Did Jagr benefit of bad competition at forward during his peak to stack up Art Ross trophies?

[Staniowski]

Besides 1994-95 when Jagr’s prime began when else was this the case?

This was discussed in other threads, but I believe Lindros was the better scorer in '93, '94, '95, '97...plus was leading, or around the same, until serious injuries in both '98 and '99.

So, probably Jagr's three best competitors for scoring titles - Lemieux, Lindros, Kariya - were each affected by injuries during Jagr's four consecutive scoring titles.

Nevertheless, Jagr was still arguably as good a scorer (or very close) as anybody ever, other than Lemieux and Gretzky.

 

[JackSlater]

Ok. I guess we disagree on that one.

The point I am trying to make is that I believe if Jagr’s peak happened at any time before 1995 and after 2020, his all time rank would be a bit lower than it is right now for some people, given he wouldn’t have dominated his contemporaries as much as he did from 1995-2001 and it might have hurt his trophy case.

Sakic and Lindros had better peak seasons than Selanne and Kariya, which is why I singled them out. Jagr’s case doesn’t get any better by singling out Selanne and Kariya instead, who even though were tremendous players, were not on the level of a Peak MacKinnon or a Peak Kucherov, at least not as consistently great.

It's not a good point and the way you tried to make it was poor. It looks like you decided beforehand, and then intentionally picked a bad representative sample of competition for Jagr. The only "knock" against Jagr is that his competition was generally riddled with injuries, in terms of talent it was a strong cohort. Jagr was not immune to injuries either, but deserves credit for being particularly durable.

Selanne, Kariya and Forsberg aren't the same level of Art Ross threat that prime Ovechkin and prime MacKinnon/Kucherov are.

Well, maybe with Forsberg, but he was also constantly injured (same with Lindros). The one season he put it all together offensively, Jagr was in his Washington era.

Even Sakic was injured a fair amount but he's also not on the same level as Crosby and McDavids main contemporaries, at least noot the same level of offensive consistency.

Not sure i'd have Selanne/Kariya over Trottier and Dionne either.

You might want to stick to responding to what was actually said. Regardless, throwing in Ovechkin is a weird choice too, he doesn't stick out at a noteworthy level as an Art Ross threat. Jagr would outscore Ovechkin every year if they were at the same points in their careers, the other mentioned players would have good odds to with regularity too. The issue is more pretending, seemingly randomly, that Jagr's only legitimate Art Ross competition was Sakic and Lindros when there were other all time greats who were credible Art Ross threats and who had healthy seasons in the specified range.

I don't know why you are specifically bringing up Trottier and Dionne.

 

[daver]

Judging by that exercice, you give the same value to a 99 pts Paul Kariya in 1997 as a 132 pts Connor McDavid in 2024?

We aren't talking about 2024 and we aren't talking about Connor McDavid.

And hopefully we aren't talking about comparing raw point totals from 25 years apart.

If you want to argue that Mac/Kuch's combined point finishes from '18 to '23 are more dominant than Selanne/Kariya's, go right ahead. Actually, this should be a must given you are the one making the claim.

 

[daver]

The point I am trying to make is that I believe if Jagr’s peak happened at any time before 1995 and after 2020, his all time rank would be a bit lower than it is right now for some people, given he wouldn’t have dominated his contemporaries as much as he did from 1995-2001 and it might have hurt his trophy case.

Such a strange idea you have laid out here.

Jagr was more dominant vs. his peers in his 7 year peak than McDavid has been in the last 7 seasons vs. his peers. He would be going head to head with McDavid for best player in the world.

We saw what happened when two Top 10 talents all-time went head to head with Wayne and Mario; an Art Ross loss to another GOAT talent shouldn't hurt your all-time rank. It doesn't take much time to look deeper than trophy counting to measure a player.

