Ever Wonder Which Of Sakic and Yzerman is Better?

[Birko19]

Total career points is a BS way of looking at things. Plus if you think it isn't, doesn't that make Messier better's numbers better than both of them, contrary to what you just said?

I said that what you proved pretty much showed that Sakic has been more consistent offensively, that's it, the fact is he's been more consistent than Messier too, I guess we can say Sakic is better than Messier too by your analogy.

It's not just his offense, it's how consistent he was with his offense, how long he maintained that offense, and how he produced in the playoffs.

Yzerman was also consistent, but unlike Sakic, he was unlucky with injuries plus he played for Bowman who made him change his game completely, and it was not that because Yzerman was not a good two-play player, it was because Bowman demanded his centers to play defense too, Sakic would have dealt with the same if he had a Bowman coaching him.

Yzerman's peak may have been better - it was much, much shorter, though.

It was a 7 year offensive peak, along with other good championship years with solid offensive numbers too, the point is Yzerman at his best was better than Sakic at his best, but Sakic was more consistent offensively for various obvious reasons, it's like comparing Fedorov to Modano exactly, Fedorov had a better peak and was a better all-round player, but Modano was more consistent, less of a peak, yet still a good two-way player, just not as good as Fedorov.

1987? That rings a bell. Isn't that the year that the Wings beat two sub-.500 teams in the first two rounds? Not really convinced by that, sorry.

Roy had an effect on Sakic's team success, but so did Forsberg, Lidstrom, Foote, Fedorov, Blake, Vernon, Bourque, Hull, Lemieux, and Konstantinov for both players.

Ok, if reaching the SCF is not a decent accomplishment anymore, how many times did Sakic lead his team into the playoffs before they had a good team? 2 times out of his first 7 years, how many times did Yzerman do it in his first 7 years? 5 out of 7, thank you very much, Yzerman was more instrumental to his weak team then Sakic was.

He was a superior defensive player. Not two-way. Sakic's two-way game was superior. Check this out:

Sakic was top-15 in Selke voting 6 times between 2000 and 2007. During this time he was top-10 in goals twice, top-10 in assists 5 times, top-10 in points 5 times, and won a Hart trophy.

Yzerman was also top-15 in Selke voting six times. Once was when he was 11th in 1989 and 3rd in league scoring. Aside from that, it was 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001. In that period of six years (including 1997), Yzerman was never top-10 in goals, top-10 in assists once, and top-10 in points once.

Generally speaking, Yzerman could only be elite offensively or defensively, never both simultaneously.

Top 15 in the Selke voting means absolutely peanuts, because as we all know that the top 3 get the most votes, and perhaps number 4, 5, and heck even 6 get a small share of votes here and there, all the other guys behind end up getting votes the amount of my fingers, which is peanuts.

I'm not saying that Sakic never had a year where he was top 3 in the Selke, but the bottom line is Yzerman went the extra step to actually win the thing, therefore his defense is better than Sakic's, and to top it off, his offense at the peak years was also better than Sakic's, had a coach like Bowman not come along I think Yzerman would've probably still put up big numbers for a while and play just as good as Sakic defensively.

WARNING: major subjectivity entering the discussion from a user with a wings avatar.

Yeah, I know he was on one leg. Do you think he'd have been more or less valuable with the other one working properly? This is emotional, sentimental stuff that I have no time for. Everything you say may be true, but that doesn't mean that he becomes their MVP because he did more per working leg than the other players on the team. He was great, but he was not their best player, and it was definitely not to Sakic's 1996 Standard.

I disagree, to me that 2002 performance will come down as legendary, and is on the same level as Sakic's 1996 imo, just not offensively (Once again, all about the stats).

You're looking at it backwards - Lemieux was retired. It was Lemieux coming back that cost Sakic the extra accolade, that being the scoring title. Not the fact that he only played half a year that gave Sakic the Hart. Besides, this is accounted for by conceding that Yzerman would have won the 1989 Hart in a Gretzky-less, Lemieux-less world. That's one Hart apiece.

If you swap that season with 89, then fair enough, I'm just saying had Mario had a full season that year, Sakic would not even come close to that Hart.

Sakic's first elite season was 1989-90, when Gretzky was 30 and Lemieux was 25, so he definitely did have to deal with them.

Lemieux and Gretzky have been fairly elminated from this comparison already, but you're still claiming that Yzerman would have had even more success without them there? You'll have to back that up with something.

Ok, take Gretz and Mario off the charts, Yzerman would have won the Art Ross in 89, and would've been 2nd behind Messier in 90, and 3rd in 93, not to mention 88 would've been an amazing season (Probably as good as 89) had he played a full season, he was on a pace for 160 points there, overall when you look at it, Sakic has done as much as this by his standards, not more than this.

 

[Padan]

I disagree, to me that 2002 performance will come down as legendary, and is on the same level as Sakic's 1996 imo, just not offensively (Once again, all about the stats)

I recall Yzerman as a defensive liability in that playoffs, due to his knee injury. That's why Bowman put defensive wizard Fedorov on the same line as Steve.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F00E4DC1538F933A15756C0A9649C8B63

Playing on a damaged right knee that may require surgery, Steve Yzerman, Detroit's captain, obviously could not match the speed of Joe Sakic, Colorado's captain, in the center position. So, during Game 1 of the Western Conference finals on Saturday, Coach Scotty Bowman moved Yzerman to right wing on a line with center Sergei Fedorov.

 

[BadHammy*]

I think overall, they are very close. Are we talking only during their primes or in total? In his prime, I think I'd pick Joe by a hair...

 

[Dark Shadows]

Birko, you are seriously overestimating certain aspects of Yzerman. For one, he was not anywhere near as good defensively before Bowman came along like you said. I had this discussion with others not a few months ago, and most who saw him agree. His defensive play was questionable before Bowman took over and forced him to backcheck and block shots. Yzerman initially chafed under Bowman and his name was coming up in trade rumors because he just did not want to play Bowman's game.

Sakic's defense was almost as good as Yzerman's in the late 90's for most of his career. Sakic was capable of backchecking AND scoring from the get go. Sakic's defense in 96 or 2001 was a metric ton better than Yzerman's in 89. Sakic deserved the Selke over Madden in 01 and even had more 1st place votes for it. Lost by a hair and its a shame.


