Is Kucherov on Jagr's level?

[JFedol]

This is going to be a no from me dawg. Jagr's one solitary Hart vs. Ovy's 3 put this one to bed, thank you very much.

Jagr outproduced anything Ovi ever did on a very mid Rangers team in 2006 lol.

 

[Regal]

This is going to be a no from me dawg. Jagr's one solitary Hart vs. Ovy's 3 put this one to bed, thank you very much.

I don’t know if I’d put Jagr’s peak over Ovechkin’s (it’s close), but Jagr had 4 Hart runner ups, 2 of which were very close. 3-1 Hart comparison is a pretty poor argument when they both had 5 top-2 placements.

 

[geebster]

They aren't the same tier of player. Kucherov is really good but he's not Jagr. Goals are a wide chasm between the two.

Jagr is clearly better than Kucherov, I never said they were the same. Same tier only means they are both in that top echelon of their era. I consider Kucherov in the same tier as Draisaitl and Mackinnon and Makar and Hughes, but I have McDavid and Lemieux and Orr and Gretzky types in the tier above.

You can have a player better than another player in the same tier. I'm taking Lemieux over McDavid for example, but have them in the same tier. I'd take Jagr over Kucherov but Kucherov has dominated regular season and post season for long enough that he deserves to be in that top of the era discussion and, in my opinion, he's at the top of that tier right now.

 

[landy]

Please gaslight someplace else. Not everyone here has the memory of a hummingbird.

View attachment 1028563

Forgot the Covid asterisk.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Jagr is clearly better than Kucherov, I never said they were the same. Same tier only means they are both in that top echelon of their era. I consider Kucherov in the same tier as Draisaitl and Mackinnon and Makar and Hughes, but I have McDavid and Lemieux and Orr and Gretzky types in the tier above.

You can have a player better than another player in the same tier. I'm taking Lemieux over McDavid for example, but have them in the same tier. I'd take Jagr over Kucherov but Kucherov has dominated regular season and post season for long enough that he deserves to be in that top of the era discussion and, in my opinion, he's at the top of that tier right now.

I don't have them in the same tier. I don't have Kucherov as high as Yzerman and Sakic. Those players were just as good and scored a lot more goals. Yzerman did it on awful teams.

 

[Fantomas]

I don’t know if I’d put Jagr’s peak over Ovechkin’s (it’s close), but Jagr had 4 Hart runner ups, 2 of which were very close. 3-1 Hart comparison is a pretty poor argument when they both had 5 top-2 placements.

It's actually a pretty great argument in reply to the statement that "Jagr was legitimately better than Ovechkin in his prime."

 

[Fantomas]

LOL Jagr has multiple years of leading his teams at the very least past the 1st round with semi-elite production while playing with a heavily mediocre 1C's at best. The years were Lemieux was retired and Francis returned to Carolina and Jagr legit had NOBODY. His playoff production as a whole is kind of iffy but those years are arguably just on par with what Kuch has accomplished in his entire playoff career.

1999, 2000, 2006, 2007. His 1C's during those years = Kovalev, Straka, Nylander.

Kucherov literally has Point doing a vast percentage of his damage offensively (zone entries, breakouts) which makes it easier for him to set up and execute plays. He also has an abundance of luxuries team wise (elite D man, elite goalie). Jagr on the other hand, had again, nobody, not a single f***ing soul that was worth of genuine skill, doing any of that shit that Point was doing. Pens defense was mid, Barasso was sstill elite but I don't he was that good. I could be misremembering. Jagr in his prime was the entire offensive focal point for his respective teams, just like how McDavid is for Edmonton, but he did it as a winger.

If Kuch was on Jagr's level, realistically, he would've won these past 2 rosses with a centre like Cirelli centering him.

And I don't think it's becoming close at all in the regular season, what Jagr accomplished from 1996-2001 is 100x more impressive especially with the f***ing era that he played in. The league wasn't rewarding soft ass perimeter players at all who float like Kuch does to an enormous degree. Dude lead the league in EVP with a 103pt margin at 453, next best was Selanne at 350. 2nd in PPG at 1.54, just behind him was Lindros at 1.33. 4 consecutive rosses while at times only playing 63 games. Had a way more deadlier lethal shot, elite size, strength, puck possession game that only Crosby rivals. His playoff totals as well are elite as well, he was 4th during those 6 years only trailing Sakic, Forsberg and Fedorov, 1st in PPG, 3rd in EVP playoff points. Kucherov has his insanely impressive stretch from 2016-Present, but he's only 6th in EVP and kind of dores most of his damage PP wise. The vision, and passing still generate chances but Jagr had all of that paired with size, and brute strength.

Kucherov lowkey is a product of this butter soft physicality where currently witnessing in this era. Jagr was legit the complete package as a player. His attitude and his weaknesses may have done some damage and could've been the reason why the Pens didn't go far back then. Back I'd still take him over Kuch anyday.

