The Athletic's 100 best players - Yzerman at 15

[Sentinel]

Crosby didn’t have Lemieux and Gretzky to compete against for those Hart and Art Ross trophies.

Remove Lemieux and Gretzky, and the only time Yzerman wins an Art Ross is 1987-88. That's one time to Crosby's two.

And if you remove McDavid, you can give Crosby an Art Ross in 2016-17.

I agree Ovie is a better goal scorer, but he isn’t a better player. If Ovie played at the same time as Gretzky and Lemieux, he doesn’t win any of the harts or art Ross trophies and likely just a handful of those Richard trophies.

Not necessarily. Hull won the Hart in 1991, Messier in 1990 and 1992. Ovechkin is better than them.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Remove Lemieux and Gretzky, and the only time Yzerman wins an Art Ross is 1987-88. That's one time to Crosby's two.

And if you remove McDavid, you can give Crosby an Art Ross in 2016-17.


Not necessarily. Hull won the Hart in 1991, Messier in 1990 and 1992. Ovechkin is better than them.

I'm guessing you mean the 1989 season when Yzerman put up 155 points. He's one of three players to ever do so.

And really Gretzky should've won the Hart in 1990 as well but it was likely a bit of voter fatigue and a more interesting story that Messier was putting up those numbers without Gretzky, even though Gretzky put up 142 points (13 more than Mess) and did it in 73 games with the Los Angeles Kings.

 

[tabness]

Remove Lemieux and Gretzky, and the only time Yzerman wins an Art Ross is 1987-88. That's one time to Crosby's two.

And if you remove McDavid, you can give Crosby an Art Ross in 2016-17.


Not necessarily. Hull won the Hart in 1991, Messier in 1990 and 1992. Ovechkin is better than them.

Ovechkin has never had a goal scoring season like Hull's 86 goal one (in whatever way you want to slice it - adjusted, dominance against peers, score effects, even strength, non empty net, whatever). Don't think any of his years would be above that one. Ovechkin may be the most consistently great goal scorer, and he will be the greatest if/when he passes the record, but best? I'd definitely say like Lemieux could score goals better, and that Hull's 1990-1991 season is the best goal scoring season, at least in my lifetime.

Messier simply doesn't become the player he was without Gretzky. As he was though, Messier brings a lot of stuff that Ovechkin doesn't...

Just removing Gretzky and Lemieux in terms trophies and stats naively, misses out on how much of a prestige boost it would be to someone like Yzerman. Crosby won two scoring titles and MVPs each yet very few dispute his status throughout his prime years and looking at only the stats now makes people forget how Stevie (and to a lesser degree Messier and Hull and Bourque) was considered much more closely to Gretzky and Lemieux than now.

 

[Sentinel]

I'm guessing you mean the 1989 season when Yzerman put up 155 points. He's one of three players to ever do so.

And really Gretzky should've won the Hart in 1990 as well but it was likely a bit of voter fatigue and a more interesting story that Messier was putting up those numbers without Gretzky, even though Gretzky put up 142 points (13 more than Mess) and did it in 73 games with the Los Angeles Kings.

Yes, I meant 88-89 season.

There is more to life than offensive stats. Gretzky wasn't even in the top three finalists that year: he was fourth with 16 votes after Messier (227), Bourque (225), and Hull (80). Gretzky should not have and could not have won Hart that year.

 

[Sentinel]

Ovechkin has never had a goal scoring season like Hull's 86 goal one (in whatever way you want to slice it - adjusted, dominance against peers, score effects, even strength, non empty net, whatever). Don't think any of his years would be above that one. Ovechkin may be the most consistently great goal scorer, and he will be the greatest if/when he passes the record, but best? I'd definitely say like Lemieux could score goals better, and that Hull's 1990-1991 season is the best goal scoring season, at least in my lifetime.

Messier simply doesn't become the player he was without Gretzky. As he was though, Messier brings a lot of stuff that Ovechkin doesn't...

Just removing Gretzky and Lemieux in terms trophies and stats naively, misses out on how much of a prestige boost it would be to someone like Yzerman. Crosby won two scoring titles and MVPs each yet very few dispute his status throughout his prime years and looking at only the stats now makes people forget how Stevie (and to a lesser degree Messier and Hull and Bourque) was considered much more closely to Gretzky and Lemieux than now.