Now, for the last point. Bowman''s effect on the team's offense was not that pronounced. In fact, since most of the players he had around were already good two way players/Defensemen, their scoring either flourished under Bowman's system, or did not take a dive. Yzerman, lacking that two way game, was the one who had to make the biggest adjustments, and thus, took the biggest hit. Sakic would not have had to do that because he already had an excellent two way game.

Detroit's scoring:
02-03: Detroit 1st Avs 5th
01-02: Detroit 2nd Avs 18th
00-01: Detroit 5th, Avs 4th
99-00: Detroit 1st, Avs 11th
98-99: Detroit 3rd, Avs 5th(Tie)
97-98: Detroit 2nd, Avs 6th
96-97: Detroit 6th, Avs 2nd
95-96: Detroit 3rd, Avs 2nd
94-95: Detroit 3rd, Nord 1st
93-94: Detroit 1st, Nord 15th
92-93: Detroit 1st, Nord 3rd
91-92: Detroit 4th, Nord 16th

Yes, Detroit, under this so called stifling defensive system, was probably the best offensive team in the league for a decade.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I think the issue of teammates needs to be addressed in more detail, e.g. through relative plus/minus and other methods. One issue I thought of was who was more likely to be facing the opposing team's best players? Sakic played with Forsberg, Yzerman played with Fedorov and others. Forsberg in particular was likely to be helping out Sakic by taking up a lot of the opposition's attention.

If you don't think that is important, check out this season-by-season comparison of Peter Forsberg's games played in Colorado vs. Joe Sakic's goals per game and points per game:

1988-89: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.33 GPG, 0.89 PPG
1989-90: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.49 GPG, 1.28 PPG
1990-91: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.60 GPG, 1.36 PPG
1991-92: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.42 GPG, 1.36 PPG
1992-93: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.62 GPG, 1.35 PPG
1993-94: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.33 GPG, 1.10 PPG
1994-95: Forsberg: 47 GP, Sakic: 0.40 GPG, 1.32 PPG
1995-96: Forsberg: 82 GP, Sakic: 0.62 GPG, 1.46 PPG
1996-97: Forsberg: 65 GP, Sakic: 0.34 GPG, 1.14 PPG
1997-98: Forsberg: 72 GP, Sakic: 0.42 GPG, 0.98 PPG
1998-99: Forsberg: 78 GP, Sakic: 0.56 GPG, 1.32 PPG
1999-00: Forsberg: 49 GP, Sakic: 0.47 GPG, 1.35 PPG
2000-01: Forsberg: 73 GP, Sakic: 0.66 GPG, 1.44 PPG
2001-02: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.32 GPG, 0.96 PPG
2002-03: Forsberg: 75 GP, Sakic: 0.45 GPG, 1.00 PPG
2003-04: Forsberg: 39 GP, Sakic: 0.41 GPG, 1.07 PPG
2005-06: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.39 GPG, 1.09 PPG
2006-07: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.44 GPG, 1.22 PPG
2007-08: Forsberg: 9 GP, Sakic: 0.30 GPG, 0.91 PPG

Sakic's playmaking abilities are unquestionable, but is he an elite goalscorer without Peter Forsberg on his team? From 1992-93 onwards, in seasons where Forsberg played less than 50 games on Colorado, Sakic averaged just 31 goals per 82 games played (compared with 44 goals per 82 when Forsberg played 70+ games). Sakic did score a lot of goals early in his career in Quebec, albeit in a higher-scoring league, but the correlation between Sakic's goals and Forsberg's games played is surprisingly strong after 1992-93.

 

[Spitfire11]

All these stats....don't people still remember them? I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking Sakic was better but I certainly wouldn't agree.

How about PK time? Blocked shots? Hits? % of Points scored on the PP? Any of these stats out there?

 

[Dark Shadows]

All these stats....don't people still remember them? I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking Sakic was better but I certainly wouldn't agree.

How about PK time? Blocked shots? Hits? % of Points scored on the PP? Any of these stats out there?

They are available as early as 97-98 on NHL.com. Time on ice anyways. Hits and Blocked shots did not start getting logged until recently.

Yzerman only started playing the PK and blocking shots consistently in the latter half of his career anyways, which is what a lot of people were already discussing. Hits really are not a factor in the case of these two players. Sakic played a more "Lidstrom" type game, based on positioning, stickwork, etc. Like Lidstrom he was Never a flashy standout, but his results were there.

 

[FissionFire]

One thing I take great issue with is the Awards voting criteria. Many time, especially in the Hart voting, a 6th or 7th place finish means a guy only got 1 high vote or a couple low votes. That type of thing can be easily a result of homer journalists rather than overall league finish. I really think you need to place a cutoff point as far as minimum number of votes for a players season to count in that statistic. Statistically insignificant finishes really ruin a comparison based completely on stats.

For example, Sakic finished 7th in Hart voting in 1990-91 which sounds decent, but 7th place eans he got only 3 3rd place votes, hardly something statistically significant. Compare that to his 7th place finish in 1996-96 where he got 18 votes. Are those really the same result? I'd argue no. Possibly determine the maximum number of points possible for each award that season and say that a finish lower than say 5% of that value is not significant and discard it. That would eliminate some of the randomness you get at the bottom of these votes (Steve Larmer finished higher than Sakic during one of those 7th place campaigns after all). This will of course affect both players but it would be interesting to see who is affected more.

I'll look into the analysis a little deeper if I get time later, but an excellent jov seventieslord!

 

[Dark Shadows]

I think the issue of teammates needs to be addressed in more detail, e.g. through relative plus/minus and other methods. One issue I thought of was who was more likely to be facing the opposing team's best players? Sakic played with Forsberg, Yzerman played with Fedorov and others. Forsberg in particular was likely to be helping out Sakic by taking up a lot of the opposition's attention.

