Is Peter Forsberg underrated?

[GoldenKnight]

Some of those came later in his career not his prime so my point still stands.

Nearly all were in his prime. The last of the top 10 seasons for Malkin was in 2019-20, where he was 33 years old and ended up 10th in Hart voting.

His consistency was not better than Forsbergs from season to season or in the playoffs, just go through their stats year by year and see for yourself.

I have looked, and the stats favor Malkin, as the post you are responding to showed. You can feel free to do a deeper dive, such as VsX-ppg, which is also in Malkin's favor against Forsberg (1.00 for Malkin, 0.93 for Forsberg), when comparing their 7 year primes:

Reference - VsX comprehensive summary (1927 to 2023)

The purpose of this thread is to summarize "Vs X", an adjusted scoring system commonly used by the History of Hockey sub-forum. As far as I know, longtime poster BM67 developed the earliest version of the system, wherein each player's stats were compared to the 2nd highest scorer in a given...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[JaegerDice]

Not on HFBoards, but in hockey fandom in general, yes.

 

[GoldenKnight]

As @authentic writes Forsberg was more consistent, the stats are there to back it up. Forsberg also played through injuries a lot more which actually makes his ppg career numbers look worse than the level a healthy Forsberg represented. Forsberg was more consistently producing and was better defensively and physically. The only argument for Malkin is health (not that Malkin's health was very good either but still).

This post is basically false from start to finish.

Everything you wrote about Forsberg can also be applied to the oft-injured prime Malkin as well.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

As @authentic writes Forsberg was more consistent, the stats are there to back it up. Forsberg also played through injuries a lot more which actually makes his ppg career numbers look worse than the level a healthy Forsberg represented. Forsberg was more consistently producing and was better defensively and physically. The only argument for Malkin is health (not that Malkin's health was very good either but still).

What a load of rubbish.

As if other star players like Malkin don’t have their on-pace stats lowered by injuries.

 

[Toby91ca]

He was an elite producer for virtually all his career (10 out of the 11 seasons when he played more than 25% of the games) while being great allround, and about his goal scoring his playoff G/G is better than Selanne, Jagr, Sakic etc.

What's your definition of elite? In the 11 seasons where he's played more than 25% of the games, he's finished top 5 in scoring 4 times, top 10 - 5 times. Top 5 in PPG 4 times and top 10 - 8 times. What are the 10 seasons you consider elite? Also his gpg in playoffs is not better than Sakic's....but that doesn't really matter much as small sample sizes in grand scheme of things can skew the numbers.

Forsberg was absolutely a beast of a player and a bit of a "what if" type guy. If he was a100% healthy, what could he have been? I don't think he demonstrated enough during the time he played to be considered as high up as some people rank him.

 

[authentic]

Nearly all were in his prime. The last of the top 10 seasons for Malkin was in 2019-20, where he was 33 years old and ended up 10th in Hart voting.


I have looked, and the stats favor Malkin, as the post you are responding to showed. You can feel free to do a deeper dive, such as VsX-ppg, which is also in Malkin's favor against Forsberg (1.00 for Malkin, 0.93 for Forsberg), when comparing their 7 year primes:

Reference - VsX comprehensive summary (1927 to 2023)

The purpose of this thread is to summarize "Vs X", an adjusted scoring system commonly used by the History of Hockey sub-forum. As far as I know, longtime poster BM67 developed the earliest version of the system, wherein each player's stats were compared to the 2nd highest scorer in a given...

forums.hfboards.com

Forsberg never went below a point per game, Malkin had the 37 in 43 games season, Forsberg was also never a - player during his prime in the regular season and only once during one single postseason. Yeah I’m not saying it isn’t close but consistency was on Forsbergs side while Malkin takes the peak offensive play. Overall I have these players neck and neck as Malkin was 10th on my last peak list and Forsberg was 11th. There are times where I have them switched around though and in their most dominant forms I’d be inclined to take either over Crosby or Ovechkin for a playoff run.

 

[authentic]

Also what you posted was for regular season offense only. Forsberg had better overall playoff stats despite the slightly less productive peak on a per game basis.

 

[Ben White]

At his peak? 100%. Better than a player like MacKinnon today who I’d probably have in my top 15. This is judging players from the 06 era and on mind you.



lol one single season and playoff run considering offense only to say Malkin was more impactful than Forsberg.

Exactly this. Considering “1 best full season” when comparing injury prone players is exactly why these discussions quickly become irrational.

 

[Deas]

What's your definition of elite? In the 11 seasons where he's played more than 25% of the games, he's finished top 5 in scoring 4 times, top 10 - 5 times. Top 5 in PPG 4 times and top 10 - 8 times. What are the 10 seasons you consider elite? Also his gpg in playoffs is not better than Sakic's....but that doesn't really matter much as small sample sizes in grand scheme of things can skew the numbers.

Forsberg was absolutely a beast of a player and a bit of a "what if" type guy. If he was a100% healthy, what could he have been? I don't think he demonstrated enough during the time he played to be considered as high up as some people rank him.

My definition of elite producer is top 10 in P/G (provided enough games played). He was that in 8 out of the 11 seasons in which he played more than 25% of the games. With a 10 year span between first and last top 10. Good call about 8 and not 10, got that wrong from memory.

Short answer is you’ve looked at season totals and I P/G. We could be the millionth example of delving into the what that measures compared to total numbers, if P/G tend to go up or down if playing more games in a season (about small sample sizes). With the elite players that’s not as easy to establish as some tend to assume. My post that you replied to was clear about him not being great at career totals and staying healthy.

I mixed Sakic up with someone then. Main point is Forsberg’s G/G is significantly higher in playoffs than in regular season and higher than many high end goal scorers. He was a great goal scorer too when he wanted, which matches the eye test too throughout his career.

His rank in P/G year by year.

94/95: 18
95/96: 6
96/97: 6
97/98: 2
98/99: 5
99/00: 13
00/01: 5
01/02: DNP (injuried)
02/03: 1 4.05% higher p/g Mario Lemieux
03/04: 1 20.41% higher p/g than Zigmund Palffy
04/05: DNP (lockout)
05/06: 9
06/07: 36

Retired (concerning games included in this survey) at age 34.

11 seasons included in survey.

Number of seasons as 1st: 2
Win margin span: 4.05-20.41%
Number of seasons in top 5: 5
Number of seasons in top 10: 8
Years in/outside top 10 ratio: 8/3, 72.72%
Span in years between first and last top 10: 10

 

[MessierII]

Great player but massively overrated.