Pick 2 to start a team (Fedorov, Sakic, Forsberg, Malkin, Yzerman, Crosby)

[ITM]

Seriously?

I'm guessing you didn't bother to read the rest of the sentence, which reads: "With a 100+ point Selke winning best skater (maybe in the history of hockey) secured as my second line centre..."...Meaning Fedorov.

The first part of the sentence doesn't describe Crosby.

Now if the "seriously" pertains to something else, you'll have to clarify. If it doesn't...

 

[Sentinel]

These six players can be comfortably divided into two groups: healthy (Y, Feds, Joe) and injured (Sid, Geno, Fors). I pick any two from the first group.

 

[daver]

Avs were always favorites vs DET and DAL?

You don't think the post-lockout Pens have generally been favorites vs anyone in the East but maybe Caps?.

I don't think there is much to choose between the Avs and Pens in terms of team success during their respective peaks, and how many series in which they were favoured.

To say that Malkin and Crosby benefitted from weaker competition relatively speaking is not accurate IMO.

 

[daver]

Most of the names you use were linemates of Forsberg/Sakic, you can just as easily say they elevated their linemates to a larger degree.

Is it easier to believe that those 8 AVs players were better than the 8 Pens players.

AVS
Sandis Ozolinsh
Milan Hejduk
Valeri Kamensky
Claude Lemieux
Adam Deadmarsh
Chris Drury
Alex Tanguay
Rob Blake

vs.

PENS
Chris Kunitz
Kris Letang
Phil Kessel
Sergei Gonchar
Jordan Staal
Pascal Dupuis
Max Talbot
Tyler Kennedy

 

[GMR]

These six players can be comfortably divided into two groups: healthy (Y, Feds, Joe) and injured (Sid, Geno, Fors). I pick any two from the first group.

I don't think you can put Crosby and Malkin in that group with Forsberg. Crosby has already played more games than Forsberg, and Malkin is only a few games behind in games played. Both players are more durable than Forsberg was.

 

[MadLuke]

If we're starting from scratch a lot of those injuries could easily not happen, especially in Crosby's case where a lot of his seemed to be bad luck. I'd also take my chances with Forsberg and tell him to tone it down a bit in the regular season while saving his best for the playoffs, and at his best him and Crosby are the best playoff centers since the late 90s.

You are probably right for Crosby, but was Forsberg foot issue caused by injuries or a very probable condition to re-occur in parallel universe ? Is very physical game is also a recurring factor. I agree that we cannot really use freak incident like a puck in the face here.

What is really tempting with Yzerman/Sakic combo for a franchise is the length of elite play.

Yzerman was elite from about age 18 to 36, offensive prime between 22 to 28, but he was still ppg in the playoff at 36.

Sakic was elite from about age 20 to 37.


That a very large 16 year's windows of 2 elite center in the playoff at the same time, you could easily achieve to get at least 2 different cup winning windows with 2 different supporting group being good enough in that time frame.

 

[bathdog]

I'm guessing you didn't bother to read the rest of the sentence, which reads: "With a 100+ point Selke winning best skater (maybe in the history of hockey) secured as my second line centre..."...Meaning Fedorov.

The first part of the sentence doesn't describe Crosby.

Now if the "seriously" pertains to something else, you'll have to clarify. If it doesn't...

I actually read your post twice and still managed a brain fart, sorry. When you see these type of statements with some frequency it becomes a bit of an automated process. If you think Crosby pre-ankle skating, top-10 Selke finish, 100pts+ obviously. I'm sure there are people that can cook that up, on the main board at least.

Add the fact that Feds only hit/was on pace to hit 100 twice in his career, both during higher scoring seasons, which also deflected me away from it a little.

I don't think there is much to choose between the Avs and Pens in terms of team success during their respective peaks, and how many series in which they were favoured.

To say that Malkin and Crosby benefitted from weaker competition relatively speaking is not accurate IMO.

