Legacy Of Los Hermanos Sedines?

[MarkusNaslund19]

Yeah, he no longer had an elite linemate anymore, literally his perfect linemate. Predictably his scoring dropped. It's what is made of it, as if him scoring a point per game is some very impressive thing when compared to the best players in the world. I'm mainly amazed that it gets brought up as a positive.

I'm pretty sure that Vancouver/Sedin fans would be the ones who get "emotional" about it. The Sedins didn't play some game that was difficult to grasp. The same weak argument gets brought out from time to time regarding Lidstrom and voters taking years to grasp what he was doing, as if it was something unique (it wasn't). Their game was very visible with a lot of puck possession. People who are not as invested in theirVancouver's success are just more likely to see them for what they were.



I would think Burrows and random fill ins. It's fine and something that sometimes happens with star centres. If Sedin played the whole season at that pace he would have finished tied for 14 in scoring, tied for 19 in points per game. Maybe he goes up a little with more stability, but he also wouldn't get to ride a ~25% shooting percentage for a whole season. I'm pretty confident that that is the general level of Sedin. Again it's fine what he did but it gets brought up as some big plus when it's not all that great.

I guess you should cherry pick all of his competition's most adverse stretches too then eh? Or were you just going to continue to pit his 'worst' stretch (ppg without anything resembling decent linemates for 20 games, when he won the art ross overall) against the other stars' entire seasons?

Whatever mental gymnastics you have to do to discredit them is up to you. It's just sports fandom after all. But your argument is nonsensical and shows either some kind of bias or ignorance I'm afraid.

 

[RANDOMH3RO]

they have a very unique legacy that will almost certainly never be replicated. Twin brothers who played on a line together their entire careers and each won an art ross trophies will likely never happen again and that’s very cool.

 

[sr edler]

Also, for the thread record, Zdeno Chara was also a diver but he could always blame it on "poor balance", due to his flamingo legs. He even dove in fights (when he was about to lose) which always cracked me up.

 

[Neutrinos]

Their legacy should've been the only twins in a major league to win the MVP award in consecutive years...

I was never a big fan of the Sedins, but given that Daniel won the Ross by 5 points, I'm still disappointed the voters didn't seize the opportunity for that 1-in-a-trillion historical moment

And on a peronal note, I feel bad that Henrik will always have that over him

 

[MadLuke]

I guess you should cherry pick all of his competition's most adverse stretches too then eh? Or were you just going to continue to pit his 'worst' stretch (ppg without anything resembling decent linemates for 20 games, when he won the art ross overall) against the other stars' entire seasons?

Whatever mental gymnastics you have to do to discredit them is up to you. It's just sports fandom after all. But your argument is nonsensical and shows either some kind of bias or ignorance I'm afraid.

This is getting a bit of a strawmen, the comments (he was PPG without Daniel which is good but not amazing) was in reaction about people saying, not something that was brought up:

- Henrik did amazingly when Daniel was injured in his Art Ross year. Could have had incredible careers apart from each other, maybe, we will never know.

Henrik picked up the slack and lead the league.

 

[HFpapi]

I'm not even a Canucks fan but one of the great shames to me is that the Sedins didn't hit their stride during the "West Coast Express" era. It wouldn't been something to behold.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Whatever mental gymnastics you have to do to discredit them is up to you. It's just sports fandom after all. But your argument is nonsensical and shows either some kind of bias or ignorance I'm afraid.

I don't agree with that, and just because someone wasn't impressed by one of your favorite players doesn't make them biased or ignorant.

The Dedins scored a lot because they were good offensive players. They scored more because they had eachother. Then their scoring dried up in the post season because they did not play well under pressure.

Ask the guys who had to cover the sedins. They were not fun to handle. They were not "tough" in the traditional sense but it was very taxing trying to get the puck away from them and it would wear guys down as the games went on because they were masters at extending shifts in the ozone. To me that's a tough player, but not everyone agrees.

When I see their lack of playoff success, opposing teams shutdown forwards probably enjoyed playing against them.

 

[JackSlater]

I guess you should cherry pick all of his competition's most adverse stretches too then eh? Or were you just going to continue to pit his 'worst' stretch (ppg without anything resembling decent linemates for 20 games, when he won the art ross overall) against the other stars' entire seasons?

