This feels like a complete rewriting of history. Jagr didn’t get the benefit of the doubt from the majority of people while he was in Washington, and while he may have still been more talented, his attitude and effort were a problem. Forsberg wasn’t a near consensus best like a McDavid today, but was widely considered the best during that period by a significant number and likely the most popular choice
Peak Fedorov vs Peak Forsberg
- Thread starter Boreal01
- Start date
This feels like a complete rewriting of history. Jagr didn’t get the benefit of the doubt from the majority of people while he was in Washington, and while he may have still been more talented, his attitude and effort were a problem. Forsberg wasn’t a near consensus best like a McDavid today, but was widely considered the best during that period by a significant number and likely the most popular choice
100%. Anyone suggesting otherwise is clearly misrepresenting reality.
A much better argument would be that the quality of competition during that stretch wasn’t nearly as strong as when Fedorov peaked.
newfy
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2010
- 14,764
- 9,518
The time between Gretzky, Lemeiux and to another extent guys like Sakic and Yzermans age group and Crosby/OV entering the league was really bad for high end forwards. It was coach killer version of Jagr, Forsberg and guys like Naslund/Iggy/whoever at the top.
1994 Fedorov would have stood out a lot against that group of forwards. Fedorovs competition was completely different at his best, not really comparable
KoozNetsOff 92
Hala Madrid
- Apr 6, 2016
- 8,567
- 8,240
Ah yes the fantasy player polls for Forsberg. Yet a couple of months later those same players chose Jagr as the best in the league (lindsay winner) while Forsberg wasn't even top 3.
TheGoldenJet
Registered User
Not when all of the NHL players that year participated in officially voting Jagr as the best player a few weeks later. Shows this sample was invalid.
Fedorov's 1994 year was otherworldly and one of the best seasons ever, but I think people forget or are too young to remember how feared and respected Forsberg was as a player before injuries took their toll. He is one of those players where simply looking at the stats does not do him justice. Injuries and the fact that his most beastly playoff runs did not end up in Cup wins does a disservice to how much of a talented warrior he was and his legacy. He impacted the game in all facets - offensively, defensively and was physically intimidating. In THN's Yearbook rankings from 1996 to 2005, he was considered a top 2 player in the league for 7 out of 10 years and was top 5 the other 3 years. He ranked ahead of Fedorov every one of those years, often by a wide margin. If you had to bottle one season out of a player's career and guarantee that you could get that player for 10 years, I would probably take Fedorov. However, if you had to bottle any 5-year or 10-year stretch, and could guarantee that you would get that player for all 10 years, I would pick from Forsberg's career.
Here are a couple of threads that examined where players were viewed compared to their peers.
forums.hfboards.com
forums.hfboards.com
Here are a couple of threads that examined where players were viewed compared to their peers.
Who Was Considered The Best From 1995-2005?
Ever since I became a full-fledged fan around 2005, there has always been a player (or a few) considered to be the best in the league. From around '05-2015, it was pretty clear these players were Crosby and Ovechkin, while a few others would sneak into the conversation every once in a while...
forums.hfboards.com
THN Yearbook Rankings - 1992-2008
Between my collection of The Hockey News yearbooks (1992-1997, 2001-2003, 2007) and what could be found online (2006, 2008), I wanted to put together a reference list for the THN rankings that were at least 10 years old. I believe that while not perfect, there is historical value in a year-end...
forums.hfboards.com
Bro someone already posted the stats. Fedorov was one of the best players all time in elimination games compared to their regular season stats.
Lexus
OWN THE MOMENT.
- Jan 29, 2009
- 3,869
- 808
Probably because Forsberg's injuries started at that time. (Groin and foot problems) This poll was posted when the Olympics was played that year, Forsberg was a question mark until the middle mark of that tournament.
He only managed to play in 60 games that regular season (with 75 points to boot) ofc. he wouldn't be winning the Lindsay award that year.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
But that’s counting elimination games for both teams, including those where the Wings were steamrolling some hapless 8 seed, which isn’t what I was talking about. That’s why the conversation started with Game 7s, where the elimination pressure is equal on both teams. He was most certainly not one of the best players of all time in that context.