Pens had more team success, Avs was in a much tougher environment.

Of course it is. Forsberg/Sakic played about a third of their playoff career as a duo against DET and DAL.

The 2 best teams in the East post-lockout, outside of Pens, are probably BOS (only other East Cup winner since 2007) and WSH (much winning RS team), would you not agree?

Crosby/Malkin faced BOS and WSH a whopping 15% of their playoff games.

Doubt many thinks DPE DET/DAL and post-lockout BOS/WSH are equally good, the only team in the same vicinity Crosby/Malkin faced was imo 2008/2009 Wings.

Is it easier to believe that those 8 AVs players were better than the 8 Pens players.

AVS
Sandis Ozolinsh
Milan Hejduk
Valeri Kamensky
Claude Lemieux
Adam Deadmarsh
Chris Drury
Alex Tanguay
Rob Blake

vs.

PENS
Chris Kunitz
Kris Letang
Phil Kessel
Sergei Gonchar
Jordan Staal
Pascal Dupuis
Max Talbot
Tyler Kennedy

I believe the Avs group you listed were collectively better, but so what? None of those players made Sakic or Forsberg.

Also seems like an unorthodox way to compare, and the cutoff becomes arbitrary too, because conviniently Kennedy (0.36ppg) just edges out Hossa (1.30ppg), Guerin (0.69ppg), and Guentzel (0.84ppg), and of course you chose Blake (0.66ppg) over Foote (0.27ppg) despite equally many points scored, and despite Foote being a much larger part of the franchise.

 

[MadLuke]

These six players can be comfortably divided into two groups: healthy (Y, Feds, Joe) and injured (Sid, Geno, Fors). I pick any two from the first group.

Sakic played 90.6% of the league regular season game during is career.
Yzerman played 86% of the league regular season game during is career.
Federov played 86% of the league regular season game during is career.
Crosby played 82.3% of the league regular season game during is career.
Malkin played 81.3% of the league regular season game during is career.

Forsberg before it's colorado return played in 73.3% of the league regular season game during is career and missed many playoff game and had a shortened career.

Will have to see for Crosby and Malkin, but it could be 3 tier

Sakic being the iron man of that group.
Yzerman
Federov/Crosby/Malkin almost the same (federov stopped to be an impact player at what 34 ? He scored 3 playoff goal after the age of 32, it is not like he is out of reach in term of impact game played for them.

Forsberg

 

[daver]

Pens had more team success, Avs was in a much tougher environment.

Of course it is. Forsberg/Sakic played about a third of their playoff career as a duo against DET and DAL.

The 2 best teams in the East post-lockout, outside of Pens, are probably BOS (only other East Cup winner since 2007) and WSH (much winning RS team), would you not agree?

Crosby/Malkin faced BOS and WSH a whopping 15% of their playoff games.

Doubt many thinks DPE DET/DAL and post-lockout BOS/WSH are equally good, the only team in the same vicinity Crosby/Malkin faced was imo 2008/2009 Wings.

Where did each team finish in the standings and what # seeds did they play? That should be the best way to gauge whether one team faced harder competition on a relative basis. That is what a claim of "weaker competition" should be backed up with.

Whether you think any teams from this era would or would not match up against any teams from the AVs era is irrelevant.

 

[daver]

I believe the Avs group you listed were collectively better, but so what? None of those players made Sakic or Forsberg.

Also seems like an unorthodox way to compare, and the cutoff becomes arbitrary too, because conviniently Kennedy (0.36ppg) just edges out Hossa (1.30ppg), Guerin (0.69ppg), and Guentzel (0.84ppg), and of course you chose Blake (0.66ppg) over Foote (0.27ppg) despite equally many points scored, and despite Foote being a much larger part of the franchise.

I don't think they made them either. I am happy to let the numbers speak for themselves but when someone starts questioning Crosby's and Malkin's numbers with things like "weaker competition" then it opens things up like this for discussion.

 

[FerrisRox]

Crosby and Fedorov.

