Who is best Peter Forsberg at his peak Vs Connor McDavid now?

[Ben White]

My facts? You pretty much just quoted a timeframe that only included Forsberg's Hart trophy winning season and tried to pawn it off as a 4 year span. He didn't play a single game in the 2001-2002 regular season. 03-04 he played 39 games. 05-06 he was nowhere near the Hart trophy force of a player he once was. The guy has exactly one top 5 Hart voting season in his entire career.

Yes he was considered the best player (or one of the best) in the league for that very short period of time, but my point is he was never once in his entire career considered a tier above everyone else like McDavid is now. The other guys winning the hardware during the timeframe you speak of were also thought of just as highly as Forsberg during that time. It was a small group of players that people argued about who was the best until Crosby finally came in and put that argument to rest for years.

Lol, yes in 2005-06 he led the league in points and ppg at the time when his injury occured and after that he wasn’t the same, ever again. He also won a big players poll ”world’s best player” by mid season by a landslide over guys like Jagr. In 03-04 he ended the season with the highest ppg even though playing through a big portion of those 39 games half injured, before the injury that season he was head and shoulders above his competition in ppg. In the playoffs 2002, he came back from one year away from hockey, hardly any practise, and became the only player (other than himself in 1999) to win the Stanley Cup scoring title without making the finals.
I specifically said between 2002 playoffs and his mid season injury in 2005-06. I was right, you were wrong, apparently. To just ignore the facts and post junk doesn’t help you.

 

[SouthWest]

As others have stated, I think Forsberg's overall body of work is exaggerated on here, but if I am looking at his peak, I'm giving the edge over current McDavid.

An 02-03 Forsberg potted 106 points in 75 games with 70 pims.

He scored 2 less points than McDavids current high with seven less games played, and nearly two and a half games worth of ice time taken off from sitting in the penalty box, in a way tougher era, and I'm not even bringing his physicality and defensive play into the argument at this point.

I have ZERO doubt that McDavid will have a better prime and career than Foppa did (if he sustains his health), but McDavid hasn't got to Forsberg's peak yet.

 

[Varan]

AS should you. It is clear that the Big Three aren't close to their peak performances. McDavid doesn't win the Ross against them or even Kane the year before.

Idk about the Big Three, but he already beat Kane. Current McDavid > peak Kane

 

[daver]

Idk about the Big Three, but he already beat Kane. Current McDavid > peak Kane

How did he beat a peak Kane? Kane's peak season saw him win by a larger margin over 2nd place and over the next best 10, 20 etc... scorers.

If you are trying to argue that 108 points > 106 points, then you are completely ignoring the difference in scoring between 15/16, which saw a total of six players in the Top 50 at a PPG or better, and 17/18, which saw a total of twenty players in the Top 50 at a PPG or better

 

[authentic]

As others have stated, I think Forsberg's overall body of work is exaggerated on here, but if I am looking at his peak, I'm giving the edge over current McDavid.

An 02-03 Forsberg potted 106 points in 75 games with 70 pims.

He scored 2 less points than McDavids current high with seven less games played, and nearly two and a half games worth of ice time taken off from sitting in the penalty box, in a way tougher era, and I'm not even bringing his physicality and defensive play into the argument at this point.

I have ZERO doubt that McDavid will have a better prime and career than Foppa did (if he sustains his health), but McDavid hasn't got to Forsberg's peak yet.

Actually if we're getting technical he averaged just over 19 minutes in 2002-03 and McDavid averaged over 22 last season. That's 12 more games worth of ice time and then an additional 7 actual games. Forsberg was also +52 that season. There's a reason why so many people think so highly of peak Forsberg.

Also to be clear I'm not saying he would've had over 130 points that season if he played all 82 averaging 22, but he probably could've got over 120 or close to it even with the ice time he had not missing any games, and that's just offense we're talking about. It was also easier to score last season than it was in 2002-03, but to be fair to McDavid he played sick for a month last season and his linemates were nowhere near Tanguay and Hejduk, not to mention the defensemen behind him. That's why I believe McDavid is already the slightly better offensive player along with watching him play and this season I think he'll prove it.