Whatever mental gymnastics you have to do to discredit them is up to you. It's just sports fandom after all. But your argument is nonsensical and shows either some kind of bias or ignorance I'm afraid.

I didn't cherry pick some random stretch and I don't know if it is his "worst" stretch. Multiple people brought up his play when his brother was out as some big positive - I don't see how to spin it as one. It's not a glaring negative either, but no one brought it up as one. It was brought up in 2010 during discussion of the Hart and it was just as perplexing at the time.

Again this is very similar to Toronto fans going on about Wendel Clark (or Matthews today or whoever else). I get it that you're a fan of the team since you think that this is some sort of example of bias or ignorance. It's ridiculous, but I get it. There's no banner that goes up for Henrik Sedin heroically scoring a point per game at his peak without his twin brother next to him though. When the fans of a team claim that more or less everyone else is against their player or just plain wrong about their player.... it's almost never everyone else who is wrong. I trust fans of a team for details on how someone played but several posts in this thread demonstrate why it is hard to trust them for judgements when it comes to quality.

 

[JianYang]

I don't agree with that, and just because someone wasn't impressed by one of your favorite players doesn't make them biased or ignorant.

The Dedins scored a lot because they were good offensive players. They scored more because they had eachother. Then their scoring dried up in the post season because they did not play well under pressure.



When I see their lack of playoff success, opposing teams shutdown forwards probably enjoyed playing against them.

They were pretty good playoff players post lockout 1.0.

They ran into to a better blackhawks team few times during their window. In general, I didn't think their limiting factor was the sedins. They had some pretty good balance on the backend but they didn't have their version a top end #1 guy like Duncan Keith, and I thought luongo was sketchy from time to time.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

I have to think a fair amount of the “sedin hate” is due to a lot of Vancouver fans being loud and obnoxious when the Sedins were at the top of their game and that has tarnished them, unfairly, in some people’s eyes

 

[Gorskyontario]

They were pretty good playoff players post lockout 1.0.

They ran into to a better blackhawks team few times during their window. In general, I didn't think their limiting factor was the sedins. They had some pretty good balance on the backend but they didn't have their version a top end #1 guy like Duncan Keith, and I thought luongo was sketchy from time to time.

They both have 70 points in 100 games.

 

[JianYang]

They both have 70 points in 100 games.

So you are including the time when they were secondary players behind naslund/morrisson/bertuzzi. Their regular season numbers back then were pretty pedestrian too.

Their numbers took off after lockout 1.0 as I mentioned above.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

I didn't cherry pick some random stretch and I don't know if it is his "worst" stretch. Multiple people brought up his play when his brother was out as some big positive - I don't see how to spin it as one. It's not a glaring negative either, but no one brought it up as one. It was brought up in 2010 during discussion of the Hart and it was just as perplexing at the time.

Again this is very similar to Toronto fans going on about Wendel Clark (or Matthews today or whoever else). I get it that you're a fan of the team since you think that this is some sort of example of bias or ignorance. It's ridiculous, but I get it. There's no banner that goes up for Henrik Sedin heroically scoring a point per game at his peak without his twin brother next to him though. When the fans of a team claim that more or less everyone else is against their player or just plain wrong about their player.... it's almost never everyone else who is wrong. I trust fans of a team for details on how someone played but several posts in this thread demonstrate why it is hard to trust them for judgements when it comes to quality.

But he literally won the Hart Trophy that season.

So for all of the doubters who said, 'well let's see how he does without his twin bro" he played a quarter of a season without him and won the art ross and hart trophy that year. So I'm really not sure what you think you're saying on this one.

 

[JackSlater]

But he literally won the Hart Trophy that season.

So for all of the doubters who said, 'well let's see how he does without his twin bro" he played a quarter of a season without him and won the art ross and hart trophy that year. So I'm really not sure what you think you're saying on this one.

Yes I know that Sedin won the Hart. He was not the most valuable or best player in the NHL, but the Hart has loads of mistakes. He isn't even one of the worst choices.

