Is Peter Forsberg underrated?

[Video Nasty]

It’s nice reading great posts from time to time. This guy provides facts, not biased opinions

I respect @Hockey Outsider because he provides stuff like that, but the facts actually are biased opinions. Rankings from sports rags and opinions from hockey GM’s (all flawed humans with skin in the game and egos to stroke) are exactly that.

Jagr was perceived as selfish at times on ice, a malcontent during his latter Pittsburgh years, was totally listless and uninterested (from dragging around a Pittsburgh corpse) until Super Mario came back as a late Christmas present in 2000, and then was lackluster in Washington. Of course GMs are going to prefer one player over another at certain points. A bunch of idiots in baseball hated Barry Bonds for reasons beyond PEDs…like how he wouldn’t dance for them.

These rankings mean something, but it’s clear who was the better player. Jagr was the best player to debut after Gretzky and Lemieux all the way up until McDavid came along. Forsberg never approached that level and if he ever did, it was briefly for a second half of play in 2002-2003.

I was obsessive about watching the Avalanche back then due to the sheer talent on the squad. In real time, I never considered Forsberg to wrestle the mantle away from Jagr, because in real time, you don’t know how everything unfolds. Jagr’s first year in Washington was viewed as an anomaly, a down season, partly because of injury, partly because of change of scenery. Then he had a lackluster first half of 2002-2003 (Forsberg wasn’t much better) and then caught fire with 11 points in 2 games and caused everyone to say that’s it, he’s back on track. Not quite. Meanwhile, Forsberg misses a season and a half during Jagr’s three season Washington tenure (and part of NYR), then boom, lockout.

What’s being ignored is that Hasek, Lindros, and Kariya had their time in the spot light as well.

 

[authentic]

Here's where Forsberg and Jagr ranked in The Hockey News' annual yearbook:

• 1995: Jagr 3rd, Forsberg not in the top 40
• 1996: Jagr 2nd, Forsberg 5th
• 1997: there wasn't a ranked list, but both were named one of six "franchise players"
• 1998: Forsberg 3rd, Jagr 4th
• 1999: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 2nd
• 2000: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 2nd
• 2001: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 4th
• 2002: Forsberg 2nd, Jagr 4th
• 2003: Forsberg 1st, Jagr 14th
• 2004: Forsberg 1st, Jagr 20th
• 2005: Forsberg 2nd, Jagr 12th

They were ranked almost evenly from 1996 to 2002 (with Forsberg pulling ahead after that).

THN's rankings are a big picture ranking of how players are perceived at a certain point in time. It doesn't necessarily translate into who had the best season (in terms of who accomplished more on the ice, it was obviously Jagr). The THN rankings were apparently based on the assumption that Forsberg was healthy (which, in practice, was maybe half the time).

I think people are answering two different questions here. Did Forsberg accomplish as much as Jagr during the Dead Puck Era? No, and it wasn't close. Was he perceived to be (roughly) Jagr's equal, based on his reputation, when healthy? Probably yes.

There was a publication that had Forsberg first in 1996, I’ve owned the book since it came out.

Joe's Vintage Collectibles - HOCKEY STARS, Presents, The HOCKEY BOOK, Peter FORSBERG / Eric LINDROS / Jaromir JAGR cover, 1997

hockey stars presents book peter Forsberg eric Lindros jaromir jagr cover 1997 paul kariya penguins

www.joesvintage.ca

There it is.

 

[authentic]

Found this 2005 thread on Jagr vs Forsberg with over 20 pages. Apparently it was a poll of "who would you build your team around" according to some posts and Forsberg was winning slightly.

But this was also before his 2005 season was complete and he was coming off of his Washington years

Jagr vs Forsberg

Tale of the tape is: 68. Jaromir Jagr drafted: 5th overall-'90 (33 yrs/6'2/235lbs): 1059-560-799-1359 +216 21. Peter Forsberg drafted: 6th overall-'91 (32 yrs/6'0/205lbs): 602-225-557-782 +221 Two dominant players of the last decade, 5 Arts Rosses to 1 for Jagr, 2 Stanley Cups each, both...

forums.hfboards.com

Regardless, whether people want to accept it or not Forsberg was always at the top of whatever list when it came to who you would want on your team, whether it was from fans, coaches, players, etc. and there’s a reason for that. Not claiming he was better than Jagr, but yes I’m claiming he was better than everyone else from that era when he was able to step foot on the ice, even at like 90%. Truthfully a 100% Forsberg in his prime never really existed much the same way a 100% Bobby Orr never existed.

 

[authentic]

Going to have provide that one.

Yeah, Forsberg spent his career on a team full of depth. You know, the kind of team that could withstand him missing the entire 2001-2002 season and still finish 2nd in the West in both wins and points, while finishing 1st in GA, or quite frankly remaining a 100 point team any year he missed significant time. Pretty cool to miss an entire regular season and not have it impact your team, so you can go on a nice playoff run.