Ovechkin also did not have the support that Hull did: Backstrom was never on the level of Oates. And Hull, like you said, never had the consistency of Ovechkin: he never had a 50 goal season after the age of 29 (and had five 50+ goal seasons to Ovechkin's nine).

As for the rest, I'm not sure what your point is. Yzerman was held in very high regard (yet miraculously was left off Team Canada in both 1987 and 1991). Crosby was held in even higher regard. Removing 66 and 99 would boost Yzerman but still wouldn't give him Crosby's trophy case.

 

[tabness]

Ovechkin also did not have the support that Hull did: Backstrom was never on the level of Oates. And Hull, like you said, never had the consistency of Ovechkin: he never had a 50 goal season after the age of 29 (and had five 50+ goal seasons to Ovechkin's nine).

As for the rest, I'm not sure what your point is. Yzerman was held in very high regard (yet miraculously was left off Team Canada in both 1987 and 1991). Crosby was held in even higher regard. Removing 66 and 99 would boost Yzerman but still wouldn't give him Crosby's trophy case.

Thought it was clear? Removing Gretzky and Lemieux from just stats and awards and seeing what's left doesn't make sense.

In particular, Messier isn't gonna be a 129 point MVP without the presence of Gretzky making him the player he became, and obviously Yzerman's next on up with 127 in 1989-1990.

In general, without Gretzky and Lemieux, I think it's clear Yzerman's star would shine even brighter. I mean, he'd be the highest scoring player in a season ever, his magic on the ice wouldn't be rivalled and eclipsed (Score had the Magician cards with Gretzky and Yzerman, it would be just Yzerman lol). That kind of added star power does wonders for how the awards are voted on. Oh, and even Mike Keenan couldn't leave Yzerman off the teams without those guys either (he was given a place on Team Canada under every other regime - Sather/Bowman/Clarke/Gretzky - Gretzky even retired his number for Canada in 2006 when he declined his invite, and didn't give Crosby a spot either).

Aside from Gretzky and Lemieux, just the other guys when Yzerman in his prime seems to be way higher star power than the Crosby era, even the NHL refers back to those times in their "New Golden Era" ads lol

Can't disagree that Crosby's been held in higher regard in his time, he's been overrated even though he was the best player of his time. Then again, he certainly wouldn't get that golden boy treatment if he came in when Gretzky and Lemieux were in the league though.

 

[kliq]

Nobody forgets anything. But Yzerman's 5x50+ goals came in a much higher scoring era. And Ovechkin has 9x50+

Ovy is the best goalscorer in the HISTORY OF THE GAME. 3 Harts, 1 Art Ross, and 9 Richards to Yzerman's zeroes. I am a huge fan of Yzerman but as far as achievements go, this is not a contest.

You seem to be putting way too much weight on trophies. I'm not going to say that trophies mean nothing, but they dont mean everything. Tell me this, outside of scoring and winning trophies, what element of the game is Ovie better then Yzerman at? Stick Handling? Playmaking? Defense? Leadership? Agility/Skating?

Ovie is the most consistent scorer in NHL history, but IMO he isnt at Yzerman's level as a player. If you asked all 32 GM's who they would choose to build a franchise around between an 18 year old Yzerman or an 18 year old Ovie, I believe all 32 would choose Yzerman (ok, maybe 31 as Ill give the Caps GM to Ovie lol).

 

[Gniwder]

You seem to be putting way too much weight on trophies. I'm not going to say that trophies mean nothing, but they dont mean everything. Tell me this, outside of scoring and winning trophies, what element of the game is Ovie better then Yzerman at? Stick Handling? Playmaking? Defense? Leadership? Agility/Skating?

Ovie is the most consistent scorer in NHL history, but IMO he isnt at Yzerman's level as a player. If you asked all 32 GM's who they would choose to build a franchise around between an 18 year old Yzerman or an 18 year old Ovie, I believe all 32 would choose Yzerman (ok, maybe 31 as Ill give the Caps GM to Ovie lol).

