930s NHL players is rather incomplete.

 

[ImporterExporter]

My reading on Taylor is that he was a better defensive player than Lalonde, but Lalonde had the physicality and leadership.

I agree. I don't know how anyone could interpret Lalonde as having plus defensive abilities. Cyclone Taylor was a pretty damn stellar defensemen early in his career.

 

[Canadiens1958]

East vs West

I agree. I don't know how anyone could interpret Lalonde as having plus defensive abilities. Cyclone Taylor was a pretty damn stellar defensemen early in his career.

Failing to account for the differences in rules and the actual game between East and West.

 

[ImporterExporter]

A fine effort you have made.

I do believe you're underrating Howie Morenz's playoff career though. I went into further detail in the Top 40 playoff project, but in my estimation the counting stats really sell him short. I would agree he falls short of Messier (most do), but I would easily rate him above Mikita in the playoffs, and I think him and Crosby are very close.

I don't think I am. Look, everyone understands that the mid 20's throughout the entire 1930's was THE original dead puck era in the NHL. So scoring is going to be down on a per game basis across the board.

I'm not out to pile on Howie Morenz but given his mythical status among readings and many contemporary sources, you'd think he was literally the "Babe Ruth of hockey". I'm sorry but that is the type of folk hero status that gets thrown around, people quote it and think it to be true. Or at the very least try to use it as some sort of major bullet point.

Anyone with baseball knowledge knows just how ridiculously dominant Babe Ruth was vs his peers. Basically every metric, numbers or otherwise, proves as much. Morenz did not blow the NHL away in the 20's or 30's.

We know Morenz had a great 1924 and 1925.

pulled quickly from Wiki

In the first game of the two-game, total-goals series, Morenz scored the only goal, and added another goal in the second game as the Canadiens won the series, five goals to two.[21] As the champions of the NHL, the Canadiens played two teams from Western Canada for the Stanley Cup. They defeated the Vancouver Maroons of the Pacific Coast Hockey Association (PCHA) in two games of a best-of-three series and then faced the Calgary Tigers of the Western Canada Hockey League (WCHL).[22] In the first game against Calgary, Morenz scored a hat trick as the Canadiens won by a score of 6–1. He scored another goal in the second game, as Montreal defeated the Tigers 3–0 to win their second Stanley Cup championship and Morenz's first with the team

In 1925 he scored 3 goals in 2 games vs Toronto St Patrick's in the league semi final's. The finals were canceled due to a players strike. In the Stanley Cup finals Montreal lost to the Victoria Cougers but Morenz played well netting 6 points in 4 games.

Remember, that is pre-consolidation of all pro talent. That's pre forward passing, pre offsides, etc.

And if you look at this stats AFTER those 2 runs, his production drops considerably. There is no arguing this, whether looking at playoff leaders or Montreal team leaders.

1927 - 1 goal in 4 games. Out in semi's.

1928 - 0 points in 2 games. Out in round 1. Art Gagne leads team with 2 points.

1929 - 0 points in 3 games. Out in round 1. Aurele Joliat leads team with 2 points.

-So by this point, over the past 3 years he has exactly 1 goal in 9 games. There is no sugar coating it. He's not producing, even in a very weak scoring era.

1930 - He has 1 goal in the 2 game Cup final. For the playoffs Morenz finishes with 3 goals. Leduc, Wasnie and Lepine all have 4 points.

1931 - He scores 1 lonely goal in 5 (FIVE) games in Cup final. 5 players score more, including Johnny Gagnon with 4 goals and 6 points. Overall for the playoffs Morenz has 5 points, Lepine, Mantha and Gagnon have more.

1932 - 1 goal in 4 games. Knocked out in round 1. 5 including Leduc, Gagnon, Joliat, Mondou and Larochelle score more.

1933 - Morenz was better with 3 assists in 2 games. Montreal still knocked in quarters. Ties with Joliat for team lead.