I am saying that Sedin's play when his brother wasn't there gets talked up as a big plus, as cited in this thread, and that I have seen no evidence that it is. It's fine, but not amazing or whatever else it is sometimes cited as. Obviously he didn't just fall off the map when Daniel was gone - I don't think that reasonable people expected that he would. Two crappy players can't turn each other into stars. Two stars with incredible chemistry can make each other look like superstars though. With his play however he did significantly drop in terms of production, and I think the thing that some Vancouver fans don't get is that a lot of people think that Henrik/Daniel made each other look better than they were due to the incredible novelty of their situation. Henrik's run when Daniel was out of the lineup actually completely supports that view, but it is often cited as the opposite.

I'll also suggest that most people, and generally the typical non-Vancouver fan in this thread, are not biased against the Sedins or out to get them or twinphobic or whatever other conspiracy may get floated. They aren't that relevant to most franchises. A lot of people just don't think that the Sedins are as good as their fans think they are.

 

[Gorskyontario]

So you are including the time when they were secondary players behind naslund/morrisson/bertuzzi. Their regular season numbers back then were pretty pedestrian too.

Their numbers took off after lockout 1.0 as I mentioned above.

I just look at the points, I don't make excuses. Henrik Sedin had 1 point in 7 games against the bruins in 2011.

 

[Dingo]

very important to me not to be mistaken on here for a Canucks fan.

Particularly THAT group of Canucks.

 

[MadLuke]

They were pretty good playoff players post lockout 1.0.

What surprise me a bit his their goal against in the playoff, they have such good puck possession...

From 2009 to 2012, 39 GF, 38 GA, despite a large domination when it come to shots, maybe a bit of bad luck.

 

[RI.B FAN]

Marchand

 

[Stephen]

I want to petition to get this thread changed to "Sedin Twins" rather than "Sedin Brothers." I just don't remember anyone calling them that.

 

[Johnny Engine]

I want to petition to get this thread changed to "Sedin Twins" rather than "Sedin Brothers." I just don't remember anyone calling them that.

I've done a lot of good in this section tonight, so I decided to do something silly instead.
It'll be back to normal in a bit.

 

[Stephen]

I've done a lot of good in this section tonight, so I decided to do something silly instead.
It'll be back to normal in a bit.

The Twins approve!

 

[trentmccleary]

They were clearly first liners for a significant portion of their careers who peaked very high and won major awards. However, their peaks and primes were notably shorter, that without the trophies they are likely bubble players to be inducted into the HHOF.

This is the kind of thing that I mean. This is a PPG per season table showing most of the stars from the 2000's (Thornton, Alfredsson, St. Louis, Datsyuk, Iginla, Kariya, Hossa, Zetterberg, Daniel Sedin, Henrik Sedin, Elias, Whitney, Lecavalier, Richards, Kovalev, Naslund, Marleau and Yashin).
This is a quick way to compare the level players were at during their whole careers; showing their peaks, primes and lower scoring years all at once.

