Sergei Fedorov (1993-94) vs Alexander Ovechkin (2007-08) vs Jaromir Jagr (1998-99)

[daver]

Different culture. Center has always been abnormally highly held in Canada. Not the case in most other countries, though that might've changed a bit in later years. There's a reason for all the exciting wingers Russia (Makarov, Krutov, Ovechkin, Bure, Mogilny, Kovalchuk, and on and on it goes...) have created while Larionov (unspectacular but extremely intelligent and very responsible) instead was a center. Different view on the position.

Just to be clear here, are you supporting the premise that 2nd assists are arbitrarily accumulated and in no way reflect playmaking abilities?

 

[Nick Hansen]

Just to be clear here, are you supporting the premise that 2nd assists are arbitrarily accumulated and in no way reflect playmaking abilities?

No. But some 2nd assists are more valuable than others. 2nd assists are a strange concept to me anyway.

Very American.

 

[daver]

You think Ovechkin and Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull lacked skills. lol

Ovechkin has one of the greatest shots of all time. You don't want a guy like that taking faceoffs. There are plenty of marginal players who are great at faceoffs. You want him ready for the one-timer.

What you are suggesting is tantamount to saying being the greatest goal scorer of all time is a weakness.

So how is this relevant anyways? Jagr is a winger. I guess him getting so many 2As is that much more impressive, or at the very least should not be dismissed due to the "centre bias".

 

[Midnight Judges]

Just to be clear here, are you supporting the premise that 2nd assists are arbitrarily accumulated and in no way reflect playmaking abilities?

Nobody supports that premise.

The premise is that secondary assists are not nearly as indicative of skill as primary assists or goals.

 

[Midnight Judges]

So how is this relevant anyways? Jagr is a winger. I guess him getting so many 2As is that much more impressive, or at the very least should not be dismissed due to the "centre bias".

It became relevant when you said "Here is what we know:

- All players have the same opportunity to accumulate assists."

...which you couldn't possibly have actually thought about before you typed it.

Right, Jagr's secondary assists didn't come from being a center. And relative to the actual importance of secondary assists - which is closer to completing a mundane pass than scoring a goal - sure, Jagr having twice as many in 99 is commensurately better.

 

[daver]

Nobody supports that premise.

The premise is that secondary are not nearly as indicative of skill as primary assists or goals.

Except the numbers show that over a large sample of games, the best 1A players are the among the best 2A players. Why would anyone think that a player who has the most "primary points" of his era would not have a decent amount of 2nd assists over that time, or a season where he had an unusually high amount?

 

[Midnight Judges]

Except the numbers show that over a large sample of games, the best 1A players are the among the best 2A players. Why would anyone think that a player who has the most "primary points" of his era would not have a decent amount of 2nd assists over that time, or a season where he had an unusually high amount?

They might. Or they might not. It's fairly random.

[MOD]

 

[daver]

They might. Or they might not. It's fairly random.

Jagr was in on 53% of the Pens goals that year, I am pretty sure there were few random assists he got.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Jagr was in on 53% of the Pens goals that year, I am pretty sure there were few random assists he got.

This is terrible logic.

The 53% includes the randomness - but you use it as evidence that the randomness doesn't exist.

 

[Midnight Judges]

They might. Or they might not. It's fairly random.

[MOD]

My point was that some posters give credit for players being born in Canada, as in, X player has a gold medal whereas Y player does not. Clearly Canadian players have an elevated opportunity to get a gold medal, and crediting them for that while faulting other players over it is not entirely equitable on an individual basis.

daver does this rather frequently. I didn't say it because of where he is from, I said it because I think his evaluation criteria is flawed.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

And there goes your credibility...

Weak reply, no surprise considering how weak your initial post was.

Jagr’s dismal Selke voting record is pretty well in line with my assessment of his defensive play.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Fair enough; if by a cherry you mean a defender. He would often carry a basket of them right on his back, and then, voila, a cherry pie!

One of my favorite cherries comes at 2:04 here. It was a good and relentless cherry Jagr carried on his back. But what else can a hungry boy do than bake a pie. No other reason to pick a cherry like this:



Another favorite cherry comes at 4:56 here. Jaromir was an experienced baker by then. He let the cherry suck up to him from one side, wisely letting it think nothing can happen anymore, but he would serve a nice fat cherry pie to his mate:



If you want me to, I can serve you many more cherries Jagr picked, but you've seen them all anyway.

Not one defensive play to be found among these 3 vids (though I skipped through a bit). I don’t know what this post showing Jagr’s play in the O zone is supposed to accomplish, other than make me hungry.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

I think you make some great points so I am only going to quibble in a minor way: Defense is not half the game when peak Jagr is on the ice. It's more like 35% of the game.

