Teemu Selanne vs. Luc Robitaille

[Herzeleid]

Which one of these two magnificent players will end up being better of all-time?

Luc has the clear edge in playoff success. The prime and regular season, I think, goes to Teemu.

What do you think about these two?

Click to read more...

 

[BraveCanadian]

I'm sure Selanne will win this in a landslide because of his higher peak and being flashier to watch.

Its interesting though because of the similarity in their results despite the fact that they couldn't be more different in the skating department.

However both are pure opportunistic snipers and I give Luc full credit for having that special ability to get to the right place at the right time and bury 600+ goals despite the fact he seemed to be skating in molasses most of the time.

It is actually much closer than the poll will end up. Especially if you consider the fact that LWers in general score less than RWers.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'm sure Selanne will win this in a landslide because of his higher peak and being flashier to watch.

Its interesting though because of the similarity in their results despite the fact that they couldn't be more different in the skating department.

However both are pure opportunistic snipers and I give Luc full credit for having that special ability to get to the right place at the right time and bury 600+ goals despite the fact he seemed to be skating in molasses most of the time.

It's really not close. Their results look "close" because Robitaille spent his prime in the highest scoring era in league history, while Selanne played all but a few years in the dead puck era.

It is actually much closer than the poll will end up. Especially if you consider the fact that LWers in general score less than RWers.

LW vs. RW is relevant in an all-time draft, but not relevant to determining the better player IMO. RWs have historically scored more than LWs because they have been better players on average. (One reason given is that most elite playmaking centers are LH shots, so historically the best sniper on the team was put on the right side of the line).

 

[BraveCanadian]

It's really not close. Their results look "close" because Robitaille spent his prime in the highest scoring era in league history, while Selanne played all but a few years in the dead puck era.

We throw around "era" way, way too much on these boards.

Both of their (somewhat flukey) career seaons were in the same year and they had 13 overlapping years in their careers.

How much are we going to discount Robitaille? even if you take away 10 goals each of those seasons before hand, he is still a 500+ goal scoring LW and it is still comparable.

I mean I agree Selanne is better and I voted for him but come on..

LW vs. RW is relevant in an all-time draft, but not relevant to determining the better player IMO. RWs have historically scored more than LWs because they have been better players on average. (One reason given is that most elite playmaking centers are LH shots, so historically the best sniper on the team was put on the right side of the line).

The reason why historically LW is a weaker scoring position than RW is exactly what you say. Scoring wingers have been encouraged to be on the right side partly because of many centers being LH shots as you say.

That also means that there is a slight bias to scoring on the right side because obviously that is a forehand pass option.

So yes.. it is relevant.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

We throw around "era" way, way too much on these boards.

Both of their (somewhat flukey) career seaons were in the same year and they had 13 overlapping years in their careers.

How much are we going to discount Robitaille? even if you take away 10 goals each of those seasons before hand, he is still a 500+ goal scoring LW and it is still comparable.

I mean I agree Selanne is better and I voted for him but come on..

Selanne's 92-93 wasn't even his best year. He was better during the dead puck era with Anaheim, while scoring fewer points, because it was just that much harder to score. Selanne was an Art Ross runner up twice in the late 90s. One of those years, he was a Hart finalist. Robitaille was never close to that level.

Scoring dropped like a rock after 92-93. That season, 7.25 goals were scored per game. In 96-97, it was at 5.83. In 98-99, it was 5.27. This is an enormous difference in just a few years.

He's a nifty graph illustrating this:

http://www.dropyourgloves.com/Stat/LeagueGoals.aspx

Back to the topic, here are their top 10 points finishes and goals finishes:

Selanne points: 2nd, 2nd, 5th, 5th, 7th, 8th
Selanne goals: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 10th

Robitaille points: 5th, 5th, 9th, 10th
Robitaille goals: 4th, 4th, 6th, 7th, 7th, 9th, 9th, 10th, 10th

It really isn't that close. Robitaille had more injury-free seasons in his prime, which he deserves credit for, but the gap in peak performance is quite large.

The reason why historically LW is a weaker scoring position than RW is exactly what you say. Scoring wingers have been encouraged to be on the right side partly because of many centers being LH shots as you say.

That also means that there is a slight bias to scoring on the right side because obviously that is a forehand pass option.

So yes.. it is relevant.

I guess it could be relevant in a close case, but I don't think this one is close.

 

[Dissonance]

We throw around "era" way, way too much on these boards.

Both of their (somewhat flukey) career seaons were in the same year and they had 13 overlapping years in their careers.

How much are we going to discount Robitaille? even if you take away 10 goals each of those seasons before hand, he is still a 500+ goal scoring LW and it is still comparable.

I mean I agree Selanne is better and I voted for him but come on..

Yeah, I think Robitaille's getting underrated here. He was a top-10 goal scorer 9 times in his career—it's hard to find many players who have done that, regardless of era. (And in addition to his four top-10 point finishes, he had two 11th place finishes, which is a very solid prime.)

