Was Sundin regarded as good as Sakic in 1993?

[Theokritos]

haha, paging todd danault

he's posted here right?

Todd Denault you mean?

He is an active forum member.

 

[sr edler]

Todd Denault you mean?

He is an active forum member.

That poster is Ty Dilello, not Todd Denault.

 

[Theokritos]

That poster is Ty Dilello, not Todd Denault.

Oops, you're right. Todd Denault is another poster, Canadiens Fan.

 

[Big Phil]

I thought Sakic too. It isn't as if there was much difference, even in 1993 (114 to 105). I will admit I figured Sundin was going to keep getting better rather than pretty much flatline at the same level his entire career. Not that it wasn't a good career, or even a good level, but it wasn't out of the ordinary to assume he would improve. Even after 1997 I figured that might be more the norm for him and it wasn't.

In 1993 Sakic had his 3rd 100+ point year and it would have been his 4th had he not missed 11 games in 1992. So I think he was a lot more established by 1993 compared to Sundin who broke out that year.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I don't recall him ever being considered a better player than Sakic.

 

[Boxscore]

Even in 1992-93, Sakic was the engine that drove the Nords bus. He was considered the best player on an up-and-coming Quebec squadron, even when Sundin had his streak going and finished with more points. Sundin didn't grow into the universally-recognized elite player until he was traded for Wendel and started carrying the Leafs on his back. Leading the Leafs, often with limited toys to play with, and doing so with great consistency, elevated Sundin in the eyes of many.

I remember young Sundin as a streaky, semi-feisty and moody player who had to grow into his lanky frame. He was similar in style to puppy Malkin in some ways. And Sakic played the role of Crosby in that scenario.

As a side note: I absolutely LOVED those Nord teams, especially the 92-93 club, which is ironic since I was a Flyers fan and Lindros was our prized rookie after the big trade. That Quebec team was fun to watch. Nolan was a beast.

 

[sr edler]

I always found it a bit peculiar or interesting with Sundin, from a talent/player evolution standpoint, that he didn't really have a single tool you could point at and say "wow, that's why this guy is elite". Sakic had that wrist shot. Forsberg had his set up skills. Fedorov his skating. Modano also his skating. Bure his explosive step when the puck was on his stick. Brett Hull his one-timer. Lindros had that scary big body presence. Stevens his mean hits. Selänne his opportunism (just kidding). Oates the knack of always finding a teammate. Et cetera.

Sundin was just strangely well-rounded, could do most anything at a very good level, transformation from lanky kid with 90s Good Will Hunting haircut in Quebec to bald bulky veteran with a quick howitzer of a shot in Toronto notwithstanding.

But, and I'm just speculating freely here, perhaps that has something to do with why he never really took off, or took that last step to become say an Art Ross contender (like M. Näslund with his wrist shot, or the Sedins with their cycling/passing game), or as a legit upper echelon two-way guy like Fedorov or Modano.

On the Swedish national team it also wasn't a particular skill that stood out but more his clutch moments and leadership qualities.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

sundin had an all-time backhand

 

[feffan]

I always found it a bit peculiar or interesting with Sundin, from a talent/player evolution standpoint, that he didn't really have a single tool you could point at and say "wow, that's why this guy is elite". Sakic had that wrist shot. Forsberg had his set up skills. Fedorov his skating. Modano also his skating. Bure his explosive step when the puck was on his stick. Brett Hull his one-timer. Lindros had that scary big body presence. Stevens his mean hits. Selänne his opportunism (just kidding). Oates the knack of always finding a teammate. Et cetera.

Sundin was just strangely well-rounded, could do most anything at a very good level, transformation from lanky kid with 90s Good Will Hunting haircut in Quebec to bald bulky veteran with a quick howitzer of a shot in Toronto notwithstanding.

But, and I'm just speculating freely here, perhaps that has something to do with why he never really took off, or took that last step to become say an Art Ross contender (like M. Näslund with his wrist shot, or the Sedins with their cycling/passing game), or as a legit upper echelon two-way guy like Fedorov or Modano.

On the Swedish national team it also wasn't a particular skill that stood out but more his clutch moments and leadership qualities.

Would say Sundin had one of the greatest backhanders ever.

 

[feffan]

For the thread as whole and adding Forsberg, I think any combo of the three that remains with the franchise during 94-05 would be regarded the greater out of the three. Sundin was a great tournament-player and playing thoose years on that great team that Quebec at the time was just a couple of years from becoming, he would most definetley also had got a Cup and some great PO:s.

And on the same note, either one of thoose 3 that ended up on Toronto would have the Sundin career. Albeit with maybe greater TP years - even if Pat Quinns "role 4 lines equal" and a overal quite poor PP coaching in Toronto during thoose years would have taken a toll on theire TP as well.

