Yzerman vs Sakic

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
I actually think Nicholls might be as good as Kurri, Coffey or Messier from a pure offensive talent point of view. He just seemed like a bit of a floater that wouldn't be able to do it year after year.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,949
I actually think Nicholls might be as good as Kurri, Coffey or Messier from a pure offensive talent point of view. He just seemed like a bit of a floater that wouldn't be able to do it year after year.

i think there's a good argument that coffey was the 5th greatest offensive player of all time
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Not enough credit being given to the Gretzky/Mario effect if you think Coffey is in the conversation for 5th.

Unlike someone like, say, Esposito, we have really little to go on when it comes to demonstrating what a prime Coffey would look like without his main benefactors. So I realize it's all speculation and guesswork, but I would not consider Coffey for 5th at all.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,949
TBH, I don't quite see an argument to begin with. 6th? MAYBE.

it sounds like you have a semi-solid #5 in mind. curious who it is.

Not enough credit being given to the Gretzky/Mario effect if you think Coffey is in the conversation for 5th.

Unlike someone like, say, Esposito, we have really little to go on when it comes to demonstrating what a prime Coffey would look like without his main benefactors. So I realize it's all speculation and guesswork, but I would not consider Coffey for 5th at all.

to me, the '95 season answered my questions about the gretzky/mario effect. a 33 year old coffey approaching the end of his prime still finishes 6th in the league, basically scoring like peak karlsson (or peak potvin or peak red kelly, if you will).

to me, unless there's an obvious name that i'm blanking on right now, you could go lots of different ways for #5, but i don't think coffey is out of place with the likes of jagr, espo, mikita, peak lafleur, beliveau, etc.

granted i think eye test is telling me this, and obviously my eyes have seen infinitely more coffey than the earlier guys so me putting him in that echelon is really just a guess.

but all that aside, and back to where this digression began, i don't think there's any reasonable argument that nicholls even on the best day of his life was in the same universe as coffey offensively.
 

cole von cole

Registered User
Mar 1, 2016
289
249
More like Karlsson. I know the other 3 had better teams to work with, but Potvin and Kelly are better defensively than Coffey or Karlsson are.
 
Last edited:

Leafsdude7

Stand-Up Philosopher
Mar 26, 2011
23,135
1,213
Ontario
It's an interesting question. Yzerman's stats are definitely much better, but I think there's an argument that Sakic's pure skill and being stuck in the dead-puck era for more of his career are heavily in his favour. I don't think there's much separation with regards to intangibles. Maybe slight edge to Sakic for being a high-end 2-way centre for more of his career? Yzerman also probably played with better wingers (Shanahan, particularly) later in his career than Sakic, which might be another point in Sakic's favour. Both were also kingpins in their respective franchise's turn-around from basement dwelling jokes into perennial contenders.

In reality, I don't think there's really any daylight between the two. They're incredibly similar in so many ways and for all the things that might potentially separate one from the other significantly, there's another that'll do the same in reverse.
 

Neutrinos

Registered User
Sep 23, 2016
8,587
3,597
It's an interesting question. Yzerman's stats are definitely much better, but I think there's an argument that Sakic's pure skill and being stuck in the dead-puck era for more of his career are heavily in his favour. I don't think there's much separation with regards to intangibles. Maybe slight edge to Sakic for being a high-end 2-way centre for more of his career? Yzerman also probably played with better wingers (Shanahan, particularly) later in his career than Sakic, which might be another point in Sakic's favour. Both were also kingpins in their respective franchise's turn-around from basement dwelling jokes into perennial contenders.

In reality, I don't think there's really any daylight between the two. They're incredibly similar in so many ways and for all the things that might potentially separate one from the other significantly, there's another that'll do the same in reverse.

Yeah, that's pretty much my take as well, which is why it's so frustrating to see Trottier listed between them on the all-time list
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
It's an interesting question. Yzerman's stats are definitely much better, but I think there's an argument that Sakic's pure skill and being stuck in the dead-puck era for more of his career are heavily in his favour. I don't think there's much separation with regards to intangibles. Maybe slight edge to Sakic for being a high-end 2-way centre for more of his career? Yzerman also probably played with better wingers (Shanahan, particularly) later in his career than Sakic, which might be another point in Sakic's favour. Both were also kingpins in their respective franchise's turn-around from basement dwelling jokes into perennial contenders.

In reality, I don't think there's really any daylight between the two. They're incredibly similar in so many ways and for all the things that might potentially separate one from the other significantly, there's another that'll do the same in reverse.

Sakic has the longevity factor. He kept up his offensive production longer and, unlike Yzerman, also had a peak offensive season that was complimented with great 2-way play. He also has a better playoff resume, at least peak-wise.
 

Sentinel

Registered User
May 26, 2009
12,758
4,588
New Jersey
www.vvinenglish.com
Sakic has the longevity factor. He kept up his offensive production longer and, unlike Yzerman, also had a peak offensive season that was complimented with great 2-way play. He also has a better playoff resume, at least peak-wise.
Yzerman's twilight years fell squarely in the DPE, while Sakic had a few post lockout years to work with. By the same token you can say that Yzerman had higher production from the start than Sakic because he started deeper into the 80s.

