The Gr8 Dane
L'harceleur
Speed and Ass sells , fun players to watchForsberg and Bure are 2 of the most overrated players on the site.
Speed and Ass sells , fun players to watchForsberg and Bure are 2 of the most overrated players on the site.
It has also to do with that he played in the DPE, put him in today’s game and he’d be unstoppable. People had to slash and grab and hook him to stop him, unfortunately they were allowed to.
Sakic was a great player. But Forsberg was a bit betterOn 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?
I think it’s a misinterpretation that the DPE was mainly about physicality. I mean the game is still physical, but the DPE was also called “the clutch and grab era”. The skilled players were punished by letting defenders hook and slash, always a stick around your waist or targeting your gloves. To say a highly skilled player, one of the best playmakers of all time, wouldn’t thrive when he got rid of all that is very strange. Did you watch him in the world juniors in ‘93? Forsberg was a player gifted with all the playmaking skills and stick skills in the world, who learned how to deal with the rough environment of the DPE, it wasn’t the other way around.It's got nothing to do with the DPE, nor does the DPE have anything to do with relative dominance.
We have zero idea how Forsberg would do in today's league. Maybe he, like Lindros and Jagr, excelled in the more physical but slower DPE due to their size and physicality while it was the less physical players who did not do as well.
Maybe he does not do as well against the more mobile d-men in today's league.
That is not even close ridiculous… you might watch nhl last 10-20 years… but us who remember, we remember Forsberg as an. absolute super elite, difference making player… and yes Sakic had better career, but Forsberg was often injured… in a peak form he was easily at the same level with Jagr. Top5 player of 90s (including Lemieux and Lindros). So prime Forsberg was better than prime Sakic, with all respect to Sakic who was hell of a player.He's overrated a LOT by some people. I've seen some ridiculous takes claiming he's a top 10 player or so. But I'm sure he gets underrated by some too.
Also OP - in regards to "best" vs "greatest", half the people don't even understand the distinction.
If you want to focus on Sakic vs Forsberg specifically:
Sakic - he is "greater". Greater career, hands down. So if you were to rank the top 100 players of all-time, Sakic is ahead, by a gap.
In terms of "best" - Sakic actually has both the best single regular season peak (2001) and single playoff run (1996) between the 2. So - it's not like you can't also easily have Sakic ahead here. I do think that for "best" it's closer though, and Forsberg has an argument. He played at his best more consistently than Sakic did, even though it's not exactly full seasons.
Nope… if you were lucky enough to see them play… both were injured very often (Bure maybe even more), but when both of them were on - they were unstoppable.Forsberg and Bure are 2 of the most overrated players on the site.
You are joking, right? Lafontaine is nowhere near to Forsberg… and no, forsberg is not overrateťd. If someone says he was absolute superelite, that is not overrating but the fact… overrating would be, he was the best whole decade… nope, but there were certain periods in 90s when it could be said, he was the best in the world.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.
Jagr in his younger days was pretty fast… he changed his style to the former NHL. He would be elite at current nhl tooIt's got nothing to do with the DPE, nor does the DPE have anything to do with relative dominance.
We have zero idea how Forsberg would do in today's league. Maybe he, like Lindros and Jagr, excelled in the more physical but slower DPE due to their size and physicality while it was the less physical players who did not do as well.
Maybe he does not do as well against the more mobile d-men in today's league.
Maybe it can be argued either way, as it’s more difficult to maintain a full season, however I think Forsberg should get the benefit of the doubt as his ppg average was actually higher when he played more games - aka was more healthy.
Jagr in his younger days was pretty fast… he changed his style to the former NHL. He would be elite at current nhl too
More like injury in singular, and more particular his feet.But injuries killed him
Why are you excluding the pre injury Forsberg in both 2003/04 and 2005/06 - that was Forsberg at his best, just as good or better as his Hart season. You’re excluding his 2 historical playoffs point leader - without playing in the finals - campaigns as well, 1999 and 2002.In 95/96, it is really close between Sakic and a 22 year old Forsberg, #5 and #6 in PPG.
In 96/97, Forsberg was at a 1.39 PPG when he got injured after 31 games. He would have finished 6th in PPG that season. Sakic was at 1.38 before he got injured that year after 40 games. It is really close again.
In 97/98, Forsberg gets injured after Game 68 and is barely ahead of Selanne for 3rd best PPG that season behind Jagr and Kariya. Sakic is outside the Top 15 in PPG. Forsberg was better.
In 98/99, both players miss some games, Sakic is 3rd in PPG, Forsberg is 5th. Sakic was a bit better.
In 99/00, both players miss a significant amount of time. Sakic ends up 2nd in PPG. Sakic was better as we have no idea what Forsberg does as injuries really affected that season.
In 00/01, Forsberg's season again is affected by injury. He was at a 1.06 PPG before getting injured. Sakic has his peak season. Clear win for Sakic
In 02/03, Forsberg has his peak season, Sakic is 33 years old and finished outside of the Top 15 in PPG. Forsberg was better against a Sakic whose is outside his prime.
I don't see overwhelming evidence that a "full season" Forsberg is that much better than Sakic.
Here are his PPG finishes in his full/relatively full seasons:
95/96 (age 22) - 6th
97/98 (age 24) - 3rd
98/99 (age 25) - 5th
02/03 (age 29) - 1st
He has only one season where you can reasonably project another 1st place in PPG in 03/04 against a very mediocre field. In 05/06, he was tied with Spezza and Alfredsson in PPG when he started missing time after Game 21.
Kariya would destroy the league today, but I don't think he has any serious argument in his own days.
Why are you excluding the pre injury Forsberg in both 2003/04 and 2005/06