 

[34]

Hard to vote against McDavid here.

 

[Willy Stylez]

As others have stated, I think Forsberg's overall body of work is exaggerated on here, but if I am looking at his peak, I'm giving the edge over current McDavid.

An 02-03 Forsberg potted 106 points in 75 games with 70 pims.

He scored 2 less points than McDavids current high with seven less games played, and nearly two and a half games worth of ice time taken off from sitting in the penalty box, in a way tougher era, and I'm not even bringing his physicality and defensive play into the argument at this point.

I have ZERO doubt that McDavid will have a better prime and career than Foppa did (if he sustains his health), but McDavid hasn't got to Forsberg's peak yet.

Agreed.

Man feels awesome that we havent seen McDavid in his prime yet and exciting as a hockey fan to follow his continuing development.

 

[bathdog]

current McDavid easily

people are forgetting that he plays with literally no names and still wins art rosses.

Peak Forsberg in the playoffs with the powerhouse Avs or with Cam Talbot, RNH and Milan Lucic?

I understand your point and I agree that Forsberg was a beast. However, he had other great linemates like HHOF Sakic, and then Tanguay and Hedjuk. McDavid has nobody really. Drai can't hold Sakic' jockstrap and RNH can't hold Hedjuk's.

Only during PP. Moreover, Sakic was a world-class player on the same tier (or even better) which required the other team to focus just as much energy and resources trying to stop if. On Edmonton, you just need to stop McDavid (apart from that playoffs two years ago).

There are so many dynamics to list.

Forsberg played with better players and team that was loaded.

McDavid destroys Forsbergs 5 on 5 numbers

Already scored more goals in a season then Peak Forsberg

2 Art Ross trophies by 21

Single handedly ended the worst run in sports ...the Oilers 10 season playoff drought on his own. Forsberg doesnt do this.



Plays in one of the biggest fishbowls in the league and manages to somehow not let the pressure get to him.


Forsberg in my opinion should make the top 50 greatest players list...but Connor McDavid is a different beast to tackle.

Honestly, now is probably a good time to start explaining yourselfs, and back your stance up with some data, because it seems popular to grasp onto arguments that's hard to quantify. As Forsberg played on a more talented team that should in theory mean that scoring was more distributed on those more talented team mates.

In the games Forsberg played during 02/03-03/04 Colorado had a GF of 359, Forsberg was in on 44.8% of those goals.
In the games McDavid played during 16/17-18/19 (so far as of today) Edmonton had a GF of 514, McDavid was in on 44.7% of those goals.

Between 99-04 Forsberg played 84 playoff games and was in on 44.6% of his teams goals in the games he played.

This obviously begs the question. If McDavid's team is and has been dogshit, and Forsberg's teams were rediculously deep, shouldn't McDavid stand out more, not less? And that's not even considering the fact that he had a ton less TOI during this time frame.

McDavid has his work cut out for him as far as I'm concerned (not career wise). I get the idea that his playoff performance can't be judged by a single run, but once that run is about as good as Forsberg's worst you know the comparison is a bit premature. Projections and excitement.

 

[daver]

Honestly, now is probably a good time to start explaining yourselfs, and back your stance up with some data, because it seems popular to grasp onto arguments that's hard to quantify. As Forsberg played on a more talented team that should in theory mean that scoring was more distributed on those more talented team mates.

In the games Forsberg played during 02/03-03/04 Colorado had a GF of 359, Forsberg was in on 44.8% of those goals.
In the games McDavid played during 16/17-18/19 (so far as of today) Edmonton had a GF of 514, McDavid was in on 44.7% of those goals.

Between 99-04 Forsberg played 84 playoff games and was in on 44.6% of his teams goals in the games he played.

