The numbers overpass provided indicate that 15% of Messier’s ES points were shared with Gretzky over that 8-year period. This probably means that about 19% of Messier’s ES TOI was with Gretzky. So, roughly speaking, about 3 minutes a game on average.
There's no way to estimate that. Mikael Samuelsson played in Vancouver and scored about half of his points with one or both Sedins. At times he played on their line. Most Vancouver fans will tell you that he played almost no time with them. If true, why did he share so much scoring with them?
Mmm hmmm, Messier avoided the top defensive defensemen and forwards because he was one himself, and had to go up against the other teams’ top guys himself!
The funny thing is there are written statements of "Messier is the best defensive forward", yet in his career he only had two top ten finishes. 1992 and 1996. 9th and 8th. That's the only time he could be legitimately called "one of the best defensive forwards". Thirteen years into his career, Yzerman had been a Selke finalist. Four years later? Yzerman would win the Selke.
Messier's Selke voting record betrays the idea of him being used in a defensive role in any serious capacity. It certainly didn't happen in the regular season; he might have received more votes than Kurri or Tikkanen. Perhaps he'd have won a Selke.
I’m surprised that you’re so sure that if Yzerman went somewhere where he wasn’t “the man†and Messier went somewhere where he was, that their scoring might change the way I’m suggesting. Because that is pretty much what happened to Messier – once he was “the manâ€, he scored a lot more. And once Yzerman wasn’t anymore – following Fedorov’s emergence – he saw a drop.
I specified that if they switched roles, Yzerman would still outscore Messier. That's a big difference than just "any" team. Detroit had NO wingers and mediocre defensemen, Edmonton had HHOF wingers and defensemen.
I realize age (Yzerman was 29 in the 1995 season) can be blamed for his statistical decline, but at the same time Messier boosted his production despite reaching that age (best adjusted PPG seasons were at age 29, 31, 35), the difference being that he was now the main guy when he wasn’t before.
No. Yzerman's knee was rapidly deteriorating and he suffered a neck injury in the 1993-94 season that caused him to missed a third of the year. His mobility wasn't there the way it had been. If he still had full health like he did at the start of 1987-88, he'd have been destroying the league offensively.
I get the argument that a stronger team can boost your production, but it’s just not that easy. It’s simple to argue the opposing point and provide evidence for it as well. Both are probably true at different times and I don’t think the evidence in this case points where you’d like it to.
If Messier had suffered a serious knee injury in 1984, and then suffered a severe neck injury in 1990, do you think he's the same player? He's certainly not winning any Hart trophies.
What do you want me to say? “ok, you got me on semantics� Nothing I said was untrue. That poster turned 7 years into 10, and turned mediocre into terrible. We should stick to facts and not wild exaggerations.
Below .500 teams are not good teams, it's at least 8 years. Which is "about ten"
It’s actually not like that, because even if we were to trust raw numbers like that we would still have to make massive adjustments for the fact that Crosby easily led his line in scoring and Juneau wasn’t close to his line’s scoring lead. No one with a background in hockey history or stats would ever make that claim.
In the manner of "second on team in scoring in higher era>first on team in scoring in lower era" it is exactly the same. You are going into the details of a particular example to suggest why Messier's second place finish is better than Yzerman's first-place finish.
Anyways, I’ve done the math before and even adjusted for age, and Messier was clearly a better playoff producer than Yzerman in his career.
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=30570380&postcount=954
I no longer have the sheet.
But if playoff scoring finishes do it for you:
2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 6, 10, 16, 17, 18
vs.
1, 2, 6, 12, 12, 14, 20, 37, 39, 59
It's hard to judge on playoff scoring finishes without knowing where they finished on their team, how far their team went, etc.
As for Yzerman having a defensive role, it sounds like you want to have it both ways. Messier had a defensive role on the Oilers too. He’d have scored more, if he didn’t. Right?
Messier was sometimes used in defensive matchups, such as the Trottier example. He did not have a defensive ROLE.
Do people still think he has top-6 talent? All I’ve ever heard is that he’s a major disappointment and overpaid. In Toronto he was semi-responsible defensively but nothing special, and was quite soft.
Anyone who saw Stajan's short stint on Iginla's line last year should be able to say he didn't look out of place, and still has the skill level he did when he was traded for.
PP totals have not been a big part of Messier’s totals. Compared to other players who scored raw totals in his range, he typically was among the lowest in terms of what percentage of them were PP-driven.
Messier's biggest year (90) saw him score 71 ESP and 47 PPP. In 92 he posted 65 and 33. Yzerman those same years was 87/37 and 66/27. In 88-89, Yzerman posted 101/46. In 88-89, Lemieux had 102/79; Gretzky had 100/53.
Messier isn't Mario Lemieux for PP scoring, but he's not Steve Yzerman for ES scoring.