Sakic vs Forsberg - better peak

[marty 4 hart*]

I am not arguing for Forsberg. I would rather have Sakic.
I am arguing that your first post was completely erroneous. Sakic did not face the best shutdown players. Forsberg did more often than not. Trying to play off his points as easy because Sakic faced better defenders and shutdown forwards is just a lie.

And for the record, Forsberg was not bad defensively himself(Slight nod to Sakic). A 2nd, 4th, 6th and 7th place Selke finish(Best defensive forward) for Forsberg is nothing to sneeze at.

Yes, I would rather have Sakic, but you should avoid making things up to support your case. At their peaks, they were very comparable.

Do you mean that other teams were more afraid of Forsberg than Sakic?

 

[Padan]

Forsberg was clearly a more consistent playoff performer. Sakic had a monster playoff in 1996, but if you exclude their respective top playoff runs (point wise) Forsberg has a clear edge in PPG (1.31 to 1.04).

I recall that Sakic was close to brutal in the back-to-back seasons that Avs lost to Dallas in the WCF. He put up 8 points in those 14 games while Forsberg had 12 points. Not to mention the upset against Detroit in 2002, where Sakic just disappeared (5 points in 7 games and was -5 (!)). Forsberg was still a major threat in that series. Then you have the choke against Oilers in the first round of the 1998 playoffs, where Forsberg put up friggin' 11 points despite receiving a concussion in game 4. Sakic just wasn't very good in that series.

And don't forget that Forsberg still put up 21 points in the 1996 playoffs, and lead the 2001 playoffs in points before the injury. Colorado would never get past LA Kings in the second round if it wasn't for Forsberg, who dominated that series.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Forsberg was clearly a more consistent playoff performer. Sakic had a monster playoff in 1996, but if you exclude their respective top playoff runs (point wise) Forsberg has a clear edge in PPG (1.31 to 1.04).

I recall that Sakic was close to brutal in the back-to-back seasons that Avs lost to Dallas in the WCF. He put up 8 points in those 14 games while Forsberg had 12 points. Not to mention the upset against Detroit in 2002, where Sakic just disappeared (5 points in 7 games and was -5 (!)). Forsberg was still a major threat in that series. Then you have the choke against Oilers in the first round of the 1998 playoffs, where Forsberg put up friggin' 11 points despite receiving a concussion in game 4. Sakic just wasn't very good in that series.

And don't forget that Forsberg still put up 21 points in the 1996 playoffs, and lead the 2001 playoffs in points before the injury. Colorado would never get past LA Kings in the second round if it wasn't for Forsberg, who dominated that series.

Sakic was injured for some of his "bad" playoffs, which hurts his PPG. Forsberg tended to sit out when suffering from injuries (not necessarily his fault, maybe the type of his injuries). 97-98 and 99-00 in particular were injury-riddle seasons for Sakic and it's likely he wasn't at his best in the playoffs. The 97-98 injury was a knee injury he suffered at the Olympics - a pretty devastating one for a guy like Sakic who relied on his speed more than Forsberg did. (I'm using wikipedia to refresh my memory as to the details).

 

[IggyFan12]

Forsberg never won the cup without Sakic while Sakic did it for two round with out Forsberg. Forsberg was a band-aid who isnt even in the same class of Sakic.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Forsberg never won the cup without Sakic while Sakic did it for two round with out Forsberg. Forsberg was a band-aid who isnt even in the same class of Sakic.

As a fan of both players, I find your perspective to be particularly naive.

 

[SEALBound]

Forsberg = The most over rated player in hockey history.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Forsberg = The most over rated player in hockey history.

Care to back that up with something? Preferably something which is related to the subject at hand?

 

[Briere Up There*]

Forsberg = The most over rated player in hockey history.

In general? I disagree.

On HF? Indisputably.

As for the question here, I give a slight edge to Forsberg in terms of pure peak performance. Other variables make Sakic the superior player obviously. Namely a defensive edge and most importantly an ability to stay on the ice.

 

[Pentothal]

This Forsberg is the most overrat.. thing is getting old. Something always tells me the poster to claim this is too young to have witnessed him play.

To me they are pretty much a wash. My inner Swede will always have a soft spot for Forsberg who is a national hero, but Sakic is perhaps the most likeable hockey player that I know of. Sakic also played a complete game and that wrister of his was deadly. Such a shame about Peters health though.

 

[Czech Your Math]

Here's some data from '96/97-03/04 (note: regular season only, OT losses counted as losses, weighted based on games missed and win % WITH player in lineup):

Colorado
------------
123 games w/o Forsberg
Expected win % = .634
Actual win % = .533

91 games w/o Sakic
Expected win % = .592
Actual win % = .593