The Cap's GM is tied to Ovie because he draws in the crowd. Go look at the '98 Cup videos and you'll see more Wings jerseys in the stands than Caps jerseys.

I actually think that GMBM would pick Stevie over Ovie for the impending rebuild. It was McPhee that picked Ovie (over Malkin), it wasn't even his decision.

That being said, the best pure scorer in the history of the league is going to be ranked top 10, if not top 5 in these lists.

 

[DanielMarois]

Crosby is better than Yzerman, Yzerman played a lot of his prime years in the high-scoring era and when goalies mostly sucked and even with this they have the same amount of 100 point seasons and Crosby has much better playoff numbers.

 

[ricky0034]

outside of Goaltending and winning trophies what element of the game is Hasek better than Brendan Smith at?

 

[Sentinel]

Thought it was clear? Removing Gretzky and Lemieux from just stats and awards and seeing what's left doesn't make sense.

In particular, Messier isn't gonna be a 129 point MVP without the presence of Gretzky making him the player he became, and obviously Yzerman's next on up with 127 in 1989-1990.

In general, without Gretzky and Lemieux, I think it's clear Yzerman's star would shine even brighter. I mean, he'd be the highest scoring player in a season ever, his magic on the ice wouldn't be rivalled and eclipsed (Score had the Magician cards with Gretzky and Yzerman, it would be just Yzerman lol). That kind of added star power does wonders for how the awards are voted on. Oh, and even Mike Keenan couldn't leave Yzerman off the teams without those guys either (he was given a place on Team Canada under every other regime - Sather/Bowman/Clarke/Gretzky - Gretzky even retired his number for Canada in 2006 when he declined his invite, and didn't give Crosby a spot either).

Aside from Gretzky and Lemieux, just the other guys when Yzerman in his prime seems to be way higher star power than the Crosby era, even the NHL refers back to those times in their "New Golden Era" ads lol

Can't disagree that Crosby's been held in higher regard in his time, he's been overrated even though he was the best player of his time. Then again, he certainly wouldn't get that golden boy treatment if he came in when Gretzky and Lemieux were in the league though.

That's a whole lotta "ifs." There are only so many butterflies you can step on in the past.

We have what we have. Yzerman has his accomplishments, Crosby has his. I am a lifelong Wings fan and I love Yzerman to death, but to deny that Crosby should be placed higher on the all-time pedestal is straight-up homerism.

 

[Sentinel]

You seem to be putting way too much weight on trophies. I'm not going to say that trophies mean nothing, but they dont mean everything. Tell me this, outside of scoring and winning trophies, what element of the game is Ovie better then Yzerman at? Stick Handling? Playmaking? Defense? Leadership? Agility/Skating?

Ovie is the most consistent scorer in NHL history, but IMO he isnt at Yzerman's level as a player. If you asked all 32 GM's who they would choose to build a franchise around between an 18 year old Yzerman or an 18 year old Ovie, I believe all 32 would choose Yzerman (ok, maybe 31 as Ill give the Caps GM to Ovie lol).

Physicality, for one. But it doesn't matter. Individual attributes don't matter, otherwise Alexei Kovalev would be ranked higher than Maurice Richard. What matters is what you do with these attributes. You're goddamn right, I place a lot of weight on trophies. This is what sports are all about: achievements.

Currently, both Crosby and Ovechkin are about 300 points behind Yzerman. They can both feasibly overtake him in about four seasons, despite playing in much lower scoring eras.

As for your second point -- "you believe"? And I believe if you ask 32 TEAM OWNERS, which player would they rather have, all 32 would pick Ovechkin. Ovechkin is the best player to put butts in the seats since Gretzky by virtue of his charisma and marketability (even though he is Russian, could barely speak English when he first arrived, and is a Putin stooge).

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Imagine what more Yzerman would've done in his career had the post come off it's moorings like it's supposed to and he had not badly injured his knee in 1988. I remember watching the game and the feeling at the time and for a few days after is his career might be over. That injury and Rick Tocchet were the beginning of the end for Yzerman's knees.



