Peak Modano-Forsberg-Bure vs. Zetterberg-Malkin-Kane for a playoff run

[wetcoast]

This reeks of insecurity. Why do you need to bring Crosby in the discussion? Guerin-Kunitz >>> Fedotenko-Talbot anyways.

Im not making stuff up. Malkin had the best offensive playoff performance of the century playing with bottom 6ers on his line.

your assertion was that

Malkin played with Ruslan Fedotenko and Maxime Talbot for basically the entirety of his playoff run.

This is factually untrue.

As pointed out above he scored 44% of his points on the PP.

I'll take Frosberg over Malkin 8 days a week during their peaks in the playoffs and Malkin is IMO the 2nd best playoff performer in the NHL since the lockout among forwards.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

your assertion was that

Malkin played with Ruslan Fedotenko and Maxime Talbot for basically the entirety of his playoff run.

This is factually untrue.

As pointed out above he scored 44% of his points on the PP.

I'll take Frosberg over Malkin 8 days a week during their peaks in the playoffs and Malkin is IMO the 2nd best playoff performer in the NHL since the lockout among forwards.

Oh, but I showed you it was true under the post you quoted. Malkin played 100 more minutes with Fedotenko-Talbot than with any Pens forwards at ES. Malkin played 40 mins with Crosby at ES and 39 mins with Craig Adams. CRAIG f***ING ADAMS.

It was poorly worded, but I was talking about ES linemates. Change “basically” for “the majority of the time” if you want.

Like I mentionned in the post above, the Pens and Avs had basically the same number of PPO per game. Maybe Forsberg just wasn’t as great as Malkin on the PP after all...

 

[GreatGonzo]

what does any of that have to do with his best playoff year?

oh another thing you forsberg fans always conveniently forget, he missed the conference and cup finals in 2001 when the Avs won the cup

Your the one insinuating that he was simply not playing rather than dealing with serious injuries, surgeries, and physical therapy. Keep avoiding that “minor” detail and march to the beat of your bias drum......

If anything it’s more impressive that he lead the playoffs in scoring that year because he had come back from such a serious injury. It’s not like he hadn’t done that before, only he wasn’t injured in ‘99.....yet still lead all playoffs in points and assists.

But please keep on marching....

 

[Ace of Hades]

So peak Bure had 31 points (16 g + 15 a) in 24 games, 2010 Kane 28 points ( 10 g + 18 a) in 22 games. Stats wise they are close but I believe when you comparing players, a lot of people tend to look only at the stats and ignoring the fact what players surrounded them. Let's be honest over here, the only remotely close star player that Bure had that season was Linden, Kane however was surrounded by all-star team, I am not going to list all of them, you know whom I am talking about

Indeed. Peak Bure is superior than Kane. Funny how anyone has a problem with that. Must've been in their diapers when Bure was playing in his prime.

 

[newfy]

Indeed. Peak Bure is superior than Kane. Funny how anyone has a problem with that. Must've been in their diapers when Bure was playing in his prime.

Peak Kane led the league in points by 17, with 2 generational players in the league, at his peak. Including 46 goals. Kane hasnt really ever came close to that level again, but for a single season, thats more impressive than anything Bure did.

17 points is a pretty ridiculous gap

 

[bathdog]

Pittsburgh and Colorado basically had the same PPOs in their respective playoff runs. It’s not like Colorado’s PP unit was trash too. You cant fault Malkin for being a great PP player.

Like I mentionned in the post above, the Pens and Avs had basically the same number of PPO per game. Maybe Forsberg just wasn’t as great as Malkin on the PP after all...

There were two points I was trying to make.

1. Malkin scored 44% on the PP where Talbot and Fedotenko weren't his regular linemates. It is impossible to argue otherwise since Malkin played 119 minutes on the PP, and Fedotenko/Talbot played 8 and 1 minute respectively.