 

[Merya]

I'll take Sakic and Fedorov and make them roommates so Feds doesn't go out with Kournikova.

 

[bathdog]

Where did each team finish in the standings and what # seeds did they play? That should be the best way to gauge whether one team faced harder competition on a relative basis. That is what a claim of "weaker competition" should be backed up with.

Whether you think any teams from this era would or would not match up against any teams from the AVs era is irrelevant.

Because you say so? It's really hard to discuss this with you if you can't acknowledge there are two different conferences in the NHL, which may or may not differentiate in strength. The majority of the playoffs is played against one's own conference.

Last year Gabala (who? yeah, some never heard of team from Azerbaijan) qualified for Europa League. So did Manchester United. Clearly they're on equal standings, and clearly they faced equally strong competition, right?

Between the two different lockouts...

95-04
West won 6 cups.
East won 4 cups.

There were 4 SCF sweeps of which...
West won 3.
East won 1.

There were 1 5-game SCF of which...
West won 1.
East won 0.

Collectively over this span West went 32-22 in matches in the SCF.

-----

06-17
West won 7 cups.
East won 5 cups.

There were 0 SCF sweeps of which...
West won 0.
East won 0.

There were 2 5-game SCF of which...
West won 2.
East won 0.

Collectively over this span West went 42-31 in matches in the SCF.

-----

Collectively since the mid-nineties lockout till now, West went 74-53 in matches in the SCF. There have been 6 multi Cup winners, of which 4 comes from West.

You don't think there is a pattern?

 

[daver]

Collectively since the mid-nineties lockout till now, West went 74-53 in matches in the SCF. There have been 6 multi Cup winners, of which 4 comes from West.

You don't think there is a pattern?

There is a pattern of dominant teams getting to the Cup finals regularly, not a pattern of the West conference winner automatically winning the Cup.

There were more dominant teams or teams that made the Finals more than once (Wings, Avs, Stars, Hawks, Kings, Ducks) from the West than the East during this time period. The East powerhouses or multi-SCF teams (Devils, Pens, Bruins) are 7 and 3 in the Cup finals.

When a non-powerhouse team from the West made the Finals as a one-off, they tend to lose (Flames, Oilers, Canucks, Sharks, Preds).

I don't think you can categorize the whole Conference as being better than the East.

Here are their standings over a ten year period:

Nords/Avs (95-04) - 1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,4,4

Pens (07-17) - 1,2,2,2,2,4,4,5,5,8


The AVs duo was on a clearly better regular season team.


The average Seed # they played was 4.6 for Forsberg/Sakic and 4.7 for Crosby/Malkin.

 

[bathdog]

There is a pattern of dominant teams getting to the Cup finals regularly, not a pattern of the West conference winner automatically winning the Cup.

Because there were more dominant teams in the West.

I never said West was automatically winning the Cup (even though I think the best teams were in the West, which you seem to agree with).

There were more dominant teams or teams that made the Finals more than once (Wings, Avs, Stars, Hawks, Kings, Ducks) from the West than the East during this time period. The East powerhouses or multi-SCF teams (Devils, Pens, Bruins) are 7 and 3 in the Cup finals.

Yes there were more dominant teams in the West, just as you conclude, thus is was tougher to come out of West, and considering 3/4 of the playoffs is played within it's own conference, the Avs and Wings duo's, proportionally faced more tough competition.

When a non-powerhouse team from the West made the Finals as a one-off, they tend to lose (Flames, Oilers, Canucks, Sharks, Preds).

East did a lot better in that situation?

FLA (96), WSH (98), BUF (99), CAR (02), OTT (07), NYR (14), TBL (15).

I don't think you can categorize the whole Conference as being better than the East.

Of course you can. More elite peers. You normally say lets compare peers, no?

 

[daver]

Yes there were more dominant teams in the West, just as you conclude, thus is was tougher to come out of West, and considering 3/4 of the playoffs is played within it's own conference, the Avs and Wings duo's, proportionally faced more tough competition.