Fair enough, I can agree with that.

So while Jagr sucked at defense and he had a rockstar attitude, these things count for something but it's not that big of a deal.

Respectfully disagree here.

 

[Sentinel]

Weak reply, no surprise considering how weak your initial post was.

Jagr’s dismal Selke voting record is pretty well in line with my assessment of his defensive play.

He had a Selke voting record? Wow!

 

[Troubadour]

Not one defensive play to be found among these 3 vids (though I skipped through a bit). I don’t know what this post showing Jagr’s play in the O zone is supposed to accomplish, other than make me hungry.

You said he cherry picked. Which is not true. So I made fun of you. And there actually were a couple of takeaways upon which he scored. But you're stuck in the D zone. A checking line poster

 

[TheGoldenJet]

You said he cherry picked. Which is not true. So I made fun of you. And there actually were a couple of takeaways upon which he scored. But you're stuck in the D zone. A checking line poster

By cherry picker I meant he was a no show in his own zone, more often than not. Not that his points came easy or that he couldn’t score highlight reel goals.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

I would presume his defense contributed a lot to him winning the Hart that year. FWIW, Jagr's Hart win was considerably more stronger than Federov's.

If the difference between Ovechkin and Crosby defensively (which you harp on about to no end) is a mole hill, the difference between Jagr and a prime Fedorov in the D zone is Mount Everest by comparison.

 

[Troubadour]

By cherry picker I meant he was a no show in his own zone, more often than not. Not that his points came easy or that he couldn’t score highlight reel goals.

OK, that makes more sense. But what Panther was trying to tell you is that Jagr was a no-show in his own zone because he was showing up at the other end of the rink. And while his strategy and possession play and reluctance to skate back when he or one of his teammates lost the puck sometimes led to trouble, more often it seemed to benefit his team.

Of course he was never there to be used in any situation like Feds was. His style was still very effective in its own right though. I'm not opposed to rating Fedorov's year higher in any way btw, although I chose differently.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

OK, that makes more sense. But what Panther was trying to tell you is that Jagr was a no-show in his own zone because he was showing up at the other end of the rink. And while his strategy and possession play and reluctance to skate back when he or one of his teammates lost the puck sometimes led to trouble, more often it seemed to benefit his team.

Of course he was never there to be used in any situation like Feds was. His style was still very effective in its own right though. I'm not opposed to rating Fedorov's year higher in any way btw, although I chose differently.

I get what you’re saying, and to a certain extent puck possesion does keep the play out of the D zone, but I cannot agree that we hand wave Jagr’s poor defense away due to his “style”.

 

[Troubadour]

I get what you’re saying, and to a certain extent puck possesion does keep the play out of the D zone, but I cannot agree that we hand wave Jagr’s poor defense away due to his “style”.

Well, my take on this is just different. Jagr was simply not nimble enough to be both an efficient defensive player and an offensive animal on top. If a guy of his build attempts to be everywhere, he ends up being nowhere. Had he been a more fervent defender, there is absolutely no way he would have conserved enough energy to play the sort of offense he played, especially in the clutch and grab era.

And since his natural instincts were all about offense and his play did benefit his team, I doubt focusing more on defense would have made him a better or more useful player. I think he would have been worse. I mean, almost anyone can destroy. Very few people could do what he was doing in the O zone. And if he had played a third line winger hockey, who would have done all the scoring? The real third liners? Makes no sense.

It's alright to prefer guys like Feds and their versatility, but asking Jagr to defend would be like asking Fedorov to play Jagr style. Would have never worked. In my opinion.

 

[c9777666]

1999 Jagr.

He not only did the most with the least roster-wise, but led a deeper playoff run than the others

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

1999 Jagr.

He not only did the most with the least roster-wise, but led a deeper playoff run than the others

1998-99 Martin Straka was better than any support on the 2007-08 Capitals, (but beyond that the Penguins had not much).

2007-08 Ovechkin had 65 goals and 112 points. 2nd place on the team (young, pre-prime Backstrom) had 69 points.

 

[Sentinel]

If the difference between those two defensively (which you harp on about to no end) is a mole hill, the difference between Jagr and a prime Fedorov in the D zone is Mount Everest by comparison.

Look, what Jagr did was great. That season and the ones around it. He was the most consistent offensive force in the league for many years. But his overall impact was not as high as those of Feds (for one year) and Ovy.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Alright, enough talk about each other, more talk about forwards having great seasons.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Look, what Jagr did was great. That season and the ones around it. He was the most consistent offensive force in the league for many years. But his overall impact was not as high as those of Feds (for one year) and Ovy.

Agreed.