JT

DA

MSL

PD

JI

PK

MH

HZ

DS

HS

PE

RW

VL

BR

AK27

Mnas

PM

AY

1.54​

1.34​

1.25​

1.20​

1.34​

1.43​

1.22​

1.23​

1.35​

1.37​

1.18​

1.02​

1.32​

1.14​

1.20​

1.27​

1.05​

1.15​

1.39​

1.27​

1.24​

1.18​

1.20​

1.32​

1.15​

1.10​

1.27​

1.15​

1.15​

0.94​

1.14​

1.11​

1.13​

1.11​

1.01​

1.07​

1.31​

1.13​

1.21​

1.16​

1.17​

1.23​

1.01​

1.08​

1.04​

1.00​

1.00​

0.94​

0.98​

1.07​

1.02​

1.08​

1.01​

0.96​

1.17​

1.04​

1.15​

1.10​

1.09​

1.16​

1.00​

1.07​

1.00​

0.99​

0.99​

0.94​

0.94​

0.96​

0.99​

1.04​

0.93​

0.95​

1.13​

1.04​

1.15​

1.05​

1.05​

1.04​

0.96​

1.04​

0.93​

0.99​

0.96​

0.92​

0.87​

0.93​

0.94​

0.98​

0.89​

0.94​

1.05​

1.03​

1.01​

1.04​

0.92​

1.02​

0.95​

1.00​

0.93​

0.94​

0.92​

0.91​

0.85​

0.86​

0.83​

0.83​

0.85​

0.91​

1.03​

1.01​

0.98​

1.03​

0.90​

0.99​

0.93​

0.95​

0.90​

0.93​

0.83​

0.91​

0.84​

0.85​

0.80​

0.79​

0.78​

0.88​

1.00​

1.00​

0.96​

0.96​

0.89​

0.93​

0.92​

0.95​

0.87​

0.91​

0.82​

0.88​

0.83​

0.84​

0.78​

0.73​

0.71​

0.86​

0.99​

0.94​

0.85​

0.91​

0.84​

0.83​

0.89​

0.86​

0.85​

0.89​

0.81​

0.87​

0.82​

0.80​

0.74​

0.72​

0.70​

0.85​

0.95​

0.93​

0.85​

0.88​

0.82​

0.79​

0.88​

0.84​

0.74​

0.74​

0.77​

0.84​

0.81​

0.76​

0.73​

0.67​

0.70​

0.80​

0.94​

0.91​

0.76​

0.82​

0.82​

0.71​

0.83​

0.83​

0.68​

0.71​

0.75​

0.79​

0.77​

0.76​

0.72​

0.56​

0.65​

0.80​

0.93​

0.82​

0.70​

0.80​

0.82​

0.70​

0.83​

0.70​

0.66​

0.61​

0.74​

0.76​

0.75​

0.74​

0.69​

0.53​

0.64​

0.72​

0.88​

0.79​

0.66​

0.74​

0.78​

0.57​

0.78​

0.68​

0.64​

0.61​

0.70​

0.74​

0.54​

0.62​

0.64​

0.45​

0.62​

_

0.83​

0.74​

0.51​

0.50​

0.75​

_

0.74​

0.61​

0.54​

0.55​

0.68​

0.73​

0.49​

0.49​

0.64​

0.15​

0.59​

_

0.83​

0.72​

0.32​

_

0.72​

_

0.72​

0.56​

0.45​

0.50​

0.50​

0.68​

0.37​

0.41​

0.58​

_

0.57​

_

0.77​

0.57​

0.15​

_

0.62​

_

0.62​

_

0.41​

0.44​

0.49​

0.66​

0.35​

_

0.58​

_

0.56​

_

0.74​

0.57​

_

_

0.61​

_

0.52​

_

0.39​

0.35​

_

0.64​

0.34​

_

0.58​

_

0.56​

_

0.63​

0.55​

_

_

0.57​

_

0.50​

_

_

_

_

0.64​

_

_

0.46​

_

0.56​

_

0.51​

_

_

_

0.46​

_

_

_

_

_

_

0.46​

_

_

_

_

_

_

0.13​

_

_

_

0.34​

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

To the left of the Sedins, you see long time first liners who are generally in the HHOF or are likely to make it. To the right of the Sedins, you see first liners whose primes weren't as long. None have been inducted into the HHOF and most never will.

Here's an expanded table of players sorted by their PPG in their best 10 seasons.