1934 - 2 points in 2 games. Montreal out in quarters. Ties with Larochelle for team lead.

1935 - 0 points in 2 games. Hawks out in round 1.

15 points in 35 games after consolidation. And in the 2 years Montreal did win the Cup, Morenz was almost completely shut down. We see far less talented players stepping up.

Other random players totals in same or similar time periods (all post consolidation #'s): This is to illustrate that there were many other players who provide as much ore better per game offense in the late 20's onward, in the playoffs.

Johnny Gagnon - 24 points in 32 games
Aurele Joliat - 19 in 40
Bill Cook - 24 in 46
Joe Primeau 23 in 38
Charlie Conacher 35 in 49
Harry Oliver 16 in 35
Johnny Gottselig 24 in 37 (without his swan 43-44 season. only kept the 30's)
Paul Thompson 22 in 48
Baldy Northcott 13 in 31

Even if we give him blanket credit for providing great defense in these postseason runs (i might add there is almost zero evidence of this in anything we've unearthed in the ATD over the years), it doesn't hide the fact that Morenz is bested by other lesser players over the same, or similar time periods, offensively, especially in the Cup finals in 1930 and 31.

If you take Aurele Joliat's stats over the exact same time period from 1927 through 1935 (Morenz's last playoff run), Joliat played exactly the same amount of games (35) and scored (16) points in that span. Morenz didn't even out produce Joliat on his own team offensively.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Interesting list but underlines the fact that the 1930s to the O6 Red Line era is very under researched and under appreciated.

Specifically:
1.) the 1929-30 season saw the introduction of the forward pass in all zones. Spike in scoring appreciated by anyone who can count but the changes in goaltending and the role of defencemen has never been explored.

2.) the 1932-33 introduction of the original NHL Salary Cap with the reduction in roster sizes. Multi-position players increased This has to be looked at as well as the composition of rosters reflecting the value of players. Two coach / GMs winning consecutive SCs - Gorman and Adams have to be appreciated for the approaches they brought to the game.

3.) the introduction of icing changed the way defensive hockey was played. This has never been examined closely.

Until then discussing 1930s NHL players is rather incomplete.

You fail to mention that the forward pass in 1929-30 and the drastic spike in scoring only lasted that one year, because there was no off sides more or less. Hence why you saw Cooney Weiland go bat **** crazy and score 73 points. If you look, averages dropped back down considerably the following year.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html

I think it's also important to note that during this time the stars (like Shore or Morenz) almost never came off the ice.

Failing to account for the differences in rules and the actual game between East and West.

What do you mean like 7 man vs 6? Or that the PCHA introduced the blue lines as seen today? Forward passing the center zone only. You could kick the puck but not into the net, etc, etc,

 

[Canadiens1958]

Playoff Format

^^^Not allowing for the playoff format, 1 vs 1.

Valuing a Phil Kessel like performance over a Sidney Crosby like performance.

Canadiens were the only repeat SC champions post consolidation, not a high scoring team between 1929 and 1932, 5,2,2,4 in GF during the RS, rolling two lines.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Forward Pass

You fail to mention that the forward pass in 1929-30 and the drastic spike in scoring only lasted that one year, because there was no off sides more or less. Hence why you saw Cooney Weiland go bat **** crazy and score 73 points. If you look, averages dropped back down considerably the following year.

https://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/stats.html

I think it's also important to note that during this time the stars (like Shore or Morenz) almost never came off the ice.



What do you mean like 7 man vs 6? Or that the PCHA introduced the blue lines as seen today? Forward passing the center zone only. You could kick the puck but not into the net, etc, etc,

No, offsides were introduced about the 1/3 mark of the season. As stated previously the Canadiens roled two lines.

1929-30 Joliat-Morenz-Larochelle and Mondou/G.Mantha - Lepine - Wasnie.

