Unpopular opinions

[Yozhik v tumane]

I don't know either. But it's mentioned in the parting-ways announcements that he signed a contract with Rogle B.K. so, fair to say that there was money involved assumedly; also I found this in The Hockey News...

I’d be interested in seeing what the contract looked like, but I don’t necessarily think that signing a contract with a team meant signing off on a salary. Theoretically it could just be an agreement that he would play for Rögle and couldn’t switch teams for the duration of the contract. In many cases, the way I’ve understood athletes earned their living back then, a contract would involve a “real job” with time off for practice and games. I agree that there likely were good money involved in the case of Sterner though. Firstly, Rögle’s plainly an odd choice for him immediately after his NHL stint. They played a tier below the top division, was not close to home for him, and his former team Frölunda were reigning champions. Rögle must have given him a good deal. But: a professional salary should have barred him from playing in the national team, I guess? So what was the deal?

Sterner, aforementioned Canadian Des Moroney and American goalie Tom Haugh were called “expensive stars” in contemporary accounts, and important parts in Rögle’s push to advance through the league pyramid.

In Sterner’s case I found two clues of how he made a living playing for Rögle in an interview for Hockeysverige. As I mentioned earlier, he ran a sports goods store playing there. I’m thinking this was his “profession”. He said he made a pretty good buck selling tickets for the team’s games through this shop, earning one SEK per ticket (a US dollar and some change, adjusted for inflation). He also mentioned a promise of a “fribrev” by the team’s big sponsor, which I’m not sure I understand but I think related to his pension with regards to taxes. But the deal to sell tickets through his shop and some kind of tax exemption seem like two plausible aspects that made Rögle a lucrative destination for him, while circumventing the amateur rules.

 

[JackSlater]

I don't know if this is unpopular as much as different, but I think that Perreault would have better replicated Lafleur's success in Montreal than Dionne would have.

This isn't history of hockey but I really think that Kariya would be probably the second best forward in hockey today and that he was the main victim, stylistically, of the dead puck era.

 

[VanIslander]

I don't know if this is unpopular as much as different, but I think that Perreault would have better replicated Lafleur's success in Montreal than Dionne would have.

This isn't history of hockey but I really think that Kariya would be probably the second best forward in hockey today and that he was the main victim, stylistically, of the dead puck era.

Yanic? That Perreault was an extremely talented passer, better than Joe Thornton but without the constitution to handle the grind and with the slowest wheels in the biz.

Kariya was indeed headhunted in a dirty era but his passing was no greater than Patrick Kane, which is saying a lot, but not top-50 all-time worthy talk. He instead is a posterboy of how MUCH an underperforming talent could be appreciated and honored. No one has done less and been respected more. Kudos.

 

[JackSlater]

Yanic? That Perreault was an extremely talented passer, better than Joe Thornton but without the constitution to handle the grind and with the slowest wheels in the biz.

Kariya was indeed headhunted in a dirty era but his passing was no greater than Patrick Kane, which is saying a lot, but not top-50 all-time worthy talk. He instead is a posterboy of how MUCH an underperforming talent could be appreciated and honored. No one has done less and been respected more. Kudos.

I don't know what the point here is but thanks for informing me I guess.

 

[VanIslander]

Unpopular opinion?

 

[daver]

This isn't history of hockey but I really think that Kariya would be probably the second best forward in hockey today and that he was the main victim, stylistically, of the dead puck era.

My unpopular opinion is that the DPE and the DPE 2.0 did not affect any player's legacies in terms of capacity to finish as high as they could in any other era due to being too small or because they were big (Jagr, Lindros).

St. Louis won an Art Ross, Kane won a dominant Art Ross.

The d-men of today are a lot more mobile than they were in the DPE so Kariya's speed would be kept in check more.

He was a 4th overall pick whose career numbers played out pretty good in comparison to other 4th overall picks.

I guess you can argue he would have been drafted higher in another era. Was he as touted as high as Kane was?

 

[VanIslander]

Kariya, Kane... belong in the same breath.

 

[Felidae]

My unpopular opinion is that the DPE and the DPE 2.0 did not affect any player's legacies in terms of capacity to finish as high as they could in any other era due to being too small or because they were big (Jagr, Lindros).

St. Louis won an Art Ross, Kane won a dominant Art Ross.

The d-men of today are a lot more mobile than they were in the DPE so Kariya's speed would be kept in check more.