Yzerman had both better offensive peak AND defensive peak than Sakic.
 

SportsPhan8

Registered User
Nov 24, 2013
198
3
New Jersey
*** Yzerman is the only player in NHL history to have 4+ goals, 12+ shots, and a 0 plus/minus rating in one game.

Did it versus Edmonton in 1990, in a 7-5 home win.

That season, out of 21 teams, Detroit ranked third worst in a team's simple rating system, and only had 28 wins, yet he had 127 points and ranked third in scoring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim MacDonald

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,590
15,949
contract dispute. obviously not his last. funny how sakic became known as such a company man. he wasn't adam oates, but he certainly had his share of ownership/$$$ drama.

Yeah it's funny how many people forget about the summer or '97, how close Joe came to being a Ranger and how pissed off fans and management were with him at the time.

And yeah, he "chose" to remain in the WHA for another season because he hadn't actually signed with the Nords yet.

it doesn't really do anything for this comparison, except to show how long sakic vs yzerman has been a topic for. but a priceless anecdote, as told by former canucks assistant GM laurence gilman on the radio yesterday:

the scenario is it's the early 90s, the quebec nordiques are being run by pierre lacroix and pierre page is the GM. sakic had already been up for arbitration a few times.

"the night before the hearing, the parties met to try to settle in advance of the arbitration and pierre lacroix and page start to talk about the fact that, the salary comparison don baizley was drawing at the time was to steve yzerman. lacroix and page countered with, well you can't compare the two because joe sakic has never been in the playoffs. and yzerman has had all this playoff experience. and apparently baizley looks across the table at them and said, i'm going to tell you guys this right now: don't bring that up at the hearing because if you do you are going to regret it. and lacroix and page shook it off, and sure enough they get into the hearing the next day and as the hearing is going forward one of the points being put forth by the quebec nordiques is, joe sakic isn't worth what he wants because he has no playoff experience and guys who have playoff experience are the ones who get paid. and apparently don baizley said very clearly, now mr. arbitrator, i don't think that mr. lacroix and mr. page are blaming mr. sakic for their ability to field a competitive team that's good enough to make the playoffs every year. and essentially the case was over and sakic had an epic win."

sidenote: gilman also went out of his way to call baizley the only agent in history deserving of being inducted into the HHOf.

EDIT: i believe gilman has his timeline mixed up. lacroix wasn't hired as the nordiques' president until 1994, so he almost certainly wasn't there for that arbitration hearing (which must have been 1991).

The Toronto Star
November 22, 1991

Ruling awaited on Sakic's wage request

[...] Sakic has this season and an option year remaining on his current contract, earning $ 405,000 this season, far below his market value.

His is no ordinary arbitration. The process is generally reserved for players in their option year. Sakic, however, has a clause that automatically invokes binding arbitration to settle a renegotiation dispute.

The Nordiques have voluntarily bumped up Sakic's salary on a couple of occasions. They're prepared to do it again, but not high enough to satisfy Sakic.

The club submitted an offer of approximately $ 675,000 to Hinnegan, a source said. According to the same source, Sakic's agent, Don Baizley of Winnipeg, submitted a figure of between $ 1.2 million and $ 1.5 million. That's in the same fiscal neighborhood as Detroit Red Wing star centre Steve Yzerman.

Hinnegan's decision may have a huge impact on the Nordiques. He is free to award any amount he sees fit.

If Sakic wins big, the Nordiques' payroll will enter a whole new universe. Other players, especially burgeoning stars Mats Sundin and Owen Nolan, will be lining up behind their offensive leader.

If the Nordiques win big, they're going to have one unhappy star on their hands. On a team that can't sign Eric Lindros and that has finished last over-all for the last three years, with the fragile psyche to prove it, it's another distraction it can do without.Potential for bitterness is high.

Both sides are reportedly using Yzerman's contract as the basis for their figures.

The discrepancy arises because Yzerman is paid by both the Red Wings and Little Caesar's pizza chain, club owner Mike Ilitch's principal business. Yzerman's contract filed with the league is apparently only for $ 700,000. He receives another $ 600,000 from the pizza chain.

The Nords are looking strictly at his Red Wing contract; Baizley and Sakic are looking at his total income.

That, apparently, is why the arbitration hearing took so long.

"The first half of the hearing contained a fair amount of arguing over what is relevant and admissible and other various legal points," Hinnegan said. "It wasn't until the second half that we got down to the actual issues."

Sakic sat through the entire proceedings.

[...]
 