If you don't think that is important, check out this season-by-season comparison of Peter Forsberg's games played in Colorado vs. Joe Sakic's goals per game and points per game:

1988-89: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.33 GPG, 0.89 PPG
1989-90: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.49 GPG, 1.28 PPG
1990-91: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.60 GPG, 1.36 PPG
1991-92: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.42 GPG, 1.36 PPG
1992-93: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.62 GPG, 1.35 PPG
1993-94: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.33 GPG, 1.10 PPG
1994-95: Forsberg: 47 GP, Sakic: 0.40 GPG, 1.32 PPG
1995-96: Forsberg: 82 GP, Sakic: 0.62 GPG, 1.46 PPG
1996-97: Forsberg: 65 GP, Sakic: 0.34 GPG, 1.14 PPG
1997-98: Forsberg: 72 GP, Sakic: 0.42 GPG, 0.98 PPG
1998-99: Forsberg: 78 GP, Sakic: 0.56 GPG, 1.32 PPG
1999-00: Forsberg: 49 GP, Sakic: 0.47 GPG, 1.35 PPG
2000-01: Forsberg: 73 GP, Sakic: 0.66 GPG, 1.44 PPG
2001-02: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.32 GPG, 0.96 PPG
2002-03: Forsberg: 75 GP, Sakic: 0.45 GPG, 1.00 PPG
2003-04: Forsberg: 39 GP, Sakic: 0.41 GPG, 1.07 PPG
2005-06: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.39 GPG, 1.09 PPG
2006-07: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.44 GPG, 1.22 PPG
2007-08: Forsberg: 9 GP, Sakic: 0.30 GPG, 0.91 PPG

Sakic's playmaking abilities are unquestionable, but is he an elite goalscorer without Peter Forsberg on his team? From 1992-93 onwards, in seasons where Forsberg played less than 50 games on Colorado, Sakic averaged just 31 goals per 82 games played (compared with 44 goals per 82 when Forsberg played 70+ games). Sakic did score a lot of goals early in his career in Quebec, albeit in a higher-scoring league, but the correlation between Sakic's goals and Forsberg's games played is surprisingly strong after 1992-93.

Those stats you just posted actually gives a strong case to Sakic's numbers being consistent no matter who his teammates are. For several years, all the attention was on Fedorov in Detroit as well. Note that while his GPG went down a bit on Forsberg lacking years, and his PPG went up without Forsberg several years because he assumed more playmaking responsibilities

Its not Like Yzerman was lacking for team support in the later half of his career during the same years. What with Lidstrom, Coffey, Murphy on the backend and Fedorov, Shanahan, etc
Are you going to compile similar statistical breakdowns to see where Yzerman stood without all those franchise players/Superstars?

 

[poise]

Yzerman only started playing the PK and blocking shots consistently in the latter half of his career anyways, which is what a lot of people were already discussing. Hits really are not a factor in the case of these two players. Sakic played a more "Lidstrom" type game, based on positioning, stickwork, etc. Like Lidstrom he was Never a flashy standout, but his results were there.

Steve Yzerman was a mainstay on the Penalty Kill in his Offensive prime. Look at his best shorthanded Goal Seasons (all in his Offensive prime) and his Power Play Goals Against (again most of them in his Offensive prime). It's fairly reasonable to conclude that leading or being close to the league lead in these categories requires quite a bit of shorthanded play time.

This is also attested in the media:

"Yzerman plays about 30 minutes a game, including regular shift, power plays and penalty killing." (St. Louis Post-Dispatch - January 21, 1988)

"Yzerman runs the power play, kills penalties and centers for Gerard Gallant (37 goals) and Paul MacLean (34). The unit has broken club records for goals, assists and points by a line, held by Alex Delvecchio, Gordie Howe and Frank Mahovlich." (Chicago Sun Times - April 2, 1989)

"Yzerman kills penalties and has five short-handed goals, sharing the league lead with four other players." (New York Times - January 13, 1988)

""He's playing great, not just offensively, but in his overall game," Murray said. "He plays in key situations at both ends of the rink every night because he's got a sound all-around game. He kills penalties regularly. On defense he's worked as hard as any star in this league. He's intense. And he plays hurt."" (St. Paul Pioneer Press - February 28, 1993)

 

[seventieslord]

By the four Defensemen I'll assume you mean Ray Bourque, Denis Potvin, Nicklas Lidstrom, and Brad Park (maybe Larry Robinson)? If so, then yes, I would place Sakic above the latter three and Yzerman over all four.

Yes, I meant those 4 including Robinson.

Yzerman over Bourque? Is this Mrs. Yzerman I'm talking to?

Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word 'prime' as it is nebulous, but I think those are fair frames for including most of both Players best years. Would you disagree?

I would, actually. Sakic's prime started a lot earlier than that, and even in 2007 he was 6th in league scoring, becoming the 2nd oldest player to score 100 points.

I just can't find myself agreeing about the reasons for the higher scoring. Obviously, expansion did play a role, especially in the case of the post Original Six era, in the increased scoring levels, but then again, it seems to have taken quite some time for the Goals average to increase. The levels of scoring throughout the 1980's stayed high, far removed from the fold of the WHA. The expansion in 1992 on the other hand, saw an instant rise in scoring followed by a sharp drop. I think there's a lot more at work then a simple causal relationship.

If you don't agree, fine, but it's the truth. You just proved it yourself. The 1992 expansion caused scoring to rise for one season and then it was able to level off as the talent level self-corrected. This was only a 14% expansion over two seasons so it's understandable that it's effect was more minimal. In 1979, for example, the league's size increased by 24%. Everything else that I mentioned had a definite, quantifiable effect on scoring levels.

1992-1993 Season for example, the numbers just don't work out when comparing the top 10 or top 20 or top 30 to the rest of the league and the increase in the Goal average from the previous year.

That is a freak season where the top players all posted ridiculously high totals. Did they all have career seasons simultaneously, or was something else at work? I made a thread about this like 2 years ago... people posted their theories. The best one is that the bad teams like Ottawa and San Jose allowed stars to pad their totals more easily.

Obviously, other factors were at work, Goaltending in the mid-1980's was worse then that of the Dead Puck Era, but I certainly don't believe the Offensive Players of both periods were equal by any stretch. If we operate by that assumption and scale accordingly, then Mario Lemieux would be scoring at a better clip in his return in 2000-2001 then he did in most of his peak years!

Why? He was 35 instead of 25, and as you just said, goaltending was better. Therefore, he should have scored at a lower rate, and he did - about 1.8 PPG instead of the 2.0+ he was used to in his prime.

As for the rate statistics, when Yzerman had played up to the 2001-2002 Season he played 1362 games with 658 goals and 1004 assists for 1662 points as compared to Sakic's current 1378 Games 625 Goals 1016 Assists 1641 Points (1363 - 623 - 1006 - 1629 if ignoring this season).

