Is The Younger, More Dynamic Yzerman A Forgotten Player?

[Sentinel]

Am I missing something? Who's the French Canadian?

Clearly HE thought Yzerman was FC.

 

[Big Phil]

Is it considered "old" now to remember Yzerman's dynamic offensive years? I guess. So maybe for me I'll say heck no, I don't forget. He was dynamic, an absolute treat to watch play the game. There would be a buzz when the Wings came into Toronto. Yzerman was always the star attraction. Here is a video with Yzerman's top 10 goals. This is the Stevie Wonder I remember. And look at the goals, many of them in the 1990s or early 2000s. I would say Yzerman was that guy broken up in two spots. Up until his knee injury in 1994 he was a lot more dynamic, almost like he had a magic wand with his stick. And his skating was better. But 1994-'02 he still scored some doozies of a goal! He had the hands right up until the end. The 2002 surgery ended it all, but Yzerman in the dead puck era was still making defenders look like fools. That #1 goal on this video, that's the Yzerman I remember.



By the way, I have no idea why this goal vs. the Hawks wasn't on that video. Anyway, this is arguably his prettiest goal.




Obviously we remember the Cup winning Yzerman too. A guy who had lost some of his offense but took on a different role as more of a leader and two way guy. Red Kelly and Scott Stevens are two other players that come to mind who changed their game and won several Cups afterwards. However, I don't know why people think Yzerman was some plug offensively at that time. He was still very dangerous offensively, even in the late 1990s/early 2000s.

 

[Sentinel]

Is it considered "old" now to remember Yzerman's dynamic offensive years? I guess. So maybe for me I'll say heck no, I don't forget. He was dynamic, an absolute treat to watch play the game. There would be a buzz when the Wings came into Toronto. Yzerman was always the star attraction. Here is a video with Yzerman's top 10 goals. This is the Stevie Wonder I remember. And look at the goals, many of them in the 1990s or early 2000s. I would say Yzerman was that guy broken up in two spots. Up until his knee injury in 1994 he was a lot more dynamic, almost like he had a magic wand with his stick. And his skating was better. But 1994-'02 he still scored some doozies of a goal! He had the hands right up until the end. The 2002 surgery ended it all, but Yzerman in the dead puck era was still making defenders look like fools. That #1 goal on this video, that's the Yzerman I remember.



By the way, I have no idea why this goal vs. the Hawks wasn't on that video. Anyway, this is arguably his prettiest goal.




Obviously we remember the Cup winning Yzerman too. A guy who had lost some of his offense but took on a different role as more of a leader and two way guy. Red Kelly and Scott Stevens are two other players that come to mind who changed their game and won several Cups afterwards. However, I don't know why people think Yzerman was some plug offensively at that time. He was still very dangerous offensively, even in the late 1990s/early 2000s.

His most famous goal is not on that video either. Weird.

 

[The Panther]

However, I don't know why people think Yzerman was some plug offensively at that time. He was still very dangerous offensively, even in the late 1990s/early 2000s.

Indeed. It's an oddity of his career that his only 1st-team All Star selection was in 2000! (for a guy who started in 1983)

 

[Big Phil]

His most famous goal is not on that video either. Weird.

Double overtime Game 7 in 1996 I assume?

Indeed. It's an oddity of his career that his only 1st-team All Star selection was in 2000! (for a guy who started in 1983)

For the longest time his only award was the Pearson in 1989, which, let's face it, should have been Mario's. Yzerman probably isn't considered to be the best centre in the NHL on anyone's lists in 2000. But there were some issues. Sakic missed 20 games, Modano was the 2nd team all-star, Lindros and Forsberg missed time, Yashin held out the entire season, Mario hadn't made his comeback yet and a bunch of players from the 1980s were older. But, he was a 1st team all-star, and a Selke winner, so there's that.

 

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

For whatever reason I havent seen that much of the first ten years of Yzerman as much as late career, but even with a bum knee, Ive never found the whole "Consumate checker putting scoring aside" narrative to hold any water.