But best would of course been if Quebec wouldn´t have traded Sundin at all... What a offense going forward...

Chance dictates more of how a hockey career works out than most would like to admit. And coaches like Pierre Page, John Tortorella and Mike Keenan are loved by many and regarded as tough and to have what it takes to the "Tell it as it is" crowd. To me they symbolize the kind of coach that will find scapegoats, often is a xenophobe and that leaves many ruined prospects by not giving them the confidence they sorely need. Instead giving them a "challenge" that really is a bully tactic.

That Sundin got the blame that PO:s is the anti-european crowd at works. An attitude that I think was largely out of the leauge just a few years later, but of course still lingers around in some circles. And as seen in this thread, still on these boards...

 

[Boxscore]

Would say Sundin had one of the greatest backhanders ever.

sundin had an all-time backhand

Definitely.

 

[c9777666]

My memory of that year is that most people thought Sundin was better. That was the period when the formerly pathetic Nords started getting good again, and Sundin was getting a lot of hype as the new, young star of the team. Sakic had been there from '88 to '92 when they totally sucked, and people were kind of immune to him by then. It was like, "He scores a bunch of points and the team blows", and consequently he was under-appreciated for a few years. It's just what happens when a sexy new star emerges and a team is suddenly getting better.

What really fueled the hype was this was when Sundin had the 30-game point streak and Quebec got off to a great start by Nords standards of that era.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Chance dictates more of how a hockey career works out than most would like to admit. And coaches like Pierre Page, John Tortorella and Mike Keenan are loved by many and regarded as tough and to have what it takes to the "Tell it as it is" crowd. To me they symbolize the kind of coach that will find scapegoats, often is a xenophobe and that leaves many ruined prospects by not giving them the confidence they sorely need. Instead giving them a "challenge" that really is a bully tactic.

mike keenan is a lot of things... including the first coach to win the cup with a russian player. he had four in his everyday lineup: zubov, nemchinov, kovalev, and karpovtsev. he loooooooved igor kravchuk, had him on three different teams.

page had no problem running with selanne as his best player and mironov as his top defenseman. he also played the hell out of mikhail tatarinov, and gusarov succeeded under him as well.

 

[McRpro]

My memory of that year is that most people thought Sundin was better. That was the period when the formerly pathetic Nords started getting good again, and Sundin was getting a lot of hype as the new, young star of the team. Sakic had been there from '88 to '92 when they totally sucked, and people were kind of immune to him by then. It was like, "He scores a bunch of points and the team blows", and consequently he was under-appreciated for a few years. It's just what happens when a sexy new star emerges and a team is suddenly getting better.

(Incidentally -- and though I was only 12 at the time --, I seem to be the only English-speaking person on earth who remembers Sakic's first few months in the NHL. He was awesome. He scored 38 points in his first 28 NHL games.)

He should have kept his old number 88

 

[sr edler]

Thought about Sundin's backhand but you can't really snipe from a distance with a backhand, at least not the same as with a wrister or a slapper, which means you have to get closer to the net with either skating or positioning, and probably beat defenders while doing so.

page had no problem running with selanne as his best player and mironov as his top defenseman. he also played the hell out of mikhail tatarinov, and gusarov succeeded under him as well.

Page also coached in Europe for 15 years. Strange place to coach for 15 years if you have a dislike for Euros.

mike keenan is a lot of things... including the first coach to win the cup with a russian player. he had four in his everyday lineup: zubov, nemchinov, kovalev, and karpovtsev. he loooooooved igor kravchuk, had him on three different teams.

Keenan liked Bure a lot too. And I've seen him give compliments to Kent Nilsson.

 

[ZEBROA]

I dont care i just miss Sundin.

 

[feffan]

mike keenan is a lot of things... including the first coach to win the cup with a russian player. he had four in his everyday lineup: zubov, nemchinov, kovalev, and karpovtsev. he loooooooved igor kravchuk, had him on three different teams.

page had no problem running with selanne as his best player and mironov as his top defenseman. he also played the hell out of mikhail tatarinov, and gusarov succeeded under him as well.

That´s why I wrote "To me they symbolize the kind of coach" and that "xenophobe" was the only point that got "often is" before it. Otherwise I would have written "They all where..." or somehting like it. But probably a bit unclear on my part.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

That´s why I wrote "To me they symbolize the kind of coach" and that "xenophobe" was the only point that got "often is" before it. Otherwise I would have written "They all where..." or somehting like it. But probably a bit unclear on my part.

my pt is your “symbolism” is based on imagined, not real things

 

[feffan]

my pt is your “symbolism” is based on imagined, not real things

I don't think "the lazy europaen" attitude was imagined. And that is xenophobic.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I don't think "the lazy europaen" attitude was imagined. And that is xenophobic.

when you are acting like those three coaches you named are basically don cherry, with their track record of playing the almighty crap out of european players, i would ask who is really resorting to nationalist/continental stereotypes here, you or those coaches.