This obviously begs the question. If McDavid's team is and has been dog****, and Forsberg's teams were rediculously deep, shouldn't McDavid stand out more, not less? And that's not even considering the fact that he had a ton less TOI during this time frame.

McDavid has his work cut out for him as far as I'm concerned (not career wise). I get the idea that his playoff performance can't be judged by a single run, but once that run is about as good as Forsberg's worst you know the comparison is a bit premature. Projections and excitement.

Great post. Should put this narrative to bed.

And it is interesting to note that Forsberg was also the dominant ES scorer in 02/03, arguably just as or more dominant than McDavid has been.

The only real argument for McDavid is playing 82 games vs. Forsberg's missed games. On a per game basis, it is clearly Forsberg.

 

[SlapshotTheMovie]

Forsberg is one of my all time favorites but its McDavid. Dude is just on a different level then the rest of the NHL. If Conor had depth scoring to thin out the other teams defense he would be doing 150 pts a season. Litterally a one man team right now.

 

[daver]

Forsberg is one of my all time favorites but its McDavid. Dude is just on a different level then the rest of the NHL. If Conor had depth scoring to thin out the other teams defense he would be doing 150 pts a season. Litterally a one man team right now.

So if the Oilers had scoring depth, the other team's would focus less on the 150 point player?

 

[McFlash97]

Imagine 97 with Sakic, Kamensky,Duchene, Blake, Deadmarsh, Tanguay, Hejduk

as opposed to

Lucic, Rattie, Caggiula, Strome, Kassian, Benning

all of who have been on McDavid's line or passing him the puck from the backend for a ton early in his career.

In my opinion Forsberg was a beast , but 97 is a Freak.

 

[newfy]

My facts? You pretty much just quoted a timeframe that only included Forsberg's Hart trophy winning season and tried to pawn it off as a 4 year span. He didn't play a single game in the 2001-2002 regular season. 03-04 he played 39 games. 05-06 he was nowhere near the Hart trophy force of a player he once was. The guy has exactly one top 5 Hart voting season in his entire career.

Yes he was considered the best player (or one of the best) in the league for that very short period of time, but my point is he was never once in his entire career considered a tier above everyone else like McDavid is now. The other guys winning the hardware during the timeframe you speak of were also thought of just as highly as Forsberg during that time. It was a small group of players that people argued about who was the best until Crosby finally came in and put that argument to rest for years.

I was going to reply to that post but you put it pretty well. Peak Forsberg coudl definitely give McDavid a run for his money but I do think its hilarious how that poster tried to pawn off a four year peak where Forsberg was the best player when in reality he played about 2 seasons worth of games and they were broke up over several seasons.

Forsberg never hit the status of undisputed best player in the league like McDavid has now. In that ~2002-2006 time frame a few guys slugged it out for best in the league but none stood out as clearly the best until Corsby showed up. I remember Iginla on a season to season basis being considered right there as the best with others like Thornton, Lidstrom and even Naslund was considered better by the players the year Forsberg won the hart.

There are some good arguments stats wise in this thread and I think they both did peak close, but Forsberg absolutely never hit a peak where he was considered so clearly ahead of the other players like McDavid is considered currently. I also think that those years for Forsberg were an awkward time for the NHL. A lot of the old guard of superstars were on their way out and not a lot of new talent had entered the league yet. There wasnt any generational stars at that point in time so it was easier to be considered the best. McDavid separating himself from guys like Ovechkin, Malkin and Crosby is more impressive than Forsberg not really separating himself from a group of guys who had really good peak 2 or 3 seasons but arent in the running for best all time arguments

 

[StoneHands]

Forsberg
'02-'03: 106 points in 75 games (1.41 PPG)
Average goals per game in the NHL: 5.30
Won the Hart and Art Ross and finished 4th in Selke voting

McDavid
'17-'18: 108 points in 82 games (1.32 PPG)
Average goals per game in the NHL: 5.94
Won the Art Ross and Pearson/Lindsay and finished 5th in Hart and 26th in Selke voting

So Forsberg had 2 fewer points in 7 fewer games in a season where league-wide scoring was much lower. He was also the undeniably better defensive player.