And he did just fine during the dead-puck years. Interesting comparison: In 1998-99, Selanne had possibly his best season and led the league with 47 goals, but Robitaille wasn't all that far back with 39 (and he did that on an absolutely wretched Kings team where he ended up with more goals than anyone else had points). The next year, even though he was well past his prime, Luc actually ended up scoring more goals than Selanne.

Selanne was a better player overall, but I think Robitaille deserves a bit more credit. He would've been a Hall of Famer in any era.

 

[BraveCanadian]

And he did just fine during the dead-puck years. Interesting comparison: In 1998-99, Selanne had possibly his best season and led the league with 47 goals, but Robitaille wasn't all that far back with 39 (and he did that on an absolutely wretched Kings team where he ended up with more goals than anyone else had points). The next year, even though he was well past his prime, Luc actually ended up scoring more goals than Selanne.

Yeah I don't think anyone is trying to make the case that Robitaille was better at his very best than Selanne but the idea that they are not comparable is very strange to say the least.

 

[arrbez]

Interesting comparison: In 1998-99, Selanne had possibly his best season and led the league with 47 goals, but Robitaille wasn't all that far back with 39

But Selanne outscored him by like 35 points and was runner-up for the scoring title to Jagr. They were in no way comparable in 1999, it was Selanne by a mile.

 

[BraveCanadian]

But Selanne outscored him by like 35 points and was runner-up for the scoring title to Jagr. They were in no way comparable in 1999, it was Selanne by a mile.

That doesn't change the fact that Robitaille was competitive as a goal scorer even during the dead puck era on an absolutely horrible team and while past his prime as a goal scorer.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

That doesn't change the fact that Robitaille was competitive as a goal scorer even during the dead puck era on an absolutely horrible team and while past his prime as a goal scorer.

But as a player, Selanne was miles ahead that year.

 

[BraveCanadian]

But as a player, Selanne was miles ahead that year.

Sigh.

Yeah, thats great that prime Selanne is better than past his prime Robiltaille. However the reason it was brought up is that it is unfair to simply discount what Robitaille did in the "high scoring era" during his prime if he was still able to get it done at a high level in the "dead puck era" despite being PAST his prime.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Sigh.

Yeah, thats great that prime Selanne is better than past his prime Robiltaille. However the reason it was brought up is that it is unfair to simply discount what Robitaille did in the "high scoring era" during his prime if he was still able to get it done at a high level in the "dead puck era" despite being PAST his prime.

Okay, my point was that you can't just say that luc was only a little worse at what each was best at - scoring goals - and ignore that selanne was the much better offensive player that year. My comment wasn't just directed at you - I see lots of people around here (many of whom probably spent too much time with fantasy hockey stat tracking) who treat goals and assists as completely seperate entities, and I completely disagree with that line of thinking.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Okay, my point was that you can't just say that luc was only a little worse at what each was best at - scoring goals - and ignore that selanne was the much better offensive player that year. My comment wasn't just directed at you - I see lots of people around here (many of whom probably spent too much time with fantasy hockey stat tracking) who treat goals and assists as completely seperate entities, and I completely disagree with that line of thinking.

I don't see them as separate entities either but even using both statistics doesn't really capture player value all that well.

For example, in that year in particular Robitaille really did have more goals than the next highest player on his team had points by the end of the year. Meanwhile Selanne has 100 point scorer Kariya so we're comparing apples and oranges no matter how we try to compare them to some degree.

I still don't think the gap between them is the chasm that the poll is going to indicate.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

I don't see them as separate entities either but even using both statistics doesn't really capture player value all that well.

For example, in that year in particular Robitaille really did have more goals than the next highest player on his team had points by the end of the year. Meanwhile Selanne has 100 point scorer Kariya so we're comparing apples and oranges no matter how we try to compare them to some degree.

I still don't think the gap between them is the chasm that the poll is going to indicate.

You and many others can't seem to accept adjusted stats, yet in every relevant scenario I've seen comparing players, their top 10 point finishes also back up the adjusted stats, go figure.

 

[Epsilon]

I still don't think the gap between them is the chasm that the poll is going to indicate.

I'm not trying to pick on you at all, but I see this line of thought quite often in poll threads and it never makes any sense. The percentage vote player A accumulates in a "who's better?" poll against player B is never a measure of the relative difference in quality between player A and player B.

Let's say that, hypothetically, Teemu Selanne is about 10% better than Luc Robaitalle. That doesn't mean he needs to lead a poll 55-45. If almost everyone agrees that he's somewhere in the 5%-25% better range, then he could win the poll 95-5 or something like that.

 

[BraveCanadian]

You and many others can't seem to accept adjusted stats, yet in every relevant scenario I've seen comparing players, their top 10 point finishes also back up the adjusted stats, go figure.