1929-30
https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1930.html

1930-31
https://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1931.html

1930-31 saw Johnny Gagnon join the team on the first line with Morenz and Joliat, Second line featured G. Mantha - Lepine - Larochelle/Wasnie with Mondou and Rivers being the utility forwards.

Yes, all the rules differences between the East and West.

 

[VanIslander]

22. Frank Nighbor
-One of my all time favorite studies. Nighbor is a player who has continually risen among hfboards members, especially in the HoH and ATD sections. Nighbor is one of the greatest two way players in the history of hockey. King Clancy, Howie Morenz, Cyclone Taylor and one of the greatest quotes one could find on the subject, the legendary Frank Selke talking about Nighbor in 1962

I'll leave this ATD bio done on Nighbor as the official read as to why he is and should be ranked so highly.

-bio by nik jr. http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=23959895&postcount=22

Good on ya.

The NHL's first Hart trophy winner, in his second decade of pro hockey, retired in 1930 as the NHL's all time leader in assists in both the regular season and playoffs. "Peerless Frank" played 15 years for Ottawa, the first two of which were in the NHA. "The Flying Dutchman" had joined the Senators months after he - as a winger - was pivotal in PCHA champion Vancouver sweeping NHA champion Ottawa to win the 1915 Stanley Cup championship: "The outstanding star was Nighbor. He combined both offense and defense and had the Senators quite bewildered." Amusingly, he later did the same thing for Ottawa against his old PCHA team in the finals of one of the three Stanley Cup championships he helped bring to Ottawa. "The Pembroke Peach" was the greatest two-way player of his era, and arguably all time.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Good on ya.

The NHL's first Hart trophy winner, in his second decade of pro hockey, retired in 1930 as the NHL's all time leader in assists in both the regular season and playoffs. "Peerless Frank" played 15 years for Ottawa, the first two of which were in the NHA. "The Flying Dutchman" had joined the Senators months after he - as a winger - was pivotal in PCHA champion Vancouver sweeping NHA champion Ottawa to win the 1915 Stanley Cup championship: "The outstanding star was Nighbor. He combined both offense and defense and had the Senators quite bewildered." Amusingly, he later did the same thing for Ottawa against his old PCHA team in the finals of one of the three Stanley Cup championships he helped bring to Ottawa. "The Pembroke Peach" was the greatest two-way player of his era, and arguably all time.

Yes sir, I'm extremely high on Nighbor as a player.

I know it's in the write up, but in case anyone missed it, the quote by Frank Selke (who's opinion i'd take over just about anyone on early hockey) said this about Nighbor:

"With all due respect to the many wonderful players who have come and gone since 1900, there are few who could be rated above Frank Nighbor. Someone once called him the "peerless centre," and I can think of no label which would have been more apt. We always felt he could have played a complete game of hockey in formal attire without even putting a wrinkle in his suit. He was a leading scorer, an expert passer and a play maker; and no rival forward could come close to him in defensive skill. Along with Jack Walker he developed the poke-check to such an extent that his contemporaries were forced to revamp completely their style of play in order to cope with him.....It is hard to say whether Morenz' style of play was more effective than Nighbor's, but there was this difference--Nighbor was so letter-perfect that a spectator could fall asleep watching him play, knowing just what was going to happen"

 

[psycat]

Harve above Lidström+Bourque and at the same time Crosby way above Jagr :^)+Hasek below Messier and such. Couldnt take the list very serious after that so wont comment on anything below those picks. Pretty much agree with your top 5 though- Although aformentioned Hasek+Bourque could challenge for 5th. Roy is like 10 spots high.

 

[MXD]

Harve above Lidström+Bourque and at the same time Crosby way above Jagr :^)+Hasek below Messier and such. Couldnt take the list very serious after that so wont comment on anything below those picks. Pretty much agree with your top 5 though- Although aformentioned Hasek+Bourque could challenge for 5th. Roy is like 10 spots high.

