Sergei Zubov

[tjcurrie]

Zubov is over-rated, if anything. He was a Norris-calibre defender for one season - 2005-06.

In that one season, he was absolutely elite. But that level of play shouldn't be projected back over his entire career.

For his first 5 seasons, he was basically a Russian Phil Housley. A brilliant PP player and passer who was rubbish in his own end.

After going to Dallas, he started to fix his defensive problems, but his offensive game suffered considerably. He averaged about 45 points/season from his move to Dallas until the lockout, which isn't exactly brilliant. He was a 10-15 overall defender in the league for most of this period.

He put both sides of his game together for one season in 2005-06, then started showing his age as he reached his late 30s.

If he'd had 5 seasons like 05-06, he might have been HHOF-worthy. But he didn't.

He played at that 05-06 level for the better part of his tenure in Dallas. You cant just stand back and look at stats and assume he didn't. He was vital to the Stars' success his whole time there. 50 points on Hitchcock's Stars is as good as 60+ on any other team. Labeling him overrated is absolutely insane.

 

[Sentinel]

Can somebody explain to me how a player with ONE THIRD PLACE FINISH in Norris voting and a couple of noteworthy postseasons ended up in the Hall of Fame?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Can somebody explain to me how a player with ONE THIRD PLACE FINISH in Norris voting and a couple of noteworthy postseasons ended up in the Hall of Fame?

It's because most people don't live in a strict binary world like you. There's nuance to things that range far beyond "Won Trophy?" [Y/N].

Zubov was an impact defenseman that showed wonderful adaptability throughout his career. He was consistently among the game's elite...and his very high skill level allowed him to produce, even under defensive clamps for most of his career...

 

[Sentinel]

It's because most people don't live in a strict binary world like you. There's nuance to things that range far beyond "Won Trophy?" [Y/N].

Zubov was an impact defenseman that showed wonderful adaptability throughout his career. He was consistently among the game's elite...and his very high skill level allowed him to produce, even under defensive clamps for most of his career...

It's not that he never won. He was never even a runner-up! A single third place finish? So, except for a single season, he was never even in the top 3 defensemen? How is that "elite"?

"Defensive clamps"? He was a defenseman!

 

[Michael Farkas]

It's not that he never won. He was never even a runner-up! A single third place finish? So, except for a single season, he was never even in the top 3 defensemen? How is that "elite"?

"Defensive clamps"? He was a defenseman!

This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is how you generally go about your business - and that's fine. But it's not an effective or, in my opinion, reasonable way of evaluating anything. Is the "elite" line at top 3?

And yes, as I'm sure you're aware, #1 defensemen tend to drive a team - offensively and defensively. Playing for coaches like Hitchcock and Tippett is a lot different than playing for coaches like Cooper and Sather.

As for the binary world...
Bourque, Stevens, MacInnis, Chelios, Leetch, Lidstrom, Pronger...tough to get around those guys every time. Because if he did that all the time, then this thread isn't made, he would been in the HOF long ago, and then you would have made a thread about someone else who wasn't Top X in award voting...

In other words, 1st or 2nd in Norris Trophy voting isn't the bar here. It's a self-suffocating way of looking at...anything.

 

[MadLuke]

Subban won it, how many would pick the career of Subban vs a career of Zubov for their franchise ?

We would never put the bar at that level for a forward, not being a clear top 2 forward any season would not remove you from HOF consideration.

Was Brendan Shanahan ever Top 5 forward in the nhl ?
Luc Robitaille ?

Got in that conversation in their peak at best, but not clearly the case they ever were top 5 and certainly never in the conversation for the top 2 (and they peaked specially robitaille in a era very rich in forward, Lemieux-Gretzky leaving only 3 spot in the top 5 to start with).

Elite consistency can beat a hot peak that put you in the top 2 in a single season in a voting award like the Norris like Subban had.

 

[MS]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is how you generally go about your business - and that's fine. But it's not an effective or, in my opinion, reasonable way of evaluating anything. Is the "elite" line at top 3?

And yes, as I'm sure you're aware, #1 defensemen tend to drive a team - offensively and defensively. Playing for coaches like Hitchcock and Tippett is a lot different than playing for coaches like Cooper and Sather.

As for the binary world...
Bourque, Stevens, MacInnis, Chelios, Leetch, Lidstrom, Pronger...tough to get around those guys every time. Because if he did that all the time, then this thread isn't made, he would been in the HOF long ago, and then you would have made a thread about someone else who wasn't Top X in award voting...

In other words, 1st or 2nd in Norris Trophy voting isn't the bar here. It's a self-suffocating way of looking at...anything.

He had two seasons where he finished higher than 8th in Norris voting and one of those seasons (1993-94) was extremely suspect as he somehow finished ahead of prime healthy Leetch and Chelios when he was basically a Russian Phil Housley at that stage of his career.

