Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
That's fairly straightforward...proper talent evaluation is the answer.How does one determine that one scored a lot of points only because they were on a great team?
That's fairly straightforward...proper talent evaluation is the answer.How does one determine that one scored a lot of points only because they were on a great team?
Well that seem an unfair way to put it, has he his certainly under that ppg because of his old age + 24 games as a rookie.Jagr is a sub-ppg player in the playoffs. And the wild thing? He's not really pulled down by his late career as much as you'd think. He doesn't have a ton of GP (at least as not as much as you'd expect given career length), but he's at best a "meh, he's fine" playoff performer.
Straightforward in clairvoyance yet ambiguous in human application, as people may disagree on proper talent evaluationThat's fairly straightforward...proper talent evaluation is the answer.
I get the then played a lot in the playoff and won a lot, but I am not sure how obvious scored a lot follow.due to the fact that he played for great teams, and therefore scored a lot in the playoffs, and won four Cups.
That's fairly straightforward...proper talent evaluation is the answer.
There's virtually nothing on paper that is "unreasonable to question" with regard to this game. The paper is trying to dumb down what happened in the game into bite sized pieces...but it rarely gets it quite right. Whether that's the case here or not, I'm not saying...but the idea that evaluating a player isn't on the table because of some number from 1976 is ludicrous.Is it unreasonable to question this when one player was the dominant offensive player for 7 straight seasons?
Where is the indication that Guy would not have put up the same numbers if he was on another team other than speculative opinion.
There's virtually nothing on paper that is "unreasonable to question" with regard to this game. The paper is trying to dumb down what happened in the game into bite sized pieces...but it rarely gets it quite right. Whether that's the case here or not, I'm not saying...but the idea that evaluating a player isn't on the table because of some number from 1976 is ludicrous.
I mean, maybe it's a correct representation of the player. Not saying it isn't...but if the work isn't being done, the answer won't present itself.
Sure...but also players on bad teams see that effect as well. The ol' "Bad Team Scorer" phenomenon. Good team? Bad team? You can generally remove team effects if you're evaluating the player...that's how you know or at least get a much better sense.Fair enough, the poster I was questioning seemed to imply that, in general, players on great teams see their numbers increase.
Bryan Trottier notes in his book that he thought Perreault was the most skilled player in the world in the 1981 Canada Cup.This is worth nothing, but I think I wrote somewhere here recently (while I'll going back through tape for the goalie project) that I wasn't sure that Lafleur was actually better than Perreault.
I've always felt that the following 3 players are untouchable all-time when it comes to ~5-6 years of consecutive play after the big 4:
Esposito
Lafleur
Jagr
No one in history has a better ~5-6 year stretch then them outside of the big 4. Some players have better overall careers, or better ~2-3 year peaks maybe, but for 5-6 years in a row, they are in a class apart.
I don't know off hand how I'd rank those 3 player's ~6 year peaks vs one another, but they are all 3 strong enough that I could see it go many different ways.
For what it's worth - McDavid may end up joining/surpassing this group. I wasn't really counting him since he's still current and adding, so will want to wait and see how his own ~5-6 year stretch stacks up. Good chance he'll surpass them.
Interesting. My thing about most games is I come in with a list of players I want to see (in this case, it was goalies, obviously, so it's a little different beast), so it takes a lot for a player to really stand out. Most of the games involving Buffalo, Perreault just consistently jumps off the page in an otherwise unbalanced league. He may well be the best forward of the 70's.Bryan Trottier notes in his book that he thought Perreault was the most skilled player in the world in the 1981 Canada Cup.
Unless you're only doing skaters, I'd add Hasek to your group (94-99), 5x Vezina, 2x Hart, 2x Pearson, 5x AS-1, 1-1-2-3-3 Hart finishes, 6x led the league in sv%
Maybe not relative to the nature of his position too.He's probably stronger for 2-3 years consecutive than 5-6 though.
I literally thought about Hasek as I was hitting "post reply", but left him off. You're right, he's probably a good fit too. He's probably stronger for 2-3 years consecutive than 5-6 though.
He may well be the best forward of the 70's.
Either that or some of the competition had fallen away and/or missed games...Hart Trophies don't exist in a vacuum.
he fell off in 96 thoTop 5 Hart votes by year for Hasek's 6 years:
1994: Fedorov, Hasek, Beezer, Gilmour, Roy
1995: Lindros, Jagr, Hasek, Coffey, Fleury
1996: Lemieux, Messier, Lindros, Jagr, Fedorov
1997: Hasek, Kariya, Lemieux, Brodeur, Selanne
1998: Hasek, Jagr, Selanne, Brodeur, Gretzky
1999: Jagr, Yashin, Hasek, Cujo, Selanne
Its not like the competition disappeared, he just beat them
I'm not saying that was the case with Hasek, per se. But everything needs context. Kariya and Jagr didn't miss any time those years (which is more heavily penalized on skaters than goalies it seems)? Looks like an influx of other goalies are there too - Brodeur (even though it's a TARP!), CuJo, Beezer.Top 5 Hart votes by year for Hasek's 6 years:
1994: Fedorov, Hasek, Beezer, Gilmour, Roy
1995: Lindros, Jagr, Hasek, Coffey, Fleury
1996: Lemieux, Messier, Lindros, Jagr, Fedorov
1997: Hasek, Kariya, Lemieux, Brodeur, Selanne
1998: Hasek, Jagr, Selanne, Brodeur, Gretzky
1999: Jagr, Yashin, Hasek, Cujo, Selanne
Its not like the competition disappeared, he just beat them
Is it at all possible that you're overstating at least one of the linemates? Notice there isn't mention of a #1 PMD either.If that's the case then why do his accomplishments not add up to this reputation? Perreault played on a good team, with great linemates and a great 2nd line.
I'm not going to do a deep dive on this right now because of the goalie project. But it's for the best given the Sittler remark hahaHow exactly does Perreault compare to Lafleur, Esposito, Dionne who all put up consistently better numbers in the 70s? Or Bobby Clarke, who put up similar numbers while playing perfect defense. Or Trottier, who arrived later and within 2-3 years completely usurped Perreaults numbers.
If anything Perreault is in a similar category to Darryl Sittler.
Is it at all possible that you're overstating at least one of the linemates? Notice there isn't mention of a #1 PMD either.
I'm not going to do a deep dive on this right now because of the goalie project. But it's for the best given the Sittler remark haha
If 43.3 gsaa is a down year for you that a good stretch, after Zhitnik the D core was not great that year.he fell off in 96 tho
Is it at all possible that you're overstating at least one of the linemates? Notice there isn't mention of a #1 PMD either.