Is Peter Forsberg underrated?

Has Forsberg become underrated?

  • Yes indeed

  • Maybe slightly

  • Not at all

  • He’s actually overrated


Results are only viewable after voting.

authentic

Registered User
Jan 28, 2015
26,454
11,425
Hello, new here and this thread caught my eye!

I’ve seen a lot of credible, ex-players, call Forsberg “the best there was”, “most talented ever” etc.

I’ve also heard stars of today have him as one of their idols (Crosby for example).

But here I see a bunch of posters calling him “overrated”? I see people are mentioning injuries and stuff, but that’s another discussion…? Are people here just very very young, or is there a lot of bias against Forsberg here? Maybe fans of teams he played or…?

Well it’s not exactly a hard call to make. All one has to do is watch the player in his prime and he looks far closer to what actual NHL players past and present describe than what half of HF will tell you.
 

Pablo El Perro

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 10, 2007
26,111
14,009
Hello, new here and this thread caught my eye!

I’ve seen a lot of credible, ex-players, call Forsberg “the best there was”, “most talented ever” etc.

I’ve also heard stars of today have him as one of their idols (Crosby for example).

But here I see a bunch of posters calling him “overrated”? I see people are mentioning injuries and stuff, but that’s another discussion…? Are people here just very very young, or is there a lot of bias against Forsberg here? Maybe fans of teams he played or…?
Overrated doesn't mean he wasn't a great HOF player.
 

Hallonbroder

Registered User
Nov 29, 2024
6
2
Overrated doesn't mean he wasn't a great HOF player.
Sure, sure, but what about him is overrated?

His playmaking skills are in the top 10 ever (4th in APG all time, playing in the DPE speaks for itself, including the eye test).

His shot - sure he preferred assists to goals, according to himself, but he’s got a higher GPG in the playoffs than Crosby and other greats.

His physicality- played a hard, sometimes ugly game that hockey fans loved.

Selkie-level defense.

Skated eights around other teams in their d-zone long before the Karlssons, Crosbys and Makar’s did. But he did it when other players used him as a sleigh.

Big-game player, stepped up when it mattered for both club and country.

Amazing playoff stats.

What does people tend to overrate?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VistamarCroissants

Pablo El Perro

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 10, 2007
26,111
14,009
Sure, sure, but what about him is overrated?

His playmaking skills are in the top 10 ever (4th in APG all time, playing in the DPE speaks for itself, including the eye test).

His shot - sure he preferred assists to goals, according to himself, but he’s got a higher GPG in the playoffs than Crosby and other greats.

His physicality- played a hard, sometimes ugly game that hockey fans loved.

Selkie-level defense.

Skated eights around other teams in their d-zone long before the Karlssons, Crosbys and Makar’s did. But he did it when other players used him as a sleigh.

Big-game player, stepped up when it mattered for both club and country.

Amazing playoff stats.

What does people tend to overrate?
Overrated, imo, has more to do with comparisons that claim he was better than certain other great HOF players.
 

Hallonbroder

Registered User
Nov 29, 2024
6
2
Overrated, imo, has more to do with comparisons that claim he was better than certain other great HOF players.
Ok, but please elaborate. I’ve seen some people comparing him to LaFontaine, which is quite ridiculous. He was also, generally, considered a top 5 player from, what, 1997-2006, when he was playing and healthy? Which is what should be considered in this THN list.

Who do you rank him with and why? I’ve seen the Sakic comparison, but Forsberg’s usually wins the “who was better?”-threads on the Avs forum, right?
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
26,579
6,289
Visit site
Ok, but please elaborate. I’ve seen some people comparing him to LaFontaine, which is quite ridiculous. He was also, generally, considered a top 5 player from, what, 1997-2006, when he was playing and healthy? Which is what should be considered in this THN list.

Who do you rank him with and why? I’ve seen the Sakic comparison, but Forsberg’s usually wins the “who was better?”-threads on the Avs forum, right?

At what point does durability become relevant? Did he have to play a physical style to be as effective offensively; a style that ultimately wasn't sustainable for a longer career?

Or was he injury-prone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Macho King

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
26,579
6,289
Visit site
Sure, sure, but what about him is overrated?

His playmaking skills are in the top 10 ever (4th in APG all time, playing in the DPE speaks for itself, including the eye test).

His shot - sure he preferred assists to goals, according to himself, but he’s got a higher GPG in the playoffs than Crosby and other greats.