 

[The Panther]

I personally would view Jagr's major competition, during his peak / prime (c. 1995 short season through 2005-06), as Lemieux (briefly), Lindros, Forsberg, and (in 2006 only) Thornton. And Forsberg is really only a legit competitor because Jagr dipped so much in 2002-03 and 2003-04 (otherwise, he wouldn't be).

I don't think Selanna, Kariya, Sakic, and old-Gretzky are real competition for Jagr, who was at a higher level of scoring than them from 1995 onward. In other words, given full games played to everyone, Jagr likely outscores all those guys 90% of the time.

Again, I don't think Mario had anything over Jagr as a point producer from 1995 forward. We'll never know what happens if Mario plays in 1995 -- maybe he wins the scoring title; maybe he doesn't. But Jagr did win (tie for) the scoring title, and that was a weird season where young stars did well and veteran guys mostly all sagged. In 1995-96, Jagr is outproducing Lemieux at even strength (and not sitting out back-to-back games) and scoring at a 150-point pace. The only player to come close to him is Mario, and they're about even at this point (Jagr much better ES results). In 2001, Jagr actually outscores Lemieux head-to-head.

Lindros (despite what most on here think) was one of the greatest players of all time, and did in fact challenge Jagr for scoring supremacy during the mid-/late-1990s. In both 1993-94 and 1995 Lindros was scoring at a higher rate than Jagr; however, in 1994 neither was winning scoring titles yet. In 1995, Lindros had a slightly higher PPG than Jagr, so we might guess that Lindros wins that Art Ross (instead of Jagr) if he doesn't miss 2 games (we don't know that, but it's a pretty good guess). 1996 is Jagr all the way (but he didn't win the Art Ross anyway because of Mario). 1997 is Mario, but Lindros might have won this if he hadn't missed games (he and Jagr are basically tied, just a bit behind Mario). Then begins Jagr's four-straight Art Ross trophies. Lindros isn't really a threat to him anymore, as Eric begins to fall off his peak (thanks to concussions) as early as 1997-98.

Forsberg, as noted, outscored Jagr handily per-game in 2002-03 and 2003-04, but this is more to do with Jagr's being bored in Washington than Forsberg being at Jagr's offensive level. But to give Forsberg his due, he may have been the best player in the world on a per-game level those 2 years.

Joe Thornton took advantage of Jagr's final-week slump and voters falling for a weird narrative, respectively, to win the '06 Art Ross and Hart trophy. But Jagr was the best player in the NHL that season and the most valuable. I can't say he was the best scorer... but he was the best scorer over about 79 games.

Jagr had both good and bad fortune with his Art Ross wins. If Lemieux didn't play, maybe Jagr wins all the Art Rosses from 1995 to 2001 (but maybe only to 2000, as Mario's return in '00-'01 seemed to stimulate Jagr back to life), which would give his legacy a massive bump up. He'd potentially have 7 Art Rosses, second to only Gretzky.

On the other hand, I kind of get the OP's point, that during the '98 to '01 period, Jagr did have some good fortune as it wasn't the best period for high-end scoring all-time elite players.

But overall, I'd say Jagr's competition was no harder nor easier than anyone.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

It's not a good point and the way you tried to make it was poor. It looks like you decided beforehand, and then intentionally picked a bad representative sample of competition for Jagr. The only "knock" against Jagr is that his competition was generally riddled with injuries, in terms of talent it was a strong cohort. Jagr was not immune to injuries either, but deserves credit for being particularly durable.



You might want to stick to responding to what was actually said. Regardless, throwing in Ovechkin is a weird choice too, he doesn't stick out at a noteworthy level as an Art Ross threat. Jagr would outscore Ovechkin every year if they were at the same points in their careers, the other mentioned players would have good odds to with regularity too. The issue is more pretending, seemingly randomly, that Jagr's only legitimate Art Ross competition was Sakic and Lindros when there were other all time greats who were credible Art Ross threats and who had healthy seasons in the specified range.

I don't know why you are specifically bringing up Trottier and Dionne.