2. Malkin played a ton more on the PP than did Forsberg. This may be faulty logic, but maybe, just maybe, you have a larger possibility of scoring a point IF you're on the ice, than IF you're on the bench? Malkin was on the ice for 71.4% more time on the PP than Forsberg, maybe there is a correlation between this and a players offensive output, rather than stating the chances a TEAM had. Malkin was a great PP player, maybe better than Forsberg, maybe not.

I'm really not sure where you're trying to head with your same PPO's since that's a team comparison, but Colorado had 77 PPO in 21 games or 3.67/game with a conversion rate of 13%, Pittsburgh had 97 PPO in 24 games or 4.04/game with a conversion rate of 20.6%. We're obviously dealing with small sample sizes (as we are when we're comparing single runs).

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Indeed. Peak Bure is superior than Kane. Funny how anyone has a problem with that. Must've been in their diapers when Bure was playing in his prime.

Anyone who says Bure must've had a problem with their eyes when Kane won a ross by 17pts and a landslide hart.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Anyone who says Bure must've had a problem with their eyes when Kane won a ross by 17pts and a landslide hart.

You must be quite young when Bure was in his prime, it's alright to admit you're wrong.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Peak Kane led the league in points by 17, with 2 generational players in the league, at his peak. Including 46 goals. Kane hasnt really ever came close to that level again, but for a single season, thats more impressive than anything Bure did.

17 points is a pretty ridiculous gap

Bure played in a far worse team, stacked with not even half the all star cast that Kane ever had. Not to mention, the level of offensive output he accumulated in the dead puck era to a point that none of his teammates let alone the center that played with him were ever on his footing from scoring perspective. Of which he lead the team by a massive gap in points. Bure wins here and I would say he was the better play off performer too. Kane was put in a far better person than Bure did. Infact Bure was even better defensively than Kane was.

 

[PatrikBerglund]

Am I the only one who thinks folks overrate Forsberg based on a PPG average that never tapered down because his career was cut short? He played 11 games after the age of 33.

Great player, but overrated.

No.

Cause he spent most of his prime in the dead hockey era and half of his whole career playing through injuries.

A healthy Forsberg would've had a top-5 career of all time. Most complete superstar to ever play the game, though constantly injured.




Btw....2:18-2:25 is INSANITY.

And do you recognize who he totally embarrassed? Multiple Selke-winner, Jere Lehtinen.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

There were two points I was trying to make.

1. Malkin scored 44% on the PP where Talbot and Fedotenko weren't his regular linemates. It is impossible to argue otherwise since Malkin played 119 minutes on the PP, and Fedotenko/Talbot played 8 and 1 minute respectively.

2. Malkin played a ton more on the PP than did Forsberg. This may be faulty logic, but maybe, just maybe, you have a larger possibility of scoring a point IF you're on the ice, than IF you're on the bench? Malkin was on the ice for 71.4% more time on the PP than Forsberg, maybe there is a correlation between this and a players offensive output, rather than stating the chances a TEAM had. Malkin was a great PP player, maybe better than Forsberg, maybe not.

I'm really not sure where you're trying to head with your same PPO's since that's a team comparison, but Colorado had 77 PPO in 21 games or 3.67/game with a conversion rate of 13%, Pittsburgh had 97 PPO in 24 games or 4.04/game with a conversion rate of 20.6%. We're obviously dealing with small sample sizes (as we are when we're comparing single runs).

Sure, Malkin scored 46% of his pts on the PP, but what does it means? I don’t get your point. He participated at 80% of his team’s goals on the PP. He just happens to be a great PP player. Even if you use the flawed logic of PP pts < ES pts and only use ES points, they are tied at 20 pts each even though Malkin played with worse linemates.

Also, for the PPOs, it probably isn’t noted that the Pens had 3 PPOs in the dying seconds of the 3rd. I’d be willing to see your source for the PPOs since I was off by 2-3 for Colorado.

 

[kp61c]

Modano < Zetterberg
Forsberg < Malkin
Bure < Kane
zmk pretty easy.