Nico Cauzuki
Registered User
dont wanna take anything away from Forsberg because i was a huge fan but i have to go with Federov
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 28,676
- 17,738
I lived that hypothetical as a Wing fan and I'm not trading Fedorov's Red Wing career for anyone. A player that could do anything you needed of him apart from play goal.Fedorov's 1994 year was otherworldly and one of the best seasons ever, but I think people forget or are too young to remember how feared and respected Forsberg was as a player before injuries took their toll. He is one of those players where simply looking at the stats does not do him justice. Injuries and the fact that his most beastly playoff runs did not end up in Cup wins does a disservice to how much of a talented warrior he was and his legacy. He impacted the game in all facets - offensively, defensively and was physically intimidating. In THN's Yearbook rankings from 1996 to 2005, he was considered a top 2 player in the league for 7 out of 10 years and was top 5 the other 3 years. He ranked ahead of Fedorov every one of those years, often by a wide margin. If you had to bottle one season out of a player's career and guarantee that you could get that player for 10 years, I would probably take Fedorov. However, if you had to bottle any 5-year or 10-year stretch, and could guarantee that you would get that player for all 10 years, I would pick from Forsberg's career.
Here are a couple of threads that examined where players were viewed compared to their peers.
Who Was Considered The Best From 1995-2005?
Ever since I became a full-fledged fan around 2005, there has always been a player (or a few) considered to be the best in the league. From around '05-2015, it was pretty clear these players were Crosby and Ovechkin, while a few others would sneak into the conversation every once in a while...THN Yearbook Rankings - 1992-2008
Between my collection of The Hockey News yearbooks (1992-1997, 2001-2003, 2007) and what could be found online (2006, 2008), I wanted to put together a reference list for the THN rankings that were at least 10 years old. I believe that while not perfect, there is historical value in a year-end...
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
Fedorov peaked in 93-94.
28 year old Lemieux was out of the league dealing with cancer.
Gretzky was 33 years old and dealing with his career altering back injury, suffered the previous year.
Lindros only played 65 games as a 2nd year player.
Even his own team's 1C, Yzerman, only played 58 games due to injury that season
How much did those 4 guys being less than 100% help Fedorov's case for the Hart?
Hard to say Fedorov would really stand out when he had a ppg season a grand total of once in the DPE.
Lexus
OWN THE MOMENT.
- Jan 29, 2009
- 3,869
- 808
Can someone dig deeper into this please? I just want to see Fedorov's production on his team (in his prime)
Doesn't need to be a 7-year span as posted above (Forsberg's prime years), but at least a 3-5 year span of his production with the Red Wings in the playoffs, when it mattered. Which I consider PEAK (years).
In Fedorov's absolute peak year (93-94) he had a "whopping" 8 points in 7 playoff games (1+7) for the Red Wings and was a minus 1 and was supposed to be the "very best player" in the game at that time.
Last edited:
An elimination game is an elimination game. Why would you rather a player who gets it done in game 7 versus a guy who doesn’t need game 7 and gets it done well before.
No matter how you soon it, your idea that Fedorov wasn’t great in the playoffs is completely debunked at this point and you should really admit you were wrong.
newfy
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2010
- 14,764
- 9,518
Not hard to say. He stood out with Gretzky still playing at a high level, guys like prime Jagr, Sakic etc. He woulda been even more noticeable against Naslund and Iginla as his best competition.
Lexus
OWN THE MOMENT.
- Jan 29, 2009
- 3,869
- 808
Which season are we talking about? The 93-94 season which Fedorov dominated "so much"? When prime Jagr? (10th place in scoring that year) and same with Sakic? (19th in scoring that year) When the high scoring era was still around aswell.
That's laughable.
Last edited:
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
His only stand out year was 93-94, the year after Gretzky hurt his back, which was also the last time Gretzky ever scored 100 points in a season. And Gretzky's Kings team finished with the 3rd fewest points in the West, 5th lowest overall. Even though he won the Ross, it's really hard to give him a Hart vote.