You are acting really defensive here. We are just speculating. You can disagree if you want, but just know you’re in the minority if you think Jagr’s top end competition was as good as McDavid’s.

 

[WarriorofTime]

For ease of review and tuning out noise probably best to look just at Jagr’s four straight Ross years and ignore the one three years earlier in a short season.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Wouldn’t say the names are bad on paper and Jagr blows everyone with a big enough sample away in point per game as well. Yeah the numbers are lower due to era. The oft mentioned Forsberg for instance is fairly healthy and can’t quite keep up with Jagr in ppg. Also wouldn’t say there’s anything to suggest Jagr was playing in a more detrimental to his team fashion.

 

[psycat]

You are acting really defensive here. We are just speculating. You can disagree if you want, but just know you’re in the minority if you think Jagr’s top end competition was as good as McDavid’s.

Ok but why is McDavids competition the standard? Might aswell make a thread about if Kucherov could win a Ross or two vs prime Jagr because thats what this thread boils down to?

 

[Troubadour]

It's a suggestive question, lol. Not many people who actually remember the era will nod. He mainly benefitted from his ability to score more and for longer than the rest despite the fact goalies were not artificially made more vulnerable to inflate the scoring and Ds were often not disciplined for attempted murder.

Lemieux would have solved this fake dilemma. With him on the Pens, Jagr would have won fewer scoring titles (so it wouldn't have to be blamed on bad competition, and the ones he might have won still, Lemieux would take credit for), and also, with Lemieux on the Pens, Jagr would have scored so much more than anyone not named Lemieux his competition would look even worse, but there would be Lemieux.

 

[daver]

This was discussed in other threads, but I believe Lindros was the better scorer in '93, '94, '95, '97...plus was leading, or around the same, until serious injuries in both '98 and '99.

He was right there as a scorer through 96/97 but Jagr took it up a notch after that.

Thru 53 games in 97/98, Jagr was at a 1.27 (1st place) and Lindros was at 1.17 (4th) then Lindros got in injured. Jagr finished at 1.32 so one would think he had the edge over Lindros that season.

Thru 69 games in 98/99, Jagr was at a 1.55 PPG (1st place) and Lindros was at a 1.35 PPG (3rd) then Lindros got injured.

So no, Lindros was not an Art Ross threat to Jagr in '98 or 99.

 

[daver]

You are acting really defensive here. We are just speculating. You can disagree if you want, but just know you’re in the minority if you think Jagr’s top end competition was as good as McDavid’s.

As clearly evidenced by the majority of posters disagreeing with the OP.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

As clearly evidenced by the majority of posters disagreeing with the OP.

Most posters are disagreeing with the notion that Jagr had weak competition, not that his top end competition was worse than McDavid in the last couple of years.

 

[daver]

Most posters are disagreeing with the notion that Jagr had weak competition, not that his top end competition was worse than McDavid in the last couple of years.

Jagr loses, maybe, one Art Ross with somewhat certainty if his peak started in 2018. I.e. McDavid's 22/23 season is argubly better than Jagr's peak full season in 98/99.

Everything else is cherrypicking arguments and season comparisons, context lacking namedropping and raw point comparisons to make your point.

Yes, there were lots of injuries to the elite forwards during Jagr's peak, while the elite scorers have been relatively healthy since 2018. We have no idea if Draisaitl, Mack or Kucherov make it through the DPE any better than Lindros, Kariya, etc....

And Jagr is not necessarily rated high relative to his Art Ross total/ offensive peak to begin with; he is behind players like Hull, Beliveau and Crosby who have a total of 6 Rosses between them. In other words, objective fans can rate players appropriately without simply counting trophies.

 

[JackSlater]

You are acting really defensive here. We are just speculating. You can disagree if you want, but just know you’re in the minority if you think Jagr’s top end competition was as good as McDavid’s.

I don't particularly care about McDavid's competition specifically, but I do find it weird to make such a poor argument against Jagr. I'm not particularly invested in Jagr or McDavid as players.

