Paul Kariya or Patrick Kane?

Paul Kariya or Patrick Kane?

  • Kariya

  • Kane


Results are only viewable after voting.

22FUTON9

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
3,210
2,267
I really do believe Kariya played during the worst time possible and imo he would have been considered one of the greats if he played in any other era. Probably not as good but I think his peak would have been right up their with the Mcdavids and the Crosbys
 

Wrath

Registered User
Jan 13, 2012
2,184
186
I really do believe Kariya played during the worst time possible and imo he would have been considered one of the greats if he played in any other era. Probably not as good but I think his peak would have been right up their with the Mcdavids and the Crosbys

I don't think he necessarily would have peaked as high as McDavid and Crosby, but I do agree that he was a bit ill suited for the DPE.

Not in that he was getting dragged down by all the hooking and interference, he was shifty and quick enough to deal with that. The main issue was the lack of attention to high hits, the general celebration of "bone jarring" hits as well.

Case in point the Scott Stevens hit which was definitely late in the 2003 SCF. Nowadays that hit would result in at least a 5 game suspension.

I don't even (fully) blame Stevens for that either, we just didn't fully understand the dangers of playing the game so violently, that's just the way that players were encouraged to play back in the day.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
I think this is a great question. It's difficult to compare them, because their situations are so different, but Kariya was a pretty fantastic player. He just didn't come into the league at the best time, and he certainly didn't have the same advantages of playing on a great team like Kane.

I'm inclined to say Kariya was better, because he had multiple 100 point seasons in the dead puck era. I think his totals are more impressive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WhatTheDuck

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Oct 23, 2014
28,353
39,702
I think this is a great question. It's difficult to compare them, because their situations are so different, but Kariya was a pretty fantastic player. He just didn't come into the league at the best time, and he certainly didn't have the same advantages of playing on a great team like Kane.

I'm inclined to say Kariya was better, because he had multiple 100 point seasons in the dead puck era. I think his totals are more impressive.

1996 and 1997 were high scoring seasosons at 3.14 and 2.92 goals per game respectively. Although in 99 in dipped a bit to 2.63. Kane's 100 point season was in a 2.71 goals per game league scoring season.

So Kane probably would have had another 100 point season or two if he played in Paul's era.
 

Nick Hansen

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
3,119
2,649
Nice poll. Went with Kane but Kariya was a pretty incredible talent himself. Would've been cool to see him in today's hockey with less hooking, garbage hits and so on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bukwas

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
1996 and 1997 were high scoring seasosons at 3.14 and 2.92 goals per game respectively. Although in 99 in dipped a bit to 2.63. Kane's 100 point season was in a 2.71 goals per game league scoring season.

So Kane probably would have had another 100 point season or two if he played in Paul's era.

Not necessarily. Kane would have had to deal with defensemen being able to practically bear hug players to slow them down. It goes beyond just scoring totals. There is a reason the bigger and less mobile defensemen were so effective, and it wasn't because there was no speed in the NHL.
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Oct 23, 2014
28,353
39,702
Not necessarily. Kane would have had to deal with defensemen being able to practically bear hug players to slow them down. It goes beyond just scoring totals. There is a reason the bigger and less mobile defensemen were so effective, and it wasn't because there was no speed in the NHL.

I could agree with that. And I'm sure you could agree with the notion that Paul would've had to deal with a league with more parity and more systems/defense based approach with better goaltending and fewer minutes played for the top players.

Goes both ways. But in both cases it's impossible to say what would have happened if both players swtiched shoes so you can only do so much with the comparison.

Their adjusted numbers are pretty damn close.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dingo

Laineux

Registered User
Aug 1, 2011
5,267
2,826
1996 and 1997 were high scoring seasosons at 3.14 and 2.92 goals per game respectively. Although in 99 in dipped a bit to 2.63. Kane's 100 point season was in a 2.71 goals per game league scoring season.

So Kane probably would have had another 100 point season or two if he played in Paul's era.
There were more powerplays and superstars played 25 minutes a night back in the DPE as well.
 