So in other words, the 5 watered-down seasons from 1983-84 through 1988-89 are the sole reason Yzerman's numbers are even higher than Sakic's but you just don't care?

Compare Yzerman's 10th place finish in 1999-2000 with his 19th place finish in 1995-1996. I'd definitely call the latter a better season for Yzerman (both Offensively, and due to the fact that while Sergei Fedorov won the Selke, Red Wings Players said that their best Defensive Forwards were Bob Errey and Yzerman). I do think there's a sharp discrepancy in top end talent between the late 1980's and the Dead Puck Era. I don't think Mark Recchi's third place finish in 2000 is anywhere near Yzerman's in 1989.

In other words, you think there were 10 more top-end forwards to contend with just 5 years later?

Recchi's 3rd place in 2000 isn't near Yzerman's in 1989, but then you're comparing one of the very best years to one of the very worst ones.

Here is the link where Jacques Martin makes the statement about Yzerman being the MVP: "He came in here hurt and then played like there was no tomorrow. You wouldn't have known he was hurt if you looked at him on the ice. The guy was outstanding. He really was. I think if there's an MVP of the tournament, he's been the guy for us." (http://slam.canoe.ca/2002GamesHockeyFeb02/25_cda2-sun.html)

We all watched the games. I honestly can't say that I'd consider Yzerman a potential MVP. Can you? This was jsut a sentimental, superlative statement from a coach.

Alan Ryder of the Globe and Mail does some nice work here on the topic: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061017.wsptryder17/BNStory/GlobeSportsHockey/

It's a good read but to summarize his findings: Generally Defensemen have lower percentages of 'first' assists (intuitive as they are farther removed from the Offensive Play). Sakic's 'First' Assist rate is on the low end for Forwards, and close to the rate of Defensemen.

I'm at work; I'll check it out later, thanks.

It's an interesting argument, and kudos to you for doing such a lengthy comparison!

Just a few points..

You say you want to be complete as possible..

Well, then where's the +/- stats?

Regular Season - Career
Yzerman + 185
Sakic +30

Playoffs - Career
Yzerman -11
Sakic -2

Edge -> Yzerman

Thanks for the comments. +/- is useless unless interpreted properly. That's why I asked Overpass for his analysis of the two players as he has extensive adjusted +/- numbers:

overpass: What can you tell us about Sakic and Yzerman's adjusted +/- figures throughout their careers? Yzerman is up by +172 at this point but I'm thinking it is practically even when adjusted by teams.

International Play
Yzerman - 1984 Canada Cup winning team
Sakic - 1988 WJC Gold

That's my bad. I forgot to mention Yzerman's Canada cup win, and when I saw Sakic's WJC stats I assumed 1987 when Canada was disqualified for the brawl. You're right on both counts. I don't think it changes the end result though. Sakic has been the MVP of a best on best tournament and has more games, goals, assists, points, and per-game averages in said tournaments.

Regarding playoffs.. you say: "Gretzky and Lemieux are no longer individuals once the playoffs begin".. but, then you go on to compare Sakic and Yzerman in terms of "Pulling off playoff upsets, Not being upset by inferior teams, and Head to head matchups".. ?????

My only reason for doing so was for simplicity, as Gretzky and Lemieux very rarely affected Yzerman and Sakic's places in the league leaderboard in the playoffs. As I said, you need to advance to get on the leaderboard in the playoffs, and if Gretzky and Lemieux finished ahead of Yzerman/Sakic, it's not just because they're better, but also (usually) because their team went further.

One last point.. you seem to weigh the 24 categories equally.. but IMO some categories are far more important than others. e.g. Hart Record >>>> Clean Play.

I don't know why you seem to think I weigh the categories equally. Obviously some are immensely more important than others. Some are also interesting to consider but can't be entirely on their shoulders, like cup wins, finals appearances, and the above mentioned Pulling off playoff upsets, Not being upset by inferior teams, and Head to head matchups.

All the playoff scoring categories that Sakic scores decisive wins in, for example, are more important than Hart records.

I said that what you proved pretty much showed that Sakic has been more consistent offensively, that's it, the fact is he's been more consistent than Messier too, I guess we can say Sakic is better than Messier too by your analogy.

As I've acknowledged twice now, he might be. Present a case and I'll look at it.

Yzerman was also consistent, but unlike Sakic, he was unlucky with injuries plus he played for Bowman who made him change his game completely, and it was not that because Yzerman was not a good two-play player, it was because Bowman demanded his centers to play defense too, Sakic would have dealt with the same if he had a Bowman coaching him.

Thornton_19 addressed this well.

It was a 7 year offensive peak, along with other good championship years with solid offensive numbers too, the point is Yzerman at his best was better than Sakic at his best, but Sakic was more consistent offensively for various obvious reasons, it's like comparing Fedorov to Modano exactly, Fedorov had a better peak and was a better all-round player, but Modano was more consistent, less of a peak, yet still a good two-way player, just not as good as Fedorov.

Bottom line is, I'd take Sakic's career over Yzerman's any day. His 7th-15th best seasons were a lot better than Yzerman's.

Ok, if reaching the SCF is not a decent accomplishment anymore, how many times did Sakic lead his team into the playoffs before they had a good team? 2 times out of his first 7 years, how many times did Yzerman do it in his first 7 years? 5 out of 7, thank you very much, Yzerman was more instrumental to his weak team then Sakic was.

I already showed that this is not true.

Furthermore, in 1987, Detroit was 2 games under .500. That was not a weak team, it was a 10th overall team! Making the playoffs in the Norris was no difficult task in those 5 years - thanks to my brutal Leafs and at least one other team always being a pretty sad sack, the last playoff seed in that division had 68, 62, 57, 70, and 52 points. That's all it took.

Plus, you gotta remember that all those teams played eachother the most and the 2 points always had to go somewhere. They were so brutal against the rest of the league that in a year like 1987, not one team was even over .500! At the beginning of Sakic's career, the Adams was always one of the 2 best divisions in the league. Quebec played a higher proportion of their games against the Habs, Bruins, and Sabres.