Hes a perfect blend of speed, stickhandling, shot, hockeysense, puck battles, even physicality for a star player

Ive said before if I can have five of any player on the ice with a minute to tie the game with my life on the line Id take five Yzermans over literally anyone else. I
particularly like how he tends to drive to the net where Lemieux/Gretzky would work the perimeter too long

 

[tinyzombies]

I was furious when Keenan cut him for Dirk Graham from the 1991 Canada Cup. His game changed as the game itself changed. He excelled at everything he was asked to do.

 

[The Panther]

Yzerman's rookie season in 1983-84 is really, really impressive. 39 goals with only 177 shots on net, so he was already an elite NHL shooter. 55 even strength points. And he led the Wings in scoring. Then, he even scored 6 points in four playoff games, though they lost.

 

[hacksaw7]

To me the younger, more dynamic Yzerman IS the real Yzerman. And the dead puck era 2 way sacrificing forward is kind of the restrained more mature Yzerman

 

[hacksaw7]

Is it considered "old" now to remember Yzerman's dynamic offensive years? I guess. So maybe for me I'll say heck no, I don't forget. He was dynamic, an absolute treat to watch play the game. There would be a buzz when the Wings came into Toronto. Yzerman was always the star attraction. Here is a video with Yzerman's top 10 goals. This is the Stevie Wonder I remember. And look at the goals, many of them in the 1990s or early 2000s. I would say Yzerman was that guy broken up in two spots. Up until his knee injury in 1994 he was a lot more dynamic, almost like he had a magic wand with his stick. And his skating was better. But 1994-'02 he still scored some doozies of a goal! He had the hands right up until the end. The 2002 surgery ended it all, but Yzerman in the dead puck era was still making defenders look like fools. That #1 goal on this video, that's the Yzerman I remember.



By the way, I have no idea why this goal vs. the Hawks wasn't on that video. Anyway, this is arguably his prettiest goal.




Obviously we remember the Cup winning Yzerman too. A guy who had lost some of his offense but took on a different role as more of a leader and two way guy. Red Kelly and Scott Stevens are two other players that come to mind who changed their game and won several Cups afterwards. However, I don't know why people think Yzerman was some plug offensively at that time. He was still very dangerous offensively, even in the late 1990s/early 2000s.

Yea there were a slew of golden oldies in the NHL in the late 90's early 2000s that you could say the same of...old 80 and early 90s stars who shone during the firewagon 80s. And they were still putting up solid numbers even in the dead puck era. Guys like Messier, Oates, Nieuwendyk, Gilmour, Francis, Robitaille

 

[Sentinel]

Jagr's take:

 

[JianYang]

To me, there is the yzerman before bowman, and the yzerman during bowman.

Certainly, I remember the bowman version of yzerman because I was a bit too young to remember yzerman very much before this time, and also, the bowman era yzerman won cups, so yes, the earlier yzerman is kind of forgotten. I just remember collecting hockey cards in the early 90s, and looking at how astounding his career numbers were at the time.

 

[Boxscore]

The answer is YES imho.

Young Yzerman was absolutely filthy. I had him behind Gretz and Mario as the best forward on the planet for years. In fact, young Yzerman was as great--or a shade better--than Crosby as his best. His only problem is that he faced prime 99 and 66. Even on some dog Wings teams, Yzerman was a complete monster.

When most fans talk about Yzerman, it seems as if they reminisce about older Yzerman who was a 2-way vet, winning Cups with those stacked Detroit teams, and not the young, ultra-dynamic Yzerman who was draw-dropping.

 

[86Habs]

Would it be a fair take to say that Yzerman at his peak (~1987 to ~1994) was most comparable to McDavid, of all current NHLers? Yzerman never had McDavid's straight-ahead speed, but he was an elite skater in his right, in terms of speed acceleration, and incredibly agile. His stickhandling ability was on-par with McDavid, imo, but Yzerman was a better shooter and had a willingness to take the shot or drive to the hole when needed. McDavid has superior vision, I believe. All my opinion. I don't recall Yzerman ever being spoken of as a "generational talent", like McDavid has (rightfully) been, but I find people underrate Yzerman's elite innate talent nowadays in favour of their image of him hobbling around on one leg, or blocking shots, or hoisting the Cup.

