What weaknesses did Jaromir Jagr have in his prime?

Crosby either. Unlike Ovechkin who is a threat to score with a slapper/wrister as soon as he crosses the blue line. To be honest, I am willing to bet that because of Jagr's strength he could hammer a puck if he wanted to. Mario didn't wind up a heck of a lot either, although definitely more than Jagr. Maybe it just wasn't his style to do it that way. I never saw him as a guy who was looking for the heavy shot either.

I will say this about Jagr, there was the odd criticism of him that he could mail it in and that he couldn't carry a team without Mario on there. The funny thing is he took the Pens on his back for the entire 1999 season and then while he was hurt scored the overtime goal in Game 6 vs. New Jersey and then helped eliminate them. Despite 200 playoff points there is less playoff memories about him than you would assume, but that might be because he doesn't have that flagship playoff year that normally every other great player has.

I remember many goals of Mario winding up. He had all the weapons so he didn't use it too often but he it was part of his arsenal. I can't think of a single Jagr goal like that, but maybe I'm wrong.

Crosby doesn't have a great slapshot, true.
 
...Is the implication that he couldn't have been mailing it in because he was 3rd in the NHL in points per game? Because that was a full 25.5% lower scoring rate than he had in the past three seasons in Pittsburgh, and he was just 29 so they had every reason to expect better of him. He was really that talented - he could mail it in and still score at the 3rd-highest rate in the NHL. Both things are true.
 
...Is the implication that he couldn't have been mailing it in because he was 3rd in the NHL in points per game? Because that was a full 25.5% lower scoring rate than he had in the past three seasons in Pittsburgh, and he was just 29 so they had every reason to expect better of him. He was really that talented - he could mail it in and still score at the 3rd-highest rate in the NHL. Both things are true.

It's worth noting there that for two whole decades, he was one of only three players to win the Art Ross, with the other two being Gretzky and Lemieux. That has to say something about how ridiculously good he was offensively. Also worth noting is that he missed 13 games in 2001-02, and if you pro-rate that scoring average to 82 games, he would have been nipping at Iginla's heels for the Art Ross. Still, even with scoring down so much, his stats that year (and during his whole time with Washington, for that matter) feel very disappointing. They don't feel Jagr-esque. I tend to think he did mail it in during those years, especially when taking his first full year with the Rangers into consideration -- a year in which I fully believe he should have won the Hart.
 
He didn’t buy into the hockey notion of team over individual. Is it wrong? I’m not sure, but given his success without Lemieux I think it is pretty obvious Jags was not a leader.

Did you change your nickname from pixiesfanyo?

Always noticed that poster as I’m also a Pixies fan, yo, and now I’m seeing the same profile picture and ill will towards Jagr, heh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gurglesons
I've always felt Jagr's production went down a bit in Washington partly because he wasn't allowed to roam free to the same extent as he was in Pittsburgh. Blaming everything on effort level seems a bit simplistic to me. It's a very small sample size, but Jagr's scoring wasn't earth shattering in the 98 Olympics either, just kinda normal. Was that because of low effort level or because the Czechs employed a defensive system where he just wasn't allowed to roam around to the same extent?
 
Last edited:
He was too emotional. When everything was fine, he smiled all the time and made everyone feel good. But when things weren't going his way, he took it personally and sulked. And he made everyone feel miserable. He probably wasn't too good at dealing with criticism and personal animosity. Too emo, too vulnerable. It's very un-NHL or unprofessional in general. Guys who do annoyed faces in certain situations usually take the bus to a farm team quickly. But Jagr was too good.

He was reluctant to help with defense. He was not a floater, but when a situation called for it, most of the time, all he could do in his own end was a half-arsed hook attempt that often resulted in a penalty. It was frustrating to watch, because he sometimes took too long to help out, hoping his mates would just get it done, and also because he actually could strip people off the puck nice and clean just using his strength, but unless it was to happen close to the net it was desirable to score on, he would rather not try.

He had no grit, which often comes along with clutch, but it is not the same thing. Jagr was clutch, but he wasn't gritty. He was not one of the guys who suddenly do no wrong and slide on their butts for the good of the team. He could step it up, but you felt there always was a superstar restraint. Except for the 99 Devils playoff. He did go out of his way there.

He did get kinda big-headed near the end of his Pittsburgh tenure. It was in the air. I think it gets overblown, but it was there.