Have you ever seen succinct in your life?

1) Jagr never won a cup without Lemieux and never came close. He won two cups by riding Mario's coattails.

2) Jagr's 2001 playoffs showing was one of the worst things I've ever seen in my life. I remember it well.

Kucherov led the Bolts to two Cups in the kind of fashion Jagr never could match. There's no denying this, it happened.

 

[bleedgreen]

It’s hard to be as good as Jagr was in the 90’s, to me he was the dominant player of that decade due to Gretzky’s decline and Lemieux’s health. It’s hard to say he doesn’t get enough credit, but sometimes I feel he really doesn’t. I don’t feel like Kucherov’s top end is comparable to Jagr’s but I get how his consistent production puts him in a higher category than some of us think of him as. Just not in the same tier as Jagr. Jagr is the second all time scorer in the history of the league, and it was done through the combination of pure dominance when he was younger and consistency when he was older. It deserves a higher tier that’s difficult for many to reach.

 

[JFedol]

Have you ever seen succinct in your life?

1) Jagr never won a cup without Lemieux and never came close. He won two cups by riding Mario's coattails.

2) Jagr's 2001 playoffs showing was one of the worst things I've ever seen in my life. I remember it well.

Kucherov led the Bolts to two Cups in the kind of fashion Jagr never could match. There's no denying this, it happened.

Jagr had nothing to work with during his prime years. That's why he couldn't match it lol. He still managed to lead the pens to a round win in a way more physical era.

Kucherov plays on a stacked team and he wouldn't be able to lead a team on his own IMO.

 

[Fantomas]

Jagr had nothing to work with during his prime years.

Demonstrably untrue.

 

[wetcoast]

Have you ever seen succinct in your life?

1) Jagr never won a cup without Lemieux and never came close. He won two cups by riding Mario's coattails.

2) Jagr's 2001 playoffs showing was one of the worst things I've ever seen in my life. I remember it well.

Kucherov led the Bolts to two Cups in the kind of fashion Jagr never could match. There's no denying this, it happened.

Sure but you are playing the 2 years here and one game there game with zero context
.

One can say that Kuch has a better individual playoff resume but they can't go in to say that it's a huge difference as the facts just don't support that.

Overall Jagrs insane lead in regular season okay is going to be very hard for Kuch to ever catch....unless one wants to cherry pick and not look at the complete picture.

 

[authentic]

Says a man who either doesn't know about or doesn't remember Jagr's turdtastic playoff performances.

I can buy the argument that Jagr bests Kucherov in the regular season (although it's becoming quite close with each passing year), but as far as playoffs go it's not even bloody close.

Jagr was the best playoff producer of his era

He was better than Kucherov in the playoffs, the difference is Kucherov played on a modern day dynasty so he had more lengthy playoff runs. There’s that adjusted playoff scoring thread I’ll have to dig up but Jagr is all-time great in the playoffs.

 

[Wings4Life]

Simple question

The real question behind this thread, seems to be to check whether he's on Crosby's level.

 

[Jack Spider]

Jagr had the swag. He also had 3 inches and 40ish pounds on him.

I will quote Andrei Markov, ''Next question''.

 

[GMR]

Hell no. Jagr was a better scorer with less talent around him for much of his prime when Mario wasn’t around.

 

[Fatass]

Of course not! Kuch is to be argued, justly, as a top 50 player. Jagr is arguably a top 10 player. Both certainly great. But Jagr is on a different (higher) level of greatness.

 

[paracord]

Jagr is clearly better than Kucherov, I never said they were the same. Same tier only means they are both in that top echelon of their era. I consider Kucherov in the same tier as Draisaitl and Mackinnon and Makar and Hughes, but I have McDavid and Lemieux and Orr and Gretzky types in the tier above.

You can have a player better than another player in the same tier. I'm taking Lemieux over McDavid for example, but have them in the same tier. I'd take Jagr over Kucherov but Kucherov has dominated regular season and post season for long enough that he deserves to be in that top of the era discussion and, in my opinion, he's at the top of that tier right now.

McDavid is not in Lemieux's tier. Lemieux never played a game from 17 to 40 where he wasn't both the best goal scorer and playmaker on his own team. McDavid has done that for a decade now.

 

[Beyonder91]

Jagr was the best playoff producer of his era

He was better than Kucherov in the playoffs, the difference is Kucherov played on a modern day dynasty so he had more lengthy playoff runs. There’s that adjusted playoff scoring thread I’ll have to dig up but Jagr is all-time great in the playoffs.

Please provide some evidence that Jagr was "all-time great" in the playoffs. The raw numbers certainly don't show that.

 

[Kranix]

Kucherov still has time to put himself in McDavid's tier the way hes playing at age 31 and taking 3 Art Rosses from McDavid during their overlapping primes.
Hmm..I guess Kuch already is in McDavid's tier? And McDavid would be on Jagr's tier or above already.