 

[bathdog]

Sure, Malkin scored 46% of his pts on the PP, but what does it means? I don’t get your point. He participated at 80% of his team’s goals on the PP. He just happens to be a great PP player. Even if you use the flawed logic of PP pts < ES pts and only use ES points, they are tied at 20 pts each even though Malkin played with worse linemates.

I'm not arguing PP pts < ES pts. You brought in the line mate argument, I never do because it's hard to objectively investigate what impact they have on one another. I was merely showing that Malkin scored nearly half his points with line mates that simply were much greater than the narrative you're pushing. They're tied for 20 ES pts each with Forsberg playing 4 games less, playing in a lower scoring environment, and playing less at ES on a per game basis.

Accounting for all games played:
Malkin saw 381 minutes 40 seconds ES TOI, good for 2nd most among forwards in the playoffs.
Forsberg saw 291 minutes 45 seconds ES TOI, good for 21st monst among forwards in the playoffs.

On a per game basis:
Malkin saw 15:54 ES TOI/GP, good for 9th among forwards in the playoffs.
Forsberg saw 14:35 ES TOI/GP, good for 23rd among forwards in the playoffs.

Unless you're suggesting Forsberg would invent a way to score negative points if playing more games, or seeing more ES TOI or PP TOI for that matter.

Also, for the PPOs, it probably isn’t noted that the Pens had 3 PPOs in the dying seconds of the 3rd. I’d be willing to see your source for the PPOs since I was off by 2-3 for Colorado.

hockey-reference

 

[newfy]

Bure played in a far worse team, stacked with not even half the all star cast that Kane ever had. Not to mention, the level of offensive output he accumulated in the dead puck era to a point that none of his teammates let alone the center that played with him were ever on his footing from scoring perspective. Of which he lead the team by a massive gap in points. Bure wins here and I would say he was the better play off performer too. Kane was put in a far better person than Bure did. Infact Bure was even better defensively than Kane was.

Lol I'm a wings fan who hates the Hawks but you want to talk about Kanes all star team? Lets talk about how the next closest scorer was 30 points behind him on that team. 3rd place? Almost 50 points behind him. Those are massive gaps, over all star teammates.

I dunno about arguing playoff performers either, Kane is about as good as they come in the playoffs, his game 7 scoring is ridiculous too. Kane has won the cup almost as many times as a Bure team made the playoffs and he has a Conn Smythe. Bure has one awesome playoff run and then 4 short playoffs where hes right around a point per game. Not really great footing to argue Bure was a better playoff performer

 

[authentic]

No.

Cause he spent most of his prime in the dead hockey era and half of his whole career playing through injuries.

A healthy Forsberg would've had a top-5 career of all time. Most complete superstar to ever play the game, though constantly injured.




Btw....2:18-2:25 is INSANITY.

And do you recognize who he totally embarrassed? Multiple Selke-winner, Jere Lehtinen.

Also 6:36-6:52, that is ridiculous.

 

[Brucelenok]

Lol I'm a wings fan who hates the Hawks but you want to talk about Kanes all star team? Lets talk about how the next closest scorer was 30 points behind him on that team. 3rd place? Almost 50 points behind him. Those are massive gaps, over all star teammates.

I dunno about arguing playoff performers either, Kane is about as good as they come in the playoffs, his game 7 scoring is ridiculous too. Kane has won the cup almost as many times as a Bure team made the playoffs and he has a Conn Smythe. Bure has one awesome playoff run and then 4 short playoffs where hes right around a point per game. Not really great footing to argue Bure was a better playoff performer

I am not sure if you had a chance to watch Bure live or at least video-tapes and his highlights but you honestly want to compare Peak Bure with Peak Kane?? Because thats exactly what the question asks. Let's go to stats. So in 2015-2016 Kane had 106 in 82 games, 29 points over Panarin who played 2 LESS games. in 93-94 season, there were 84 games, Bure played 76 games and had 107 points where he scored 60 goals! If we assume he would play 6 extra games, he probably would have between 115-120 points. His closest teammate was freaking Geoff Courtnall who scored 70 points in 82 games. So Bure outscored his next closest teammate by 37 points by playing in 6 LESS games! Probably would outscore by 45+ if he'd play those 6 extra games. Even though 93-94 was more of higher scoring season it doesn't change the fact that Bure still owns Kane by points, by goals, by who was his closest teammate etc. Ow and Bure was a better defensive winger than Kane too