His physicality- played a hard, sometimes ugly game that hockey fans loved.

Selkie-level defense.

Skated eights around other teams in their d-zone long before the Karlssons, Crosbys and Makar’s did. But he did it when other players used him as a sleigh.

Big-game player, stepped up when it mattered for both club and country.

Amazing playoff stats.

What does people tend to overrate?

He gets overrated when people use his career APG to claim he is a Top 10 playmaker all-time when he is 80th all-time in assists.

He gets overrated when his regular season goalscoring is excused by his playoff goalscoring. You can't pump up his regular season assist resume and then expect his regular season goalscoring resume should be ignored.

I personally think his goalscoring overall is not a weakness in comparison to other players with similar point production which is in the Sakic/Yzerman/Trottier tier.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
23,468
16,893
It’s peculiar how people obsess over this stat with Forsberg but don’t realize clutch playoff performers like Sakic, Kucherov, MacKinnon and many others were even worse. Also I had no idea about the fact that he led his team in scoring in 7 out of 8 seven games series… That’s actually insane considering you figure Sakic would’ve at least led a few times himself.

Is that particularly impressive though? Since I suppose Sakic led in points in many of the series that ended in 4, 5 or 6 games. What's the difference?

I figure it's more a matter of randomness luck - not really significant one way or another.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,110
30,070
At what point does durability become relevant? Did he have to play a physical style to be as effective offensively; a style that ultimately wasn't sustainable for a longer career?

Or was he injury-prone?
This. Dude wasn't getting bit by snakes here.
 

Pablo El Perro

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 10, 2007
26,111
14,009
Ok, but please elaborate. I’ve seen some people comparing him to LaFontaine, which is quite ridiculous. He was also, generally, considered a top 5 player from, what, 1997-2006, when he was playing and healthy? Which is what should be considered in this THN list.

Who do you rank him with and why? I’ve seen the Sakic comparison, but Forsberg’s usually wins the “who was better?”-threads on the Avs forum, right?
I'm not an Avs fan, but, for career, I'd rank Sakic above Forsberg. I'd also rank Clarke, mentioned in this thread, ahead of him for career. I'm not going to do an all-time ranking here, the history of hockey forum would be a better place to do that.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
49,110
30,070
I'm not an Avs fan, but, for career, I'd rank Sakic above Forsberg. I'd also rank Clarke, mentioned in this thread, ahead of him for career. I'm not going to do an all-time ranking here, the history of hockey forum would be a better place to do that.
If I recall Forsberg came in around the 50s back then. McDavid and Kucherov have probably passed him among active players - a few others are probably making their cases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pablo El Perro

Hallonbroder

Registered User
Nov 29, 2024
6
2
I noticed that a lot of the answers I’m getting are still focused on the career of Forsberg, which is not what THN and the OP was talking about. I agree that Forsberg’s career is less than others because of the lack of games he played. Still, overall, he was a better player than a lot of the ones “ranked ahead of him” in the career-list.
There is a difference.

I also find it interesting that one poster totally disregards his APG and goals in the playoffs. That just sounds weird
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
26,579
6,289
Visit site
I noticed that a lot of the answers I’m getting are still focused on the career of Forsberg, which is not what THN and the OP was talking about. I agree that Forsberg’s career is less than others because of the lack of games he played. Still, overall, he was a better player than a lot of the ones “ranked ahead of him” in the career-list.
There is a difference.

I also find it interesting that one poster totally disregards his APG and goals in the playoffs. That just sounds weird

Which ones?
 

Hockey Outsider

Registered User
Jan 16, 2005
9,516
15,891
Is that particularly impressive though? Since I suppose Sakic led in points in many of the series that ended in 4, 5 or 6 games. What's the difference?

I figure it's more a matter of randomness luck - not really significant one way or another.
I looked into it, and you're right. Forsberg generally outscored Sakic in seven game series, and the opposite was true for six game series:
  • 4 games - Sakic 1 (1 tie)
  • 5 games - Forsberg 2, Sakic 1 (2 tie)
  • 6 games - Sakic 7, Forsberg 2
  • 7 games - Forsberg 7, Sakic 2
Overall the Avalanche played 25 series during from 1995 to 2004. Both players finished ahead of each in scoring in 11 series (and they were tied three times). Forsberg missed two series entirely.