Lemieux only played 22 games because of cancer.
2nd year Lindros put up some crazy offensive numbers, but only played 65 games.
21 year old Jagr was coming off his first 70+ point season and wouldn't start his prime until the following year.
Sakic was 24 and putting numbers, but he was also on a non-playoff team that had picked 1OA 3 straight times and top 4 in 4 of the previous 5 seasons. Sundin was the only other guy on the team to even break 70 points. (For comparison, Detoit had 6 guys scored 70+, and 3 score 80+).
Lexus
OWN THE MOMENT.
- Jan 29, 2009
- 3,869
- 808
Here's some quotes on Peter Forsberg.
"He was the most talented guy I ever played with, for just pure raw talent. But more than that, he was a winner and a total gamer, he just wanted to win. He didn't care who scored all the goals or who got all the credit. He just wanted to win, and that's why his teams won as much as they did. We were all very lucky to play with him. He was such an unselfish player, he loved to setup teammates, he's passing ability was second to none. He created alot of empty nets for alot of players and im one of the big benefactors from him, I got alot of easy goals thanks to Peter. There was nobody in my era there that was as skilled as him and that could play that tough style of hockey and i know when see other friends, he's the one player they mentioned they hated to play against." -- Joe Sakic
"Peter Forsberg is one of the best hockey players that ever played the game, and I actually don't think that anyone has been so good as Peter was during his peak, I've played against him alot, so I should know." -- Vjatjeslav Fetisov
At the HHOF induction, was asked the question on which player he thinks it's the best he ever played against. -- "I would probably say that Forsberg is the best player I ever played against" -- Scott Stevens
"Some of the stuff he does is just ridiculous. Jaromir Jagr is big and strong like Forsberg, but Jagr doesn't fight back if you play him tough like Forsberg does. "I think he's the toughest player in the game to play against." -- Derian Hatcher
"For me, an agitator is somebody who controls the emotion of the game, "And Peter definitely controls the emotion of the game for them. "The only thing that stopped Forsberg is that he ran out of gas when they double- and tripleshifted him, and he wasn't able to use his speed, plus his strength," Hitchcock says. "I remember one time he kept the puck in our end for 40, maybe 50 seconds, and we couldn't get the thing away from him. His ability to knock Derian Hatcher on his butt while giving up 40 pounds shows how he can completely control and dominate a game. He's a player with skill and talent who occasionally goes maniacal. Boy, he gets a really strange look in his eyes. It's like the same steely glare that Mark Messier always gets, and you don't want to be anywhere near him." -- Ken Hitchcock
"Obviously one of the best players in the league the last 15 years, a guy who really controlled the play when he was on the ice, and there's only a handful of guy's in the league at any given era that really, actually controlled the play when the're where on the ice, just his combination of skill, strenght, determinition, and a bit of meanness or alot of meanness actually made him one of the best players to play." -- Steve Yzerman
"Peter is the best all-around player in the NHL, bar none. He's a competitor. He's the ultimate warrior. His hands are electric. He's one of the smartest players on the ice, and he knows where everybody is. He always makes the right play, and he even makes the plays you don't think he can make. He's so fast on his feet and so powerful. And he's mean. The guy is so talented, he's disgusting to watch." -- Jeremy Roenick
"If you could be anyone else in hockey, who would it be?" -- "That's easy. Peter Forsberg," (Claude) Lemieux says. "I could still be mean and nasty, but if I had all of the skills that he has, I might have won five or six Stanley Cups by now. "I can only dream of skating like Peter. Either that or buy some rocket-powered skates." "(After seeing) a Michael Jordan or a Wayne Gretzky, you think you've seen it all," Lemieux says, "and then Peter shows you something entirely new. "It's the way he creates space, uses space. It's the way he sees the ice. It's the way he picks up speed even after he picks up the puck. And it's the meanness, the nastiness." -- Claude Lemieux