I've posted on this before, but I've always found it strange how Yzerman is typically ranked below Sakic in most all-time rankings; the eye test tells me that Yzerman was a notably superior player at his peak and over the course of his prime, even if didn't maintain his offensive consistency over the entirety of his career as Sakic did. Sakic had the more elite shooting ability (as in, arguably one of the best 5-10 shots of all time, versus Yzerman having merely an elite shot for his time), but I think Yzerman did basically everything else a little better than Sakic. Skating? Yzerman (easily). Stickhandling? Yzerman. Passing/vision? Yzerman. Yzerman peaked higher defensively, though Sakic was very good in his own right for an offensive center and combined offense/defense a little better than Yzerman did, though of course there is nuance to that part of the discussion.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

The answer is YES imho.

Young Yzerman was absolutely filthy. I had him behind Gretz and Mario as the best forward on the planet for years. In fact, young Yzerman was as great--or a shade better--than Crosby as his best. His only problem is that he faced prime 99 and 66. Even on some dog Wings teams, Yzerman was a complete monster.

When most fans talk about Yzerman, it seems as if they reminisce about older Yzerman who was a 2-way vet, winning Cups with those stacked Detroit teams, and not the young, ultra-dynamic Yzerman who was draw-dropping.

Footage from the 90s onward is much easier to find than grainy footage from the 80s is part of the reason people don't realize how good he was. The other part is Detroit was much more successful from 1992-93 onward.

Also there was only so much spotlight to go around. Lemieux and Gretzky took most of it, and then Messier had the cup wins in 1990 and 1994 without #99. But Yzerman was, in my opinion, the 3rd best forward in the league from 1987 until 1993. And even after that he was still right up there amongst the best in the league.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Would it be a fair take to say that Yzerman at his peak (~1987 to ~1994) was most comparable to McDavid, of all current NHLers? Yzerman never had McDavid's straight-ahead speed, but he was an elite skater in his right, in terms of speed acceleration, and incredibly agile. His stickhandling ability was on-par with McDavid, imo, but Yzerman was a better shooter and had a willingness to take the shot or drive to the hole when needed. McDavid has superior vision, I believe. All my opinion. I don't recall Yzerman ever being spoken of as a "generational talent", like McDavid has (rightfully) been, but I find people underrate Yzerman's elite innate talent nowadays in favour of their image of him hobbling around on one leg, or blocking shots, or hoisting the Cup.

I've posted on this before, but I've always found it strange how Yzerman is typically ranked below Sakic in most all-time rankings; the eye test tells me that Yzerman was a notably superior player at his peak and over the course of his prime, even if didn't maintain his offensive consistency over the entirety of his career as Sakic did. Sakic had the more elite shooting ability (as in, arguably one of the best 5-10 shots of all time, versus Yzerman having merely an elite shot for his time), but I think Yzerman did basically everything else a little better than Sakic. Skating? Yzerman (easily). Stickhandling? Yzerman. Passing/vision? Yzerman. Yzerman peaked higher defensively, though Sakic was very good in his own right for an offensive center and combined offense/defense a little better than Yzerman did, though of course there is nuance to that part of the discussion.

It's already been said, but Crosby is about as close to a Steve Yzerman clone as you're going to see. Both are the kinds of players that would cut off their arm to score the go ahead goal, then go back to the dressing room to get it stitched back on and come back to finish the rest of the game. McDavid is a different beast entirely. With Crosby and Yzerman the drive was to win. With McDavid it seems like the drive is to score.

 

[Sentinel]

It's already been said, but Crosby is about as close to a Steve Yzerman clone as you're going to see. Both are the kinds of players that would cut off their arm to score the go ahead goal, then go back to the dressing room to get it stitched back on and come back to finish the rest of the game. McDavid is a different beast entirely. With Crosby and Yzerman the drive was to win. With McDavid it seems like the drive is to score.