He was a 4th overall pick whose career numbers played out pretty good in comparison to other 4th overall picks.

I guess you can argue he would have been drafted higher in another era. Was he as touted as high as Kane was?

I agree with this. I do think players like Bure, Forsberg, lindros and Kariya would be much healthier, so they'd probably have longer primes and their legacies would be more solidified rather than a bunch of "what ifs". But I don't think they'd dominate their competition to a greater degree than they did in the DPE. (It would be about the same)

 

[Felidae]

Luongo is the best goalie of the 2000s, and really, better than any goalie since then(for now)...

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

He was a 4th overall pick whose career numbers played out pretty good in comparison to other 4th overall picks.

I guess you can argue he would have been drafted higher in another era. Was he as touted as high as Kane was?

I feel as if Kariya was/would have been pretty highly thought of at the draft, but Daigle, Pronger and Gratton were still drafted ahead of him. With Daigle, he was a tremendously highly touted draft pick, right? Perhaps not in the Lindros/Crosby sphere but in the next tier: if not a “generational” talent then at least one who would go first most years. Pronger of course was probably was the top defenseman no-brainer, and Gratton, considering the era and the Lindros hype, seems to me in hindsight like one of the all-time most overrated players, and probably prospects.

Certain posters (@Habsfan18, @tabness?) can probably shed light on Kariya’s status as a prospect, but based on his performance for Team Canada and whatnot it feels like he probably was considered a top talent albeit hurt by size concerns.

In his D+1 year he must have been in “best player outside the NHL”-talks, I think?

I’m pretty sure he alongside Petr Nedved was considered Canada’s main threat in the 1994 Olympics, here in Sweden. Not sure how aware our hockey people were prior to the tournament, but I don’t think it was merely a revelation during the tournament. He’d been solid in the 1993 World Championships, which were prior to his draft.

 

[Mohar Ikram]

Luongo is the best goalie of the 2000s, and really, better than any goalie since then(for now)...

Please explain how this is unpopular, because AFAIK, this take is insanely popular. Everyone felt relief when he finally able to put his name on the cup.

 

[Felidae]

Please explain how this is unpopular, because AFAIK, this take is insanely popular. Everyone felt relief when he finally able to put his name on the cup.

I think most people here would rank Brodeur as the number 1 goalie of the 2000s, not Luongo..

Lundqvist also won a poll against Luongo a couple years back, so I'm not even convinced Luongo would come 2nd on most people's lists.

 

[JackSlater]

My unpopular opinion is that the DPE and the DPE 2.0 did not affect any player's legacies in terms of capacity to finish as high as they could in any other era due to being too small or because they were big (Jagr, Lindros).

St. Louis won an Art Ross, Kane won a dominant Art Ross.

The d-men of today are a lot more mobile than they were in the DPE so Kariya's speed would be kept in check more.

He was a 4th overall pick whose career numbers played out pretty good in comparison to other 4th overall picks.

I guess you can argue he would have been drafted higher in another era. Was he as touted as high as Kane was?

I don't know what you mean by "finish as high as they could" but it seems..... very strange to think that things play out the same for every player regardless of era. This is an unpopular opinions thread of course. This post is all over the place though. First off, the "DPE2.0" is irrelevant to my post as I was not referring to low scoring hockey but the style of hockey that was played at the time of Kariya's peak.

Likewise, comparisons to St. Louis and Kane don't work just because they are small. They don't generate offence the same way and especially in the case of St. Louis aren't built the same way. I don't want to get into it too much but I'd say that Kariya is comfortably the best off the rush of these three, which is a more significant part of offence now compared to the attrition warfare of Kariya's peak, and that he was more inclined than the others to get his offence in the middle of the dots once in the zone, which was a problem for anyone (but especially small players) at his peak. He's also the fastest of these three and peaked at a time when speed was hindered, plus Kariya could process quickly at a time when that wasn't necessarily as important as it is today. I do think that the comparison of the three works in terms of none of the three ever having considered defending before, but that would be fine now.

Kariya wasn't as hyped as he would be in recent times because he played NCAA hockey and was small, even though he torched his league. Kane had more hype I'd say but he wasn't through the roof either. If you switched their draft years there are good odds that they swap draft spots as well.

 

[bobholly39]

I think most people here would rank Brodeur as the number 1 goalie of the 2000s, not Luongo..

Lundqvist also won a poll against Luongo a couple years back, so I'm not even convinced Luongo would come 2nd on most people's lists.

