What makes Yzerman rated so high

[Rhiessan71]

You can pretty much add crosby to the list too, when his career is over, his playoff resume will laugh at yzerman's.

Yeah well...if Sid wins 2 more Cups, a Smythe and is still scoring at a point per game in the playoffs at age 37 like Yzerman then you can come back and say what ever you want.
Until then, this is the History forum not the "The what my personal crystal ball tells me" forum

 

[canucks4ever]

Yeah well...if Sid wins 2 more Cups, a Smythe and is still scoring at a point per game in the playoffs at age 37 like Yzerman then you can come back and say what ever you want.
Until then, this is the History forum not the "The what my personal crystal ball tells me" forum

I'm sorry what was yzerman's playoff resume prior to 1998? Yeah a bunch of disappointments. Crosby already has two 20+ playoff runs in a lower scoring era, yzerman has a grand total of 3 and he played run n gun hockey.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I'm sorry what was yzerman's playoff resume prior to 1998? Yeah a bunch of disappointments. Crosby already has two 20+ playoff runs in a lower scoring era, yzerman has a grand total of 3 and he played run n gun hockey.

...and I'm sorry but who was the Pens best player and Conn Smythe winner when they did win the Cup?

Oh and I got news for ya about this lower scoring era crap.....checking your facts always helps son.

1995 5.97
1996 6.29
1997 5.83 (Yzerman Cup)
1998 5.28 (Yzerman Cup)
1999 5.27
2000 5.49
2001 5.51
2002 5.24 (Yzerman Cup)
2003 5.31
2004 5.14
lockout
2006 5.94
2007 5.53
2008 5.24
2009 5.82 (Crosby Cup)
2010 5.68

 

[canucks4ever]

...and I'm sorry but who was the Pens best player and Conn Smythe winner when they did win the Cup?

Oh and I got news for ya about this lower scoring era crap.....checking your facts always helps son.

1995 5.97
1996 6.29
1997 5.83 (Yzerman Cup)
1998 5.28 (Yzerman Cup)
1999 5.27
2000 5.49
2001 5.51
2002 5.24 (Yzerman Cup)
2003 5.31
2004 5.14
lockout
2006 5.94
2007 5.53
2008 5.24

Yeah in 1996 the league averaged 6.29, which is substantially higher than today's era. In 1997 Yzerman played strictly a defensive role, his offense vanished, fedorov was the one who stepped up. So really his two best runs are 1998 and 2002, the end of his career. Crosby already has 2 that are just as good as both.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yeah in 1996 the league averaged 6.29, which is substantially higher than today's era. In 1997 Yzerman played strictly a defensive role, his offense vanished, fedorov was the one who stepped up. So really his two best runs are 1998 and 2002, the end of his career. Crosby already has 2 that are just as good as both.

Minus the Cups and the Conn Smythe of course

Look dude, your crystal ball not withstanding, Sid still has a hell of a long way to go to match Yzerman's career.
He's off to a great start but he's NOT there yet.

 

[unknown33]

Fedorov, Forsberg, Sakic, Roy, Messier, Lidstrom, Bourque and Jagrare all better playoff performers than yzerman.

Nah at Jagr.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

Nah at Jagr.

I'd say yeah. He was easily one of the best playoff performers of his era. During the dead puck era him and Forsberg averaged 1.21 points per game during the playoffs, Sakic 1.04, and everyone else below a point a game. Not to mention him being a big part of Pittsburgh's Stanley Cups as a first and second year player, then his dominating two rounds in 2008 in which he tallied 15 points after finishing with a sub-par 71 point season.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

He put up absolutely incredible numbers on absolutely terrible teams. For five or six years he was Lafleur like.

He didn't maintain his offense when the transition to defense began but I think a large part of that had to do with the fact that he was getting older and he had injuries to deal with.

Personally I take him over Sakic because I thought he was absolutely incredible during his peak. Highlight reel goals every night on a pathetic team for years.

 

[jepjepjoo]

This guy is a true winner. First he strictly bases how good players are on how many top ten finishes they have in terms of points and then he spouts off false information to help his case. Bowman has said he wasn't sure if he could play in the system, not that he wouldn't and that he underestimated Yzerman big time. Good one though, keep looking like a ****ing clown.