 

[The Macho King]

So late 90s gets a lot of nostalgia but I do think Jagrs competition was pretty poor.

It was Sakic - good scorer but never really a serious Art Ross threat outside of his spike season (2nd in 04 but that's more of a knock on him and the league in 04 than anything else).

It was Kariya - not even a top 100 player? Good scorer at his peak but a short peak and a lot of what ifs.

Selanne- 2nd twice and probably his most consistent competition? Borderline top 80 player of all time.

Lindros - enough has been said here. Couldn't put together a full season due to play style.

That feels more in line with the league around 2010s with Crosby competing primarily with the Sedins/Perry/Stamkos than McDavid and Kucherov/MacKinnon/Draisatl.

Idk - maybe it's not particularly weak historically in the same way the early 80s were for Gretzky (but 99 clears by so much it's a moot point), but it certainly isn't something I'd categorize as strong.

 

[WarriorofTime]

So late 90s gets a lot of nostalgia but I do think Jagrs competition was pretty poor.

It was Sakic - good scorer but never really a serious Art Ross threat outside of his spike season (2nd in 04 but that's more of a knock on him and the league in 04 than anything else).

It was Kariya - not even a top 100 player? Good scorer at his peak but a short peak and a lot of what ifs.

Selanne- 2nd twice and probably his most consistent competition? Borderline top 80 player of all time.

Lindros - enough has been said here. Couldn't put together a full season due to play style.

That feels more in line with the league around 2010s with Crosby competing primarily with the Sedins/Perry/Stamkos than McDavid and Kucherov/MacKinnon/Draisatl.

Idk - maybe it's not particularly weak historically in the same way the early 80s were for Gretzky (but 99 clears by so much it's a moot point), but it certainly isn't something I'd categorize as strong.

Forsberg played 72, 79, 49 and 73 games during Jagr's 4-peat. His 49 game season wasn't close to Jagr's PPG (as Jagr himself won the Ross with only 63 GP).

Jagr, Sakic, Selanne, Forsberg, T. Fleury, Modano, Sundin, Amonte, Rechhi, Bure, Z. Palffy, Kariya, Oates, Allison, Roenick, Turgeon, Straka, Francis, Robitaille, Yzerman, Weight, Shanahan, Br. Hull, Kovalev, LeClair, Demitra, Lidstrom, Sykora, K. Tkachuk, Elias, Yashin, Bondra, Satan, Naslund, Ronning, Whitney, Guerin, Messier, Friesen, McEachern were the top 40 in that 4-year stretch. While there's the share of "random" names that you'll find in any strict parameter stretch, I think you see there were still a lot of great and mostly healthy players at that time.

 

[The Macho King]

Forsberg played 72, 79, 49 and 73 games during Jagr's 4-peat. His 49 game season wasn't close to Jagr's PPG (as Jagr himself won the Ross with only 63 GP).

Jagr, Sakic, Selanne, Forsberg, T. Fleury, Modano, Sundin, Amonte, Rechhi, Bure, Z. Palffy, Kariya, Oates, Allison, Roenick, Turgeon, Straka, Francis, Robitaille, Yzerman, Weight, Shanahan, Br. Hull, Kovalev, LeClair, Demitra, Lidstrom, Sykora, K. Tkachuk, Elias, Yashin, Bondra, Satan, Naslund, Ronning, Whitney, Guerin, Messier, Friesen, McEachern were the top 40 in that 4-year stretch. While there's the share of "random" names that you'll find in any strict parameter stretch, I think you see there were still a lot of great and mostly healthy players at that time.

There's great players in any era, but we aren't touting Brayden Point and Alexander Barkov as significant threats for the Art Ross today, so the names you list (outside of the obvious) aren't really relevant to the discussion.

Edit: also some real curious additions to that list there.

 

[WarriorofTime]

There's great players in any era, but we aren't touting Brayden Point and Alexander Barkov as significant threats for the Art Ross today, so the names you list (outside of the obvious) aren't really relevant to the discussion.

