only one person has mentioned Cam Neely ? i thought he was at the top for points per game in the playoffs ?
isn't that the stat pro Neely fans mention when arguing that he belongs in the Hall ?
Well the 2001 playoffs lasted 4 rounds, it was Peter Forsberg who was thier main guy in the first 2 rounds, not joe sakic. If you go by adjusted stats, Forsberg's 27 points in 2002 has to be up there with one of the best. In 2002, most players couldn't even average a point per game.
He was actually under a point per game in the playoffs. 89 in 93 games, despite the fact this came between the time period of 84-95, a very high scoring era.
If it wasn't for Forsberg, colorado would have lost to LA in 2001.
How so?
This is a guy who never scored more than 30 goals in a season.
Try to find another supposed all-time great center that played in the modern era who didn't top 30 goals.. even the "playmakers"
The reason why Forsberg gets brought back down to Earth on the history boards is because he gets way too much credit for what he *might* have done. He played his whole career in his prime and people extrapolate that too much. (although he did battle injuries)
Based on what he did, yes he was a great player.. but some of the comparisons that get thrown around are crazy.
Sakic was better in the playoffs than Forsberg.
He won the Conn Smythe when the Avs won it all and Forsberg was playing. He also won it all when Forsberg wasn't playing.
Outside of the awfully impressive overtime play of Sakic there is one other thing that stands out when you compare him to Forsberg. When the Avs won the Cup in 1996 and 2001 Sakic put on a clinic, winning the Conn Smythe and coming awfully close the second time. Forsberg was under a point per game in 1996 and missed the last two rounds in 2001. The point I am making is that when the Avs won the Cup it was Sakic who led them. In 1999 and 2002 Forsberg led the playoffs in scoring but they never made the final. Hey that's nice, and I give Forsberg props because he is a great playoff performer but few are in Sakic's neighbourhood.
While plus/minus is not the best stat in the world the difference in Joe and Peter does account for something.
here are their overall statlines
Sakic 172-84-104-188 minus 2 19 GWG
forsberg 151-64-107-171 plus 51 14 GWG
You add the 2 way play of Forsberg then you should really include both and not put one in a ton higher than the other one.
Peter is one of the top 20 best all time playoff performers period IMO and so is Sakic.
The thread topic is about the best 50 all time playoff performers not the best in the clutch or best finals series only ect.. you have to take the totality of a guys career in consideration IMO.
In my opinion, Sakic was a better two-way player than Forsberg. His coaches seemed to agree, as after 1998 or so, he got the tougher defensive assignments and spent much more time on the PK.
I haven't done a list, but I'm sure Sakic would be a Top 20 playoff performer if I were to make one. Forsberg would definitely be Top 40, maybe higher.
Roy won it n 2001 and could have easily won it in 1996. Sakic was better in the years the AVs won the cup but he was also No show Joe for atleast 3 playoffs where as Forsberg was always on top of his game in the post-season.
Which 3 playoffs were those that Forsberg was excelling in while Joe Sakic was a no show?