I don't remember Yzerman being made of glass.
In his first ten seasons he only missed a significant number of games once: in 1985-86.

 

[tabness]

I used to put up some old Wings games on YouTube and while some got copyright striked quickly, others remain (I have so much more that I wanted to put up but a while back Google thought it was "suspicious" that I tried to log into my account after updating my phone and locked me out... our future lives with AI lol)

You can see a bit of Yzerman in his younger years though:







For a quicker look, here's a highlight video I did of Yzerman against the Lightning in two games during the 1992-1993 season, you get a more condensed video on how he played (to the tune of the nice Jefferson Starship "We Built This City" joint written for the Wings):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKqtJCRJpQQ

For a shift by shift take like Cambie Kev does so nicely, I also liked this clip of Yzerman's penalty killing in the third game 2 of the 1993 playoffs against the Leafs. The Wings took so many penalties including their some of their other big penalty killers, so tons of consecutive shifts of Yzerman, including some at righty defense lol (Fedorov wasn't the only one who could do this):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNOHVbB1OV4

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

I don't remember Yzerman being made of glass.
In his first ten seasons he only missed a significant number of games once: in 1985-86.

Crosby had some serious injury issues but there were a few pretty bad concussions. And you're forgetting Yzerman's problems in 1993-94 that allowed for Fedorov's emergence. Then the knee problems from 2000 until 2003. Different times, my dude.

 

[JackSlater]

Jagr's take:

I like that. Jagr is pretty much a walking history at this point.

Would it be a fair take to say that Yzerman at his peak (~1987 to ~1994) was most comparable to McDavid, of all current NHLers? Yzerman never had McDavid's straight-ahead speed, but he was an elite skater in his right, in terms of speed acceleration, and incredibly agile. His stickhandling ability was on-par with McDavid, imo, but Yzerman was a better shooter and had a willingness to take the shot or drive to the hole when needed. McDavid has superior vision, I believe. All my opinion. I don't recall Yzerman ever being spoken of as a "generational talent", like McDavid has (rightfully) been, but I find people underrate Yzerman's elite innate talent nowadays in favour of their image of him hobbling around on one leg, or blocking shots, or hoisting the Cup.

I've posted on this before, but I've always found it strange how Yzerman is typically ranked below Sakic in most all-time rankings; the eye test tells me that Yzerman was a notably superior player at his peak and over the course of his prime, even if didn't maintain his offensive consistency over the entirety of his career as Sakic did. Sakic had the more elite shooting ability (as in, arguably one of the best 5-10 shots of all time, versus Yzerman having merely an elite shot for his time), but I think Yzerman did basically everything else a little better than Sakic. Skating? Yzerman (easily). Stickhandling? Yzerman. Passing/vision? Yzerman. Yzerman peaked higher defensively, though Sakic was very good in his own right for an offensive center and combined offense/defense a little better than Yzerman did, though of course there is nuance to that part of the discussion.

I agree, I don't think it's as simple as looking at Sakic's superior number of top ten scoring placements (for example) and claiming that Sakic was the clearly better player. In fact, I think that the shift toward people claiming that Sakic was clearly better is in and of itself evidence that the dynamic Yzerman is being forgotten. That isn't to say that Yzerman is definitely better, but over time the players get forgotten and people are just left comparing resume bullet points.

 

[Sentinel]

Crosby had some serious injury issues but there were a few pretty bad concussions. And you're forgetting Yzerman's problems in 1993-94 that allowed for Fedorov's emergence. Then the knee problems from 2000 until 2003. Different times, my dude.

I said "first ten seasons."

 

[Big Phil]

Would it be a fair take to say that Yzerman at his peak (~1987 to ~1994) was most comparable to McDavid, of all current NHLers? Yzerman never had McDavid's straight-ahead speed, but he was an elite skater in his right, in terms of speed acceleration, and incredibly agile. His stickhandling ability was on-par with McDavid, imo, but Yzerman was a better shooter and had a willingness to take the shot or drive to the hole when needed. McDavid has superior vision, I believe. All my opinion. I don't recall Yzerman ever being spoken of as a "generational talent", like McDavid has (rightfully) been, but I find people underrate Yzerman's elite innate talent nowadays in favour of their image of him hobbling around on one leg, or blocking shots, or hoisting the Cup.

