Vincent Lecavalier Versus Steven Stamkos

[GlitchMarner]

How do they compare as of today?

Tampa is one of secondary teams, and I'm a fan of both of these players (although my favorite former Lightning centre is Brad Richards, as you may have guessed by now).

I think at his peak, which only lasted two seasons, Lecavalier was better than Stamkos has ever been, even during his 60 goal season, but I think Steven is well ahead of where Vinny was when he was 27 years old. It was during his age 27 season that Lecavalier broke out. He took him quite a while to get there.

Stamkos has actually regressed somewhat from his younger days, but he's still in his prime and he showed signs of being his former self last season before getting injured. I think he'll definitely put together some more strong seasons if he stays healthier than he has been in recent years and will pass Lecavalier.

 

[Sticks and Pucks]

I think Stamkos' accolades has already equaled that of Lecavalier. Stamkos still has a decade of hockey left so I'd take Stamkos at this point.

 

[Big Phil]

Stamkos at the same age blows Vinny out of the water. In reality Stamkos practically hit the ground running from day one. Led the NHL in goals in his sophomore season when he was still a teenager. Really took a big leap from year 1 to year 2. Lecavalier never had that. He struggled to find elite offense until after the lockout.

Overall I will take Stamkos from an eventual career standpoint as well. I don't care about his injuries, he was THE story in the NHL last year before he got hurt.

 

[GlitchMarner]

If Lecavalier had had more years where he played like he did in '07, I think this would be a better comparison.

THAT version of Lecavalier was one hell of a player - definitely world class and one of the top players in the NHL. He was great offensively and very good defensively, he had size, strength and reach and was flashy as well. Stamkos has never had that complete package, but he's consistently put up points and scored goals whereas Lecavalier had a number of under-whelming seasons even when he was younger.

Unfortunately, it took him years to become that player, and then that piece of trash Matt Cooke abruptly ended his peak

 

[Sensinitis]

I like peak Lecavalier better. I like Stamkos. However, I think he tends to get a bit overrated.

His best seasons were insane, but his linemate St.Louis outplayed him in the playoffs. When St.Louis left, it's guys like Hedman, Kucherov, Johnson, even Palat, who I think contributed more to the Lightning's playoff successes.*

I find him very similar to Seguin at this point, in the sense that he has a lot to prove despite achieving a lot in the regular season.

Lecavalier in 04 playoffs was very good in my opinion.

*of course, Stamkos was injured for significant portions, but he did play a lot of games nevertheless.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

LeCavalier for peak, Stamkos for prime.

Career requires further analysis, but I think its Stamkos

 

[Sticks and Pucks]

I'm still not sure how Lecavalier's peak is better than Stamkos' peak. Lecavalier finished fourth in Hart voting in his best season, Stamkos finished second in 2011-2012. Both players won the Rocket Richard that year. Scoring in the NHL was down during Stamkos' peak compared to Lecavalier's peak.

 

[GlitchMarner]

I'm still not sure how Lecavalier's peak is better than Stamkos' peak. Lecavalier finished fourth in Hart voting in his best season, Stamkos finished second in 2011-2012. Both players won the Rocket Richard that year. Scoring in the NHL was down during Stamkos' peak compared to Lecavalier's peak.

Vinny was a better all-around player.

As I said, I like Stamkos... but one common criticism that he receives is that when he's not scoring a ton, he can't really be put in the upper-echelon of NHL centres.

In 2012, his goal output WAS ridiculous, but Lecavalier in '07 led the NHL in goals himself while also putting up 108 points, logging heavy minutes and playing in all situations.

The Lightning basically worked him like a horse for a few years because they didn't have much depth beyond the big three. That could be part of the reason he wore down so much while still in his early to mid 30s.

Lecavalier and St. Louis basically dragged Tampa into the playoffs in '07. Richards has a meh season that year... by his usual standards at the time anyway. He was coming off a 91 point output the previous season and a top ten finish in points the season prior.

In 2012, they missed the playoffs... although they would have been much, much worse without Stamkos' tremendous season.

 

[The Panther]

I'm still not sure how Lecavalier's peak is better than Stamkos' peak.

It depends; some of us don't think of "peak" as only one season.

Recall that Lacavalier...
- scored 9 goals in a Cup-winning run
- was MVP of the World Cup in 2004
- lost a season of his prime (2004-05) to the Lock-out
- 52 goals, 108 points in 2006-07
- 40 goals, 92 points in 2007-08

That's a lot of good stuff for 4 years and a little over 3 seasons.