Player	GP	G	A	Pts	GPG	PPG
Forsberg	67​	24​	61​	85​	0.37​	1.28​
Lindros	62​	35​	44​	79​	0.56​	1.28​
Thornton	79​	26​	65​	91​	0.33​	1.16​
Palffy	65​	32​	38​	70​	0.49​	1.08​
Kariya	78​	33​	51​	84​	0.43​	1.08​
Alfredsson	73​	30​	48​	78​	0.41​	1.07​
St. Louis	81​	31​	55​	86​	0.39​	1.06​
Datsyuk	74​	27​	51​	78​	0.36​	1.05​
Getzlaf	73​	20​	55​	75​	0.28​	1.04​
Kovalchuk	77​	40​	39​	79​	0.52​	1.03​
Iginla	80​	39​	42​	81​	0.49​	1.02​
Spezza	73​	27​	46​	73​	0.37​	1.01​
Hossa	75​	34​	41​	75​	0.45​	1.00​
Zetterberg	73​	27​	46​	73​	0.37​	1.00​
D.Sedin	79​	29​	49​	78​	0.37​	0.99​
H.Sedin	81​	17​	63​	80​	0.21​	0.99​
Demitra	68​	27​	40​	67​	0.39​	0.98​
Heatley	79​	36​	41​	77​	0.46​	0.98​
Elias	71​	27​	41​	68​	0.39​	0.97​
Lecavalier	78​	32​	42​	74​	0.41​	0.95​
Staal	81​	34​	43​	77​	0.42​	0.95​
Yashin	75​	31​	40​	71​	0.41​	0.94​
B.Richards	77​	22​	50​	72​	0.29​	0.93​
Gaborik	68​	31​	31​	62​	0.46​	0.92​
Whitney	74​	25​	43​	68​	0.34​	0.92​
Kovalev	73​	28​	39​	67​	0.38​	0.92​
Kessel	76​	30​	40​	70​	0.40​	0.92​
Bergeron	75​	29​	39​	68​	0.39​	0.91​
Pavelski	80​	32​	40​	72​	0.40​	0.90​
Naslund	80​	33​	40​	73​	0.41​	0.89​
Tanguay	74​	22​	43​	65​	0.30​	0.89​
Hejduk	77​	32​	34​	67​	0.42​	0.87​
Perry	77​	33​	34​	67​	0.43​	0.87​
Marleau	81​	32​	37​	69​	0.40​	0.86​
Nash	75​	35​	30​	65​	0.46​	0.86​
Smyth	75​	28​	32​	60​	0.38​	0.81​
Doan	78​	25​	37​	62​	0.32​	0.80​

Once again, we see a clear division around the Sedins. The players above them are mostly in the HHOF or will be inducted, while the guys below them aren't and in most cases won't.

When I look at tables like these, gaps are noticeable been tiers of players.
Generational players (Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid) - guys who were first liners for their entire careers and competing for scoring leads almost as long. Surefire HHOF'er.
Superstars (Sakic, Selanne) - guys who were first liners for almost all of their careers and competed for scoring leads often. Non-debatable HHOF'er.
Stars plus (St. Louis, Kariya, Iginla, Alfredsson, Sundin, Modano) - guys with long careers as first liners who had a handful of top-10 seasons. Likely HHOF'ers who tend to draw more criticism from fans with high HHOF standards.
Stars minus (Lecavalier, Yashin, Whitney, Staal, Naslund, Kovalev) - guys who were first liners for a long time, but not as good or for as long as stars plus. They aren't likely to be inducted into the HHOF.

IMHO, the Sedins have a peak that looks like Star plus, but a longevity closer to Star minus. Which I think still puts them solidly in the Star plus category. They won major awards though and that tends to cause fans to greatly overrate players. It's like everybody who ever won a major award starts getting compared to Sakic and Selanne, when their peaks and primes are no where near comparable.

 

[Dingo]

They both have 70 points in 100 games.

might as well apply that to pre lockout Datsyuk as well, who was also buried in depth.

they were decent playoff performers in their primes

 

[The Panther]

They were clearly first liners for a significant portion of their careers who peaked very high and won major awards. However, their peaks and primes were notably shorter, that without the trophies they are likely bubble players to be inducted into the HHOF.

This is the kind of thing that I mean. This is a PPG per season table showing most of the stars from the 2000's (Thornton, Alfredsson, St. Louis, Datsyuk, Iginla, Kariya, Hossa, Zetterberg, Daniel Sedin, Henrik Sedin, Elias, Whitney, Lecavalier, Richards, Kovalev, Naslund, Marleau and Yashin).
This is a quick way to compare the level players were at during their whole careers; showing their peaks, primes and lower scoring years all at once.

