Yashin vs Sundin, who was better in their primes?

[Passchendaele]

Sundin is obviously the easy choice overall, as he was more of a team player, and way more consistent than Yashin, but for a short while in the late 1990s/early 2000s, they weren't that far apart.

Click to read more...

 

[Boxscore]

Mats Sundin by a mile--not based on skill, but consistenecy, focus, work ethic and character. In terms of raw talent and offense, you are correct, they weren't that far apart. Yashin was a very talented player, and he was a big, strong man... a right hander like Mats. But Mats got it done every night--he was a legit leader and a clutch performer as well. His intangibles made him twice the player Yashin was.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Without a doubt it's Sundin. Now I might be biased as a Leafs fan but seeing Sundin play was a treat to watch. For a period of time he lead the NHL in career overtime goals and I happen to see him score his 500th NHL goal in overtime live and in person which was also a hat trick during the 2007 season. Plus I still remember when he had 4 goals and 2 assists for a total of 6 points against the Panthers late in the 2006 season and his overtime goal in Game 1 vs the Senators during their 2001 playoff series, that won the game 1-0 when Toronto wasn't given a chance to defeat them that year.

 

[scott clam]

Doesn't Yashin have like one season where he was better?

 

[NyQuil]

Doesn't Yashin have like one season where he was better?

Yashin was a runner-up to a Hart trophy, so his absolute peak was better.

Prime is a bit longer than that though.

 

[DitchMarner]

Yashin was very good for a while, but he was more like Seguin than Sundin.

Sundin was more clutch, a better team player, better defensively (and played on the PK much more often), easily better in the playoffs and a better Even Strength player.

In '99, Yashin outscored him by 11 points, but Sundin actually had 16 more ES points.

 

[bobholly39]

Sundin is obviously the easy choice overall, as he was more of a team player, and way more consistent than Yashin, but for a short while in the late 1990s/early 2000s, they weren't that far apart.

Sounds like you're asking more about peak, then prime. As in - at their absolute best.

Prime is easily Sundin no questions asked. One of the most consistent primes of all-time.

 

[Big Phil]

Doesn't Yashin have like one season where he was better?

You could say 1999 I guess. Things went well for him that year, they just clicked. However............that was the regular season. What I can never forget about Yashin is that he got beaten like a rented mule against Peca and the Sabres that spring. No points in a sweep. Peca smothered him and I am not even a Sens fan and I thought it was frustrating to watch. He just looked like a deer in headlights, and as it turned out that was pretty much how he often looked when the going got tough.

Sundin had 83 points to Yashin's 94 in 1999. I honestly think that just because Sundin was there every night and worked hard all of the time that you still take him that season, and this is the only season I would say Yashin is similar to Sundin. I loved Sundin on the Leafs, I felt he got a lot less respect than he should have because there was never a more consistent player, perhaps in NHL history, than him. Season after season, game after game, etc. He just wasn't appreciated when he was with the Leafs. Honestly, the guy was a better player than his numbers show, and he never got a decent winger for most of his career, and yet he never complained about it, ever. Once he was gone I think the fan base noticed how good they had it with him. Phil Kessel came on after, and even Auston Matthews since then, neither were good game in and game out like him. Matthews might peak higher and such, but I never thought Sundin was lazy in any game, I have thought that with Matthews a lot.

So yeah, even in 1999 give me Sundin. It wasn't him who went pointless in the postseason and then demanded more money on a contract he was already under and then sat out a year. It was Yashin.

 

[Neutrinos]

Yashin was a runner-up to a Hart trophy, so his absolute peak was better.

Prime is a bit longer than that though.

A Hart nomination doesn't necessarily mean he was better at their respective peaks

 

[NyQuil]

A Hart nomination doesn't necessarily mean he was better at their respective peaks

It does in this case.

Yashin outscored the next Senators player by 38 points.

Everyone talks about how Sundin had it so tough in Toronto while they had one of the highest salaries in the league and could bring in expensive veterans for the playoffs while the Senators had to wait for their young talent to develop and learn the post-season game.