EDIT - I also looked at it by series outcome. Colorado won 17 series. Sakic finished higher in scoring 8 times, Forsberg 6 times (with 3 ties). But Forsberg was ahead 5-3 in the losses. The pro-Sakic way to interpret this is, when he was at his best, Colorado kept winning. The pro-Forsberg was to interpret this is, he was more likely to go down swinging.
 
Last edited:

authentic

Registered User
Jan 28, 2015
26,454
11,425
If I recall Forsberg came in around the 50s back then. McDavid and Kucherov have probably passed him among active players - a few others are probably making their cases.

Kucherov? In what way has Kucherov surpassed Forsbergs career.

Is that particularly impressive though? Since I suppose Sakic led in points in many of the series that ended in 4, 5 or 6 games. What's the difference?

I figure it's more a matter of randomness luck - not really significant one way or another.

It just surprised me more than anything, doesn’t hold any real significance to me.
 

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
26,675
16,644
Vancouver
2 Art Ross against far better competition, better playoffs, 2 Cups plus another 2 Finals. Not as good as reverse hitter but by any other metric Kucherovs career value has surpassed Forsberg.

What makes his playoffs better? They’re similarly productive despite league average scoring levels being lower in Forsberg’s era and Forsberg had the better goal differential. Neither one has a Conn Smythe but both led the playoffs in scoring twice. Both teams were one of the dominant teams of the era with two cups and multiple long runs, though the Avs had to deal with the Red Wings that kept the from winning more.

Forsberg in his first Colorado stint from age 21 to 30 had a line of

133-57-97-154
Per 82 that’s 35-60-95

Kucherov since 15-16 when he first broke out with the triplets to last year, his same age 21 to 30 period, he has a line of

145-52-114-166
Per 82 that’s 29-65-94

But the league average GPG in the playoffs from ‘94 to ‘04 was 2.55

The league average GPG in the playoffs from ‘16 to ‘24 was 2.84
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: authentic

authentic

Registered User
Jan 28, 2015
26,454
11,425
What makes his playoffs better? They’re similarly productive despite league average scoring levels being lower in Forsberg’s era and Forsberg had the better goal differential. Neither one has a Conn Smythe but both led the playoffs in scoring twice. Both teams were one of the dominant teams of the era with two cups and multiple long runs, though the Avs had to deal with the Red Wings that kept the from winning more.

Forsberg in his first Colorado stint from age 21 to 30 had a line of

133-57-97-154
Per 82 that’s 35-60-95

Kucherov since 15-16 when he first broke out with the triplets to last year, his same age 21 to 30 period, he has a line of

145-52-114-166
Per 82 that’s 29-65-94

But the league average GPG in the playoffs from ‘94 to ‘04 was 2.55

The league average GPG in the playoffs from ‘16 to ‘24 was 2.84

That’s also just covering offense only. Considering overall play it’s really not even close. This is where I feel too many people miss the mark when ranking Forsberg against other players and claiming he’s overrated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fatass

Fatass

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
24,039
15,757
2 Art Ross against far better competition, better playoffs, 2 Cups plus another 2 Finals. Not as good as reverse hitter but by any other metric Kucherovs career value has surpassed Forsberg.
Kooch is great too. But these are very different players. So to say one impacted winning more than the other is difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: authentic

VistamarCroissants

Registered User
Apr 19, 2024
108
71
I think Forsberg was perhaps the best center in the world if we look at overall average performance- from 1996 to 2006. Slightly ahead of Fedorov, Sakic, Lemieux, and Lindros
 
  • Like
Reactions: authentic

Hippasus

1,9,45,165,495,1287,
Feb 17, 2008
5,974
508
Bridgeview
Is that particularly impressive though? Since I suppose Sakic led in points in many of the series that ended in 4, 5 or 6 games. What's the difference?

I figure it's more a matter of randomness luck - not really significant one way or another.
Could it be that Forsberg is more of a big games player while Sakic is more of a get it done early type of player?
 

Cruor

Registered User
May 12, 2012
816
116
Forsberg drew the top defensive pairings in the playoffs, not Sakic. I think that says it all.
 

authentic

Registered User
Jan 28, 2015
26,454
11,425
Could it be that Forsberg is more of a big games player while Sakic is more of a get it done early type of player?

Well also probably when they faced better teams the series went longer I assume, both were big game players though without a doubt, Sakic had no shortage of clutch moments and led the playoffs in OT goals at one point IIRC.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad