Who had the better peak?

[Morozov]

Not really. His even strength goals against that season vs goals for was worse than his average at the time.


One of his less stalwart years with the puck.

As Opposed to Forsberg



Who defensively, had his best year ever.

Overall, you can see the difference defensive play makes. Forsberg's career numbers for two way play show that he both dominated offensively while keeping pucks out of his own net.

Yeah and these stats take into account the quality of other players on the ice, quality of the goaltending each had? trying to use that stat to somehow justify defensive superiority is rubbish imo. Chuck Bure on the same team as Hasek in his prime and suddenly the number of goals against he would be on the ice for would go down significantly would that have meant he was better defensively? no not at all.

 

[Morozov]

I totally disagree, Morrison and Bertuzzi weren't no elite players. Naslund was by far the best player on the line, he made it work.
If anything Naslund would put up better numbers on atleast a dozen other teams.

This is way off track, at that point Bert was one of the most dominant forces in the league. Naslund himself didnt make that line work the three of them together made it work. Put Naslund "on atleast a dozen other teams" and that chemistry dissapears as does the space that Big Bert created for Naslund.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Yeah and these stats take into account the quality of other players on the ice, quality of the goaltending each had? trying to use that stat to somehow justify defensive superiority is rubbish imo. Chuck Bure on the same team as Hasek in his prime and suddenly the number of goals against he would be on the ice for would go down significantly would that have meant he was better defensively? no not at all.

In some senses, you are correct(About needing to take this into context with the situation). However, in this particular comparison, your reasoning is flawed because Florida had better goaltending and team defense than Pittsburgh on the year we are discussing.

Bure's numbers in 99-00 were not bad considering they had 4 separate goaltenders on rotation, and most of them had decent Save %. The Panthers that year were only 9th in goals against. The penguins were far worse at 19th.

Jagr's numbers were surprising considering the terrible goaltending and team defense on the pens squad, but he had better scoring linemates than Bure too.

In the end, their performance was close.

Naslund and Forsberg's performance was not as close.

The Canucks and Avalanche had very similar team numbers.

Canucks had 264 goals for, and 208 goals against.
The Avs had 251 goals for, and 194 goals against.

The differences between Naslund and Forsberg on both ends of the ice were astronomical though. Forsberg was a Selke finalist and had his best Offensive/Defensive season combination ever. Naslund, despite little team changes from the year before or the year after in GAA or Goals for or teammates, had his worst defensive performance on his highest scoring year.

Season|PLAYER|POS|Franch.|ESGA|ESGF|TOT ES MIN| TOT ES MIN per ESGA |TOT ES MIN per ESGF|DIF
1994|NASLUND, MARKUS|R|PIT|25|22|668.04| 26.72 |30.37|-3.64
1995|NASLUND, MARKUS|R|PIT|3|3|117.60| 39.20 |39.20|0.00
1996|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|45|65|925.30| 20.56 |14.24|6.33
1997|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|54|39|949.42| 17.58 |24.34|-6.76
1998|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|36|41|777.48| 21.60 |18.96|2.63
1999|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|64|51|1106.40| 17.29 |21.69|-4.41
2000|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|60|55|1229.18| 20.49 |22.35|-1.86
2001|NASLUND, MARKUS|R|VAN|57|55|950.40| 16.67 |17.28|-0.61
2002|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|49|71|1159.92| 23.67 |16.34|7.33
2003|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|58|64|1175.88| 20.27 |18.37| 1.90
2004|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|45|69|1155.18| 25.67 |16.74|8.93
2006|NASLUND, MARKUS|L|VAN|64|45|1033.56| 16.15 |22.97|-6.82
12||||560|580|11248.36| 20.09 |19.39|0.69
||||||| ||

The gap between Forsberg and Naslund to me was bigger than the gap between Bure and Jagr. Forsberg played 7 less games than Naslund, and outscored him while also being far far better defensively. Jagr outscored Bure in 11 less games, but his defensive performance was not that much better.

 

[Morozov]

In some senses, you are correct(About needing to take this into context with the situation). However, in this particular comparison, your reasoning is flawed because Florida had better goaltending and team defense than Pittsburgh on the year we are discussing.

Bure's numbers in 99-00 were not bad considering they had 4 separate goaltenders on rotation, and most of them had decent Save %. The Panthers that year were only 9th in goals against. The penguins were far worse at 19th.

Jagr's numbers were surprising considering the terrible goaltending and team defense on the pens squad, but he had better scoring linemates than Bure too.

In the end, their performance was close.

Naslund and Forsberg's performance was not as close.

The Canucks and Avalanche had very similar team numbers.