And regarding a play-off he put his best play-off exactly same season as he did his regular season. Kane doesn't match Bure's overall season (regular + playoff). End of story

 

[authentic]

I am not sure if you had a chance to watch Bure live or at least video-tapes and his highlights but you honestly want to compare Peak Bure with Peak Kane?? Because thats exactly what the question asks. Let's go to stats. So in 2015-2016 Kane had 106 in 82 games, 29 points over Panarin who played 2 LESS games. in 93-94 season, there were 84 games, Bure played 76 games and had 107 points where he scored 60 goals! If we assume he would play 6 extra games, he probably would have between 115-120 points. His closest teammate was freaking Geoff Courtnall who scored 70 points in 82 games. So Bure outscored his next closest teammate by 37 points by playing in 6 LESS games! Probably would outscore by 45+ if he'd play those 6 extra games. Even though 93-94 was more of higher scoring season it doesn't change the fact that Bure still owns Kane by points, by goals, by who was his closest teammate etc. Ow and Bure was a better defensive winger than Kane too

And regarding a play-off he put his best play-off exactly same season as he did his regular season. Kane doesn't match Bure's overall season (regular + playoff). End of story

They are much closer at their peak than many in this thread believe, but at the same time Kane in 2015-16 had 17 more points than anyone else in the NHL, and has had numerous dominant playoff performances. I wouldn't act like it's not a close comparison.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Lol I'm a wings fan who hates the Hawks but you want to talk about Kanes all star team? Lets talk about how the next closest scorer was 30 points behind him on that team. 3rd place? Almost 50 points behind him. Those are massive gaps, over all star teammates.

I dunno about arguing playoff performers either, Kane is about as good as they come in the playoffs, his game 7 scoring is ridiculous too. Kane has won the cup almost as many times as a Bure team made the playoffs and he has a Conn Smythe. Bure has one awesome playoff run and then 4 short playoffs where hes right around a point per game. Not really great footing to argue Bure was a better playoff performer

Whoever you are a fan of is pretty irrelevant. Go look at how Viktor Kozlov was the closest player to Bure in 2000-1 campain and the most impressive thing he was 55 points behind Bure in the dead puck era. Kane received help from having a fantastic winger in Panarin on his line, along with much better offensive support in the back end than whoever Bure played with. Bure had to deal with the two line pass and tougher physical competition. Bure was the main target the opposition's top defenders had to focus on, Kane didn't receive that disadvantage.

We're talking about peak performance. Bure in 1994 is just as good as any playoff Kane had and Kane had the benefit of playing for much better teams, and Toews was better C than anything Bure ever had in his prime to work with. Also Bure was way more physical and better defensively than Kane was, and IMO more skilled too, which is why I have it as Bure> Kane.

I have no problem with you picking Kane, but to to find it ridiculous for anyone to state Bure > Kane is a joke reaction from them and shows how little these few people have actually seen Bure play.

 

[ottawa]

Peak ZMK

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I'm not arguing PP pts < ES pts. You brought in the line mate argument, I never do because it's hard to objectively investigate what impact they have on one another. I was merely showing that Malkin scored nearly half his points with line mates that simply were much greater than the narrative you're pushing. They're tied for 20 ES pts each with Forsberg playing 4 games less, playing in a lower scoring environment, and playing less at ES on a per game basis.

Accounting for all games played:
Malkin saw 381 minutes 40 seconds ES TOI, good for 2nd most among forwards in the playoffs.
Forsberg saw 291 minutes 45 seconds ES TOI, good for 21st monst among forwards in the playoffs.

