Is Peter Forsberg underrated?

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.

Has Forsberg become underrated?

  • Yes indeed

  • Maybe slightly

  • Not at all

  • He’s actually overrated


Results are only viewable after voting.
Forsberg drew the top defensive pairings in the playoffs, not Sakic. I think that says it all.

Didn't Sakic draw the other team's #1 line? It was more of a 1A/1B situation unlike Crosby/Malkin or McDavid/Draisaitl where Malkin and Draisaitl face easier matchups.

Linemates can be a factor too but I don't think that's relevant as both Sakic and Forsberg had very good linemates throughout their shared prime.
 
Didn't Sakic draw the other team's #1 line? It was more of a 1A/1B situation unlike Crosby/Malkin or McDavid/Draisaitl where Malkin and Draisaitl face easier matchups.

Linemates can be a factor too but I don't think that's relevant as both Sakic and Forsberg had very good linemates throughout their shared prime.
Nope, I’ve seen this brought up elsewhere and Forsberg was the focus for other teams 5v5. Also, didn’t Forsberg make guys like Gagne and Hejduk Rocket-contenders? Don’t know the stats for Sakic teammates really, but I let you and other fill me in on that
 
Nope, I’ve seen this brought up elsewhere and Forsberg was the focus for other teams 5v5. Also, didn’t Forsberg make guys like Gagne and Hejduk Rocket-contenders? Don’t know the stats for Sakic teammates really, but I let you and other fill me in on that

In the face of this compelling evidence, I withdraw my comment.
 
In the face of this compelling evidence, I withdraw my comment.
I mean, it’s been mentioned in avs and for example red wings forums before, but it would take a while to find.. Feels like you’re set in your mind though.
 
I mean, it’s been mentioned in avs and for example red wings forums before, but it would take a while to find.. Feels like you’re set in your mind though.

The general comment is that Forsberg faced the tougher defensive matchups while Sakic was matched up against the other team's #1 line.

I can buy a "healthy" Forsberg was slightly better than Sakic the same way that I can buy a "healthy, peak" Malkin was as good as Crosby but that you need to qualify a comparison with "healthy" is too much to ignore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pablo El Perro
I’d rather just look at peak than best. Best ability is far too subjective to have any importance to me. Theoretically they should have shown their best ability at their peak.
It does, best ability is basically what said player showed at his peak and consistent enough to not be considered a hot streak. It’s just that “highest ability” disqualifies all those stupid arguments which confuses best peak with best peak seasons and what not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: authentic
It does, best ability is basically what said player showed at his peak and consistent enough to not be considered a bot streak. It’s just that “highest ability” disqualifies all those stupid arguments which confuses best peak with best peak seasons and what not.

You may want to look at this thread which tries to identify the absolute best stretches of hockey since the Wayne/Mario era.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Ben White
You may want to look at this thread which tries to identify the absolute best stretches of hockey since the Wayne/Mario era.

Good stuff
 
Even if that were true in Canada, it's more than made up for by internationalization of the sport.

There's been no internationalisation of the sport. Kopitar, Josi and Draisaitl (a few number of players from a few Central European countries) are neutralised by the Czechs are Slovaks (particularly the latter ones) having smaller outputs.

Yes, the Americans look somewhat (?) better now on paper but that's mostly because Canada is worse overall in comparison, plus arguably their biggest name (Matthews) is suspect as hell in the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BraveCanadian
There's been no internationalisation of the sport.

The NHL used to be almost 100% Canadian. In the early part of Gretzky's career it was about 80% Canadian. Now it is less than 42% Canadian.


Hockey Nationality by year.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: authentic
Most overrated players are probably some Canadian players who were picked 1st overall and had a press following from their mid-teens, but then never hit that next-level status in the big leagues. I'm thinking guys like Marc-André Fleury, John Tavares, Steven Stamkos, or Vinny Lecavalier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hallonbroder
Most overrated players are probably some Canadian players who were picked 1st overall and had a press following from their mid-teens, but then never hit that next-level status in the big leagues. I'm thinking guys like Marc-André Fleury, John Tavares, Steven Stamkos, or Vinny Lecavalier.