If you want to call making the playoffs in the Norris an achievement, don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

Top 15 in the Selke voting means absolutely peanuts, because as we all know that the top 3 get the most votes, and perhaps number 4, 5, and heck even 6 get a small share of votes here and there, all the other guys behind end up getting votes the amount of my fingers, which is peanuts.

Not true at all. Go look at the award voting thread pinned at the top of this section.

I'm not saying that Sakic never had a year where he was top 3 in the Selke, but the bottom line is Yzerman went the extra step to actually win the thing, therefore his defense is better than Sakic's,

Ahh, the "you either win it or you don't" mentality. I've got no time for that. We have enough info available to see how close each guy got to the hart, the selke, the cup, the scoring lead each season - why not collect all the data and use it. It's too simplistic to say "Yzerman, 1 Selke, Sakic, 0 Selkes".

If you swap that season with 89, then fair enough, I'm just saying had Mario had a full season that year, Sakic would not even come close to that Hart.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda. Let's pretend it was a usual Mario season and he just missed 40 games for other reasons. I'd still say Sakic deserved the Hart because you have to be durable enough to play enough games to get consideration. (on that note, Mario did get enough consideration to be runner-up!)

Ok, take Gretz and Mario off the charts, Yzerman would have won the Art Ross in 89, and would've been 2nd behind Messier in 90, and 3rd in 93, not to mention 88 would've been an amazing season (Probably as good as 89) had he played a full season, he was on a pace for 160 points there, overall when you look at it, Sakic has done as much as this by his standards, not more than this.

You realize that this is all already accounted for, right?

 

[FissionFire]

They are available as early as 97-98 on NHL.com. Time on ice anyways. Hits and Blocked shots did not start getting logged until recently.

Yzerman only started playing the PK and blocking shots consistently in the latter half of his career anyways, which is what a lot of people were already discussing. Hits really are not a factor in the case of these two players. Sakic played a more "Lidstrom" type game, based on positioning, stickwork, etc. Like Lidstrom he was Never a flashy standout, but his results were there.

That is probably the biggest misconception that exists about Yzerman. He was actually one of the teams top options (top defined as top 4 forwards) on the PK as early as the 1986-87 season. While exact time on ice statistics weren't kept then, the amount of PP goals against was and it's a generally safe assumption that if a forward is top 4 on his team amongst forwards in terms of PP goals against that he was likely top 4 on the team in terms of shorthanded ice time as well.

Yzerman's PPGA team ranking
1983-84: T-8th
1984-85: T-7th
1985-86: 9th
1986-87: 4th
1987-88: 3rd
1988-89: 1st
1989-90: 1st
1990-91: 1st
1991-92: 2nd
1992-93: T-1st
1993-94: 2nd
1994-95: 2nd
1995-96: 1st
1996-97: 1st

I won't go from 1997-98 onward since we have the shorthanded ice time numbers for that period.

As you can see, he was killing penalties on a regular basis as young as 21 in 1986-87 and became the teams primary PK option at 23 in 1988-89, which coincidentally was his best offensive season of his career. Yzerman has killing penalties at a very young age and long before Scotty Bowman joined the team.

By contrast, here are Joe Sakic's numbers

Sakic's PPGA team ranking
1988-89: 5th
1989-90: 5th
1990-91: 1st
1991-92: 2nd
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 2nd
1994-95: T-2nd
1995-96: T-4th
1996-97: 4th

Sakic also started being a consistent penalty killer at age 21, although he was his teams primary man compared to Yzerman's secondary role. The difference here however is that while Sakic role on the PK has steadily declined as the team added players like Forsberg and Ricci, Yzerman's importance on the PK never wavered despite players like Fedorov and Draper being added.

In conclusion, Yzerman has been playing a large role on the PK from around the same age Sakic has. Even during his best offensive seasons Yzerman has his teams primary PK forward. While his role didn't decline as other defensive players were added to the team, Sakic's brief time as a main PK option quickly ended when different options became available. I believe that Yzerman's defensive play was far better during his scoring prime than many posters here give him credit for - at the very minimum on par with Sakic's and IMO better. It's time to stop pretending that his two-way play only became with the arrival of Scotty Bowman and start giving him credit for being the solid two-way player early in his career that he was.

 

[seventieslord]

I think the issue of teammates needs to be addressed in more detail, e.g. through relative plus/minus and other methods. One issue I thought of was who was more likely to be facing the opposing team's best players? Sakic played with Forsberg, Yzerman played with Fedorov and others. Forsberg in particular was likely to be helping out Sakic by taking up a lot of the opposition's attention.

If you don't think that is important, check out this season-by-season comparison of Peter Forsberg's games played in Colorado vs. Joe Sakic's goals per game and points per game:

1988-89: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.33 GPG, 0.89 PPG
1989-90: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.49 GPG, 1.28 PPG
1990-91: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.60 GPG, 1.36 PPG
1991-92: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.42 GPG, 1.36 PPG
1992-93: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.62 GPG, 1.35 PPG
1993-94: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.33 GPG, 1.10 PPG
1994-95: Forsberg: 47 GP, Sakic: 0.40 GPG, 1.32 PPG
1995-96: Forsberg: 82 GP, Sakic: 0.62 GPG, 1.46 PPG
1996-97: Forsberg: 65 GP, Sakic: 0.34 GPG, 1.14 PPG
1997-98: Forsberg: 72 GP, Sakic: 0.42 GPG, 0.98 PPG
1998-99: Forsberg: 78 GP, Sakic: 0.56 GPG, 1.32 PPG
1999-00: Forsberg: 49 GP, Sakic: 0.47 GPG, 1.35 PPG
2000-01: Forsberg: 73 GP, Sakic: 0.66 GPG, 1.44 PPG
2001-02: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.32 GPG, 0.96 PPG
2002-03: Forsberg: 75 GP, Sakic: 0.45 GPG, 1.00 PPG
2003-04: Forsberg: 39 GP, Sakic: 0.41 GPG, 1.07 PPG
2005-06: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.39 GPG, 1.09 PPG
2006-07: Forsberg: 0 GP, Sakic: 0.44 GPG, 1.22 PPG
2007-08: Forsberg: 9 GP, Sakic: 0.30 GPG, 0.91 PPG

Sakic's playmaking abilities are unquestionable, but is he an elite goalscorer without Peter Forsberg on his team? From 1992-93 onwards, in seasons where Forsberg played less than 50 games on Colorado, Sakic averaged just 31 goals per 82 games played (compared with 44 goals per 82 when Forsberg played 70+ games). Sakic did score a lot of goals early in his career in Quebec, albeit in a higher-scoring league, but the correlation between Sakic's goals and Forsberg's games played is surprisingly strong after 1992-93.