I've posted on this before, but I've always found it strange how Yzerman is typically ranked below Sakic in most all-time rankings; the eye test tells me that Yzerman was a notably superior player at his peak and over the course of his prime, even if didn't maintain his offensive consistency over the entirety of his career as Sakic did. Sakic had the more elite shooting ability (as in, arguably one of the best 5-10 shots of all time, versus Yzerman having merely an elite shot for his time), but I think Yzerman did basically everything else a little better than Sakic. Skating? Yzerman (easily). Stickhandling? Yzerman. Passing/vision? Yzerman. Yzerman peaked higher defensively, though Sakic was very good in his own right for an offensive center and combined offense/defense a little better than Yzerman did, though of course there is nuance to that part of the discussion.

Yes. Absolutely. A peak Yzerman was as good as McDavid today, I think. Definitely as dynamic and jaw dropping.

Yzerman's rookie season in 1983-84 is really, really impressive. 39 goals with only 177 shots on net, so he was already an elite NHL shooter. 55 even strength points. And he led the Wings in scoring. Then, he even scored 6 points in four playoff games, though they lost.

And he made the 1984 Canada Cup. Sather was the coach for that team, and I tend to think that he makes the 1987 and 1991 teams if he is coaching again. At the very least the 1991 team.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I agree, I don't think it's as simple as looking at Sakic's superior number of top ten scoring placements (for example) and claiming that Sakic was the clearly better player. In fact, I think that the shift toward people claiming that Sakic was clearly better is in and of itself evidence that the dynamic Yzerman is being forgotten. That isn't to say that Yzerman is definitely better, but over time the players get forgotten and people are just left comparing resume bullet points.

i think all of this is true

but i also think the young dynamic yzerman was overrated, partially because of how dynamic he was, and that it took a while to get over the cognitive dissonance of sakic being on that level

when i started watching, starting 1989 but not really figuring out who was who and what was what until around '91, there was gretzky and mario, then there was yzerman, then there was everybody else. for a long time, there was this idea that in the late 80s/early 90s, if there was no gretzky or mario, yzerman would be winning multiple art ross and hart trophies.

but then you look back and obviously 1989 was a very special year. but while he was extremely competitive in his '88 to '93 offensive peak, in no other year of that stretch was he head and shoulders above the pack.

'88 was yzerman's breakout year and he finishes fourth for the hart trophy. but statistically, he's behind denis savard in per game scoring and falls out of the top ten in actual points because he missed 16 games

in 1990, he's right there with peak messier (two points back). that's very good, obviously, but again he's not head and shoulders above the pack

'91 was a bit of a dud year from him. "only" 7th in scoring, including behind a 21 year old sakic

'92 was more of the same, 7th again, tied with young breakout roenick

then back up to the big boys in '93, with a very strong 4th place between career statistical years by oates and turgeon/selanne

which is to say, i think peak yzerman as a scoring force was closer to the stastny/savard/hawerchuk group than we thought at the time, but for 1989.

meanwhile, sakic kind of snuck up on you. he finally broke out as a creme de la creme top scorer in '95, but it got a little swept under the radar because it was the lockout year. then after his magical 1996 season, he has a handful of injured years, before reemerging with another magical september to may tour de force in 2001. and i think especially because '97 and '98 were kind of down years for him made us not fully appreciate how elite his injury-abbreviated '99 and 2000 were. and i think it really wasn't until the older sakic hitting 100 in 2007 when a lot of people looked back and were like, whoa you know what, this is maybe a top 30-40 all time career.

i'm agnostic on sakic vs yzerman but this is my feel on the ebbs and flows of the 19 vs 19 debate.