So you want to position the AVs as being tough competition yet also promote the Pens as being better than the AVs because they had more success?

The AVs were the better team than the Pens which makes this whole "weaker competition" argument irrelevant. The AVs had better regular season finishes and faced the seeds they faced were about the same.

I don't get how you see comparing a pre-Cap team to a Post-cap team makes any sense. You can only compare their relative performances. It was easier to maintain a powerhouse team pre-Cap.

 

[daver]

Of course you can. More elite peers. You normally say lets compare peers, no?

If you want to argue that the AVs make the SCF more if they played in the EC then you will get no argument from me. I don't see the relevance of that to this discussion. It's about as relevant as saying put Roy on the Pens and they make more SCFs.

 

[threetimer*]

I'll take Sakic and Fedorov and make them roommates so Feds doesn't go out with Kournikova.

Excuse me, do you seriously consider Joe Sakic to be hotter than Anna Kournikova?

Or do you think that Sakic would have put Sergei on the chain and let him suffer through the spasms of withdrawal, handily wiping off the spume from Sergei's sweaty face?

 

[bathdog]

So you want to position the AVs as being tough competition yet also promote the Pens as being better than the AVs because they had more success?

The AVs were the better team than the Pens which makes this whole "weaker competition" argument irrelevant. The AVs had better regular season finishes and faced the seeds they faced were about the same.

I don't get how you see comparing a pre-Cap team to a Post-cap team makes any sense. You can only compare their relative performances. It was easier to maintain a powerhouse team pre-Cap.

Never said or implied that. More Cups doesn't necessarily mean better team.

That no player managed to maintain a ppg pace against those teams should tell you something.

If you're not open to those teams being tougher to face, then why on earth would you bring up Lids + Z as argument when Crosby 2009 SCF performance comes up?

 

[Cursed Lemon]

People are talking about Forsberg's injuries, but I wonder what Yzerman would've looked like without running knee-first into that post.

Also, Fedorov really underachieved for the rest of his career after 1998, so I'm a little wary of him.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Excuse me, do you seriously consider Joe Sakic to be hotter than Anna Kournikova?

Or do you think that Sakic would have put Sergei on the chain and let him suffer through the spasms of withdrawal, handily wiping off the spume from Sergei's sweaty face?

This went under-appreciated.


Sakic was pretty good about keeping the band together in 2001, but could you imagine having both Sakic and Fedorov in the Summer of 1997? How much are you paying up-front to keep both?

 

[daver]

If you're not open to those teams being tougher to face, then why on earth would you bring up Lids + Z as argument when Crosby 2009 SCF performance comes up?

There is no way to evaluate how Crosby and Malkin would have done if you placed them on the 95 to 04 AVs teams. It's baseless speculation.

Simple as that.

 

[bathdog]

There is no way to evaluate how Crosby and Malkin would have done if you placed them on the 95 to 04 AVs teams. It's baseless speculation.

Simple as that.

Just as it is Malkin wouldn't have thrived against a Lids + Z matchup.

 

[GordieHowsUrBreath]

wait a minute people still think these 90's guys are better than crosby?

don't see much of an argument for most of them over malkin either

more cups, more individual trophies and not even close to stopping

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think it is important to remember that Crosby's major injuries were had by either very questionable hits to the head (Steckel), a bad boarding (Hedman), or freak accident (slapshot to the face by his own teammate, Orpik).

Sid is one of the best conditioned athletes and hardest workers in the game.

Crosby is clearly the most distinguished player from the list in the OP and not picking him is a bit baffling in my mind, especially given the events of the past year+. He is a borderline top 10 player of all time, whereas Sakic and Yzerman are, at best right around 30 or so, followed by the rest of the group, in varying places.

Hard not to go Sid and Burnaby Joe here. Sakic gives you another great leader, big time playoff performer and very solid 2 way hockey player.