He's a prime example of the 'Niedermayer Effect' where a guy peaks very late in his career and then fans/media retcon that level of performance back over his entire career when it wasn't what actually happened.

 

[Dingo]

Subban won it, how many would pick the career of Subban vs a career of Zubov for their franchise ?

We would never put the bar at that level for a forward, not being a clear top 2 forward any season would not remove you from HOF consideration.

Was Brendan Shanahan ever Top 5 forward in the nhl ?
Luc Robitaille ?

Got in that conversation in their peak at best, but not clearly the case they ever were top 5 and certainly never in the conversation for the top 2 (and they peaked specially robitaille in a era very rich in forward, Lemieux-Gretzky leaving only 3 spot in the top 5 to start with).

Elite consistency can beat a hot peak that put you in the top 2 in a single season in a voting award like the Norris like Subban had.

Mike Green was twice runner up......

i dont have a horse in this race. Zubov was good, imo, but i have a hard time with what constitues HOF.

Would be easier if it was Hall Of Excellence, and you essentially had to be considered a top 3 player in your position at least 3 times, or something like that.

 

[sr edler]

Zubov had a quiet demeanour, didn't throw booming hits, didn't have a big sexy Weberesque shot, so of course he's going to get undersold in Norris voting, which, by the way, is voted on by journalists aka sportswriters. Since when is tabloid journalists/sportswriters an esteemed benchmark, you'll have to ask yourself.

 

[sr edler]

Zubov was pretty subtle at times, much like Niedermayer. You need a good eye to catch some of that, some of which isn't just BOOM! BOOM! hits or BAM! BAM! shots or GRRRR! GRRRR! angry in a scrum, so not surprised large chunks of HOH think he was overrated.

 

[Hobnobs]

It's not that he never won. He was never even a runner-up! A single third place finish? So, except for a single season, he was never even in the top 3 defensemen? How is that "elite"?

"Defensive clamps"? He was a defenseman!

Players are more than just individual awards. Alfredsson has a calder and one top-5 in hart voting for example. We all know he was a great player. Shanahan basically only have two AST-1s. Francis has one selke, really. Art Coulter, Laprade etc etc. Lots of players who were great but without any real accolades.

 

[Boxscore]

I've always felt Zubov was a very interesting player. Early on he was an offensive dynamo and had some huge moments for the Rangers prior to the trade. His short stint in Pittsburgh was puzzling to say the least. I thought he was tailor made for the Pens machine and he ended up with an awesome 66 points in 64 GP before being quickly moved to Dallas where he forged his legacy.

As a Star, he carved out a brilliant career and, for my money, was one of the best RH defensemen of his era. In Dallas, he did it all... he was a true general. I absolutely loved his game. To me, the baffling thing about Zu was that he was moved twice early on. Sure, I know Chelios and Murphy were also traded a couple of times, but high-end RHD like Zubov shouldn't have been seen as expendable in the 90s imho... especially the 2nd deal where he was flipped for an aging Kevin Hatcher.

I think the early "rumors" involving Zubov hurt him in the eyes of fans. He supposedly once admitted to Neil Smith that he was afraid of Eric Lindros and the Flyers after facing them. Who knows if that's 100% true or not? And it was also rumored that the Pens traded him because he wasn't the best fit with Mario on the PP. Again, I find that bizarre, and his 66 points in 64 kind of washes that for me. But his 12-year run in Dallas was magnificent. In fact, during 8 of those years he averaged 25-26+ minutes a night! And, as others said, he was super on the PP.

Players are more than just individual awards. Alfredsson has a calder and one top-5 in hart voting for example. We all know he was a great player. Shanahan basically only have two AST-1s. Francis has one selke, really. Art Coulter, Laprade etc etc. Lots of players who were great but without any real accolades.

100%. Look at Nathan MacKinnon. How many players on the planet would we select over him if starting a franchise? Count on one hand.

 

[Hobnobs]

I've always felt Zubov was a very interesting player. Early on he was an offensive dynamo and had some huge moments for the Rangers prior to the trade. His short stint in Pittsburgh was puzzling to say the least. I thought he was tailor made for the Pens machine and he ended up with an awesome 66 points in 64 GP before being quickly moved to Dallas where he forged his legacy.

As a Star, he carved out a brilliant career and, for my money, was one of the best RH defensemen of his era. In Dallas, he did it all... he was a true general. I absolutely loved his game. To me, the baffling thing about Zu was that he was moved twice early on. Sure, I know Chelios and Murphy were also traded a couple of times, but high-end RHD like Zubov shouldn't have been seen as expendable in the 90s imho... especially the 2nd deal where he was flipped for an aging Kevin Hatcher.