Stamkos was 1, 2, 1, 2 in goals and 5, 5, 2, 2 in points over the course of four consecutive seasons and led the league in goals and points through sixteen games the next season before breaking his leg. He authored a 60 goal season for a team that scored a total of 235 goals, which ranked ninth in the league, but would be bottom six last season. His trajectory was very clearly altered, and to say he never hit next level status is monstrously false. He very clearly hit a level that the others didn’t, as soon as his sophomore season, and maintained it longer. He does not belong in your list.
 
Most overrated players are probably some Canadian players who were picked 1st overall and had a press following from their mid-teens, but then never hit that next-level status in the big leagues. I'm thinking guys like Marc-André Fleury, John Tavares, Steven Stamkos, or Vinny Lecavalier.
.. Huh? Which level was he supposed to hit? Stamkos has more Top-5 goalscoring finishes than Brett Hull and would probably have 6 straight Top-2 goalscoring finishes without his pretty gruesome injury, something Hull himself never came very close to achieve. While Hull probably has an overall edge due to peak, prime longevity (I'm taking for granted that Stamkos is post-prime, which may be a mistake), longevity per se and playoffs, they can't be THAT far from each other... And I don't think Stamkos was projected to be better than Brett Hull.

EDIT : Even as it is, Stamkos has four straight Top-2 goalscoring finishes. On top of my head, only Gretzky, Bossy, Ovechkin, Lafleur, Esposito, Richard and Howe achieved this, the last three in completely different contexts.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TheGoldenJet
Those damn Euro 90s/early 00s forwards, always so overrated, must be something in the water over there.

Forsberg and Bure get overrated when they are given credit for things they did not do due to injuries and these things can include levels of play above what they actually reached. There is something about unfulfilled careers that gets people's imagination going.

Federov and Datyusk get overrated when their Selke wins get added to their Hart finishes when it is obvious that their Hart finishes were the product of them winning the Selke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frisco
Federov and Datyusk get overrated when their Selke wins get added to their Hart finishes when it is obvious that their Hart finishes were the product of them winning the Selke.
Fedorov was the best offensive player as well and should have won even if you ignore the Selke aspect entirely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gerulaitis
Forsberg and Bure get overrated when they are given credit for things they did not do due to injuries and these things can include levels of play above what they actually reached. There is something about unfulfilled careers that gets people's imagination going.

Federov and Datyusk get overrated when their Selke wins get added to their Hart finishes when it is obvious that their Hart finishes were the product of them winning the Selke.

Can’t forget the excitement factor. These are all players who were some of the most noticeable players on the ice. Same thing happens to exciting Canadian players like Lindros as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yozhik v tumane
He didn't win the Art Ross and was 3rd in goals on a offensive powerhouse with superstar talent. Remove the Selke and likely Gilmour gives him a run for the Hart.
Gretzky (38+92=130) won the Art Ross just ahead of Fedorov (56+64=120) and got 0 Hart votes. That means 0 even third place votes. Gilmour's (27+84=111) votes relied on his defensive play at least as much as Fedorov's.
 
Gretzky (38+92=130) won the Art Ross just ahead of Fedorov (56+64=120) and got 0 Hart votes. That means 0 even third place votes.

Usually the Art Ross winner is considered to have had the best offensive season.

Gilmour's (27+84=111) votes relied on his defensive play at least as much as Fedorov's.

And also how much he contributed to the Leafs offense. He had considerably less support than Federov; a big consideration in Hart voting.

Anyways, it was a great season by Federov but not a the level the narrative of "He won the Hart AND the Selke" would suggest.
 
Didn't Sakic draw the other team's #1 line? It was more of a 1A/1B situation unlike Crosby/Malkin or McDavid/Draisaitl where Malkin and Draisaitl face easier matchups.