I do see a correlation there too. It's too bad that Fedorov didn't miss enough games to really do the same thing with Yzerman's numbers. But Yzerman had Fedorov for basically full seasons all those years and his PPG was still always lower than Sakic's.

I'm not going to say having Forsberg on his team didn't help sakic. Of course it did. I don't think it's a stretch to say that having better players around you always helps you.

All these stats....don't people still remember them? I wouldn't fault anyone for thinking Sakic was better but I certainly wouldn't agree.

How about PK time? Blocked shots? Hits? % of Points scored on the PP? Any of these stats out there?

PK time we could get going back to 1999. You'd have to use NHL.com to do it. My guess - Yzerman killed penalties 10-20% more often than Sakic.

Blocked shots and hits go back to 1999 only, and even then, I think there were 2-3 years where they stopped doing it. I think the comparison would be futile there.

% of Points scored on the PP - I think those numbers exist and I'd like to see them. If not PPP, then at least PPG would exist right back to the beginnings of their careers.

One thing I take great issue with is the Awards voting criteria. Many time, especially in the Hart voting, a 6th or 7th place finish means a guy only got 1 high vote or a couple low votes. That type of thing can be easily a result of homer journalists rather than overall league finish. I really think you need to place a cutoff point as far as minimum number of votes for a players season to count in that statistic. Statistically insignificant finishes really ruin a comparison based completely on stats.

For example, Sakic finished 7th in Hart voting in 1990-91 which sounds decent, but 7th place eans he got only 3 3rd place votes, hardly something statistically significant. Compare that to his 7th place finish in 1996-96 where he got 18 votes. Are those really the same result? I'd argue no. Possibly determine the maximum number of points possible for each award that season and say that a finish lower than say 5% of that value is not significant and discard it. That would eliminate some of the randomness you get at the bottom of these votes (Steve Larmer finished higher than Sakic during one of those 7th place campaigns after all). This will of course affect both players but it would be interesting to see who is affected more.

I'll look into the analysis a little deeper if I get time later, but an excellent jov seventieslord!

The reason there was a difference between 1991 and 1996 was because voters could only name 3 players in 1991 and 5 in 1996. Sakic still had the 7th most voting points in 1991. Based on the season he had and his three 3rd place votes, we could assume he'd have had some 4ths and 5ths if there were such things, and still finished 7th. I know it's not precision science, primarily due to the subjectivity of voting, but that is a valid concern. I do believe it's being overblown though.

Using a point minimum would not work for that very reason.

 

[Dark Shadows]

That is probably the biggest misconception that exists about Yzerman. He was actually one of the teams top options (top defined as top 4 forwards) on the PK as early as the 1986-87 season. While exact time on ice statistics weren't kept then, the amount of PP goals against was and it's a generally safe assumption that if a forward is top 4 on his team amongst forwards in terms of PP goals against that he was likely top 4 on the team in terms of shorthanded ice time as well.

Yzerman's PPGA team ranking
1983-84: T-8th
1984-85: T-7th
1985-86: 9th
1986-87: 4th
1987-88: 3rd
1988-89: 1st
1989-90: 1st
1990-91: 1st
1991-92: 2nd
1992-93: T-1st
1993-94: 2nd
1994-95: 2nd
1995-96: 1st
1996-97: 1st

I won't go from 1997-98 onward since we have the shorthanded ice time numbers for that period.

As you can see, he was killing penalties on a regular basis as young as 21 in 1986-87 and became the teams primary PK option at 23 in 1988-89, which coincidentally was his best offensive season of his career. Yzerman has killing penalties at a very young age and long before Scotty Bowman joined the team.

By contrast, here are Joe Sakic's numbers

Yzerman's PPGA team ranking
1988-89: 5th
1989-90: 5th
1990-91: 1st
1991-92: 2nd
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 2nd
1994-95: T-2nd
1995-96: T-4th
1996-97: 4th

Sakic also started being a consistent penalty killer at age 21, although he was his teams primary man compared to Yzerman's secondary role. The difference here however is that while Sakic role on the PK has steadily declined as the team added players like Forsberg and Ricci, Yzerman's importance on the PK never wavered despite players like Fedorov and Draper being added.

In conclusion, Yzerman has been playing a large role on the PK from around the same age Sakic has. Even during his best offensive seasons Yzerman has his teams primary PK forward. While his role didn't decline as other defensive players were added to the team, Sakic's brief time as a main PK option quickly ended when different options became available. I believe that Yzerman's defensive play was far better during his scoring prime than many posters here give him credit for - at the very minimum on par with Sakic's and IMO better. It's time to stop pretending that his two-way play only became with the arrival of Scotty Bowman and start giving him credit for being the solid two-way player early in his career that he was.

Nice post FF. I am likely mistaken then about his PK time.

I still stand firm on his shot blocking and Bowman demanding Yzerman take fewer chances though. That is one thing I remember clearly. Him and Bowman actually had fights over shot blocking(Yzerman did not want to do it) which lead to talks of Yzerman being traded. I still remember the game where the fans booed Bowman because of these trade rumors, then Cheered Yzerman. But years later, Yzerman confirmed the shot blocking rumors were true, while avoiding the trade rumor questions.

And I still disagree about Yzerman's defense during his early years. Sakic was always a better two way player. Yzerman became better defensively, but not until Bowman.

 

[seventieslord]

That is probably the biggest misconception that exists about Yzerman. He was actually one of the teams top options (top defined as top 4 forwards) on the PK as early as the 1986-87 season. While exact time on ice statistics weren't kept then, the amount of PP goals against was and it's a generally safe assumption that if a forward is top 4 on his team amongst forwards in terms of PP goals against that he was likely top 4 on the team in terms of shorthanded ice time as well.

Yzerman's PPGA team ranking
1983-84: T-8th
1984-85: T-7th
1985-86: 9th
1986-87: 4th
1987-88: 3rd
1988-89: 1st
1989-90: 1st
1990-91: 1st
1991-92: 2nd
1992-93: T-1st
1993-94: 2nd
1994-95: 2nd
1995-96: 1st
1996-97: 1st

I won't go from 1997-98 onward since we have the shorthanded ice time numbers for that period.

