From 1995-97, Lindros reached a higher level of dominance than Messier ever did.
Alright, you name a season and then I'll name a season. 1990 for Messier. Hart, 129 points, 2nd in scoring, won the Cup, captained the Cup win, had 31 points in the Cup run, was a Conn Smythe candidate and probably favourite after three rounds. And played a great overall game.
That's a level Lindros never hit, but it's your turn, so name a season where Lindros was as good as a 1990 Messier.
Well. Just keep in mind, i'm not talking about whose career was better. Messier's career was arguably better than everyone I listed. I'm talking about who was the better player?
Without being able to predict the remainder of their career, at their best, do you pick Messier, or Crosby? Messier was never the best player in the league or close, I think Crosby is quite a bit above that.
You don't think Forsberg is a better/more talented player than Messier was?
And Stamkos? Messier's season of 129 points looks good, but it's also the only one that really stands out. Stamkos has so far had multiple 50+ goal seasons, in a much lower scoring era. So yeah, Stamkos above Messier too
Who was the better player? There is no doubt Messier was better than Forsberg. Let's throw that out the window now. The playoff heroics Forsberg had were great, the ones Messier had were legendary. There was nothing Forsberg could do that Messier couldn't do as good or better.
Stamkos has no place here. Yes, he hit 60 goals at a time when it is extremely difficult. He is a great, great player in today's game. Might be the best outside of Crosby right now. But he also has 17 career playoff points. I am not going to even bother mentioning the amount of times Messier had that many in a single playoff year. Stamkos at his best was not Messier at his best. If there is a player in the NHL who can have that title it might be Crosby.
Speak of the devil. Alright, Crosby has been the best player in the NHL since 2010. Since Ovechkin has fallen off the map he's had little company too. The harshest critic should say Sid is the best. That being said, he does things Messier never did. Messier never screwed up the postseason for his team. Hurt or not, he didn't and Sid has. Let's not pretend Messier wasn't banged up and injured himself in the postseason either. You have to give Sid credit for being the best player for as long as he has. But the question you have to ask, is whether or not he would have stood out more than Messier if he had to play in a league with Gretzky and Lemieux.
But mainly it's the postseason. When was there ever a time Messier blew the joint in the postseason? 1982 would be like saying 2007 for Sid. So we can cancel each of them out. But in every single playoff he played after 1982 he had double digit points. Every one of them. Crosby has had too many disappointments since his Cup win in 2009. You can name them: 2010, 2012, 2013 and 2014. There is no way Messier drops the ball that many times, you knew he wouldn't right off the bat. With Sid, he's a guy who can control a playoff series if he wants to, but he gets thrown off his game way too easily and that's been the mark for him in the postseason. You couldn't do this with Messier. It never happened. So yeah, as far as who has been a better "player", I think if a prime Messier's team went against this current Penguins team with Sid and the feast or famine Malkin that we're used to, I would be incredibly nervous going against Messier.
Messier won both his Harts when Lemieux missed significant time. Gretzky played on awful L.A. teams (hard to win the Hart under those circumstances). He hardly robbed them.
Lindros had a better PPG than Jagr in 1995. In 1996-97, he was on pace for 125 points, more than Lemieux's 122 (albeit in more games).
You get a lot of this "on pace" stuff with Lindros. Luckily Messier doesn't need this. Sure Mario was hurt in 1990 after his 46 game point streak. The guy wins the Hart if he plays a whole season, no question. But so what? It's Mario Lemieux we're talking about in his prime. Gretzky may have had his 2nd worst statistical season up to that point in 1990 but he was still just 13 points behind Gretzky. I don't think you are taking into consideration just how much of a guarantee it was that Gretzky and Lemieux were untouchable. So for someone to be voted ahead of them, that was something.
Same with 1992. Gretzky and Lemieux both had better - or healthier - years. However, doesn't this show you that the third best player in the NHL for quite some time was Mark Messier?