In that case, may I suggest you won't take many lists seriously?

 

[quoipourquoi]

Harve above Lidström+Bourque and at the same time Crosby way above Jagr :^)+Hasek below Messier and such. Couldnt take the list very serious after that so wont comment on anything below those picks. Pretty much agree with your top 5 though- Although aformentioned Hasek+Bourque could challenge for 5th. Roy is like 10 spots high.

Those aren't bugs; those are features.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Team

How did you mitigate or balance the team issue question?

Did you add, neutralize or subtract for the ability or willingness of players to set egos aside and buy into the team success concept?

 

[ImporterExporter]

Harve above Lidström+Bourque and at the same time Crosby way above Jagr :^)+Hasek below Messier and such. Couldnt take the list very serious after that so wont comment on anything below those picks. Pretty much agree with your top 5 though- Although aformentioned Hasek+Bourque could challenge for 5th. Roy is like 10 spots high.

Harvey is above Lidstrom and Bourque because he was simply better. He won 7 Norris trophies and it wasn't even created until he was already 29 years old, plus he battled a prime Red Kelly throughout his time period of dominance. He has a superior Hart record over Lidstrom. His AS record is essentially on par with Lidstrom. Bourque's longevity beats Harvey, no doubt, but it's not like Harvey is weak in that area in any way. There are very, very few players who come anywhere close to Bourque's longevity, which is a big reason why he is where he is. I think Harvey and Lidstrom are certainly a good bit above Bourque in postseason play, although Ray is a bit underrated IMO. And studying their defensive abilities, Harvey is pretty clearly the most dominant player in his own end. It's Harvey>Lidstrom>Bourque in that regard. Plus Doug led the league among D in scoring 5 times and was runner up another 5. I think overall Bourque was the best offensive player of the 3, because he was a better goal scorer, with Harvey in 2nd and Lidstrom 3rd.

Jagr gets overrated some because he has a high offensive peak. It's quite amazing no doubt, but he played zero defense throughout his career, always came up short in crunch time when he was in his prime, with or without Mario, and generally was a compiler after he left Pittsburgh at age 28, although he did have 2 great regular seasons in NY to be fair, after the lockout. Think of Phil Esposito. His offensive peak is actually even better than Jagr, and he also has a great deal of postseason success as well. But like Jagr, neither played much defense of any kind.

Jagr simply has more holes in his resume than others above him IMO.

Many people (especially Euro's) seem to undersell Roy as it pertains to Hasek. If you look at some of the studies I posted done by folks like Q and Hockey Outsider, Roy's regular season is very impressive given he played the majority of his career in a much, much higher scoring environment and still managed to not trail Hasek much in key statistics. And obviously the biggest gap is postseason play. Roy almost single handedly led 2 Montreal teams to SC victories. His postseason numbers and accolades blow pretty much everyone away, especially goalies. Hasek certainly wasn't a poor playoff performer but he trails Roy by a wide margin.

 

[ImporterExporter]

How did you mitigate or balance the team issue question?

Did you add, neutralize or subtract for the ability or willingness of players to set egos aside and buy into the team success concept?

Team strength was a metric I focused on, yes, but I try to be careful when assigning a value to that. It would be very easy to say Montreal greats during the Toe Blake and Scotty Bowman years had a distinct advantage in team make up and strength, and punish them individually.

Notice I pointed out Ovechkin losing credit in relationship to his failures in the postseason, both on a team scale but individually. The Caps have had some of the most dominant regular season teams of the cap era but routinely fall flat and Ovechkin has been rather poor since 2010/11. Compare the failures of a Marcel Dionne for example to Ovechkin and one can see that at least Dionne could claim almost all of his LA Kings teams were very over matched and usually at best average among NHL teams of that time period.

 

[BraveCanadian]

And this very forum has a sticky that links to that ATD master thread.

I hadn't noticed that, good stuff!