Huh? Adjusted stats are very suspect and have to be taken with a grain of salt.. as do top 10 finishes due to relative competition.

Or would Selanne have those 1st place goal finishes playing against a prime Lemieux and Gretzky and Yzerman and Hull like Robitaille faced during his prime?

 

[Regal]

You and many others can't seem to accept adjusted stats, yet in every relevant scenario I've seen comparing players, their top 10 point finishes also back up the adjusted stats, go figure.

I'm confused by this. Adjusted stats are based on single season scoring in relation to all time scoring, so they don't change the scoring leaders of that season. Or do you mean that Robitaille's adjusted numbers would place him in the same level of finishes in Selanne's era as he achieved in his own? Cuz I don't think that's the case.


As for the question, it's Selanne fairly easily, due to his higher peak, but Robitaille does get underrated at times I think. His prime was longer, and he had a similar late-career resurgence.

 

[Dissonance]

Okay, my point was that you can't just say that luc was only a little worse at what each was best at - scoring goals - and ignore that selanne was the much better offensive player that year. My comment wasn't just directed at you - I see lots of people around here (many of whom probably spent too much time with fantasy hockey stat tracking) who treat goals and assists as completely seperate entities, and I completely disagree with that line of thinking.

That's fair, and I certainly wasn't suggesting that Robitaille was anywhere near as good as Selanne in '98. I was mostly just reacting to the notion that Robitaille was a product of the run-and-gun '80s. He was still scoring a lot of goals in the dead-puck era on a crappy team long after his prime. And I'd wager his career totals wouldn't look all that different if he'd been born five or six years later.

 

[arrbez]

Or would Selanne have those 1st place goal finishes playing against a prime Lemieux and Gretzky and Yzerman and Hull like Robitaille faced during his prime?

It's not like Robitaille was losing out on goal scoring titles to Lemieux and Gretzky. In his two best seasons was also behind Jimmy Carson and Craig Simpson (1988), or behind Selanne himself (1993).

I think it's a good comparison, as both guys came out of the gate flying, had a few lost years in the middle of their careers, and had a resurgence in their 30's. I just think that Selanne's highs were higher, and his late-career comeback has been better as well. Selanne was a monster in international play as well, and honestly, it doesn't hurt that he was a more dynamic player on the ice. For all these reasons, I go with Selanne.

BTW, anyone who saw the Kings play a lot in the late 90's: What changed for Robitaille that he went from 16 goals (a 22 goal pace) in 1998 to being a consistent 35+ goal guy again from 1999-2002? It's especially strange since a lot of the Kings had pretty good seasons in 1998 (Stumpel with 79 points, Murray with 60, etc), but Robitaille didn't. And the next year he goes off for 39 goals and the rest of the team pretty much sucks.

 

[BraveCanadian]

That's fair, and I certainly wasn't suggesting that Robitaille was anywhere near as good as Selanne in '98. I was mostly just reacting to the notion that Robitaille was a product of the run-and-gun '80s. He was still scoring a lot of goals in the dead-puck era on a crappy team long after his prime. And I'd wager his career totals wouldn't look all that different if he'd been born five or six years later.

Yes I don' t think people are understanding where we are coming from..

 

[Infinite Vision*]

Huh? Adjusted stats are very suspect and have to be taken with a grain of salt.. as do top 10 finishes due to relative competition.

Or would Selanne have those 1st place goal finishes playing against a prime Lemieux and Gretzky and Yzerman and Hull like Robitaille faced during his prime?

See arrbez post. I also love how the higher scoring eras had, "more competition". If everyone from the higher scoring eras were in their "primes" in the lower scoring eras, of course they would have scored the same as they did in their higher scoring eras. Except they wouldn't.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

As far as the Selanne vs. Robitaille comparison it's Selanne, and no it's not really something you should have to think about.

 

[Dissonance]

BTW, anyone who saw the Kings play a lot in the late 90's: What changed for Robitaille that he went from 16 goals (a 22 goal pace) in 1998 to being a consistent 35+ goal guy again from 1999-2002? It's especially strange since a lot of the Kings had pretty good seasons in 1998 (Stumpel with 79 points, Murray with 60, etc), but Robitaille didn't. And the next year he goes off for 39 goals and the rest of the team pretty much sucks.

He was very good at the start of that '97-98 season (something like 13 goals in his first 25 games), but then tore an abdominal muscle and tried to play through it for the next 25 games. Bad idea, as it turned out.

 

[seventieslord]

Both are pure goalscorers who were alaso decent playmakers. Neither was a major factor physically or defensively. Neither has a great playoff record. Both won a cup late in their career as a more minor contributor.

Selanne was just plain better at what he did, than Robitaille. He had five seasons where he placed higher in goals than Luc ever did, and he didn't have Gretzky passing to him.

 

[canucks4ever]

Teemu easily, luc is one of the slowest skaters i've seen on film, not sure how he puts up those point totals.