I give the edge to Forsberg for Peak but McDavid is still only 21 and just scratching the surface of his prime/peak.

 

[daver]

I was going to reply to that post but you put it pretty well. Peak Forsberg coudl definitely give McDavid a run for his money but I do think its hilarious how that poster tried to pawn off a four year peak where Forsberg was the best player when in reality he played about 2 seasons worth of games and they were broke up over several seasons.

Forsberg never hit the status of undisputed best player in the league like McDavid has now. In that ~2002-2006 time frame a few guys slugged it out for best in the league but none stood out as clearly the best until Corsby showed up. I remember Iginla on a season to season basis being considered right there as the best with others like Thornton, Lidstrom and even Naslund was considered better by the players the year Forsberg won the hart.

There are some good arguments stats wise in this thread and I think they both did peak close, but Forsberg absolutely never hit a peak where he was considered so clearly ahead of the other players like McDavid is considered currently. I also think that those years for Forsberg were an awkward time for the NHL. A lot of the old guard of superstars were on their way out and not a lot of new talent had entered the league yet. There wasnt any generational stars at that point in time so it was easier to be considered the best. McDavid separating himself from guys like Ovechkin, Malkin and Crosby is more impressive than Forsberg not really separating himself from a group of guys who had really good peak 2 or 3 seasons but arent in the running for best all time arguments

None is this changes the fact that Forsberg's peak season is better than McDavid's.

 

[arrbez]

I'm a child of the 90's, nostalgia weighs heavy for me.

But this is McDavid, and I don't think it's even that close. Who knows how many Harts, Smyths, Cups he'll win (he's only 21). But I've seen enough by now to say that I think he's the best forward to come into the league since Lemieux. Better than Forsberg, better than Lindros, better than Jagr, better than Ovechkin, and yes, better than Crosby.

 

[Echo Roku]

Forsberg has to be the most overrated player in not only the history of hockey, but in all of sports.

And we all know why you’ll never actually try to defend this

 

[newfy]

None is this changes the fact that Forsberg's peak season is better than McDavid's.

Depends on how you look at it I guess. Statistically Forsberg may have had a better one peak season just breaking down the numbers. But like I said, he never had a season where he was the unanimous best player in the league and didnt dominate his peers to the extent McDavid does. For a guy people keep saying was the clear best in the league for an extended period of time, you would think he would have at least one Pearson/Lindsay award to his name, or maybe the players didnt think he was clearly the best at any point in his career?

McDavids 2016-17 season he got 96% of the hart vote compared to 02-03 Forsberg getting 82%.

McDavids 2016-17 season he won the Lindsay. 02-03 Forsberg was considered less outstanding than Markus Naslund by the players themselves.

McDavid 2016-17 season he led the league in points by 11. Forsberg 02-03 led by 2 but missed games. He was on pace to lead the league in scoring by 11 had he played all 82. So he couldnt stay as healthy, which is the story of Forsbergs career.

 

[daver]

Depends on how you look at it I guess. Statistically Forsberg may have had a better one peak season just breaking down the numbers. But like I said, he never had a season where he was the unanimous best player in the league and didnt dominate his peers to the extent McDavid does. For a guy people keep saying was the clear best in the league for an extended period of time, you would think he would have at least one Pearson/Lindsay award to his name, or maybe the players didnt think he was clearly the best at any point in his career?

You can stop right there. That's what the OP is asking. If you want to play the injury card, that's fine but your trophy talk is somewhat meaningless.

Lots of players have had better seasons than McDavid but did not get the trophy recognition.