"He's a coach's dream. The more crucial the time in a game or a series, the tougher he gets. I think sometimes he's able to flip on a switch in his mind and be at a different level than everyone else. He is the strongest player I've ever played against" -- Ray Bourque
"Peter's ability to change the game was bar none, he could bring so many elements to a game to change it... My best advice when you're playing against Peter is to go change and let someone else play against him." -- Adam Deadmarsh
"The toughest NHL player you ever played against?" -- Quite easily Peter Forsberg. We have had our battles (he said laughing)... Forsberg was a one-man wrecking crew. He was so skilled and yet so powerful.. the man could simply do it all and at the same time he was hard as nails. He was extremely tough to play against. He was down right nasty." -- Chris Chelios
Forsberg's brilliance comes from a unique amalgam of skills, styles and attitudes. If you borrowed a dollop of Jaromir Jagr's intimidating strength on the puck, a drop of Paul Kariya's speed, a dash of John LeClair's stevedore toughness, a pinch of Teemu Selanne's finesse, a healthy dose of Michael Peca's body-checking skills and a full measure of Steve Yzerman's commitment to playing all 200 feet of the ice, the product would be a rough approximation of Forsberg. -- Michael Farber
Forsberg has the meanness of Mark Messier, the dirtiness of Ken Linseman, the smarts of Wayne Gretzky and the strength of Bryan Trottier. Avalanche coach Marc Crawford says that Forsberg's competitiveness sets him apart from "ordinary superstars. If you saw Forsberg play on a regular basis, and not just looking at the scoresheet you wouldn't hesitate to put him up with some of the all-time greats. And yes, i think he would be at least as dominant as Crosby been, before he got injuried. -- Bob McCammon
"He was the most talented guy I ever played with, for just pure raw talent. But more than that, he was a winner and a total gamer, he just wanted to win. He didn't care who scored all the goals or who got all the credit. He just wanted to win, and that's why his teams won as much as they did. We were all very lucky to play with him. He was such an unselfish player, he loved to setup teammates, he's passing ability was second to none. He created alot of empty nets for alot of players and im one of the big benefactors from him, I got alot of easy goals thanks to Peter. There was nobody in my era there that was as skilled as him and that could play that tough style of hockey and i know when see other friends, he's the one player they mentioned they hated to play against." -- Joe Sakic
"Peter Forsberg is one of the best hockey players that ever played the game, and I actually don't think that anyone has been so good as Peter was during his peak, I've played against him alot, so I should know." -- Vjatjeslav Fetisov
At the HHOF induction, was asked the question on which player he thinks it's the best he ever played against. -- "I would probably say that Forsberg is the best player I ever played against" -- Scott Stevens
"Some of the stuff he does is just ridiculous. Jaromir Jagr is big and strong like Forsberg, but Jagr doesn't fight back if you play him tough like Forsberg does. "I think he's the toughest player in the game to play against." -- Derian Hatcher
"For me, an agitator is somebody who controls the emotion of the game, "And Peter definitely controls the emotion of the game for them. "The only thing that stopped Forsberg is that he ran out of gas when they double- and tripleshifted him, and he wasn't able to use his speed, plus his strength," Hitchcock says. "I remember one time he kept the puck in our end for 40, maybe 50 seconds, and we couldn't get the thing away from him. His ability to knock Derian Hatcher on his butt while giving up 40 pounds shows how he can completely control and dominate a game. He's a player with skill and talent who occasionally goes maniacal. Boy, he gets a really strange look in his eyes. It's like the same steely glare that Mark Messier always gets, and you don't want to be anywhere near him." -- Ken Hitchcock
"Obviously one of the best players in the league the last 15 years, a guy who really controlled the play when he was on the ice, and there's only a handful of guy's in the league at any given era that really, actually controlled the play when the're where on the ice, just his combination of skill, strenght, determinition, and a bit of meanness or alot of meanness actually made him one of the best players to play." -- Steve Yzerman