Edit: also some real curious additions to that list there.

Yeah but active 4-year rolling would have Point at 20th, Barkov at 22nd so they're down a bit.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I don't particularly care about McDavid's competition specifically, but I do find it weird to make such a poor argument against Jagr. I'm not particularly invested in Jagr or McDavid as players.

Feel free to leave the thread if you’re not willing to discuss the premise by challenging it with any valuable substance instead of simply criticizing the ideology.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Ok. I guess we disagree on that one.

The point I am trying to make is that I believe if Jagr’s peak happened at any time before 1995 and after 2020, his all time rank would be a bit lower than it is right now for some people, given he wouldn’t have dominated his contemporaries as much as he did from 1995-2001 and it might have hurt his trophy case.

Sakic and Lindros had better peak seasons than Selanne and Kariya, which is why I singled them out. Jagr’s case doesn’t get any better by singling out Selanne and Kariya instead, who even though were tremendous players, were not on the level of a Peak MacKinnon or a Peak Kucherov, at least not as consistently great.

Ok but why is McDavids competition the standard? Might aswell make a thread about if Kucherov could win a Ross or two vs prime Jagr because thats what this thread boils down to?

See the message above

 

[JackSlater]

Feel free to leave the thread if you’re not willing to discuss the premise by challenging it with any valuable substance instead of simply criticizing the ideology.

Might want to make the title or OP explicitly a comparison of Jagr and McDavid's competition if that is your goal. The title is just about Jagr and the OP cites McDavid as an example, not a focal point. And still no, Jagr did not benefit "of" bad competition at forward.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Jagr loses, maybe, one Art Ross with somewhat certainty if his peak started in 2018. I.e. McDavid's 22/23 season is argubly better than Jagr's peak full season in 98/99.

Everything else is cherrypicking arguments and season comparisons, context lacking namedropping and raw point comparisons to make your point.

Yes, there were lots of injuries to the elite forwards during Jagr's peak, while the elite scorers have been relatively healthy since 2018. We have no idea if Draisaitl, Mack or Kucherov make it through the DPE any better than Lindros, Kariya, etc....

And Jagr is not necessarily rated high relative to his Art Ross total/ offensive peak to begin with; he is behind players like Hull, Beliveau and Crosby who have a total of 6 Rosses between them. In other words, objective fans can rate players appropriately without simply counting trophies.

You know you could’ve just said the following concerning the subject:

No, I don’t think his competition was weak because “”. No, I don’t think his all time rank would have been affected had his peak occurred before 1995 or after 2020 because “”.

You are so agenda driven in your analysis/replies that arguing with you becomes a chore in itself, especially when your analysis often show clear bias.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Might want to make the title or OP explicitly a comparison of Jagr and McDavid's competition if that is your goal. The title is just about Jagr and the OP cites McDavid as an example, not a focal point. And still no, Jagr did not benefit "of" bad competition at forward.

I am putting emphasis on “McDavid’s era” because Jagr was not winning a single thing if his peak occurred between 1980 and 1994.

Here was my reply to add context to the OP:

Ok. I guess we disagree on that one.

The point I am trying to make is that I believe if Jagr’s peak happened at any time before 1995 and after 2020, his all time rank would be a bit lower than it is right now for some people, given he wouldn’t have dominated his contemporaries as much as he did from 1995-2001 and it might have hurt his trophy case.

Sakic and Lindros had better peak seasons than Selanne and Kariya, which is why I singled them out. Jagr’s case doesn’t get any better by singling out Selanne and Kariya instead, who even though were tremendous players, were not on the level of a Peak MacKinnon or a Peak Kucherov, at least not as consistently great.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Treat one another as colleagues, folks.

 

[WarriorofTime]

When inquiring about say, how many Art Rosses Aged 25-28 Jagr wins in the 2020s, are we to assume he is joining the mix with everyone playing now or say, putting him in McDavid's spot, so he's also not also competing with McDavid?