NHL scoring wasn't hugely different between 2008 and 2012 (Stamkos's big year). The Lightning scored 2.96 goals-per-game in Lecavalier's biggest season, and 2.83 in 2012 (also, the Lightning scored more goals in 2015 than during Lecavalier's big year). Anyway, both players led the NHL in even-strength goals, and both benefited from playing with St.Louis.

One reason we might be low-balling Stamkos a bit is that we've seen Lecavalier be good-ish in the Cup Finals and great at the World Cup, but we haven't seen Stamkos do those things yet. (As a reminder, in the Finals Stamkos had 1 assist and went -1 in six games. Ouch. Not that Lecavalier was a Conn Smythe candidate either.)


Still, Stamkos will probably easily win this in the end. Also, Lecavalier was never able to put together three (or four) really elite seasons in a row, which Stamkos did from 2009-10 to 2011-12 (or including 2012-13, a shortened season).

 

[Neutrinos]

I was actually looking at Stamkos' stats yesterday

Is it possible we've collectively forgotten just how good he was before injuries?

3 straight 90+ point seasons from the age of 19 - 21

2 Rocket Richard trophies by the age of 21


As a goal scorer, he could legitimately rival Ovehkin

 

[Laineux]

NHL scoring wasn't hugely different between 2008 and 2012 (Stamkos's big year). The Lightning scored 2.96 goals-per-game in Lecavalier's biggest season, and 2.83 in 2012 (also, the Lightning scored more goals in 2015 than during Lecavalier's big year). Anyway, both players led the NHL in even-strength goals, and both benefited from playing with St.Louis.

A lot of the difference comes from powerplay points though which reflects disproportionally in the totals of star players.

In 06-07 there was 49% and in 07-08 33% more powerplay goals scored than in Stamkos' peak year of 11-12. Stamkos season of 60 goals and 97 points should compare favourably to any year of Lecavalier's at least strictly in offensive numbers.

 

[Sticks and Pucks]

I was actually looking at Stamkos' stats yesterday

Is it possible we've collectively forgotten just how good he was before injuries?

3 straight 90+ point seasons from the age of 19 - 21

2 Rocket Richard trophies by the age of 21


As a goal scorer, he could legitimately rival Ovehkin

Yup, I remember at the time people thought Stamkos could legitimately rival the big 3 in Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin and perhaps succeed them as the face of the NHL someday. Was definitely seen as better than Tavares at the time.

 

[GlitchMarner]

Yup, I remember at the time people thought Stamkos could legitimately rival the big 3 in Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin and perhaps succeed them as the face of the NHL someday. Was definitely seen as better than Tavares at the time.

I'm pretty sure that circa 2007-2009, Lecavalier was considered to be one of the absolute best centres in the League. I think Crosby, Vinny, Datsyuk, Malkin and maybe Joe Thornton were hyped as the best C's for a short period before Lecavalier's decline.

I've read that the Canadiens were interested in trading Price, Subban and Pacioretty for him back in 2009.

Stamkos was really a huge deal when he suffered that broken leg against the Bruins. There was all sorts of hysteria over the fact that he might miss the 2014 Olympics (which he ultimately did).

 

[GlitchMarner]

A lot of the difference comes from powerplay points though which reflects disproportionally in the totals of star players.

In 06-07 there was 49% and in 07-08 33% more powerplay goals scored than in Stamkos' peak year of 11-12. Stamkos season of 60 goals and 97 points should compare favourably to any year of Lecavalier's at least strictly in offensive numbers.

Lecavalier finished third in League scoring the year he had 108 points. Crosby was first with 120 (12 more than VL) and Thornton had 115.

In 2012, Malkin had 109 points, so he beat Stamkos by 12 points.

Offensively, the best seasons VL and SS had/have had were pretty much identical. I just prefer Vincent's better all-around game.

 

[Laineux]

Lecavalier finished third in League scoring the year he had 108 points. Crosby was first with 120 (12 more than VL) and Thornton had 115.

In 2012, Malkin had 112 points, so he beat Stamkos by 15 points.

True. I'd argue though that Malkin in 11-12 was clearly more dominant than Crosby in 06-07. I checked once, and in terms of ppg domination over peers that season ranks as the best since Mario Lemieux's prime years.

I guess you can argue for Lecavalier as well, but Stamkos 60 goals with so little powerplay opportunities IMO makes his season superior in terms of offensive numbers.

 

[MXD]

Fact : Without #26, Steven Stamkos is roughly Max Pacioretty with better linemates, offense-friendly coaching and a penchant for not playing complete seasons.

 

[Skobel24]

I'd go with Vinny. He was the complete package.

 

[Boxscore]

I think early on in Stamkos' career this would have been a landslide. But, looking at this now, both players have had a couple of impact seasons, with the slight edge going to Lecavalier in those IMO. Since then, Stamkos seems to always be injured and if he's not scoring goals from his office, he isn't making an elite-level impact.