I think the early "rumors" involving Zubov hurt him in the eyes of fans. He supposedly once admitted to Neil Smith that he was afraid of Eric Lindros and the Flyers after facing them. Who knows if that's 100% true or not? And it was also rumored that the Pens traded him because he wasn't the best fit with Mario on the PP. Again, I find that bizarre, and his 66 points in 64 kind of washes that for me. But his 12-year run in Dallas was magnificent. In fact, during 8 of those years he averaged 25-26+ minutes a night! And, as others said, he was super on the PP.


100%. Look at Nathan MacKinnon. How many players on the planet would we select over him if starting a franchise? Count on one hand.

Yes, for sure and I doubt anyone will have a problem with Nate in the Hall.

As for zubov in Pittsburgh. As far as I remember it was Mario himself that didn't like Zubov.

 

[Boxscore]

As for zubov in Pittsburgh. As far as I remember it was Mario himself that didn't like Zubov.

I wonder if that's true. I've heard mixed on that. I couldn't imagine Mario saying, "I don't like a 66 point defenseman" but you never know. Some players just don't jive.

 

[Hobnobs]

I wonder if that's true. I've heard mixed on that. I couldn't imagine Mario saying, "I don't like a 66 point defenseman" but you never know. Some players just don't jive.

He didn't like that Zubov held on to the puck on the PP. He wanted to be the play driver. Ego is a fickle bitch.

I do remember there being reports of a friction between them about the PP. Zubov denied it publically. Mario didn't.

 

[MXD]

Can somebody explain to me how a player with ONE THIRD PLACE FINISH in Norris voting and a couple of noteworthy postseasons ended up in the Hall of Fame?

This bump will attend junior high next September.

 

[K Fleur]

I’m actively waiting till 2032 to bump a thread about Kevin Lowe being in the HOf

 

[Sentinel]

I've always felt Zubov was a very interesting player. Early on he was an offensive dynamo and had some huge moments for the Rangers prior to the trade. His short stint in Pittsburgh was puzzling to say the least. I thought he was tailor made for the Pens machine and he ended up with an awesome 66 points in 64 GP before being quickly moved to Dallas where he forged his legacy.

As a Star, he carved out a brilliant career and, for my money, was one of the best RH defensemen of his era. In Dallas, he did it all... he was a true general. I absolutely loved his game. To me, the baffling thing about Zu was that he was moved twice early on. Sure, I know Chelios and Murphy were also traded a couple of times, but high-end RHD like Zubov shouldn't have been seen as expendable in the 90s imho... especially the 2nd deal where he was flipped for an aging Kevin Hatcher.

I think the early "rumors" involving Zubov hurt him in the eyes of fans. He supposedly once admitted to Neil Smith that he was afraid of Eric Lindros and the Flyers after facing them. Who knows if that's 100% true or not? And it was also rumored that the Pens traded him because he wasn't the best fit with Mario on the PP. Again, I find that bizarre, and his 66 points in 64 kind of washes that for me. But his 12-year run in Dallas was magnificent. In fact, during 8 of those years he averaged 25-26+ minutes a night! And, as others said, he was super on the PP.


100%. Look at Nathan MacKinnon. How many players on the planet would we select over him if starting a franchise? Count on one hand.

As others indicated, Zubov finished higher than EIGHTH only twice in twenty years. This is not just "not elite." This is pretty mediocre.

My Wings played Dallas a lot in those years. One player I always expected to turn the puck over was Zubov. Sure, he had a great stretch pass but he was a turnover machine and I was never afraid of him. Hatcher and even Sydor scared me more. I would have taken at least 4 players on my Wings over him: Lidstrom, Vladdy (pre-97), Chelios (post-98), Murphy.

Until two years ago, not many people would pick McKinnon for starting a franchise. In fact, this is the first year that he is finally living up to his hype. But he was always higher than TOP EIGHT in his position.

 

[MadLuke]

That seem all over the place, all replacement named are HOF and not many people would have took McKinnon to start a franchise ? You were blessed with way too many talent growing up with those superwings teams.

Like almost all teams Montreal did not had a last year Mack since forever as a forward..., they did not had 22 years old Mack........ in a very very long time either.

 

[Michael Farkas]

What the hell is going on here? What a mess.

Zubov being in the 95th percentile (or greater) percentile spanning (after being Soviet/Russian trained) the run and gun 90's, the DPE, and the post-lockout nuNHL is somehow NOT elite?

No one should have picked MacKinnon to start a franchise given what was available. But that didn't stop folks...

MacKinnon has only been a top 8 forward (since d-men are grouped together, we should group forwards too, right?) for, what, five of 10 seasons? So, "always higher" has a lot of explaining to do.

At this rate of evaluation, I'm not sure why you'd qualify taking Konstantinov over him "(pre-97)", it sounds like you'd very much take Konstantinov post-97 over Zubov too...