Also pretty cool to miss the back half of a Cup winning run and not be impacted legacy wise.

It’s in my post above.

 

[BLNY]

Not even remotely. A great player whose career was cut short by injury. As good as he was in his era, he might have been even better in this one.

 

[Gerulaitis]

Forsberg is slightly underrated.

Only healthy Lemieux, motivated Fedorov and occasionally Sakic could be better centers than Forsberg during his era...
And Zhamnov and Lindros were better than him in the short season of 1995 which now sounds like a joke I guess

 

[My3Sons]

Are that many posters here old enough to have watched him with more than a child’s eyes?

 

[Vukotal Recall]

I've been watching NHL hockey since the late '70s, and of the thousands of players I've seen, none have been more exciting and entertaining than prime Forsberg.

/adjusts onion on belt

 

[daver]

Here's where Forsberg and Jagr ranked in The Hockey News' annual yearbook:

• 1995: Jagr 3rd, Forsberg not in the top 40
• 1996: Jagr 2nd, Forsberg 5th
• 1997: there wasn't a ranked list, but both were named one of six "franchise players"
• 1998: Forsberg 3rd, Jagr 4th
• 1999: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 2nd
• 2000: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 2nd
• 2001: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 4th
• 2002: Forsberg 2nd, Jagr 4th
• 2003: Forsberg 1st, Jagr 14th
• 2004: Forsberg 1st, Jagr 20th
• 2005: Forsberg 2nd, Jagr 12th

They were ranked almost evenly from 1996 to 2002 (with Forsberg pulling ahead after that).

When Mario retired in '97, Lindros was the heir apparent to the title of Best player with Jagr close behind. Lindros took a step back and Jagr comfortably won the Art Ross as Forsberg missed a few games and both were good in 1st round playoff exits.

Not sure what Forsberg did in '97/98 to be placed ahead. THN clearly seemed to place high emphasis on offensive output.

THN's rankings are a big picture ranking of how players are perceived at a certain point in time.

I disagree, they seem to be a ranking based strictly on that year. Or it is not really clear what they are doing.

I don't have an issue with a claim that "if healthy, Forsberg was closer to Jagr than their offensive numbers would indicate" but "if" is the operative word here as "when" would arguably be not appropriate.

Jagr was clearly the greater pure offensive force but gave away a lot defensively and, at the time, in on-ice leadership Hard to not place him in the Top 20 all-time, while recognizing his Top 5ish all-time offensive resume, while Forsberg's "if healthy" level of play could be placed there too.

 

[Toby91ca]

Regardless, whether people want to accept it or not Forsberg was always at the top of whatever list when it came to who you would want on your team, whether it was from fans, coaches, players, etc. and there’s a reason for that. Not claiming he was better than Jagr, but yes I’m claiming he was better than everyone else from that era when he was able to step foot on the ice, even at like 90%. Truthfully a 100% Forsberg in his prime never really existed much the same way a 100% Bobby Orr never existed.

Comments like this answers the question quite clearly.....there is no way he's underrated, quite the opposite.

 

[frisco]

Here's where Forsberg and Jagr ranked in The Hockey News' annual yearbook:

• 1995: Jagr 3rd, Forsberg not in the top 40
• 1996: Jagr 2nd, Forsberg 5th
• 1997: there wasn't a ranked list, but both were named one of six "franchise players"
• 1998: Forsberg 3rd, Jagr 4th
• 1999: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 2nd
• 2000: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 2nd
• 2001: Jagr 1st, Forsberg 4th
• 2002: Forsberg 2nd, Jagr 4th
• 2003: Forsberg 1st, Jagr 14th
• 2004: Forsberg 1st, Jagr 20th
• 2005: Forsberg 2nd, Jagr 12th

This might be evidence that Forsberg was overrated perhaps. The actual production and results often didn't match the perception of how well he was expected to do.

My Best-Carey

 

[authentic]

Well Lindros at his peak was on that level too, Hasek was the best if we’re including goalies but I try to rank them separately. That era was probably the best of all-time for top end talent, so the fact that Forsberg ended up #2 in points per game in the regular season and playoffs despite all that he played through is a testament to the type of talent he was without even getting into his two-way impact.

When Mario retired in '97, Lindros was the heir apparent to the title of Best player with Jagr close behind. Lindros took a step back and Jagr comfortably won the Art Ross as Forsberg missed a few games and both were good in 1st round playoff exits.

Not sure what Forsberg did in '97/98 to be placed ahead. THN clearly seemed to place high emphasis on offensive output.



I disagree, they seem to be a ranking based strictly on that year. Or it is not really clear what they are doing.

I don't have an issue with a claim that "if healthy, Forsberg was closer to Jagr than their offensive numbers would indicate" but "if" is the operative word here as "when" would arguably be not appropriate.