On a per game basis:
Malkin saw 15:54 ES TOI/GP, good for 9th among forwards in the playoffs.
Forsberg saw 14:35 ES TOI/GP, good for 23rd among forwards in the playoffs.

Unless you're suggesting Forsberg would invent a way to score negative points if playing more games, or seeing more ES TOI or PP TOI for that matter.



hockey-reference

Points and ice-time aren’t a linear thing.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

I am not sure if you had a chance to watch Bure live or at least video-tapes and his highlights but you honestly want to compare Peak Bure with Peak Kane?? Because thats exactly what the question asks. Let's go to stats. So in 2015-2016 Kane had 106 in 82 games, 29 points over Panarin who played 2 LESS games. in 93-94 season, there were 84 games, Bure played 76 games and had 107 points where he scored 60 goals! If we assume he would play 6 extra games, he probably would have between 115-120 points. His closest teammate was freaking Geoff Courtnall who scored 70 points in 82 games. So Bure outscored his next closest teammate by 37 points by playing in 6 LESS games! Probably would outscore by 45+ if he'd play those 6 extra games. Even though 93-94 was more of higher scoring season it doesn't change the fact that Bure still owns Kane by points, by goals, by who was his closest teammate etc. Ow and Bure was a better defensive winger than Kane too

And regarding a play-off he put his best play-off exactly same season as he did his regular season. Kane doesn't match Bure's overall season (regular + playoff). End of story

Congratulations, that season Bure came 12th in hart voting and 5th in pts. Let me know where his 17pt ross win is. Or his landslide hart vs a prime generational player.

 

[newfy]

Congratulations, that season Bure came 12th in hart voting and 5th in pts. Let me know where his 17pt ross win is. Or his landslide hart vs a prime generational player.

Lol seriously.. Boohoo Bures team sucked, I think we all know that. Kane won the Hart and Art Ross (by 17 points!!!) against a healthy Crosby. Maybe didnt outscore his closest teammate by as much as Bure did, but he still outscored the entire league by 17 points. Some people need to give it a rest, Bure was never the best player in the league. For a season, Kane was

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Lol seriously.. Boohoo Bures team sucked, I think we all know that. Kane won the Hart and Art Ross (by 17 points!!!) against a healthy Crosby. Maybe didnt outscore his closest teammate by as much as Bure did, but he still outscored the entire league by 17 points. Some people need to give it a rest, Bure was never the best player in the league. For a season, Kane was

Now you're going to get told that Bure couldn't be the best player in the league because he competed against Gretzky and Lemieux... Even though he didn't lose a ross, hart or lindsay to them lol.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Lol seriously.. Boohoo Bures team sucked, I think we all know that. Kane won the Hart and Art Ross (by 17 points!!!) against a healthy Crosby. Maybe didnt outscore his closest teammate by as much as Bure did, but he still outscored the entire league by 17 points. Some people need to give it a rest, Bure was never the best player in the league. For a season, Kane was

How about trying to come up with an actual reasoning and respond to posts that counter yours instead of posting this drivel. Give it a rest with this Kane nonsense.

 

[newfy]

How about trying to come up with an actual reasoning and respond to posts that counter yours instead of posting this drivel. Give it a rest with this Kane nonsense.

This drivel? The drivel is people saying Bure is better than peak season Kane. I've given my reasoning, Kane was the best player in the NHL for a season and had an absolutely dominant Art Ross win. The nonsense here is people living in the past and not realizing how dominant that season was for Kane. Bure never hit that level.

Since the 99-00 season, Kanes 17 points higher than second place has never been beaten. Crosby has led 2nd place by that much once and is tied with him, a generational, top 10 all time player has had that gap over second place once. Malkin has never done it, Ovechkin has never done it. He took home 121 first place votes for the hart, second place had 11.

Now someone will say "Oh but Bure had worse teammates" like that somehow beats the guy having the most dominant art ross win in the last 20 years. Nonsense is right