 

[MadLuke]

No one should have picked MacKinnon to start a franchise given what was available. But that didn't stop folks...

Feel like I am really not following, do anyone think Drafting MacKinnon over Barkov ended up being some big mistake that no one should have done ?

Are many people have teams constantly build around significantly better first line center than freaking Nathan MacKinnon or speaking about an other player ?

Zubov being mediocre... (the guy played 28-30 minutes a night of cup winners) he was not close to be an average nhler.... I feel like I must be just having missed some part of the first page and misreading people here.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, I don't know what's going on either. Like, Zubov isn't elite because of little nooks and crannies in Norris voting. But yet, he wants Chelios post-98 who finished top 5, what, one time in the 500 years he played after '98...and it's unclear, maybe wanted Sydor too?

I guess maybe he only watched Red Wings games and Zubov was bad against the Wings...? A quick look at his splits show that he was a heavy minus against the Wings.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I have mixed feelings on Zubov.

On the one hand, I agree that his Norris trophy record isn't impressive. (He finished higher than 8th, twice in a long career). Is it possible that he was shortchanged when it came to the Norris? Maybe, but I don't think so. The voters often gravitate towards defensemen with big point totals, and Zubov was one of the highest scoring defensemen of his era. He also played for some high profile teams (the 1994 Rangers, the 1996 Pens, and the 1999/00 Stars).

He was excellent in 2006 - perhaps the best defenseman in the regular season (after Lidstrom, of course). It's not difficult to imagine that some people incorrectly project backwards, and assume that he always played at that level. (The same thing happened with Scott Niedermayer or "playoff warrior" Keith Primeau).

On the other hand - there's more to player evaluation than how someone ranked in Norris voting. Zubov played a lot of minutes on some very good teams. From 1998 to 2007, Zubov was 2nd in the entire league in ES TOI, 1st in PP TOI, and 24th in PK TOI. (Obviously he was stronger offensively than defensively, but he wasn't getting anywhere close to Phil Housley, or even Sergei Gonchar, deployment). And he wasn't racking up crazy ice time playing on bad teams (I keep picking on Alexei Zhitnik when making this point). Dallas was the #2 team in the NHL during this period.

The counter-argument to that counter-argument is Zubov wasn't the key driver of Dallas's success. The Stars were much strong defensively than offensively (they had the lowest GAA during that period vs only T-10th highest goals per game). Therefore one could argue that Belfour, Hatcher, Lehtinen and Modano really drove the team's success. I know that plus/minus is only a vague approximation, but it's telling that Hatcher had better plus/minus than Zubov during their years in Dallas (despite playing fewer games, being way less talented offensively, and taking the tougher matchups).

A question - if Zubov is in the Hall, why isn't Gonchar? It's not a perfect comparison (Gonchar was a better goal-scorer, Zubov a better passer - and he put up his numbers in a defensive system). But they were two of the top offensive defensemen of their era. Both were the #1/2 defenseman on three Stanley Cup finalists. Zubov was better defensively, but not by a huge margin. Gonchar did significantly better in terms of Norris voting (six years in 7th place or better).

The reason I've softened on Zubov is because earning that many minutes, year after year, on such a consistently strong team, is very impressive. I wouldn't have voted for him, but I don't find Zubov's induction offensive (the way that I do with Lowe, Housley or Boivin).

 

[MadLuke]

. I know that plus/minus is only a vague approximation, but it's telling that Hatcher had better plus/minus than Zubov during their years in Dallas

The stars have around +-120 in special teams during their tenure (i.e scored about 60 goals on the pk and got scored 60 goals against them in the PP), Hatcher probably got way less of those PP minus and Zubov a little less of those PK bonus.

Played fewer game but in term of EV ice time Hatcher had a little more and not that big of a gap (enough that for which season did Hatcher missed game vs played could be a factor, if their EV +- is not in favor of Zubov like it could very well be, not sure if there a way to easily check that).

In the playoff Zubov lead the Stars +/-, with +25 vs +1 for Hatcher.

 

[Hobnobs]

As others indicated, Zubov finished higher than EIGHTH only twice in twenty years. This is not just "not elite." This is pretty mediocre.

My Wings played Dallas a lot in those years. One player I always expected to turn the puck over was Zubov. Sure, he had a great stretch pass but he was a turnover machine and I was never afraid of him. Hatcher and even Sydor scared me more. I would have taken at least 4 players on my Wings over him: Lidstrom, Vladdy (pre-97), Chelios (post-98), Murphy.

Until two years ago, not many people would pick McKinnon for starting a franchise. In fact, this is the first year that he is finally living up to his hype. But he was always higher than TOP EIGHT in his position.

Offensive/creative players have many turnovers. HOFers Chelios and Pronger gave away the puck more frequently than Zubov.