JT

DA

MSL

PD

JI

PK

MH

HZ

DS

HS

PE

RW

VL

BR

AK27

Mnas

PM

AY

1.54​

1.34​

1.25​

1.20​

1.34​

1.43​

1.22​

1.23​

1.35​

1.37​

1.18​

1.02​

1.32​

1.14​

1.20​

1.27​

1.05​

1.15​

1.39​

1.27​

1.24​

1.18​

1.20​

1.32​

1.15​

1.10​

1.27​

1.15​

1.15​

0.94​

1.14​

1.11​

1.13​

1.11​

1.01​

1.07​

1.31​

1.13​

1.21​

1.16​

1.17​

1.23​

1.01​

1.08​

1.04​

1.00​

1.00​

0.94​

0.98​

1.07​

1.02​

1.08​

1.01​

0.96​

1.17​

1.04​

1.15​

1.10​

1.09​

1.16​

1.00​

1.07​

1.00​

0.99​

0.99​

0.94​

0.94​

0.96​

0.99​

1.04​

0.93​

0.95​

1.13​

1.04​

1.15​

1.05​

1.05​

1.04​

0.96​

1.04​

0.93​

0.99​

0.96​

0.92​

0.87​

0.93​

0.94​

0.98​

0.89​

0.94​

1.05​

1.03​

1.01​

1.04​

0.92​

1.02​

0.95​

1.00​

0.93​

0.94​

0.92​

0.91​

0.85​

0.86​

0.83​

0.83​

0.85​

0.91​

1.03​

1.01​

0.98​

1.03​

0.90​

0.99​

0.93​

0.95​

0.90​

0.93​

0.83​

0.91​

0.84​

0.85​

0.80​

0.79​

0.78​

0.88​

1.00​

1.00​

0.96​

0.96​

0.89​

0.93​

0.92​

0.95​

0.87​

0.91​

0.82​

0.88​

0.83​

0.84​

0.78​

0.73​

0.71​

0.86​

0.99​

0.94​

0.85​

0.91​

0.84​

0.83​

0.89​

0.86​

0.85​

0.89​

0.81​

0.87​

0.82​

0.80​

0.74​

0.72​

0.70​

0.85​

0.95​

0.93​

0.85​

0.88​

0.82​

0.79​

0.88​

0.84​

0.74​

0.74​

0.77​

0.84​

0.81​

0.76​

0.73​

0.67​

0.70​

0.80​

0.94​

0.91​

0.76​

0.82​

0.82​

0.71​

0.83​

0.83​

0.68​

0.71​

0.75​

0.79​

0.77​

0.76​

0.72​

0.56​

0.65​

0.80​

0.93​

0.82​

0.70​

0.80​

0.82​

0.70​

0.83​

0.70​

0.66​

0.61​

0.74​

0.76​

0.75​

0.74​

0.69​

0.53​

0.64​

0.72​

0.88​

0.79​

0.66​

0.74​

0.78​

0.57​

0.78​

0.68​

0.64​

0.61​

0.70​

0.74​

0.54​

0.62​

0.64​

0.45​

0.62​

_

0.83​

0.74​

0.51​

0.50​

0.75​

_

0.74​

0.61​

0.54​

0.55​

0.68​

0.73​

0.49​

0.49​

0.64​

0.15​

0.59​

_

0.83​

0.72​

0.32​

_

0.72​

_

0.72​

0.56​

0.45​

0.50​

0.50​

0.68​

0.37​

0.41​

0.58​

_

0.57​

_

0.77​

0.57​

0.15​

_

0.62​

_

0.62​

_

0.41​

0.44​

0.49​

0.66​

0.35​

_

0.58​

_

0.56​

_

0.74​

0.57​

_

_

0.61​

_

0.52​

_

0.39​

0.35​

_

0.64​

0.34​

_

0.58​

_

0.56​

_

0.63​

0.55​

_

_

0.57​

_

0.50​

_

_

_

_

0.64​

_

_

0.46​

_

0.56​

_

0.51​

_

_

_

0.46​

_

_

_

_

_

_

0.46​

_

_

_

_

_

_

0.13​

_

_

_

0.34​

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

_

To the left of the Sedins, you see long time first liners who are generally in the HHOF or are likely to make it. To the right of the Sedins, you see first liners whose primes weren't as long. None have been inducted into the HHOF and most never will.

Here's an expanded table of players sorted by their PPG in their best 10 seasons.