Stammer is still young and has plenty of time to stay healthy and accomplish a ton more. You would think that he will end up well beyond Vinny when it's all said and done ... but as of today, I think it's close with the tiny edge going to Lecavalier, honestly.

 

[Regal]

Fact : Without #26, Steven Stamkos is roughly Max Pacioretty with better linemates, offense-friendly coaching and a penchant for not playing complete seasons.

Fact: This is complete BS. Injuries are what has slowed him down. He outscored St. Louis by 23 points in his 60 goal season, and St. Louis only had the first assist on 13 of Stamkos' 60 goals. To suggest Stamkos' peak play was all St. Louis is ludicrous. There seems to be this idea that Stamkos at his best was a pure shooter finding soft spots in defenses but while there was some truth to this early in his career, it's simply not true in '12. While not a great puck handler, he would still be the play driver on his line, forechecking like a madman with his speed, creating turnovers, putting it on net and driving to the net for rebounds.

 

[Boxscore]

Fact: This is complete BS. Injuries are what has slowed him down. He outscored St. Louis by 23 points in his 60 goal season, and St. Louis only had the first assist on 13 of Stamkos' 60 goals. To suggest Stamkos' peak play was all St. Louis is ludicrous

This.

Injuries have been the biggest obstacle for Stamkos. And pretty bad ones too.

 

[MXD]

Fact: This is complete BS. Injuries are what has slowed him down. He outscored St. Louis by 23 points in his 60 goal season, and St. Louis only had the first assist on 13 of Stamkos' 60 goals. To suggest Stamkos' peak play was all St. Louis is ludicrous

So, that was one season.
What about the other seasons?

And what's even more complete BS is that you fail to acknowledge that he's INDEED Max Pacioretty with all the qualifiers that applies. And even more-er complete BS is the sudden importance of first assists, probably because that's the kind of stat that has no importance unless it can be used to support a point.

 

[MXD]

This.

Injuries have been the biggest obstacle for Stamkos. And pretty bad ones too.

Never said injuries had no effect, but failing to recognize MSL's effect here... well, do it if you want. That's you, and that's on you.

 

[Regal]

So, that was one season.
What about the other seasons?

And what's even more complete BS is that you fail to acknowledge that he's INDEED Max Pacioretty with all the qualifiers that applies. And even more-er complete BS is the sudden importance of first assists, probably because that's the kind of stat that has no importance unless it can be used to support a point.

Lol, I fail to acknowledge a ridiculous assertion that has no statistical or eye test basis? Yea, I think I'm good with that. And if we're judging how much a player helped another, why would first assists not be relevant? The idea is that the playmaker is helping the goalscorer, so why are his passes not directly leading to goals? But if you want just assists, he had a point on 19 of Stamkos' 60 goals. Not even 1/3.

Yes, it's one season, but it's literally the best year of his career where he showed that he wasn't reliant on St. Louis to succeed. St. Louis is not Gretzky, he's not turning a 65 point MaxPac into a 60 goal scorer. It makes far, far more sense that the leg injury was the biggest factor in Stamkos' decline, especially since there was a distinct visual decline in his game, as he simply didn't look confident going to the net like he had in the past.

 

[JackSlater]

I'm surprised by how much praise Lecavalier is getting in this thread compared with Stamkos. Stamkos was a top ten scorer four times to Lecavalier's two, and was top four in all star voting four times to Lecavalier's two. Both played with prime St. Louis, though admittedly Stamkos did to a greater degree. Lecavalier's 2007 may have been better than Stamkos' best year, in part because his puck dominant style of player is more impressive looking that Stamkos' quick strike offence, but it's very close and Stamkos' elite years seem less like outliers. Stamkos' biggest problem has been freak injuries, otherwise this wouldn't be very close.

 

[Sensinitis]

I'm surprised by how much praise Lecavalier is getting in this thread compared with Stamkos. Stamkos was a top ten scorer four times to Lecavalier's two, and was top four in all star voting four times to Lecavalier's two. Both played with prime St. Louis, though admittedly Stamkos did to a greater degree. Lecavalier's 2007 may have been better than Stamkos' best year, in part because his puck dominant style of player is more impressive looking that Stamkos' quick strike offence, but it's very close and Stamkos' elite years seem less like outliers. Stamkos' biggest problem has been freak injuries, otherwise this wouldn't be very close.

I can't speak for others, but I put a lot of value in playoff performance. While Stamkos has been much more of a perimeter player in the playoffs, pre or post injury, Lecavalier showed another gear. Like it's been said, not some kind of elite Conn smythe candidate, but definitely a higher level than Stamkos.