"Peter is the best all-around player in the NHL, bar none. He's a competitor. He's the ultimate warrior. His hands are electric. He's one of the smartest players on the ice, and he knows where everybody is. He always makes the right play, and he even makes the plays you don't think he can make. He's so fast on his feet and so powerful. And he's mean. The guy is so talented, he's disgusting to watch." -- Jeremy Roenick
"If you could be anyone else in hockey, who would it be?" -- "That's easy. Peter Forsberg," (Claude) Lemieux says. "I could still be mean and nasty, but if I had all of the skills that he has, I might have won five or six Stanley Cups by now. "I can only dream of skating like Peter. Either that or buy some rocket-powered skates." "(After seeing) a Michael Jordan or a Wayne Gretzky, you think you've seen it all," Lemieux says, "and then Peter shows you something entirely new. "It's the way he creates space, uses space. It's the way he sees the ice. It's the way he picks up speed even after he picks up the puck. And it's the meanness, the nastiness." -- Claude Lemieux
"He's a coach's dream. The more crucial the time in a game or a series, the tougher he gets. I think sometimes he's able to flip on a switch in his mind and be at a different level than everyone else. He is the strongest player I've ever played against" -- Ray Bourque
"Peter's ability to change the game was bar none, he could bring so many elements to a game to change it... My best advice when you're playing against Peter is to go change and let someone else play against him." -- Adam Deadmarsh
"The toughest NHL player you ever played against?" -- Quite easily Peter Forsberg. We have had our battles (he said laughing)... Forsberg was a one-man wrecking crew. He was so skilled and yet so powerful.. the man could simply do it all and at the same time he was hard as nails. He was extremely tough to play against. He was down right nasty." -- Chris Chelios
Forsberg's brilliance comes from a unique amalgam of skills, styles and attitudes. If you borrowed a dollop of Jaromir Jagr's intimidating strength on the puck, a drop of Paul Kariya's speed, a dash of John LeClair's stevedore toughness, a pinch of Teemu Selanne's finesse, a healthy dose of Michael Peca's body-checking skills and a full measure of Steve Yzerman's commitment to playing all 200 feet of the ice, the product would be a rough approximation of Forsberg. -- Michael Farber
Forsberg has the meanness of Mark Messier, the dirtiness of Ken Linseman, the smarts of Wayne Gretzky and the strength of Bryan Trottier. Avalanche coach Marc Crawford says that Forsberg's competitiveness sets him apart from "ordinary superstars. If you saw Forsberg play on a regular basis, and not just looking at the scoresheet you wouldn't hesitate to put him up with some of the all-time greats. And yes, i think he would be at least as dominant as Crosby been, before he got injuried. -- Bob McCammon
Last edited:
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,129
- 16,892
Consider The Hockey News's annual Top 50 players list. From 1996 to 2004, Forsberg ranked 5th, 5th*, 3rd, 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 2nd, 1st, and 1st. Not that THN is perfect, but it's a good snapshot of how he was generally ranked in the hockey community. That's nine consecutive years of being ranked a top five player. (To me, this accurately reflects Forsberg's reputation at the time).
On the other hand, Forsberg only placed in the top five in Hart voting once (in 2003, when he won). Part of that's due to injuries (for example, Forsberg was clearly the best player in the NHL in 2004, but he missed 43 games - and he missed the entire 2002 regular season). Part of that could be due to vote splitting (for example, in 2001, Forsberg wasn't going to get many Hart votes when Sakic won the Hart, Bourque was runner-up for the Norris, and Roy was 5th for the Vezina). And sometimes Forsberg seems to have been short-changed (Forsberg finished behind Selanne in Hart voting in 1998 and 1999 and although the Finn outscored him by five points over the course of two seasons, but the Swede was a far better all-around player).
My recollection (which is the same as what the THN yearbooks show) is that Forsberg was perceived as a perennial top five player for his entire prime. But he probably wasn't a top five player over the course of very many full seasons (largely, but not entirely, due to injuries). Fedorov was perceived to be "at the top" for a much shorter period of time, but he was much healthier, so it's a tough trade-off to weigh.