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
24,542
13,835
Vancouver
Kane's '15 was the best season between them but I'm not sure if one outlier is the best way to judge players. My gut tells me Kariya but I'm wondering if that's just 90s bias. Kane from '13-'17 was putting up similar or better numbers relative to the league and he didn't have a linemate like Selanne
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
I could agree with that. And I'm sure you could agree with the notion that Paul would've had to deal with a league with more parity and more systems/defense based approach with better goaltending and fewer minutes played for the top players.

Goes both ways. But in both cases it's impossible to say what would have happened if both players swtiched shoes so you can only do so much with the comparison.

Their adjusted numbers are pretty damn close.

Oh, I agree. That's why it's really difficult to compare. The situations they were in was quite different.

I just think it favors Kariya a bit more to go to the same NHL Kane was in, because I think his strengths are better suited to it. For many of the same reasons Kane thrives in the current NHL too. It's tough to back that up with anything more than, well, my own observations of the different times and the two players.

Like you said, it's really impossible to say. It's a cool thing to think about though.
 

authentic

Registered User
Jan 28, 2015
25,405
10,421
I would have to say Kane, but they were fairly even outside of Kane's peak season if not a slight edge to Kariya. Kane's playoffs, peak, and never playing with an equal caliber offensive linemate give him the edge for me though.
 

wintersej

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2011
21,969
16,663
North Andover, MA
I really do believe Kariya played during the worst time possible and imo he would have been considered one of the greats if he played in any other era. Probably not as good but I think his peak would have been right up their with the Mcdavids and the Crosbys

Yeah DPE and Scott Stevens style hits tough for him. Made for the modern era. Think the McDavid and Crosby statement is a step too far tho.
 

22FUTON9

Registered User
Jun 30, 2010
3,210
2,267
Yeah DPE and Scott Stevens style hits tough for him. Made for the modern era. Think the McDavid and Crosby statement is a step too far tho.
Okay maybe but I could see him being in that top 5 forward discussion year in and year out for sure, with a maybe a year or two being up for the hart discussion
 
  • Like
Reactions: wintersej

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,095
1,381
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
Pretty interesting: three first-team All-Star nods each. Amazing that- as I look at this, I see that Kariya's high-water mark came at age 22! After age 25, he was out of his prime... but it wasn't his freaking fault. Hurt not so much by the "Dead-Puck-Era" as much as the "Deliberate-Attempts-to-Injure-Are-Tolerated" era. By contrast, Kane had his peak at age 27. [And having said that, I believe that he's on the downward arc of his career now.] More out of wishful thinking than sober analysis, I still think he might be just one quality linemate away from a nice Indian Summer run.

One-year-peak, two year extended peak: Kane
Five-year-prime: Kariya (even with that contract-squabble+injury year of 97-98)

As I looked further at Kariya's statistical package, I noticed freakish time-on-ice stats-- which (incidentally) don't seem comprehensively monitored pre-1998. {And it's easy to believe that he likely had a similar workload before that time, too.}

Although I can't demonstrate it with numbers, I think Kane was capable of that sort of work-rate, also. One of my enduring memories of Kane was with the US Olympic team, when he was being double-shifted, against Canada's best, as a 21-year-old.
 

Masch78

Registered User
Oct 5, 2017
2,459
1,584
I wish Paul Kariya would play now. I mean the pre Suter hit Kariya. He was pure dynamite. Bure dto.

Yeah DPE and Scott Stevens style hits tough for him. Made for the modern era. Think the McDavid and Crosby statement is a step too far tho.

I don't think he would be far behind them but it is tough to call since they are both center. What would a Suter hit and the Stevens late blindside hit do to McDavid? Kariya was on the way to become the best goalscorer of this time. The 95-97 seasons were an indication of it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peanut

Rhaegar Targaryen

Registered User
Jun 25, 2016
6,375
4,203
People remember Kariya a lot better than he actually was (if they even did really watch him, I know a lot of the younger posters didn’t even see him). This is Kane.
 

Luigi Lemieux

Registered User
Sep 26, 2003
21,437
9,057
Kariya put up more elite seasons - he had 4 seasons where i'd consider him a top 5ish player (95-96, 96-97, 98-99, 99-00) whereas Kane has 2 (15-16 and 16-17).
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->