BTW. it's never a simple question from daver. It's always a 4-D chess to somehow spin that Crosby is better than someone.

 

[wetcoast]

Jagr was the best playoff producer of his era

He was better than Kucherov in the playoffs, the difference is Kucherov played on a modern day dynasty so he had more lengthy playoff runs. There’s that adjusted playoff scoring thread I’ll have to dig up but Jagr is all-time great in the playoffs.

Here it is and Kuch still does very well considering he is 31.

But you need to also reference it in the Jagr/Crosby poll in this section right?

Thread 'Adjusting playoff scoring for defense faced'

Mar 20, 2025

As talked about in a thread, it would be maybe interesting to adjust playoff scoring over player career around a weighted defensive score of the opponent they face, 6 games against a 3 goals against, 4 games against a 4 goals a game, faced a average 3.4 goals a games defensive team that year.

player nan	seasson	gameplayed	average defense	points	adjustedpts	ppg adj
Gretzky	19801981	9	3.13	21	24.7	2.74

...

• MadLuke
• Replies: 53
• Forum: The History of Hockey

• 

 

[authentic]

Please provide some evidence that Jagr was "all-time great" in the playoffs. The raw numbers certainly don't show that.

Look at the thread above ^

If you’re the best playoff producer of your era, the mid 90s to mid 2000s with all the players that era featured it goes without saying how good he was

 

[Regal]

Please provide some evidence that Jagr was "all-time great" in the playoffs. The raw numbers certainly don't show that.

The raw numbers include multiple seasons as a teenager and as a 39+ year old. From 21 to 35 he produced at a 42 goal, 99 point pace, and from ‘95 to ‘01 (his first to last Art Ross), he produced at a 47 goal, 101 point pace, which was the best in the league over that time frame, outside of Gretzky, who only played 28 games. He never had a signature run, and he sucked in both the 1996 and 2001 conference finals, which were the two best years for the Pens to make a run in his prime, but overall he showed he could produce at a high level in the playoffs.

 

[Beyonder91]

The raw numbers include multiple seasons as a teenager and as a 39+ year old. From 21 to 35 he produced at a 42 goal, 99 point pace, and from ‘95 to ‘01 (his first to last Art Ross), he produced at a 47 goal, 101 point pace, which was the best in the league over that time frame, outside of Gretzky, who only played 28 games. He never had a signature run, and he sucked in both the 1996 and 2001 conference finals, which were the two best years for the Pens to make a run in his prime, but overall he showed he could produce at a high level in the playoffs.

I'm looking at each of his playoff performances and there is maybe only 1 year where he far and away stands out from his teammates in each of those years.
95-96 - Lemieux outperforms him
96-97 - 5 games - Slightly outperforms Lemieux by a couple points
97-98 - 6 games - A few points ahead of Ron Frances & Stu Barnes
98-99 - 9 games - He missed a number of games but production on par with Kovalev/Straka
99-00 - 11 games - This was his best performance relative to his teammates - Finished 4 points ahead of Straka but Jagr also had 8 goals
00-01 - 16 games - Disappointing 12 points - Lemieux & Straka outperformed him

There is nothing in this stretch of games that shows me he is "all-time" playoff performer. Made it out of the 2nd round once and had his worst performance in that run.

 

[Beyonder91]

Look at the thread above ^

If you’re the best playoff producer of your era, the mid 90s to mid 2000s with all the players that era featured it goes without saying how good he was

Yes, I looked at the thread. It's deceptive because it is showing the ranking (Jagr 5th) in total adjusted points and Jagr played a lot more games than other players. He is far down the list when you look at adjusted points per game (28th - just ahead of Daniel Briere)

For example in that thread it shows the following for adjusted playoff points per game:

Kucherov: 1.61ppg (9th)
Jagr: 1.32ppg (28th)

Yes, Jagr is dragged down a little because of his 39 later playoff games but the bulk of his playoff games (77%) were age 35 and younger. 72% were age 30 and younger.

 

[Regal]

I'm looking at each of his playoff performances and there is maybe only 1 year where he far and away stands out from his teammates in each of those years.
95-96 - Lemieux outperforms him
96-97 - 5 games - Slightly outperforms Lemieux by a couple points
97-98 - 6 games - A few points ahead of Ron Frances & Stu Barnes
98-99 - 9 games - He missed a number of games but production on par with Kovalev/Straka
99-00 - 11 games - This was his best performance relative to his teammates - Finished 4 points ahead of Straka but Jagr also had 8 goals
00-01 - 16 games - Disappointing 12 points - Lemieux & Straka outperformed him

There is nothing in this stretch of games that shows me he is "all-time" playoff performer. Made it out of the 2nd round once and had his worst performance in that run.

That’s a pretty absurd way to look at it. You’re complaining because he’s only a couple points ahead of his non-Lemieux teammates in each of a handful of games sample.