Linemates can be a factor too but I don't think that's relevant as both Sakic and Forsberg had very good linemates throughout their shared prime.

If by top line you mean the opposing top scorers then yes. They more often than not felt comfortable in trading offensive blows with Sakic, while focusing on trying to shut down Forsberg to the extent that it was feasible.

Their respective +/- records in the playoffs against powerhouse teams from the time should implicitly bear this out. If by top line you mean top defensive shutdown unit, then no. I don't have the time at the moment to link the newspaper clippings, but this has been discussed extensively and argued convincingly by quouipourquoi among others in the History sub-section of the forums.
 
While looking for old news reports I stumbled upon this, which may explain why he is over- or underrated depending on where you land on the issue.

Game 2, WCF in the 2002 playoffs against the Red Wings:

After two games of the Western Conference finals between the Red Wings and Avalanche, we know one thing for sure: If the Wings don't find a way to stop Avalanche center Peter Forsberg, they will not win this series.

In Game 1, Detroit's two-tiered approach to checking Forsberg (with center Sergei Fedorov and defenseman Chris Chelios being key players in the plan) worked wonders. Forsberg didn't register a single point as the Wings' grabbed a 1-0 series lead with a 5-3 win.

However, in Game 2 on Monday, Forsberg ruled the ice -- with a bunch of help from linemates Chris Drury and Steve Reinprecht -- during most of his 29 shifts (17:24 of ice time). He contributed to each of his team's goals en route to a series-tying 4-3 win in overtime.

Throughout the evening, the Swedish star toyed with Chelios and his young defensive partner, Jiri Fischer, as well as anyone else who was dressed in home white. Physical enough to battle in the nasty areas of the ice and skilled enough to stickhandle through the entire list of New York Rangers coaching candidates, Forsberg showed why he's the most complete player in the game.

He served early notice that he would be a factor in Game 2 by setting up Alex Tanguay for a power-play goal at the 2:59 mark of the first period.

In the second period, with the score tied at 1, Forsberg used his head -- and his foot -- to push the Avs back into the lead. The Colorado star eyed teammate Martin Skoula teeing up a one-timer from the blue line. At the same time, he was locked in a slot scrum with Chelios and unable to free his stick. As Skoula's shot approached, Forsberg had the smarts to turn his right skate, redirecting the puck into the cage behind Wings goalie Dominik Hasek.

A period later, Forsberg got involved again. This time, Reinprecht did most of the work, setting up late-charging defenseman Greg de Vries for a tie-breaking 3-2 goal. Still, Reinprecht probably wouldn't have had the time to make the pass if Forsberg hadn't tapped the puck to him, then subtly pick off a stick-less Chelios behind the Wings' net.

In overtime, Forsberg completed his tour de force performance.

After batting down a pass in the neutral zone by Steve Yzerman, Forsberg quickly retrieved the loose puck and slid a back-hand pass right to the tape of a cutting Drury, who attacked the Wings' blue line with speed.

Seeing Drury pull up at the top of the left wing circle, Forsberg filled an open passing lane between the circles and accepted a short pass. Skating across the high slot, Forsberg quickly put the puck on his backhand. His dangerous presence drew two Wings -- Yzerman and Brendan Shanahan. Cutting corners like a Ferrari; Forsberg wheeled back, a la Gretzky, then ripped a low bullet at Hasek. The Dominator stopped the shot but left a messy rebound. Because both Yzerman and Shanahan were with Forsberg, there was time and space for Reinprecht and Drury (beating Chelios and Fischer) to work a quick play with the loose puck. Game over.

In the short time between games, savvy Detroit coach Scotty Bowman and his staff will try to come up with some new ways to stop Forsberg. And they'd better come up with something good. If they don't, they won't win this series. It's that simple.

Forsberg finished this series with 8 points, Sakic with 5.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Hallonbroder

Ad

Ad