A type of play in the playoffs where everything goes. I think people have forgotten how oppressive it was for the young and skilled players.

By the time their talent gained that experience, Yashin was long gone.

It is that hard to imagine that the secret to beating the Senators in the prime of the dead puck era was to basically sit Mike Peca on him, the only real superstar player at the time, for an entire series?

And are we actually sleeping on a Stanley Cup finalist Buffalo Sabres team where Hasek put up a 1.87 and .937 in one of the most dominating defensive performances ever? This is a Sabres team that performed better than any Toronto team with Leaf legends Sundin or Gilmour on it.

In any event, I don't mind people picking Sundin for obvious reasons, but Yashin's peak was noteworthy on a team that had been an absolute laughing stock disaster owing to expansion draft availability that the league never allowed again and a team budget that was often less than half of what the Leafs put up.

As it turned out, Yashin made the mind-boggling decision to listen to his agent and erase all goodwill towards him in the city, which is why he often isn't defended all that much in hockey circles.

 

[DitchMarner]

It does in this case.

Yashin outscored the next Senators player by 38 points.

Everyone talks about how Sundin had it so tough in Toronto while they had one of the highest salaries in the league and could bring in expensive veterans for the playoffs while the Senators had to wait for their young talent to develop and learn the post-season game.

A type of play in the playoffs where everything goes. I think people have forgotten how oppressive it was for the young and skilled players.

By the time their talent gained that experience, Yashin was long gone.

It is that hard to imagine that the secret to beating the Senators in the prime of the dead puck era was to basically sit Mike Peca on him, the only real superstar player at the time, for an entire series?

Are we actually sleeping on a Stanley Cup finalist Buffalo Sabres team where Hasek put up a 1.87 and .937 in one of the most dominating defensive performances ever?

In any event, I don't mind people picking Sundin for obvious reasons, but Yashin's peak was noteworthy on a team that had been an absolute laughing stock disaster owing to expansion draft availability that the league never allowed again and a team budget that was often less than half of what the Leafs put up.

Sundin's '97 season is pretty similar to Yashin's 99 season. He didn't get much Hart support because the Leafs sucked and missed the playoffs, however.

He led the team in scoring by 34 points and had 94 points (same as Yashin in '99). He finished seventh in scoring; Yashin was sixth in '99.

 

[NyQuil]

Sundin's '97 season is pretty similar to Yashin's 99 season. He didn't get much Hart support because the Leafs sucked and missed the playoffs, however.

He led the team in scoring by 34 points and had 94 points (same as Yashin in '99). He finished seventh in scoring; Yashin was sixth in '99.

Missing the playoffs really puts a dent in your Hart and Norris votes.

Not sure if that’s fair or not, but seems to occur.

 

[firstemperor]

Sundin was much more imposing then Yashin. I don't think point totals are the best way to evaluate a player like Sundin. Some players fill the box score stats up a lot more but Sundin wasn't one of them. He's one of those players in the old era that would just impose his will down-low whenever he had possession and was on the ice. It didn't always mean generating points, but it meant a lot on the overall impact of the game. It's too bad we mostly lacked quality around him for a lot of years.

 

[scott clam]

Yashin was a runner-up to a Hart trophy, so his absolute peak was better.

Prime is a bit longer than that though.

Yeah, the way I see it is that even if Yashin was a little bit "better" than Sundin for a little while, that it's not a big enough difference for it to really mean anything. Let alone a long enough time frame.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Outside of his rookie/final seasons and the 1995 lockout, the lowest amount of goals Sundin ever scored was 27. The man was a powerhouse.

 

[Michael Farkas]

When I read the thread title, I said, "Oh my God, Sundin!"

...that will serve as my message and vote as well...

 

[LeafsNation75]

You could say 1999 I guess. Things went well for him that year, they just clicked. However............that was the regular season. What I can never forget about Yashin is that he got beaten like a rented mule against Peca and the Sabres that spring. No points in a sweep. Peca smothered him and I am not even a Sens fan and I thought it was frustrating to watch. He just looked like a deer in headlights, and as it turned out that was pretty much how he often looked when the going got tough.