 

[feffan]

when you are acting like those three coaches you named are basically don cherry, with their track record of playing the almighty crap out of european players, i would ask who is really resorting to nationalist/continental stereotypes here, you or those coaches.

Again. I didn´t. Please stop saying/suggesting I said that they specific where xenophobic. I said that the kind of coach found scapegoats, ruined prospects and often are xenophobic. Not most often or always. But often. I, as admitted, used poor examples. It´s you who decided to say I put that label speficic on thoose coaches. And yes, it´s not something I can back up by statistics or dozens off quotes. But based on my experience as a player, coach and supporter in different sports on different continents/contries threw decades. You can see it as imagined, but to me it´s more often the ones that find easy solutions/scapegoats that tend towards beeing xenophic. Even if the point was poorly made with the examples I had.

I don´t know why you are trying so hard to corner me with something I didn´t said, after I even said I in my first post that I was unclear and once again explained that I didn´t mean all of them or even specific one of them, a point I already from the start tought was clear but only adding "often" to only that term. Bu as admitted, it was poorly worded.

And as I never once said my stereotype was based on nationality or continent, nor did I apply them on a special nation. I used "hard" NHL coaches as (poor) examples, because this is a hockey forum where mostly NHL is debated. But these kind of coaches exist all over the world in every sport. So I would appreciate if you would stop trying to suggest I´m sterotyping nationalities for making a poor wording in what is not my main language. Stereotyping over "hard" coaches I´m guilty off. I don´t believe in that kind of leadership and what I´ve seen it often bring. I´m also "guilty" of believeing in that the "lazy european" was a issue within the NHL, just as the "canadian neanderthal" was a thing in Europe . But that doesn´t make me a beliver in thoose stereotypes. Just as I can believe the KKK is racist without being racist myself. Nothing in what I have posted as my opinions have been about claiming nationalist/continental stereotypes.

 

[sr edler]

Come on feffan, you don't have to be so defensive about it or write a long novel about it. It's not even that big of a big deal.

By the way, "lazy European"? I thought it was mainly "soft European", the old school stereotyping, no? Swedish players for instance, I don't think they've ever had a broader reputation of being lazy, but instead have (and had) a reputation as good hard working team guys who can gel in pretty much everywhere. Perhaps there are different ones (stereotypes) for Swedes, Finns, Czechs, Russians though. The "chicken Swede" stereotype was definitely a real one though.

I remember a good quote actually about Inge Hammarström (by a Toronto guy, Ballard?) where he said Inge could skate into the corner with an egg (or multiple eggs) and come out of it (the corner) with all eggs intact (i.e. not broken). Implying he was super soft, of course. I think that story is funny though, exaggerated or not.

We did have a poster on this board just recently though claiming that 70% of the Europeans in the early 90s NHL were soft (including Mats Sundin, the only player he mentioned by name). When I asked him about more examples of these players (outside of Sundin) he didn't answer me though. I'm still interested to know how he came up with that number though, 70%.

Stereotypes can fly in all different types directions though. I remember the Czechoslovaks had a pretty big reputation as divers (through the Swedish commentators) when I watched international tourneys in the early 90s.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Would say Sundin had one of the greatest backhanders ever.

Perhaps, but could he do it one-handed?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

can we just cut the crap and acknowledge what we're really talking about, which is that *maybe, just maybe* pierre page was yelling at sundin and the rest of his line not because they were european players but because that line was getting ventilated by the habs?

look at the game 4 and 5 box scores and it's clear who was on the ice when the habs were scoring in those one-goal games.

Chance dictates more of how a hockey career works out than most would like to admit. And coaches like Pierre Page, John Tortorella and Mike Keenan are loved by many and regarded as tough and to have what it takes to the "Tell it as it is" crowd. To me they symbolize the kind of coach that will find scapegoats, often is a xenophobe and that leaves many ruined prospects by not giving them the confidence they sorely need. Instead giving them a "challenge" that really is a bully tactic.

That Sundin got the blame that PO:s is the anti-european crowd at works. An attitude that I think was largely out of the leauge just a few years later, but of course still lingers around in some circles. And as seen in this thread, still on these boards...

 

[Troubadour]

sundin had an all-time backhand

Also pretty good/soft hands which always looks good on big and reachy types.