As you can see, he was killing penalties on a regular basis as young as 21 in 1986-87 and became the teams primary PK option at 23 in 1988-89, which coincidentally was his best offensive season of his career. Yzerman has killing penalties at a very young age and long before Scotty Bowman joined the team.

By contrast, here are Joe Sakic's numbers

Sakic's PPGA team ranking
1988-89: 5th
1989-90: 5th
1990-91: 1st
1991-92: 2nd
1992-93: 1st
1993-94: 2nd
1994-95: T-2nd
1995-96: T-4th
1996-97: 4th

Sakic also started being a consistent penalty killer at age 21, although he was his teams primary man compared to Yzerman's secondary role. The difference here however is that while Sakic role on the PK has steadily declined as the team added players like Forsberg and Ricci, Yzerman's importance on the PK never wavered despite players like Fedorov and Draper being added.

In conclusion, Yzerman has been playing a large role on the PK from around the same age Sakic has. Even during his best offensive seasons Yzerman has his teams primary PK forward. While his role didn't decline as other defensive players were added to the team, Sakic's brief time as a main PK option quickly ended when different options became available. I believe that Yzerman's defensive play was far better during his scoring prime than many posters here give him credit for - at the very minimum on par with Sakic's and IMO better. It's time to stop pretending that his two-way play only became with the arrival of Scotty Bowman and start giving him credit for being the solid two-way player early in his career that he was.

Your assumptions are fair and I like your angle. I've been saying all along that Yzerman holds the slim but real edge in defensive play. What you just provided confirms just that. Thank you.

As far as two-way play, I think Sakic's selke votes during seasons in which he was a high scorer compared to those of Yzerman, say a lot.

 

[FissionFire]

Nice post FF. I am likely mistaken then about his PK time.

I still stand firm on his shot blocking and Bowman demanding Yzerman take fewer chances though. That is one thing I remember clearly. Him and Bowman actually had fights over shot blocking(Yzerman did not want to do it) which lead to talks of Yzerman being traded. I still remember the game where the fans booed Bowman because of these trade rumors, then Cheered Yzerman. But years later, Yzerman confirmed the shot blocking rumors were true, while avoiding the trade rumor questions.

And I still disagree about Yzerman's defense during his early years. Sakic was always a better two way player. Yzerman became better defensively, but not until Bowman.

You are correct, he DID become better under Bowman. My contention is that he went from Sakic-level defense to the shutdown-caliber defense under Bowman. Even in his scoring prime his defense wasn't subpar and was quite underrated.

 

[FissionFire]

Your assumptions are fair and I like your angle. I've been saying all along that Yzerman holds the slim but real edge in defensive play. What you just provided confirms just that. Thank you.

As far as two-way play, I think Sakic's selke votes during seasons in which he was a high scorer compared to those of Yzerman, say a lot.

Do you really want to get into the debate on the merits of Selke vote totals as they relate to overall defensive ability? That's a can of worms I'm not sure you want to defend.

 

[Dark Shadows]

You are correct, he DID become better under Bowman. My contention is that he went from Sakic-level defense to the shutdown Selke-caliber defense under Bowman. Even in his scoring prime his defense wasn't subpar and was quite underrated.

I know, but I say you are underrating Sakic level defense, which was higher caliber.
In his Scoring prime, Yzerman was not up there with the Gilmours or Francis or Messier types, although he certainly was not down with the Gretzky's. Nobody is saying he was a sieve, but he also was not great defensively, and certainly not as good as Sakic two way during the high scoring time period.

Sakic Defensively was not a shutdown guy, but his two way play and ability to score at a high level while playing good defense was slightly higher than Yzerman's. Sakic was Robbed of a Selke by Madden.
I honestly think this is just an "Agree to disagree" point

I consider Sakic and Yzerman a coin flip, but Sakic gets the slight edge, mostly due to his performance over time and playoff performance.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Do you really want to get into the debate on the merits of Selke vote totals as they relate to overall defensive ability? That's a can of worms I'm not sure you want to defend.

I don't think anyone wants to go there

 

[19Yzerman19]

Sakic also played in the 89 season and only managed 102 pts 53 less than Yzerman did that year. He also out scored Joe by a healthy margin in each of the so called "high scoring" seasons (88-93) were goals/pts. apparently didn't count according to some posters.


I don't think you can go wrong with either one,

But I would take Yzerman's career and his 3 cups over Sakic's every day of the week and twice on Sunday's.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Sakic also played in the 89 season and only managed 102 pts 53 less than Yzerman did that year. He also out scored Joe by a healthy margin in each of the so called "high scoring" seasons (88-93) were goals/pts. apparently didn't count according to some posters.

Bad comparison chum. Sakic was a 19 year old rookie playing on the 2nd line(P.S you got the years wrong as Sakic did not score 102 in 88-89). Yzerman in the peak of his career by this point, and not the two way player he became later yet.

I don't think you can go wrong with either one,

But I would take Yzerman's career and his 3 cups over Sakic's every day of the week and twice on Sunday's.

I don't think anybody is surprised here given your name and obvious Home team bias in favor of Yzerman.

 

[FissionFire]

Sakic also played in the 89 season and only managed 102 pts 53 less than Yzerman did that year. He also out scored Joe by a healthy margin in each of the so called "high scoring" seasons (88-93) were goals/pts. apparently didn't count according to some posters.


I don't think you can go wrong with either one,

But I would take Yzerman's career and his 3 cups over Sakic's every day of the week and twice on Sunday's.

Steve Yzerman was 23 years old, in his 6th NHL season in 1988-89.
Joe Sakic was 19 years old, in his rookie NHL season in 1988-89. Also Sakic only scored 62 points as a rookie, not 102 (that was his sophomore 1989-90 season).

You can't directly compare them that season. Apples to oranges.