 

[BraveCanadian]

Jagr gets overrated some because he has a high offensive peak. It's quite amazing no doubt, but he played zero defense throughout his career, always came up short in crunch time when he was in his prime, with or without Mario

Just want to point out that this is absolutely false.

You linked to my bio so you should know better.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Jagr in '99 was the only player on the team and willed us past NJ (!) singlehandedly...on one leg to boot...

 

[Sentinel]

The thinking is this: They have similar peaks relative to their peers, but Roy has a clearly superior record of playoff performances.

They were each other's peers. Yet Hasek has two Harts and a OG gold, with a clear record of beating Roy in head-to-head matches.

 

[BraveCanadian]

They were each other's peers. Yet Hasek has two Harts and a OG gold, with a clear record of beating Roy in head-to-head matches.

Their statistical primes were not at the same time.

Prime Roy wasn't winning Hart trophies against prime Gretzky and Lemieux.

The Olympic gold is a great feather in Hasek's cap but anything can happen in single elimination.. if I recall correctly, Roy outplayed Hasek in regulation and Canada lost on the gimmick? (with a little help from the post)

 

[Canadiens1958]

Chicago

Team strength was a metric I focused on, yes, but I try to be careful when assigning a value to that. It would be very easy to say Montreal greats during the Toe Blake and Scotty Bowman years had a distinct advantage in team make up and strength, and punish them individually.

Notice I pointed out Ovechkin losing credit in relationship to his failures in the postseason, both on a team scale but individually. The Caps have had some of the most dominant regular season teams of the cap era but routinely fall flat and Ovechkin has been rather poor since 2010/11. Compare the failures of a Marcel Dionne for example to Ovechkin and one can see that at least Dionne could claim almost all of his LA Kings teams were very over matched and usually at best average among NHL teams of that time period.

Still you have the following paradox. Sixties Chicago with five players although not nearly as highly ranked, same number as the 1956-60 Canadiens. Chicago with more players and higher rankings than dynasty Leafs 1947 to 1951 and 1962 to 1967, represented by Apps Sr. and Mahovlich each, throw in Kelly plus Bathgate who never fit with the Leafs. 1970s dynasty Canadiens with three players.

Somehow Ted Kennedy, Dave Keon and Jacques Lemaire, team first players, are relegated while offensively the more attractive, but less team productive players who are in the same group - Bathgate, Ovechkin - not different from Brett Hull or Marcel Dionne are getting a pass.

Ovechkin is much closer to Malkin than Crosby in terms of overall results and team contributions. Only real edge Ovechkin has is staying healthy, which is a skill.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Just want to point out that this is absolutely false.

You linked to my bio so you should know better.

Is it really BC?

I am a Pens diehard and watched/remember most of Jagr's years pretty darn clearly. While there were a handful of years where he led the team in scoring, there were also numerous times where he came up short or unimpressive in series if you factor in the entire scope of a hockey game. Jagr took some really stupid penalties over the years in the postseason for Pitt and more than once was near tops in PIMs.

I never felt like Jagr was a real leader and had the ability to raise his game to or even beyond his regular season production. On the stat sheet he looks pretty decent some years but Jagr wasn't a guy who had "it" when it came to the vast majority of key situations.

Now by the very late 90's and early 2000's the Pens were very average and often below average, but he was gone after 2001 anyway.

Jagr in '99 was the only player on the team and willed us past NJ (!) singlehandedly...on one leg to boot...

I remember 99 well. He was inspirational in the few games he suited up for, and had a couple of great games while being far less than 100%, but I also clearly remember Marty Straka as really the key offensive guy in that series. Straka was a guy who was underappreciated by many in Pittsburgh and outside the city. In those lean late 90's teams Straka seemed like he raised his game in the postseason for weaker teams more than Jagr did, given the talent gap between the two. Not that Straka wasn't talented, he certainly was. Just not near a player like Jagr.