Your reading comprehension is Charlie Sheen.

83-93 Top10 in points: 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 7th, 7th (not a good defensive player)

93-06 Top10 in points: 10th

If you go just by these numbers that doesn't even look like a surefire HHOF career.

I even bolded the if.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Yet your claim was that he wasn't able to combine both elite offense and defense at the same time at all. I think it's fairly obvious that his Selke from that season proves that he had elite defensive qualities at the moment, while his position in the top 10 for points proves his elite status in the offense.

I really think you're stretching here. Yzerman finished exactly 10th, was outpaced in Goals by Shanahan (11th in the league) and Assists by Lidstrom (tied for 18th in the league). He was 18th in points-per-game and only won received the 1st Team All-Star vote because Sakic, who outscored him, missed 22 Games. Yzerman was 42nd in Even Strength Goals (18) and 25th in Even Strength Points (46), meaning that his offense didn't come when he was playing great defensive hockey; it came when the Red Wings were a man-up and in the attacking zone. He wasn't in the vicinity of the scoring race. You cannot call that an elite offensive season without saying that Valeri Bure had "elite status" as well.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I think the supposed playoff failures of selanne are overblown too. But that doesn't mean we need to demean yzerman's playoff heroics just because selanne never got a shot. Yzerman got his shot - and he absolutely excelled to historical levels.

Absolutely. For the record, I'm one of the sentimentalists who has Yzerman in their Top 20 and well ahead of Nicklas Lidstrom. I just don't like to see people get thrown under the bus in the Yzerman argument (and it always seems to be some combination of Selanne, Messier, Jagr, Lemieux, Gretzky, and Sakic...) when there is a well-publicized explanation for a statistical difference, whether it be injuries, trends in the scoring era, or the arbitrary cut-off of elite seasons at 10th place in points.

Yzerman's the bee's knees - the cat's pajamas. He's Scott Stevens with a twist.

 

[Blizzard]

I'd say yeah. He was easily one of the best playoff performers of his era. During the dead puck era him and Forsberg averaged 1.21 points per game during the playoffs, Sakic 1.04, and everyone else below a point a game. Not to mention him being a big part of Pittsburgh's Stanley Cups as a first and second year player, then his dominating two rounds in 2008 in which he tallied 15 points after finishing with a sub-par 71 point season.

You obviously didn't watch Jagr in his rookie season. He was wildly inconsistent, got very little ice time for large parts of the season, and spent the majority of the year on the fourth line. And I wouldn't call 3 goals in 24 Playoff games playing a "big part". His breakout came the following year when Lemieux got chopped by Graves against the Rangers in the second round of the Playoffs.

 

[Blizzard]

Being Captain for 20 years of one of the most successful organizations in hockey, under the greatest coach, that won three Cups in six years tells me more than any numbers do about Steve Yzerman. And by the way, his numbers are pretty damn good too.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

You obviously didn't watch Jagr in his rookie season. He was wildly inconsistent, got very little ice time for large parts of the season, and spent the majority of the year on the fourth line. And I wouldn't call 3 goals in 24 Playoff games playing a "big part". His breakout came the following year when Lemieux got chopped by Graves against the Rangers in the second round of the Playoffs.

My point still stands, who cares if he had a poor rookie season considering the rest of his playoff career?

 

[Rhiessan71]

Your reading comprehension is Charlie Sheen.

I even bolded the if.

What is wrong with you? Like is there something loose in your skull or what?

I understand someone arguing for Sakic over Stevie or trying to put Sid above Stevie even if I do not agree with either opinion.
But to even slightly infer that Yzerman is not even HHoF worthy is ridiculous and is easily THE most asinine thing I have seen on these boards in months.

Here's a guy that almost single handedly dragged his crappy teams into the playoff's year after year and still got **** on for not being able to make up for their crappiness once they got there.
Then when his team improves and he no longer has to do it all himself, he changes his game to do what it takes to win and captures 3 Cups.

Gimme a break!

 

[jimmycarter]

his skill, his determintion, his selflessness, his on ice vision, his offence, his defence, his humilty, his leadership, his stats, his cup rings.

in no specific order.