Jagr - 05/06
Malkin - 08/09
Crosby/OV - 09/10

 

[newfy]

You can stop right there. That's what the OP is asking. If you want to play the injury card, that's fine but your trophy talk is somewhat meaningless.

Lots of players have had better seasons than McDavid but did not get the trophy recognition.

Jagr - 05/06
Malkin - 08/09
Crosby/OV - 09/10

Yeah but those seasons are apples to oranges. For example, Jagrs numbers were pretty ridiculous that season in 05/06, to the point that its hard to really compare McDavids numbers to them. But as I mentioned above, Jagr blew everyone out of the water that year except Thornton and thats why the trophies ended up split. 2 guys lapped the field instead of just one like McDavid has been. 125 point seasons with no one hardly within 20 points for 2 guys isnt the same as comparing a Forsberg with a 2 point lead, that would've had the same point lead had he played all the games. Forsberg being on pace for 115 as a raw number is impressive but not when you consider its the same lead in points as McDavid had, and 7 others broke 90 that season (a couple with 100 as well). In that same year McDavid put up 100, there were a grand total of 0 90 point getters, 6 in the 80s and the rest were in the 70s.

In Forsbergs dominant year, there were more people scoring 90 or 100 points than there was people scoring over 80 point in McDavids. So yeah Jagrs season was more impressive its just that one other guy completely lapped the field that year as well. Forsberg didnt lap the field, he didnt put up ridiculous numbers compared to the year McDavid did it, so looking at trophies and how much they won them by is a pretty fair way to say who was more dominant.

Statistically 108 points is more than 100 but it doesnt mean it was necessarily a more dominant peak than McDavids year. The amount that he was voted for trophy wise compared to Forsberg helps illustrate that point.

 

[Regal]

You can stop right there. That's what the OP is asking. If you want to play the injury card, that's fine but your trophy talk is somewhat meaningless.

Lots of players have had better seasons than McDavid but did not get the trophy recognition.

Jagr - 05/06
Malkin - 08/09
Crosby/OV - 09/10

Figuring out who is the most productive in the context of the league should be the start of the conversation about who is actually better, not the end. Point totals are important stats, but things are never that black and white

 

[SlapshotTheMovie]

So if the Oilers had scoring depth, the other team's would focus less on the 150 point player?

So you are telling me that a team that has to cover Crosby on one line and Malkin on another doesnt change its coverage if Malkin is injured? Get with it noob

 

[Zamuz]

Honestly, now is probably a good time to start explaining yourselfs, and back your stance up with some data, because it seems popular to grasp onto arguments that's hard to quantify. As Forsberg played on a more talented team that should in theory mean that scoring was more distributed on those more talented team mates.

In the games Forsberg played during 02/03-03/04 Colorado had a GF of 359, Forsberg was in on 44.8% of those goals.
In the games McDavid played during 16/17-18/19 (so far as of today) Edmonton had a GF of 514, McDavid was in on 44.7% of those goals.

Between 99-04 Forsberg played 84 playoff games and was in on 44.6% of his teams goals in the games he played.

This obviously begs the question. If McDavid's team is and has been dog****, and Forsberg's teams were rediculously deep, shouldn't McDavid stand out more, not less? And that's not even considering the fact that he had a ton less TOI during this time frame.

McDavid has his work cut out for him as far as I'm concerned (not career wise). I get the idea that his playoff performance can't be judged by a single run, but once that run is about as good as Forsberg's worst you know the comparison is a bit premature. Projections and excitement.

The answer is simple:

Forsberg had better scorers in his line to finish from his plays and also he had players in his line that could also create scoring chances so he can finish from their plays.

 

[daver]

So you are telling me that a team that has to cover Crosby on one line and Malkin on another doesnt change its coverage if Malkin is injured? Get with it noob

Most of the time, nope. And both Crosby and Malkin have shown they produce as well or better when the other is injured. Same with Sakic and Forsberg. It is just as reasonable to think that all those players would score more if they were a one man show.

So I guess you are the one who is a noob.