Is Peter Forsberg underrated?

[DJJones]

Agree with most people, when healthy he was dominant and my favorite player growing up.

But injuries killed him, I have no issue with Sakic being ahead of him even if I'd take a healthy Forsberg over him in a playoff series.

 

[Midnight Judges]

And the key is how this list was headlined - it says “best players” not “greatest players”. I’m pretty sure all hardcore hockey fans make a distinction between those two terms.

I think people are often talking past each other in this regard. Most of the time when people say "best" they actually mean "greatest."

 

[archangel2]

Everyone can not be in the top 10. Forsberg was one of the best from his era. There are certain key stats that hurt him from the word go. 249 goals and 885 pts in 708 games. If he was healthy for his entire career? that is another story. He was a very good player, in the hall of fame and all that. But if he had stayed healthy? Legend.

Sakic vs Forsberg

Sakic

NHL Totals

1378

625

1016

1641

614

172

84

104

188

78

Forsberg

NHL Totals

708

249

636

885

690

151

64

107

171

163

 

[RandV]

I voted overrated but it's really hard to tell. A lot of Avs fans will insist when healthy he was the better player than Sakic, but it's hard to peg these guys when they only got maybe 10 seasons in and they don't stand out as an all time great like Bobby Orr. You only get to see him playing in his prime for a stacked multi-Cup winning team with some better playoff performances than his peer Joe Sakic, that creates an air of mystique around a player.

As a comparison I don't have access to THN ranking but I'd ask if/were Malkin lands on their list, and question how he'd be perceived if after some Cups and a Conn Smythe he had to hang them up after about 10 seasons.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Around here he walks on water.

 

[John Mandalorian]

He's infamously overrated on this site though not as much lately, not as sure about the general public. He'll end up underrated in the long run due to injuries, but he's not there yet.

This sounds highly scientific. What instrument are you using to measure this?

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

On the recent THN top 75 best players of all time list Peter Forsberg was ranked at place 48. Sakic was on place 33. Yet I now for a fact, through various experiments on here for example, that Avs’ fans almost unanimously think Forsberg was the better player. And the key is how this list was headlined - it says “best players” not “greatest players”. I’m pretty sure all hardcore hockey fans make a distinction between those two terms. Forsberg is top 5 in assists per game all time, he’s top 10 in ppg as well as playoffs points per game all time, this while playing in the dead puck era. That’s pretty insane. Has Forsberg become underrated?

Sakic was a far superior goal scorer.

As for your question. Quite the opposite. Forsberg is one of the most overrated players to ever play.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

On here he's overrated by a handful of fans. He had a couple of great years and a few great playoff stretches. There's a lot of what could have been. Still an obviously great player, but so was Lafontaine.

 

[dr robbie]

I loved watching him play and got to see his whole career from start to finish (to attempted comeback).

He's definitely overrated if anything though.

 

[authentic]

There was a time where it was between him and Jagr as the NHL's best skater.

There was also a time, from the 2002 playoffs until halfway through the 2005-06 season where Forsberg was the hands down best player in the NHL, but between his injuries in 2003-04 and the lockout the following season it doesn’t get remembered as much, but he was putting up insane numbers for the time while combining an elite all around game and physical play. In a list of best of all time he narrowly missed the top 10 and depending on the day you ask me I could slide him into that 10th spot.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

There was also a time, from the 2002 playoffs until halfway through the 2005-06 season where Forsberg was the hands down best player in the NHL, but between his injuries in 2003-04 and the lockout the following season it doesn’t get remembered as much, but he was putting up insane numbers for the time while combining an elite all around game and physical play. In a list of best of all time he narrowly missed the top 10 and depending on the day you ask me I could slide him into that 10th spot.

Those were the years when Jagr and him were the best players. Thornton challenged for a cup of coffee

 

[authentic]

On here he's overrated by a handful of fans. He had a couple of great years and a few great playoff stretches. There's a lot of what could have been. Still an obviously great player, but so was Lafontaine.

Sure, if by a couple of great years you mean he was 2nd to Jagr in points per game in the regular season and playoffs over a 10 year period from the beginning of his career. This is what Ben White is getting at, in a list of best players he should be objectively a fair bit higher than 48th. Let’s put it this way, he is better than a player like MacKinon today, essentially on par with a peak Malkin who was as good as Crosby and Ovechkin at their best who are considered top 10 players of all-time.

Those were the years when Jagr and him were the best players. Thornton challenged for a cup of coffee

Jagr was the best player in 2005-06. He wasn’t in the conversation based on his actual performance beginning in 2001-02 leading up to that point.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

Sure, if by a couple of great years you mean he was 2nd to Jagr in points per game in the regular season and playoffs over a 10 year period from the beginning of his career. This is what Ben White is getting at, in a list of best players he should be objectively a fair bit higher than 48th. Let’s put it this way, he is better than a player like MacKinon today, essentially on par with a peak Malkin who was as good as Crosby and Ovechkin at their best who are considered top 10 players of all-time.

Not disagreeing, but Sakic was better for the career, and that's not arguable. By a couple great years I mean years when he was in the Hart conversation.

Sure, if by a couple of great years you mean he was 2nd to Jagr in points per game in the regular season and playoffs over a 10 year period from the beginning of his career. This is what Ben White is getting at, in a list of best players he should be objectively a fair bit higher than 48th. Let’s put it this way, he is better than a player like MacKinon today, essentially on par with a peak Malkin who was as good as Crosby and Ovechkin at their best who are considered top 10 players of all-time.



Jagr was the best player in 2005-06. He wasn’t in the conversation based on his actual performance beginning in 2001-02 leading up to that point.

Sorry if I upset you, but Jagr had a good stretch before that as well.

 

[authentic]

Not disagreeing, but Sakic was better for the career, and that's not arguable. By a couple great years I mean years when he was in the Hart conversation.


Sorry if I upset you, but Jagr had a good stretch before that as well.

You didn’t upset me I just think you’re forgetting the Washington years for Jagr leading up to the lockout. They weren’t best in the world material.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

You didn’t upset me I just think you’re forgetting the Washington years for Jagr leading up to the lockout. They weren’t best in the world material.

Yet, I don't think those years make much of a difference. You can substitute Sakic, Iginla, or a few other guys who were in the mix between 01 and 06.

 

[the valiant effort]

Minimum 664 games:

(Kucherov is 10th)

 

[Dust]

Minimum 664 games:

(Kucherov is 10th)

We should go min 657 games so that we can include Bobby Orr at 0.98.

 

[the valiant effort]

We should go min 657 games so that we can include Bobby Orr at 0.98.

Lol yes, I screwed that up. NHL.com on mobile is a pain for me.