Canucks had 264 goals for, and 208 goals against.
The Avs had 251 goals for, and 194 goals against.

The differences between Naslund and Forsberg on both ends of the ice were astronomical though. Forsberg was a Selke finalist and had his best Offensive/Defensive season combination ever. Naslund, despite little team changes from the year before or the year after in GAA or Goals for or teammates, had his worst defensive performance on his highest scoring year.




The gap between Forsberg and Naslund to me was bigger than the gap between Bure and Jagr. Forsberg played 7 less games than Naslund, and outscored him while also being far far better defensively. Jagr outscored Bure in 11 less games, but his defensive performance was not that much better.

I wasnt trying to use Bure or any particular Bure season as a specific example just as evidence for why those stats are flawed. Like I said if you take Bure and stick him on the same team as 98 Hasek then Bures goals against while he is on the ice go down, does that make him better defensively? no it doesnt. I wasnt trying to conjure up some kind of Bure vs Jagr argument just trying to display why taking stats like that are not a good way to try and judge who was better defensively. I wasnt even bothering to consider what the Panthers stats etc might be just the fact that if you took Bure and stuck him on the same team as Hasek when he was truely the Dominator then Bures stats for goals against while on the ice drop down. Put him on the same team as somebody like Lidstrom and they go down aswell. Put Ken Daneyko on the wing with Gretzky and suddenly his stats for being on the ice for goals go up but it wouldnt have meant he was better offensively. I will probably try to pick holes out any kind of stat one brings up to try and prove somebody is better defensively when so many great defensive plays will never show up on a stat sheet.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Not really. His even strength goals against that season vs goals for was worse than his average at the time.


One of his less stalwart years with the puck.

As Opposed to Forsberg



Who defensively, had his best year ever.

Overall, you can see the difference defensive play makes. Forsberg's career numbers for two way play show that he both dominated offensively while keeping pucks out of his own net.

Your numbers also show that Forsberg was playing with hall of famers and outstanding defencemen such as Blake, Bourque, Foote etc during that time while Jagr was being supported by guys like Tugnut, Lalime and a broken Barasso while the blueline was lead by the vaunted pairing of Kasperitis and Andrew Ference. Measuring minutes between es gf and es ga is a fancy way of measuring plus/minus. It doesn't really tell you anything. If jagr was really having one of his lesser years with the puck the Pens would not have posted such a terrible record in games he missed.

 

[Master_Of_Districts]

I personally feel the gap between a Selke finalist AND art Ross winner like Forsberg over a far from stalwart defensively Naslund is slightly bigger than the gap between a cherry picking Bure and Jagr, who is about as good defensively as Naslund(Not very).

Forsberg was just dominant that season.


Gretzky was far from the only good player on the kings squad, and they still managed to blow. Among other things, 93-94 was by far Gretzky's worst defensive year to date. He was more a liability than a help that year. 109 even strength goals against were scored while he was on the ice, and only 84 goals for, and only 14 Power play goals to show for the non shorthanded times on ice.

Defense does matter unless you outscore the competition by an obscene amount.


Jagr won the Art Ross by 20 points that year, almost double his dominance from the year before. Its safe to say he deserved the Hart trophy that year


No argument. He was clearly the Vezina guy in 98-99, but Jagr's scoring dominance was also extremely great that year.




This is one of the few points you have made that I completely agree with. it wasn't only Cherry. it was just about every analyst that year going on about standards for Hart voting, etc. They were pushing the point so hard every chance they got that it became clear that whoever won the Norris that year was going to have a good shot at winning the Hart.

The bolded part sounds worse than it actually is because:

a) Gretzky played on a bad team.

b) Gretzky had a lot of ice time that season.

c) Fedorov, who played on a much better team than Gretzky, was on the ice for 71 even strength against that season, yet still won the Hart and Selke.

 

[Wings4Life]

He was still the best forward during the playoffs, so there was a 3 month period where he was the best.

He was outplayed by both Larionov and Fedorov in the first round, imo. Feds played 2/3 of that series without the badly injured Yzerman and had to deal with the Sharks' shutdown crew by himself, with inferior linemates.

Unfortunately for us Detroit fans, that year was the last we saw of Larionov's prime, and it featured him kicking the Red Wings' ass all over the ice over 7 games (the series also featured an equally bad chokejob by a young Chris Osgood).

 

[Wings4Life]

That's just it. I don't feel the offensive gap between Jagr and Bure is as big as the Defensive gap between Forsberg and Naslund.

Fully agree here.