 

[tabness]

Would it be a fair take to say that Yzerman at his peak (~1987 to ~1994) was most comparable to McDavid, of all current NHLers? Yzerman never had McDavid's straight-ahead speed, but he was an elite skater in his right, in terms of speed acceleration, and incredibly agile. His stickhandling ability was on-par with McDavid, imo, but Yzerman was a better shooter and had a willingness to take the shot or drive to the hole when needed. McDavid has superior vision, I believe. All my opinion. I don't recall Yzerman ever being spoken of as a "generational talent", like McDavid has (rightfully) been, but I find people underrate Yzerman's elite innate talent nowadays in favour of their image of him hobbling around on one leg, or blocking shots, or hoisting the Cup.

I've posted on this before, but I've always found it strange how Yzerman is typically ranked below Sakic in most all-time rankings; the eye test tells me that Yzerman was a notably superior player at his peak and over the course of his prime, even if didn't maintain his offensive consistency over the entirety of his career as Sakic did. Sakic had the more elite shooting ability (as in, arguably one of the best 5-10 shots of all time, versus Yzerman having merely an elite shot for his time), but I think Yzerman did basically everything else a little better than Sakic. Skating? Yzerman (easily). Stickhandling? Yzerman. Passing/vision? Yzerman. Yzerman peaked higher defensively, though Sakic was very good in his own right for an offensive center and combined offense/defense a little better than Yzerman did, though of course there is nuance to that part of the discussion.

I've generally seen Yzerman ranked above Sakic in general in the hockey world/media, on HFBoards and here, of course, given the way things are evaluated, Sakic seems to be more often ranked ahead, but I don't think that's generally the case outside.

I've never thought Sakic was the right comparable to Yzerman in the first place. I get why the comparison is made, due the some superficial similarities (captains, same number, born in British Columbia, quiet personalities, etc) during the Wings-Avs rivalry years, but like even in demeanor or what is said to be leadership style, it seems to me that say Lidstrom or Zetterberg were better comparable to Sakic than the more vocal Yzerman himself. Certainly in playstyle the two were different enough.

It's interesting that Sakic didn't get compared to Yzerman too much in the early nineties. Yzerman usually got compared to Gretzky and Lemieux themselves, or otherwise, what I consider to be the closest stylistic comparison, LaFontaine. Even then it isn't a perfect comparison, LaFontaine more of a straight ahead speed guy, low to the ground, whereas Yzerman would weave more, but at least both generally drove to the net with a frequency that Sakic didn't for example. Like Jagr said, Yzerman was one of a kind in the way he moved.

Here's a fun article from the St. Louis media on Hull and Yzerman, with the basketball comparisons. Aside from Gretzky and Lemieux, what can be more flattering than comparisons with Jordan stylistically?

i think all of this is true

but i also think the young dynamic yzerman was overrated, partially because of how dynamic he was, and that it took a while to get over the cognitive dissonance of sakic being on that level

when i started watching, starting 1989 but not really figuring out who was who and what was what until around '91, there was gretzky and mario, then there was yzerman, then there was everybody else. for a long time, there was this idea that in the late 80s/early 90s, if there was no gretzky or mario, yzerman would be winning multiple art ross and hart trophies.

but then you look back and obviously 1989 was a very special year. but while he was extremely competitive in his '88 to '93 offensive peak, in no other year of that stretch was he head and shoulders above the pack.

'88 was yzerman's breakout year and he finishes fourth for the hart trophy. but statistically, he's behind denis savard in per game scoring and falls out of the top ten in actual points because he missed 16 games

in 1990, he's right there with peak messier (two points back). that's very good, obviously, but again he's not head and shoulders above the pack

'91 was a bit of a dud year from him. "only" 7th in scoring, including behind a 21 year old sakic

'92 was more of the same, 7th again, tied with young breakout roenick

then back up to the big boys in '93, with a very strong 4th place between career statistical years by oates and turgeon/selanne

which is to say, i think peak yzerman as a scoring force was closer to the stastny/savard/hawerchuk group than we thought at the time, but for 1989.

meanwhile, sakic kind of snuck up on you. he finally broke out as a creme de la creme top scorer in '95, but it got a little swept under the radar because it was the lockout year. then after his magical 1996 season, he has a handful of injured years, before reemerging with another magical september to may tour de force in 2001. and i think especially because '97 and '98 were kind of down years for him made us not fully appreciate how elite his injury-abbreviated '99 and 2000 were. and i think it really wasn't until the older sakic hitting 100 in 2007 when a lot of people looked back and were like, whoa you know what, this is maybe a top 30-40 all time career.

i'm agnostic on sakic vs yzerman but this is my feel on the ebbs and flows of the 19 vs 19 debate.