 

[DRWCountryClub]

Do people not understand that there is more to being a playoff performer than points? For the guys bringing up PPG as the key to figuring that out, you must not actually watch hockey.

I mean, Yzerman is on par with guys like Sakic, Forsberg, Federov, and quite a bit better than guys like Jagr and Bourque.

Yzerman has legendary playoff heroics, 3 Cups, and a Conn Smythe, arguably the greatest(one of) leader of all time.

Yzerman has never been strictly about the numbers, and most people around here only like to look at numbers.

 

[canucks4ever]

Do people not understand that there is more to being a playoff performer than points? For the guys bringing up PPG as the key to figuring that out, you must not actually watch hockey.

I mean, Yzerman is on par with guys like Sakic, Forsberg, Federov, and quite a bit better than guys like Jagr and Bourque.

Yzerman has legendary playoff heroics, 3 Cups, and a Conn Smythe, arguably the greatest(one of) leader of all time.

Yzerman has never been strictly about the numbers, and most people around here only like to look at numbers.

Bourque was easily more dominant as a defenseman than yzerman was as a forward. The fact that you would rank yzerman above bourque shows that you didnt watch hockey. Bourque carried teams with half the depth that yzerman's teams had. Bouruqe was a great playoff performer his whole career, yzerman was labelled as a joe thornton until his early 30's.

Jagr did the best he could with mediocre teams and took them as far as he could. What did yzerman do when he had to carry weak teams? He got eliminated in the first round and his production dropped big time. A great playoff performer is based on how you do individually, not how many hall of famers are stacked on your team.

I noticed the only players that got mentioned in the other thread for great playoff performers were forwards, yeah the goalies and defenseman must have sucked in the playoffs.

 

[Unaffiliated]

I noticed the only players that got mentioned in the other thread for great playoff performers were forwards, yeah the goalies and defenseman must have sucked in the playoffs.

Here's the OP from that thread:

Rank them from #1-10.

Gretzky
Roy
Richard
Sakic
Beliveau
Messier
Bossy
Howe
Lemieux
Anderson

HM hated keeping him out of the top 10: Lafleur, Yzerman


Drop the gloves fellas, let the good times roll

I heard Roy was a forward.

 

[canucks4ever]

Here's the OP from that thread:




I heard Roy was a forward.

One goalie compared to 8 or 9 forwards on a list/

 

[Unaffiliated]

You can pretty much add crosby to the list too, when his career is over, his playoff resume will laugh at yzerman's.

Can I have your lotto numbers? Must be nice to be able to see into the future.




For all you know, Crosby is the latest incarnation of Eric Lindros. It's entirely possible (though not likely) that Crosby gets absolutely demolished by, say, Zdeno Chara, during his first game back, and that he's never able to recover fully for the rest of his career.

 

[canucks4ever]

Can I have your lotto numbers? Must be nice to be able to see into the future.




For all you know, Crosby is the latest incarnation of Eric Lindros. It's entirely possible (though not likely) that Crosby gets absolutely demolished by, say, Zdeno Chara, during his first game back, and that he's never able to recover fully for the rest of his career.

So you base players on how many games they can play rather than how good they were. Crosby is a better player than yzerman ever was, dont kid yourself. Crosby doesnt need 5-8 hall of famers in order to produce in the playoffs.

 

[Unaffiliated]

One goalie compared to 8 or 9 forwards on a list/

I noticed the only players that got mentioned in the other thread for great playoff performers were forwards, yeah the goalies and defenseman must have sucked in the playoffs.

noticed the only players that got mentioned

the only players

only

on·ly (nl)
adj.
1. Alone in kind or class; sole

 

[Unaffiliated]

So you base players on how many games they can play rather than how good they were. Crosby is a better player than yzerman ever was, dont kid yourself. Crosby doesnt need 5-8 hall of famers in order to produce in the playoffs.

My argument is not with your basic premise; rather, it is with your main argument.


Namely, that "when his career is over, his playoff resume will laugh at yzerman's".

That is projection. In a serious debate or discussion, that sort of argument would be tossed.

 

[canucks4ever]

on·ly (nl)
adj.
1. Alone in kind or class; sole

Your point is? I dont see you voice your opinion on anything, you just quote others like an english professor.