Price is definitely better than Luongo (Brodeur too).

Luongo is a goalie I have a lot of trouble trusting for a big game/big playoff run. Lundqvist is definitely better in that regard too

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Yanic? That Perreault was an extremely talented passer, better than Joe Thornton but without the constitution to handle the grind and with the slowest wheels in the biz.

Kariya was indeed headhunted in a dirty era but his passing was no greater than Patrick Kane, which is saying a lot, but not top-50 all-time worthy talk. He instead is a posterboy of how MUCH an underperforming talent could be appreciated and honored. No one has done less and been respected more. Kudos.

I'd call that a very unpopular opinion.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'd call that a very unpopular opinion.

It's not even unpopular in the right direction. Perreault was a shooter - a good one at that - and was not a great passer. Like his son Jacob.

If you want to be unpopular,.you could say that he would have out scored Glenn Murray (or whoever) if he cared...

 

[Mohar Ikram]

Yanic? That Perreault was an extremely talented passer, better than Joe Thornton but without the constitution to handle the grind and with the slowest wheels in the biz.

I don't know you're joking or not but I think he is talking about Gilbert. Not Yanic.

 

[VanIslander]

I was not born this century.

This is the Hockey History board.

The only great Perreault i've seen (ain't old enough for Gilbert) was the slow-foot passing Yanic.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Now I'm starting to wonder if *I* actually watched Yanic Perreault.

 

[JackSlater]

Yes it's time I fess up. I did mean that Yanic Perreault could replicate Mark Lafleur's success in the Montreal party scene better than Gilbert Dionne could have.

 

[MadLuke]

talking about a Perrault in place of Lafleur on the Habs
Hum this will be a talk about the great Gilbert Perrault

I was not born this century.
Hum this will be a talk about the great Gilbert Perrault

This is the Hockey History board.
Hum this will be a talk about the great Gilbert Perrault

The only great Perreault i've seen (ain't old enough for Gilbert) was the slow-foot passing Yanic.
Surprise !

Next, the great Donald Audette would have won more cup than Steve Shutt.

A center than often scored more goals than assists in his career:
-Better at creating play with a pass than Joe Thornton
-Would have done what Lafleur did with the Canadians.

Quite a mix of unpopular opinions going on.

Kariya was indeed headhunted in a dirty era but his passing was no greater than Patrick Kane,

With a competing for the Rocket goal scoring.....

 

[Michael Farkas]

Is he confusing Yanic Perreault with Jason Allison maybe?

Both wore numbers in the 40s, both played for Toronto and Los Angeles, career overlapped basically 100%.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I can't stand by and read all of these posts about Yanic Perreault without posting this:

 

[daver]

I don't know what you mean by "finish as high as they could" but it seems..... very strange to think that things play out the same for every player regardless of era. This is an unpopular opinions thread of course. This post is all over the place though. First off, the "DPE2.0" is irrelevant to my post as I was not referring to low scoring hockey but the style of hockey that was played at the time of Kariya's peak.

Likewise, comparisons to St. Louis and Kane don't work just because they are small. They don't generate offence the same way and especially in the case of St. Louis aren't built the same way. I don't want to get into it too much but I'd say that Kariya is comfortably the best off the rush of these three, which is a more significant part of offence now compared to the attrition warfare of Kariya's peak, and that he was more inclined than the others to get his offence in the middle of the dots once in the zone, which was a problem for anyone (but especially small players) at his peak. He's also the fastest of these three and peaked at a time when speed was hindered, plus Kariya could process quickly at a time when that wasn't necessarily as important as it is today. I do think that the comparison of the three works in terms of none of the three ever having considered defending before, but that would be fine now.

Kariya wasn't as hyped as he would be in recent times because he played NCAA hockey and was small, even though he torched his league. Kane had more hype I'd say but he wasn't through the roof either. If you switched their draft years there are good odds that they swap draft spots as well.

Fair points on the different styles of play between Kariya, Kane and St. Louis. One counter would be the success of Bure in both the early '90s and late '90s; he seemingly was not affected by the DPE.

As much as Kariya was obstructed in the DPE, one can argue he also thrived against slower, less mobile d-men than he would face today.

I guess I see it as, if anything, players like Jagr and Lindros overperformed in the DPE due to their size moreso than smaller and/or speedier players underperformed.

But I would not argue that Jagr is any less dominant if his prime was today. That would be too unpopular.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Lemieux would have broken 215 in 92-93