Well scoring placements and the like will never really capture all that much. To use another player as an example, why is it that as early as the late eighties, LaFontaine is already considered to be among the best players in the world? To the point that he is mentioned among a very select few others (Lemieux, Yzerman, Messier, Bourque, Savard) in Gretzky's entry in the Hockey Scouting Report after 1989-1990 as one of the players who can be considered the best on any given night. His numbers are pretty low, there are several other forwards who have more points than him that he is considered better than, he only broke 100 points once with the Islanders. The thing was, at the time, it was given that LaFontaine was a man on an island in Long Island, he had probably the least help of any superstar of that period, and it wasn't surprising to many that he broke out in such a way when he went to Buffalo. Today you see how the hockey world and media rank LaFontaine, which doesn't jive with the way players are evaluated here, so it becomes a point of criticism. I find Fedorov often getting similar treatment nowadays, by people who maybe didn't watch too much of him and just go by stats, and I just have to shake my head... as if Fedorov couldn't have scored much more had he played somewhere else and not in Detroit during his prime lol

Yzerman same sort of story. Looking at his points together stats, of that era, aside from Islanders LaFontaine, who would be said to have less help/consistency with linemates?

Then there is Yzerman's powerplay scoring, which generally lagged quite a bit behind other superstars of the day? Why so low? Well earlier in the late eighties, when Yzerman played most of the powerplay, the Wings were pretty low in terms of powerplay opportunities, when the Wings had a ton of talent and started getting more powerplay opportunities and had a powerhouse powerplay, Yzerman split time and didn't play with Fedorov (in 1992-1993 the Wings scored 113 powerplay goals, Yzerman was on the ice for only 61 of them, he scored 41 points with only 3 powerplay points shared with Fedorov, when most of the other top scorers had 50-60 on less prolific powerplays).

Yzerman sometimes gets said to have inflated numbers since he played in the Norris division. Turns out, he scores less against the Norris than he does against the other divisions, until in the early nineties, by which time, the Norris is probably the best division in the league.

His even strength scoring, and especially road even strength scoring are really remarkable. He sees very little drop (and in some cases increases) on the road as compared to home, and makes it look a lot closer to Gretzky and Lemieux in points and Brett Hull in goals.

Eyeballing things, he seems to depend less on blowout goals and points for his scoring than most of his contemporaries, and he scores really well against the best defensive teams like Montreal and Boston. As Gerard Gallant said, Yzerman never cared about getting 50 goals or 100 points or individual milestones, he played to win and did what he had to do and it really shows in the numbers.

In the early nineties, Yzerman already had to share the icetime/scoring opportunities with what was considered to be the deepest team at center with Fedorov and Carson (this is called out in the Yzerman/Hull Jordan/Bird article as well).

I don't think it's as simple as saying something like Yzerman only lost out one scoring title to Gretzky and Lemieux, so he wasn't clearly the best offensive player aside from them. All of the underlying numbers strongly suggest his numbers, far from being inflated, were likely deflated compared to other superstars.

 

[MadLuke]

I don't think it's as simple as saying something like Yzerman only lost out one scoring title to Gretzky and Lemieux, so he wasn't clearly the best offensive player aside from them. All of the underlying numbers strongly suggest his numbers, far from being inflated, were likely deflated compared to other superstars.

That do feel revisionist history it is true, there was a debate at the time was he the third best player (was it Messier, Roy, Bourque or Yzerman, etc...), but he was the clear third best offensive player of that era, separating himself from the rest of the pack quite well I think in that regard.