In defence it is:

Forsberg




Naslund

Jagr





Bure

 

[Wings4Life]

The bolded part sounds worse than it actually is because:

a) Gretzky played on a bad team.

b) Gretzky had a lot of ice time that season.

c) Fedorov, who played on a much better team than Gretzky, was on the ice for 71 even strength against that season, yet still won the Hart and Selke.

Fedorov made that team in 1994, which is why he won the Pearson/Hart/Selke in the first place. Yzerman was out for much of the season and playoffs, and Fedorov picked up the slack.

The reason there was 71 ES GA that year with Fedorov on the ice might have something to do with Detoit's goaltending...both guys let in a tonne of softies. In fact the goaltending wasn't solid until Vernie took the reigns in 1997.

Also, Detroit's D-core wasn't what it was in 1997/2008: Konstantinov and Lidstrom were both very green, and Coffey was on the slide (and never known for his defensive skills anyway).

And in terms of ice time, Bowman didn't let Fedorov get tired, he kept him out there as long as it took, in those days (a drastic reversal from what would happen over the next 3-5 years).

 

[lextune]

Not even close. Bure.

 

[Shredder]

Does anyone know what kind of TOI-numbers Bure chalked up during his stint in Florida? I mean, in his first 144 games with the team he scored an absolutely obscene 130 goals. What was it? 26-27 minutes per game? It's not like the Panthers had much else going for them offensively. Chuck Pavel out there!

EDIT: Just found the numbers, lol.

98-99: 21:41
99-00: 24:23
00-01: 26:52
01-02: 25:18

This, to me, seems like an underrated issue when comparing stats. For example, it seems much more logical that Gretzky could score 215 points if he also played 31-32 minutes per game in a wide-open era rather than the 22-23 minutes today's forwards play. Not that any forward today could actually do that, but still...

This also begs the question: How much did Orr play? 45 minutes per game?

Okay, I'm getting off topic here.

 

[Coffey77]

Going with Pavel Bure. When healthy he had 2 60 goal years and 2 50 goal years. He was one of the most exciting players I've seen and made so many defenceman look like pylons.

 

[canucks4ever]

Does anyone know what kind of TOI-numbers Bure chalked up during his stint in Florida? I mean, in his first 144 games with the team he scored an absolutely obscene 130 goals. What was it? 26-27 minutes per game? It's not like the Panthers had much else going for them offensively. Chuck Pavel out there!

EDIT: Just found the numbers, lol.

98-99: 21:41
99-00: 24:23
00-01: 26:52
01-02: 25:18

This, to me, seems like an underrated issue when comparing stats. For example, it seems much more logical that Gretzky could score 215 points if he also played 31-32 minutes per game in a wide-open era rather than the 22-23 minutes today's forwards play. Not that any forward today could actually do that, but still...

This also begs the question: How much did Orr play? 45 minutes per game?

Okay, I'm getting off topic here.

What website did you use to find minutes per game?

Cuz I want to know how many minutes per game Guy Lafleur was playing during his first 3 years in Montreal.

 

[Shredder]

I lucked out when I saw that hockey-reference.com had TOI numbers starting from the same year Bure arrived in Florida. It doesn't seem like seasons before 1998-99 are available there. The Gretzky numbers were something I vaguely remember reading somewhere in a career retrospective or whatever it was. Orr was just a punch in the dark.

Other notable forwards:

|Season|Avg. TOI
Jagr|1998-99|25:51
Sakic|1998-99|25:35
Kariya|1998-99|25:32
Lemieux|2000-01|24:20

 

[David Puddy]

Naslund was named to the First All-Star Team three consecutive times (2002, 2003 and 2004.) Naslund also won the Leaster B. Pearson in 2003 as the NHLPA's MVP.

Bure was only named to the First All-Star Team once (1994) and the Second All-Star Team twice (2000 and 2001.)

Bure was a dazzling goal scorer, but he wasn't much more than that. Bure didn't spend much of his many minutes per game in the defensive zone.

Also, Detroit's D-core wasn't what it was in 1997/2008: Konstantinov and Lidstrom were both very green, and Coffey was on the slide (and never known for his defensive skills anyway).

Nicklas Lidstrom was 27 years old and was selected to the First All-Star Team for the 1997-98 season.

I lucked out when I saw that hockey-reference.com had TOI numbers starting from the same year Bure arrived in Florida. It doesn't seem like seasons before 1998-99 are available there.

I think that TOI is only available since the 1998-99 season. NHLPA.com also only has detailed stats going back to the 1998-99 season as well.

 

[VladNYC*]

I don't believe that any one here if they had one roster spot left would pick Naslund over Bure. I wouldn't even pick Messier over Bure for the last roster spot, but that's just my opinion.