(For what it's worth, I see little separating Forsberg and Fedorov at their best. I voted Fedorov, but it's virtually a coin flip. Forsberg was at/near his best for much longer in terms of ability, but he missed so much time it's hard to say who provided more value to their team over their best, say, seven or ten years. Probably still Forsberg, but it's close).
* In 1997, THN didn't release a Top 50 players list. But Forsberg was named one of five "franchise players", so I'm giving him credit for a 5th place finish.
Last edited:
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 28,676
- 17,738
Has anyone done an aggregate of those rankings to see how players fit into a list?
And I wonder if there were a good way to validate the list after every season. Hart voting doesn't go deep enough. Not to give you busy work or anything, just pondering.
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,129
- 16,892
I already have this data compiled. Here's what I have for both players:
Never topped 30 goals, always injured, lucky he had Sakic and Roy
| Season | Age | GP | G | A | PTS | TMGLS | participation |
| 1994-95 | 21 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 19 | 31.6% |
| 1995-96 | 22 | 22 | 10 | 11 | 21 | 80 | 26.3% |
| 1996-97 | 23 | 14 | 5 | 12 | 17 | 59 | 28.8% |
| 1997-98 | 24 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 16 | 68.8% |
| 1998-99 | 25 | 19 | 8 | 16 | 24 | 56 | 42.9% |
| 1999-00 | 26 | 16 | 7 | 8 | 15 | 43 | 34.9% |
| 2000-01 | 27 | 11 | 4 | 10 | 14 | 69 | 20.3% |
| 2001-02 | 28 | 20 | 9 | 18 | 27 | 54 | 50.0% |
| 2002-03 | 29 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 17 | 47.1% |
| 2003-04 | 30 | 11 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 26 | 42.3% |
| 2005-06 | 32 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 14 | 57.1% |
| 2006-07 | 33 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 14 | 28.6% |
| 2007-08 | 34 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 26 | 19.2% |
Coasted in the regular season, 17 goals in final 85 playoff games, lucky he had Yzerman and Lidstrom
| Season | Age | GP | G | A | PTS | TMGLS | participation |
| 1990-91 | 21 | 7 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 20 | 30.0% |
| 1991-92 | 22 | 11 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 29 | 34.5% |
| 1992-93 | 23 | 7 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 30 | 30.0% |
| 1993-94 | 24 | 7 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 27 | 29.6% |
| 1994-95 | 25 | 17 | 7 | 17 | 24 | 61 | 39.3% |
| 1995-96 | 26 | 19 | 2 | 18 | 20 | 58 | 34.5% |
| 1996-97 | 27 | 20 | 8 | 12 | 20 | 58 | 34.5% |
| 1997-98 | 28 | 22 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 75 | 26.7% |
| 1998-99 | 29 | 10 | 1 | 8 | 9 | 31 | 29.0% |
| 1999-00 | 30 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 23 | 34.8% |
| 2000-01 | 31 | 6 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 17 | 41.2% |
| 2001-02 | 32 | 23 | 5 | 14 | 19 | 72 | 26.4% |
| 2002-03 | 33 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 50.0% |
| 2007-08 | 38 | 7 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 20 | 25.0% |
| 2008-09 | 39 | 14 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 41 | 19.5% |
Forsberg has a higher career average (34.7% vs 31.0%). Drop off the last two years for Fedorov (age 38 and 39) and it's closer, but Forsebrg is still ahead (32.1%).
If we cherry-pick Forsberg's best years (1998 to 2006), he's at 40.0%. Drop 2001 (where he missed half the postseason) and he's at 46.0% (which, believe it or not, is Gretzky/Lemieux territory).
If we cherry-pick Fedorov's best years (1995 to 2001), he's at 33.4%. But Detroit generally had better depth than Colorado, so Sakic and Forsberg would look better than Yzerman and Fedorov by this stat. It's a good argument for Forsberg, but it's also due how their teams were designed.
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,129
- 16,892
I've been meaning to do that for a while, and this was a good reminder. Link
Based on the list (there's some subjectivity since I had to decide how many points to assign to each spot), from 1994 to 2005, Forsberg was 1st overall in the THN annual rankings. Fedorov was 4th.