(there's also fun highlights from that season. Not just the injury)

 

[Stony Curtis]

Imagine what more Yzerman would've done in his career had the post come off it's moorings like it's supposed to and he had not badly injured his knee in 1988. I remember watching the game and the feeling at the time and for a few days after is his career might be over. That injury and Rick Tocchet were the beginning of the end for Yzerman's knees.



(there's also fun highlights from that season. Not just the injury)

I think the moorings had been yet to be redesigned. IIRC, it was Yzerman's injury that spurred the change. Much like Mark Howe's gruesome injury precipitated the redesign of the net.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

I think the moorings had been yet to be redesigned. IIRC, it was Yzerman's injury that spurred the change. Much like Mark Howe's gruesome injury precipitated the redesign of the net.

This injury was definitely back before the redesign, when they had the magnets screwed into the ice that fit inside the posts. When Yzerman hit the post it was partially stuck and frozen to the ice so it didn't pop off nearly as easily as it should have.

 

[tabness]

That's a whole lotta "ifs." There are only so many butterflies you can step on in the past.

We have what we have. Yzerman has his accomplishments, Crosby has his. I am a lifelong Wings fan and I love Yzerman to death, but to deny that Crosby should be placed higher on the all-time pedestal is straight-up homerism.

I mean we're trying to compare the incommensurable, players that basically didn't overlap in terms of their career lol. Everything is based counterfactual reasoning, including trying to compare accomplishments or stats or whatever, which of are heavily based on factors outside a player's own agency.

For the examples I gave, it's well established that it was Messier from the Oiler greats who blossomed as a player due to Gretzky's effect and far exceeded his potential (obviously Kurri, Coffey, and so on benefited as well, but their talent was seen as juniors before ever playing with Gretzky it was much more likely that they'd hit their potential than Messier). It's also a well established sentiment contemporaneously that Yzerman's star would shine brighter if it wasn't for Gretzky and Lemieux.

If your all time pedestal is just based on comparing stats and awards from different eras, I mean OK, but quite frankly, that entire enterprise is just based on a house of cards lol

Yzerman at his zenith was compared directly to Gretzky and Lemieux themselves not lesser players, and had a good showing, not much more that could be more flattering.

Lastly, this is Crosby and Ovechkin lol, it isn't like a Lindros or McDavid, at least with the latter, I can see what makes them better players than Stevie. The former though, not so much, call me a homer if you want (and yeah would say the same thing about them vs Messier or Bourque or Coffey or whoever of Yzerman's contemporaries).

Let me just turn to the great Brett Hull:

 

[kliq]

Physicality, for one. But it doesn't matter. Individual attributes don't matter, otherwise Alexei Kovalev would be ranked higher than Maurice Richard. What matters is what you do with these attributes. You're goddamn right, I place a lot of weight on trophies. This is what sports are all about: achievements.

Currently, both Crosby and Ovechkin are about 300 points behind Yzerman. They can both feasibly overtake him in about four seasons, despite playing in much lower scoring eras.

As for your second point -- "you believe"? And I believe if you ask 32 TEAM OWNERS, which player would they rather have, all 32 would pick Ovechkin. Ovechkin is the best player to put butts in the seats since Gretzky by virtue of his charisma and marketability (even though he is Russian, could barely speak English when he first arrived, and is a Putin stooge).

Agree to disagree about trophies, winning a trophy means a group of people (many of which don't even watch every game) simply voted for you, hardy an "achievement" (obviously Art Ross and Richard aside). I said it once, Ill say it again, Ovie is a more consistent goal scorer but Yzerman is better everywhere else and is a better player overall. If your definition of who's the better player is simply offense, Yzerman still has more points and has wayyyyy more assists (1063 to 652) and Yzerman only has 192 games on Ovie. Playmaking is just as important as scoring, and most will argue that a Center that drives offense is a hell of a lot more important then a sniper on the wing. Then when you take into consideration the defensive responsibilities of a 1C like Yzerman, he blows Ovie out of the water.

You say that Yzerman played in a higher scoring era when comparing total points for their careers, yet you're forgetting that Yzerman played until 2006. Sure the 80's were a higher scoring era, but the end of his career was the dead puck era and one of the lowest scoring era's in league history in which he essentially played on one leg. If you actually break down the league average for goals per game in each of their careers, for Yzerman its 3.2 GPG while in Ovie's career it was 2.9 so we're not talking gigantic differences here.

