Just using the same approach as the Jagr backers who penalize other players in the same fashion.
Specifically, Esposito gets penalized for playing with Orr even though his numbers with the Bruins held when Orr was injured and during the 1972 Summit, while Bossy gets penalized for playing with Trottier / Potvin, Mikita and Hull get penalized because they played with each other, Beliveau, Lafleur, Richard get penalized for playing with stacked teams, just a short list.
Espo is really a special case. He played his prime with a player who is considered by most to be among the top 3-5 all-time players in his prime. Unlike Jagr who only played a couple half seasons ('97 and '01) on the same line as Lemieux, Orr was often on the ice with Espo throughout his prime. Combined with expansion which doubled the number of teams and increased scoring significantly (despite expansion teams lowering the average) make Espo's prime one of the most difficult to evaluate of the top forwards.
As far as the Summit Series, that was one (albeit very memorable and historical) series of 8 games, which Canada may have lost if they didn't break the opponent's ankle (in which case would that indicate Espo's "shortcomings"?). He should get credit for playing well in an important international tournament, as any player should.
I don't know on what you are basing the statement that Espo's numbers held while Orr was injured (besides Summit Series, which isn't comparable). The only season in which Orr missed a substantial portion of the season while on Espo's team was '72-73. In '73, Espo's numbers "held" from '72, but were still his worst actual point total from '71-74 and about 10% less than his next worst season from '71-74 on an adjusted basis. What is apparent is how much his numbers jumped upon joining the Bruins (not all due to Orr and stacked team, but also from expansion and possibly more top line playing time), just as they immediately dropped by 1/3 when he was traded and stayed at or below that level for the remainder of his career.
As far as the other players, I don't penalize the Isles' or Habs' dynasties, but also don't give them nearly the "extra credit" for winning Cups that many others do. Team success is obviously important (but not black & white as Cup/no Cup), but the quality of each player's team must be factored in. It's one component, along with player performance in the playoffs, team/player performance in international competition, regular season stats/rankings and the voting of others for awards and all-star teams. People put emphasis on each component in varying amounts.
I don't penalize Hull and Mikita for playing together. In fact, they are the classic examples of players who excelled in the regular season, but whose teams often disappointed in the playoffs. I don't penalize them significantly for that, especially Hull who was generally very strong in the playoffs.
Simple statistical fact is that Jagr's best season was 1995-96 where he was outpointed significantly by an injured / ill Lemieux playing 12 fewer games. Without Lemieux, Jagr's numbers did not hold.When Mario Lemieux returned, older and playing on a non-playoff team he cleaned Jagr in scoring.
Yes, that was his best actual point season. He happened to set the all-time season records for points and assists by a Right Wing, and was 12 points behind Lemieux while 29 points ahead of second.
That season was behind '99 in terms of adjusted points/ppg and only 8% above his adjusted ppg for the rest of '94/95-'00/01, not a huge amount. That was a standout season for him, but he wasn't a Hart finalist in '96 (somehow) nor in '97, yet was the next three seasons from '98-00 without Lemieux, as he was in '95 and '06.
Conversely players like Beliveau, Hull, Mikita, Esposito, Moore, Geoffrion and others were able to beat a healthy Gordie Howe, consensus top 4, All-Time(20 consecutive seasons top 5 in scoring) going head to head.Likewise Lemieux beat Gretzky.
Not trying to say Jagr was better than Lemieux, Gretzky and Howe in his prime. IIRC, Jagr bested every player in the league in points. This included Gretzky, Sakic, Yzerman, Forsberg, Lindros, Messier, Selanne, Hull, etc. So he never beat Lemieux in ppg during their primes, is that surprising? He had more points than Lemieux as a rookie, does that make him better?
Simple Jaromir Jagr was never able to beat a consensus top 4 player in scoring head to head, playing a comparable number of games.
Jagr beat Gretzky each season in ppg from '95-99. That's five straight seasons. While Gretzky wasn't the goal scorer he was in earlier years, he still finished:
- 12th in points in '96, but 7th among non-Euros (behind Lemieux, Sakic, Lindros, etc.)
- 4th in points in '97, 3rd among non-Euros (behind Lemieux and Kariya)
- 3rd in points in '98, behind only Jagr and Forsberg.
So without the additional competiton of Euros, Gretzky finished 7th, 3rd and 1st in three consecutive seasons during that stretch. Take out Lemieux, and it's 6th, 2nd, and 1st, not too bad. Yet Jagr had a higher ppg each season and the only season he had fewer points was '97 (97-95) due to injury, but still had 1.51 ppg to 1.18 for Gretzky. Over the entire three years, Jagr had 1.63 ppg to 1.18 for Gretzky. It just goes to show how there are many misperceptions of strength of competition during the '90s, due to the lower scoring in the league and the influx of skilled Euro forwards.
Things are not as cut and dried as we might like. Some years a Moore or Iginla or St. Louis can win a Ross, other years Gretzky, Lemieux and Yzerman battle it out. It's very rare that most or all of the top players are going to be in their prime in the same seasons, but there was no lack of competition in the '90s.
The top 20 scorers in '96 included Lemieux, Jagr, Sakic, Forsberg, Lindros, Selanne, Kariya, Mogilny, Fedorov, Gretzky, Messier, and Yzerman. Talk about strong competition.
Yes, Jaromir Jagr had an interesting prime and a significant career but he is a fair distance from top 10 prime or top 10 overall.
That's your opinion and you are entitled to it.