 

[pnep]

YEAR|PLAYER|TOI|TOI-ES|TOI-PP|TOI-SH|ESGA|ESGF|TOT ES MIN|TOT ES MIN per ESGA|TOT ES MIN per ESGF|DIF
1984|YZERMAN, STEVE|19.66|14.66|4.78|0.22|88|71|1172.80|13.33|16.52|-3.19
1985|YZERMAN, STEVE|19.86|15.40|4.32|0.13|102|85|1232.32|12.08|14.50|-2.42
1986|YZERMAN, STEVE|19.23|14.36|4.05|0.82|65|41|732.21|11.26|17.86|-6.59
1987|YZERMAN, STEVE|21.16|15.24|4.63|1.29|73|72|1219.04|16.70|16.93|-0.23
1988|YZERMAN, STEVE|22.61|15.65|4.70|2.27|60|90|1001.34|16.69|11.13|5.56
1989|YZERMAN, STEVE|25.83|16.52|5.15|4.17|107|124|1321.28|12.35|10.66|1.69
1990|YZERMAN, STEVE|26.11|17.11|5.36|3.65|116|110|1351.45|11.65|12.29|-0.64
1991|YZERMAN, STEVE|24.52|15.35|5.27|3.90|92|90|1228.32|13.35|13.65|-0.30
1992|YZERMAN, STEVE|23.55|14.92|4.87|3.77|66|92|1178.29|17.85|12.81|5.05
1993|YZERMAN, STEVE|23.41|15.91|4.17|3.33|80|113|1336.52|16.71|11.83|4.88
1994|YZERMAN, STEVE|22.28|16.08|3.63|2.56|62|73|932.70|15.04|12.78|2.27
1995|YZERMAN, STEVE|19.32|13.19|3.93|2.20|27|33|620.02|22.96|18.79|4.18
1996|YZERMAN, STEVE|22.04|13.24|4.88|3.92|40|69|1059.44|26.49|15.35|11.13
1997|YZERMAN, STEVE|23.13|15.23|4.84|3.06|52|74|1233.47|23.72|16.67|7.05
1998|YZERMAN, STEVE|20.43|13.95|3.77|2.72|52|55|1046.25|20.12|19.02|1.10
1999|YZERMAN, STEVE|21.59|14.45|4.58|2.56|58|66|1156.00|19.93|17.52|2.42
2000|YZERMAN, STEVE|21.11|14.65|3.95|2.50|49|77|1142.70|23.32|14.84|8.48
2001|YZERMAN, STEVE|22.24|14.03|5.14|3.07|38|42|757.62|19.94|18.04|1.90
2002|YZERMAN, STEVE|20.58|13.46|4.54|2.58|31|42|699.92|22.58|16.66|5.91
2003|YZERMAN, STEVE|15.59|12.59|1.69|1.31|7|13|201.44|28.78|15.50|13.28
2004|YZERMAN, STEVE|17.53|12.64|3.00|1.89|35|45|948.00|27.09|21.07|6.02
2006|YZERMAN, STEVE|12.78|10.08|2.41|0.29|26|33|614.88|23.65|18.63|5.02
|||||||||||
1989|SAKIC, JOE|18.95|12.80|4.97|1.19|73|37|895.79|12.27|24.21|-11.94
1990|SAKIC, JOE|22.47|16.55|5.16|0.76|121|81|1324.24|10.94|16.35|-5.40
1991|SAKIC, JOE|24.79|15.98|5.28|3.53|110|84|1278.64|11.62|15.22|-3.60
1992|SAKIC, JOE|23.59|15.98|5.11|2.50|73|78|1102.34|15.10|14.13|0.97
1993|SAKIC, JOE|22.46|14.27|5.48|2.72|77|74|1112.75|14.45|15.04|-0.59
1994|SAKIC, JOE|22.08|14.63|5.25|2.21|80|72|1228.92|15.36|17.07|-1.71
1995|SAKIC, JOE|21.26|15.53|4.05|1.67|39|46|730.05|18.72|15.87|2.85
1996|SAKIC, JOE|22.16|15.10|5.38|1.68|71|85|1237.95|17.44|14.56|2.87
1997|SAKIC, JOE|21.27|14.41|5.24|1.62|59|49|936.72|15.88|19.12|-3.24
1998|SAKIC, JOE|23.09|17.29|4.53|1.26|45|45|1106.56|24.59|24.59|0.00
1999|SAKIC, JOE|25.58|16.62|5.42|3.55|56|79|1213.26|21.67|15.36|6.31
2000|SAKIC, JOE|23.27|17.84|4.26|1.17|46|76|1070.40|23.27|14.08|9.19
2001|SAKIC, JOE|23.02|16.21|4.79|2.02|48|93|1329.22|27.69|14.29|13.40
2002|SAKIC, JOE|22.01|16.20|4.40|1.41|53|65|1328.40|25.06|20.44|4.63
2003|SAKIC, JOE|21.20|14.81|4.86|1.54|45|49|858.98|19.09|17.53|1.56
2004|SAKIC, JOE|20.26|14.38|4.11|1.77|49|60|1164.78|23.77|19.41|4.36
2006|SAKIC, JOE|19.92|13.37|5.34|1.20|63|73|1096.34|17.40|15.02|2.38
2007|SAKIC, JOE|20.18|14.48|5.08|0.60|68|70|1187.61|17.46|16.97|0.50
2008|SAKIC, JOE|19.98|14.25|5.23|0.48|36|32|627.00|17.42|19.59|-2.18

Aver:

Player|TOI|TOI-ES|TOI-PP|TOI-SH
YZERMAN, STEVE|21.50|14.65|4.39|2.46
SAKIC, JOE|22.02|15.28|4.97|1.77

Total:

Player|ESGA|ESGF|TOT ES MIN|TOT ES MIN per ESGA|TOT ES MIN per ESGF|DIF
YZERMAN, STEVE|1326|1510|22186.01|16.73|14.69|2.04
SAKIC, JOE|1212|1248|20829.95|17.19|16.69|0.50

 

[19Yzerman19]

Bad comparison chum. Sakic was a 19 year old rookie playing on the 2nd line(P.S you got the years wrong as Sakic did not score 102 in 88-89). Yzerman in the peak of his career by this point, and not the two way player he became later yet.




I don't think anybody is surprised here given your name and obvious Home team bias in favor of Yzerman.

Is anyone surprised at your constant discrediting of anything that is Detroit?

 

[FissionFire]

Is anyone surprised at your constant discrediting of anything that is Detroit?

Thornton_19 doesn't have any personal grudge against Detroit. He's one of the most objective and open-minded posters you'll find on this forum.