Player	GP	G	A	Pts	GPG	PPG
Forsberg	67​	24​	61​	85​	0.37​	1.28​
Lindros	62​	35​	44​	79​	0.56​	1.28​
Thornton	79​	26​	65​	91​	0.33​	1.16​
Palffy	65​	32​	38​	70​	0.49​	1.08​
Kariya	78​	33​	51​	84​	0.43​	1.08​
Alfredsson	73​	30​	48​	78​	0.41​	1.07​
St. Louis	81​	31​	55​	86​	0.39​	1.06​
Datsyuk	74​	27​	51​	78​	0.36​	1.05​
Getzlaf	73​	20​	55​	75​	0.28​	1.04​
Kovalchuk	77​	40​	39​	79​	0.52​	1.03​
Iginla	80​	39​	42​	81​	0.49​	1.02​
Spezza	73​	27​	46​	73​	0.37​	1.01​
Hossa	75​	34​	41​	75​	0.45​	1.00​
Zetterberg	73​	27​	46​	73​	0.37​	1.00​
D.Sedin	79​	29​	49​	78​	0.37​	0.99​
H.Sedin	81​	17​	63​	80​	0.21​	0.99​
Demitra	68​	27​	40​	67​	0.39​	0.98​
Heatley	79​	36​	41​	77​	0.46​	0.98​
Elias	71​	27​	41​	68​	0.39​	0.97​
Lecavalier	78​	32​	42​	74​	0.41​	0.95​
Staal	81​	34​	43​	77​	0.42​	0.95​
Yashin	75​	31​	40​	71​	0.41​	0.94​
B.Richards	77​	22​	50​	72​	0.29​	0.93​
Gaborik	68​	31​	31​	62​	0.46​	0.92​
Whitney	74​	25​	43​	68​	0.34​	0.92​
Kovalev	73​	28​	39​	67​	0.38​	0.92​
Kessel	76​	30​	40​	70​	0.40​	0.92​
Bergeron	75​	29​	39​	68​	0.39​	0.91​
Pavelski	80​	32​	40​	72​	0.40​	0.90​
Naslund	80​	33​	40​	73​	0.41​	0.89​
Tanguay	74​	22​	43​	65​	0.30​	0.89​
Hejduk	77​	32​	34​	67​	0.42​	0.87​
Perry	77​	33​	34​	67​	0.43​	0.87​
Marleau	81​	32​	37​	69​	0.40​	0.86​
Nash	75​	35​	30​	65​	0.46​	0.86​
Smyth	75​	28​	32​	60​	0.38​	0.81​
Doan	78​	25​	37​	62​	0.32​	0.80​

Once again, we see a clear division around the Sedins. The players above them are mostly in the HHOF or will be inducted, while the guys below them aren't and in most cases won't.

When I look at tables like these, gaps are noticeable been tiers of players.
Generational players (Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid) - guys who were first liners for their entire careers and competing for scoring leads almost as long. Surefire HHOF'er.
Superstars (Sakic, Selanne) - guys who were first liners for almost all of their careers and competed for scoring leads often. Non-debatable HHOF'er.
Stars plus (St. Louis, Kariya, Iginla, Alfredsson, Sundin, Modano) - guys with long careers as first liners who had a handful of top-10 seasons. Likely HHOF'ers who tend to draw more criticism from fans with high HHOF standards.
Stars minus (Lecavalier, Yashin, Whitney, Staal, Naslund, Kovalev) - guys who were first liners for a long time, but not as good or for as long as stars plus. They aren't likely to be inducted into the HHOF.

IMHO, the Sedins have a peak that looks like Star plus, but a longevity closer to Star minus. Which I think still puts them solidly in the Star plus category. They won major awards though and that tends to cause fans to greatly overrate players. It's like everybody who ever won a major award starts getting compared to Sakic and Selanne, when their peaks and primes are no where near comparable.

This is a great post.

It's exactly how I've intuitively felt, as well -- the Sedins are both players who had a fairly high short, peak (cleary a peak at HOF level), but whose sustained level of play isn't overly impressive, and is kind of borderline HOF.

To put it another way, I could say this:

Roughly point-per-game (or higher) seasons:
8 -- Henrik
6 -- Daniel
Below point-per-game seasons
9 -- Henrik
11 -- Daniel

Henrik's career (in terms of point production) follows a fairly consistent and normal distribution (lower scoring early in career and when older), except that it takes him a bit longer than most future HOF'ers to reach a 1st-line level.

Daniel had slightly lesser point production overall (which maybe is expected as he was more so a goal scorer than playmaker), but he didn't become an "all star" type of forward until he was 26.

 

[sr edler]

Who's been comparing the Sedins to Joe Sakic? I haven't seen that, but alas, perhaps it happens behind my back or in threads I don't care to read.

Also, people's obsession with the HHOF will never stop to puzzle me.