That's like in the 2001 playoffs when Toronto swept Ottawa and Shayne Corson wouldn't let Yashin out of his cite.

 

[Hockeyholic]

At their absolute best/peak? Yashin.

In their prines? Obviously Sundin.

When Yashin was at his best, he was an elite player. But he wasn't consistent enough.

 

[sr edler]

Even bulked up slow ass Toronto version of Sundin felt like a more fluid and better overall player than Yashin, and I'm not that surprised he had way more even strength points than Yashin even at Yashin's absolute peak. Yashin was an ox in the slot or around the net where he could do his regular season thing, but as soon as he lost the puck you felt he became almost an instant non-factor.

 

[quoipourquoi]

A Hart nomination doesn't necessarily mean he was better at their respective peaks

In this case, it is worth noting that in his Hart runner-up season, Yashin was not even the 1st Team Center, so the same voters who had him as the second most valuable (to Jagr) had him 30 voting points underneath Forsberg at Center (27 to 18 in 1st place votes). It’s not too dissimilar to Sakic’s edge over Sundin in 2002 (27 to 21).

Valuable was doing the heavy lifting in 1999.

 

[billybudd]

Yashin's best season was obviously pretty impressive, but if you'd have asked me this question that year, on Yashin's best day, I'd have said Sundin was better and been pretty confident about it. I just liked everything about Sundin's game better. Maybe Yashin was stronger. Marginally stronger. Possibly.

 

[billybudd]

Sundin was much more imposing then Yashin. I don't think point totals are the best way to evaluate a player like Sundin. Some players fill the box score stats up a lot more but Sundin wasn't one of them. He's one of those players in the old era that would just impose his will down-low whenever he had possession and was on the ice. It didn't always mean generating points, but it meant a lot on the overall impact of the game. It's too bad we mostly lacked quality around him for a lot of years.

In Yashin's defense, at his best, he was another one of those irresistible-force types who was so strong that you couldn't defend him properly using the common clutch/grab tactics of the day. If Yashin wanted to make it hard on you, it would be like trying to Sumo Wrestle a buffalo. Physical indomitability is not really where the comparison favors Sundin. Where Sundin separates himself is that he was more versatile, gutsier, smarter and miles more consistent.

 

[Sentinel]

Yashin was always one of my least favorite Rashin players. He was always so frustrating to watch when things got tough. Give me Sundin at his peak, his prime, or his career.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

one thing that jumps out at me is alexei yashin is much much closer to 1,000 points than i would have thought.

850 games, 781 points.

now imagine there's no 1994-'95 lockout. he scored 79 points as a rookie in '94, then 44 points in 47 games during the lockout year. so let's be conservative and give him +28 points in the games he missed there.

after that year, he holds out. he comes back 36 games into the season. let's give him +30 points in those missed games.

most famously, he holds out for an entire year of his absolute peak, between seasons of 94 and 88 points. let's give him +85 points.

and then he missed an entire year in 2004-'05 to another lockout. he's still basically a 65 points/82 game player so let's give him +60 points.

add it all up and he's got 203 extra points. which pus him at 984 career points.

i've projected pretty conservatively, so it's probably not too hard to find 16 points over those four seasons to get him to 1,000 is it? hell, had he not interrupted his absolute peak he might have gotten them all in 1999-2000.

as for sundin vs yashin peak vs peak, even if we concede that yashin might have been a little better in his peak, which i don't, peak yashin plays 2 out of 3 seasons. you get a doughnut right in the middle of that peak. sundin was one of the most dependable stars ever.

 

[MadLuke]

I feel like picking peak Sundin for a playoff or an best on best intl tournament versus peak Yashin isn't an unreasonable stance at all (in fact seem an easy pick for an olympics/world cup).

Considering that the edge for Yashin is at best that close, prime wise would go to Sundin.