Last edited:

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
One thing I would love to see one day, (as much as I love Stevie Y, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Super Joe).....it would be awesome if a television personality could get them both to sit down for a lengthy interview, discussing the Avalanche-Red Wings rivalry, what it was like to play on the Canadian National Teams together, and hear them describe the other's style of play and what they liked about the other. I'm of the belief they have a friendship outside of hockey....
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
There is honestly no wrong answer when you do the Sakic vs. Yzerman comparison. I flip flop constantly on these two. I flip flop mid-debate actually. With Sakic you can argue that he had more offensive flair for a longer period of time, but I think Yzerman at his peak was more offensively dominant. Both were responsible at both ends of the ice, sometimes even at an elite level defensively. I don't know, can I have them both on my team?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrhockey193195

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
Most of us agree that Sakic and Yzerman are very close. So how does Trottier, who seems like a very different player who is also from a slightly earlier era, slot in between the two on our all time lists?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neutrinos

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
Most of us agree that Sakic and Yzerman are very close. So how does Trottier, who seems like a very different player who is also from a slightly earlier era, slot in between the two on our all time lists?

Because it’s possible that two close players can have additional players in-between.

I might have 6 or 7 centers in that #26-35 range. All are what I would consider very close. Esposito, Sakic, Lalonde, Clarke, Trottier, Taylor, Yzerman.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Most of us agree that Sakic and Yzerman are very close. So how does Trottier, who seems like a very different player who is also from a slightly earlier era, slot in between the two on our all time lists?
This might depend on how much weight one wants to give Trottier for his (clearly?) superior checking and defensive game.

Actually, Trots has the huge/elite scoring season -- 134 points, Art Ross, Hart -- which Yzerman and Sakic lack, but that aside I don't think he had (a) the offensive longevity or (b) the proven ability to carry a weaker team that both Yzerman and Sakic had. Trottier came in the League onto a strong team on the rise (and made the most of it), but once Bossy was taken off his line he scored only 59 points in 68 games, and then his last four years with the Isles his offensive decline mirrors the team's decline in the standings. Conversely, I would suggest that Yzerman and Sakic proved multiple times over that they were super-elite players on both weak and strong teams, and also they had better longevity as impact players than Trottier. (In fairness to Trottier, though, players like him who entered in the mid-70s generally didn't have as long a career and prime as those who entered in the mid-80s.)
 

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
To me the reason for picking Sakic every single time this debate comes up is the following: while Yzerman had both the higher peak defensively and offensively, he never combined the two, so to speak. His focus on the defensive game ate away at his offensive output, which wasn't the case for Sakic, who nearly won the Selke the same year he took home the Hart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Phil

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
This might depend on how much weight one wants to give Trottier for his (clearly?) superior checking and defensive game.

Actually, Trots has the huge/elite scoring season -- 134 points, Art Ross, Hart -- which Yzerman and Sakic lack, but that aside I don't think he had (a) the offensive longevity or (b) the proven ability to carry a weaker team that both Yzerman and Sakic had. Trottier came in the League onto a strong team on the rise (and made the most of it), but once Bossy was taken off his line he scored only 59 points in 68 games, and then his last four years with the Isles his offensive decline mirrors the team's decline in the standings. Conversely, I would suggest that Yzerman and Sakic proved multiple times over that they were super-elite players on both weak and strong teams, and also they had better longevity as impact players than Trottier. (In fairness to Trottier, though, players like him who entered in the mid-70s generally didn't have as long a career and prime as those who entered in the mid-80s.)

Huh? Yzerman literally has the higher scoring season and Sakic's 00/01 season is easily on par with Trots' best.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Yzerman's twilight years fell squarely in the DPE, while Sakic had a few post lockout years to work with. By the same token you can say that Yzerman had higher production from the start than Sakic because he started deeper into the 80s.

Yzerman had both better offensive peak AND defensive peak than Sakic.

I didn't say anything about scoring levels. Sakic clearly kept up his offensive production longer than Yzerman, based on Art Ross placings.

Sakic had the higher 2-way peak than Yzerman.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,114
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Huh? Yzerman literally has the higher scoring season and Sakic's 00/01 season is easily on par with Trots' best.
My point was that Trottier is generally regarded as a solid defensive player, likely to a level exceeding Yzerman or Sakic at any point. And yet, he in fact is the only one of the three to have an Art Ross and Hart-season at once. In other words, his offensive peak was pretty darn high, too.
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
This might depend on how much weight one wants to give Trottier for his (clearly?) superior checking and defensive game.

Actually, Trots has the huge/elite scoring season -- 134 points, Art Ross, Hart -- which Yzerman and Sakic lack, but that aside I don't think he had (a) the offensive longevity or (b) the proven ability to carry a weaker team that both Yzerman and Sakic had. Trottier came in the League onto a strong team on the rise (and made the most of it), but once Bossy was taken off his line he scored only 59 points in 68 games, and then his last four years with the Isles his offensive decline mirrors the team's decline in the standings. Conversely, I would suggest that Yzerman and Sakic proved multiple times over that they were super-elite players on both weak and strong teams, and also they had better longevity as impact players than Trottier. (In fairness to Trottier, though, players like him who entered in the mid-70s generally didn't have as long a career and prime as those who entered in the mid-80s.)

You're kind of making my point for me. Yzerman and Sakic were very similar. I'm not saying that Trottier was better or worse, just quite different. Yet, he slots in between them on the all-time centers list.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->