Yzerman is a better player than Ovie, and quite frankly its not even close. If you want to use "Ovies a bigger draw" as a main point in your argument, I think that speaks volumes right there and kind of proves my point.

 

[Gniwder]

outside of Goaltending and winning trophies what element of the game is Hasek better than Brendan Smith at?

Take away the top 180 defenseman in the league and Brendan would have won the Norris trophy every season of his career.

Obviously underrated.

 

[Geezer WC]

Yzerman was held in very high regard (yet miraculously was left off Team Canada in both 1987 and 1991)

Keenan was playing games with the Captain of a division rival.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Keenan was playing games with the Captain of a division rival.

yup.

He's been out of the league how many years and seeing his name still gets my hackles up. What a jackass that guy was.

 

[Sentinel]

Agree to disagree about trophies, winning a trophy means a group of people (many of which don't even watch every game) simply voted for you, hardy an "achievement" (obviously Art Ross and Richard aside). I said it once, Ill say it again, Ovie is a more consistent goal scorer but Yzerman is better everywhere else and is a better player overall. If your definition of who's the better player is simply offense, Yzerman still has more points and has wayyyyy more assists (1063 to 652) and Yzerman only has 192 games on Ovie. Playmaking is just as important as scoring, and most will argue that a Center that drives offense is a hell of a lot more important then a sniper on the wing. Then when you take into consideration the defensive responsibilities of a 1C like Yzerman, he blows Ovie out of the water.

You say that Yzerman played in a higher scoring era when comparing total points for their careers, yet you're forgetting that Yzerman played until 2006. Sure the 80's were a higher scoring era, but the end of his career was the dead puck era and one of the lowest scoring era's in league history in which he essentially played on one leg. If you actually break down the league average for goals per game in each of their careers, for Yzerman its 3.2 GPG while in Ovie's career it was 2.9 so we're not talking gigantic differences here.

Yzerman is a better player than Ovie, and quite frankly its not even close. If you want to use "Ovies a bigger draw" as a main point in your argument, I think that speaks volumes right there and kind of proves my point.

It proves the opposite of your point. And you hang your hat on dismissing voted trophies (which is rather stupid of you because it hurts Yzerman even more: his only awards -- the Lindsay, the Conn Smythe, and the Selke -- are ALL voted, haha!), which basically proves MY POINT.

We are not talking who was better. We are talking who was GREATER. And that means trophies and other achievements with respect to their peers. 3 Harts, 1 AR, and 9 f***ing Richards blow Yzerman's single Selke clean out of the water.

Outside of Detroit, NOBODY will make an argument now that Yzerman stands above Ovechkin or Crosby on the all-time greatness scale.

 

[kliq]

It proves the opposite of your point. And you hang your hat on dismissing voted trophies (which is rather stupid of you because it hurts Yzerman even more: his only awards -- the Lindsay, the Conn Smythe, and the Selke -- are ALL voted, haha!), which basically proves MY POINT.

We are not talking who was better. We are talking who was GREATER. And that means trophies and other achievements with respect to their peers. 3 Harts, 1 AR, and 9 f***ing Richards blow Yzerman's single Selke clean out of the water.

Outside of Detroit, NOBODY will make an argument now that Yzerman stands above Ovechkin or Crosby on the all-time greatness scale.

I am talking who is better. I couldnt care less about your definition of what "greater" is. I will be crystal clear, I believe Yzerman is a better hockey player then Ovie.

 

[Sentinel]

I am talking who is better. I couldnt care less about your definition of what "greater" is. I will be crystal clear, I believe Yzerman is a better hockey player then Ovie.

To be crystal clear: it doesn't matter what you believe.

 

[kliq]

To be crystal clear: it doesn't matter what you believe.

Then why are you wasting your time going back and forth with me?

 

[Sentinel]

Then why are you wasting your time going back and forth with me?

Because it's a hockey forum. Your beliefs and opinions are of value to yourself only. Unlike presented facts and evidence.