Jagr was clearly the greater pure offensive force but gave away a lot defensively and, at the time, in on-ice leadership Hard to not place him in the Top 20 all-time, while recognizing his Top 5ish all-time offensive resume, while Forsberg's "if healthy" level of play could be placed there too.

Jagr was the one player where his lack of defense did not hinder his defensive impact 5vs5. Infact you could throw him out there with borderline 3rd line wingers on an otherwise bad defensive team and he was guaranteed to outscore the opposition cleanly every single season of his career.

 

[Video Nasty]

There was a publication that had Forsberg first in 1996, I’ve owned the book since it came out.

Joe's Vintage Collectibles - HOCKEY STARS, Presents, The HOCKEY BOOK, Peter FORSBERG / Eric LINDROS / Jaromir JAGR cover, 1997

hockey stars presents book peter Forsberg eric Lindros jaromir jagr cover 1997 paul kariya penguins

www.joesvintage.ca

There it is.

Everyone okay with the fact that Forsberg had done nothing to earn #1 from that rag?

 

[authentic]

Jagr had nearly 60% corsi in his 43/44 year old season leading the Panthers in points, would’ve loved if advanced stats were tracked back in the day I could see him having seasons well above 60%, probably same with Forsberg.

Everyone okay with the fact that Forsberg had done nothing to earn #1 from that rag?

He obviously did something in the eyes of those who watched him play hockey

 

[authentic]

Comments like this answers the question quite clearly.....there is no way he's underrated, quite the opposite.

That settles it then

 

[Video Nasty]

He obviously did something in the eyes of those who watched him play hockey

Yeah, he cast a hypnotize spell to hoodwink people into thinking he was ever the best in the league pre-2003. Reminds me of their embarrassing behavior with Fleury, though at least Forsberg felt at home in the top 3-5 at most points.

 

[HaNotsri]

He's the best player from Sweden by a mile but that doesn't mean much on a global ranking.
I always saw him as more talented than Sakic but actually playing is pretty important...

 

[authentic]

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

1. Lemieux GP 290 P/GP 1.69
2. Jagr GP 716 P/GP 1.38
3. Forsberg GP 580 P/GP 1.28
4. Sakic GP 694 P/GP 1.21
5. Lindros GP 552 P/GP 1.17
6. Gretzky GP 362 P/GP 1.10
7. Kariya GP 657 1.07

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

1. Sakic 147 GP 163P
2. Forsberg 133 GP 154P
3. Fedorov 130 GP 130P
4. Yzerman 132GP 115P
5. Lidstrom 143 GP 107P
6. Hull 130 GP 104P
7. Jagr 80 GP 102P

“The results just weren’t there”

Besides Jagr at #1 If you set the minimum GP to 50 the only player within striking distance of Forsberg’s points per game in the playoffs from 1994-2004 is Lindros at 1.14 with exactly 50 games played. If you don’t select a minimum games played you have Gretzky, Lemieux and Fleury ahead with 28, 41 and 29.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

 

[Toby91ca]

That settles it then

Exactly.....

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Regardless, whether people want to accept it or not Forsberg was always at the top of whatever list when it came to who you would want on your team, whether it was from fans, coaches, players, etc. and there’s a reason for that. Not claiming he was better than Jagr, but yes I’m claiming he was better than everyone else from that era when he was able to step foot on the ice, even at like 90%. Truthfully a 100% Forsberg in his prime never really existed much the same way a 100% Bobby Orr never existed.

That just isn't true though. At the time that Foppa was at the top of his game, it was a defense and goalie league. We had Hasek, Roy, Marty, Lidstrom, Pronger etc as the top players in the game. Even on his team Sakic was a 1A/1B option.

Bobby Orr won 8 straight Norris trophies from 68-75. While he struggled to put together a long career, we certainly had a healthy Bobby Orr reign that is tangible and that we can point to. We can't do that for Foppa, and his career most resembles Lindros.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

He's the best player from Sweden by a mile but that doesn't mean much on a global ranking.
I always saw him as more talented than Sakic but actually playing is pretty important...

This is a good point. I always had Malkin as more talented than Crosby, as he had physical gifts that rivaled Mario. Your actual impact is what matters at the end of the day, and unfortunately Foppa never really was able to put it all together for multiple full seasons + playoffs. I think people look at what he could have done and give way too much credit for that, and that is why he is definitely overrated on this site.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Comments like this answers the question quite clearly.....there is no way he's underrated, quite the opposite.

I got just the opposite impression. It is pretty clear that we have a mythical skater issue with Foppa. When he is healthy, and in his prime, and Gretzky and Mario aren't in the league, and other top players are having down years or injured, he is the best player in the world. That player doesn't exist.

Healthy prime Foppa
1994 Federov
Healthy Lindros
Motivated Kovalev

Just some of the mythical players that get thrown around on these boards that don't exist, or exist an a narrow vacuum and get credit for that for eternity.