He could be a somewhat cruel joker/prankster. Jagr jokes a lot, and that's good. But he used to frequently cross the line into the near-bully zone according to current sensibilities. I remember watching an interview with his personal coach who remembered "a good one".

He had a colleague who came for a stint in Pittsburgh. Generous as he sometimes was, Jagr took them out for dinner in a fancy restaurant. And as the poor, no-English colleague took a restroom break, Jagr stuffed his jacket full of silver knives and forks... When the guy came back, he found their table and his jacket surrounded by the staff, with raised eyebrows. And as they began to take the silverware out of his pockets, he stammered "this can't be, I did not, I could not... This is a mistake. Jaromir, say something!"

And Jaromir did. "I don't even know this guy."

They called the cops. Since the guy couldn't explain anything at all, they just threw him in the car, tomato-red, and drove him away. They drove him a good two hundred meters before letting the poor folk out, pale white, stumbling. You can guess what Jagr was doing. Even the reporter hearing the story cracked up, but it must have been no fun being put through this for amusement of a bored, wealthy, superstar jock. You can guess if he just used people for fun like this, at least some of them didn't like it. If stuff like this happened these days and it went public, Jagr would be risking the politically non-desirable territory.
 
most valuable wingers are valued and expected and used in the role of creating offence, i think?
I think this is why i liked the top centers/top wingers projects being separated. They are different positions with different expectations.
Centers are expected to play three zones and man the transition game. Wingers get to be more offensive. (But centers get to take every draw and get lots of bonus assists straight off of that)

Jagr was arguable as all around great offensively, and as good a total forward as anyone in this century.
 
He was too emotional. When everything was fine, he smiled all the time and made everyone feel good. But when things weren't going his way, he took it personally and sulked. And he made everyone feel miserable. He probably wasn't too good at dealing with criticism and personal animosity. Too emo, too vulnerable. It's very un-NHL or unprofessional in general. Guys who do annoyed faces in certain situations usually take the bus to a farm team quickly. But Jagr was too good.

He was reluctant to help with defense. He was not a floater, but when a situation called for it, most of the time, all he could do in his own end was a half-arsed hook attempt that often resulted in a penalty. It was frustrating to watch, because he sometimes took too long to help out, hoping his mates would just get it done, and also because he actually could strip people off the puck nice and clean just using his strength, but unless it was to happen close to the net it was desirable to score on, he would rather not try.

He had no grit, which often comes along with clutch, but it is not the same thing. Jagr was clutch, but he wasn't gritty. He was not one of the guys who suddenly do no wrong and slide on their butts for the good of the team. He could step it up, but you felt there always was a superstar restraint. Except for the 99 Devils playoff. He did go out of his way there.

He did get kinda big-headed near the end of his Pittsburgh tenure. It was in the air. I think it gets overblown, but it was there.

He could be a somewhat cruel joker/prankster. Jagr jokes a lot, and that's good. But he used to frequently cross the line into the near-bully zone according to current sensibilities. I remember watching an interview with his personal coach who remembered "a good one".

He had a colleague who came for a stint in Pittsburgh. Generous as he sometimes was, Jagr took them out for dinner in a fancy restaurant. And as the poor, no-English colleague took a restroom break, Jagr stuffed his jacket full of silver knives and forks... When the guy came back, he found their table and his jacket surrounded by the staff, with raised eyebrows. And as they began to take the silverware out of his pockets, he stammered "this can't be, I did not, I could not... This is a mistake. Jaromir, say something!"

And Jaromir did. "I don't even know this guy."

They called the cops. Since the guy couldn't explain anything at all, they just threw him in the car, tomato-red, and drove him away. They drove him a good two hundred meters before letting the poor folk out, pale white, stumbling. You can guess what Jagr was doing. Even the reporter hearing the story cracked up, but it must have been no fun being put through this for amusement of a bored, wealthy, superstar jock. You can guess if he just used people for fun like this, at least some of them didn't like it. If stuff like this happened these days and it went public, Jagr would be risking the politically non-desirable territory.

Seems that practical jokes have always been an acceptable part of team sports at the highest levels.

Hopefully its a tradition that's fading away.
 
Seems that practical jokes have always been an acceptable part of team sports at the highest levels.

Hopefully its a tradition that's fading away.

I have read my share of biographies. They sometimes border on bullying, but it is or it was somewhat acceptable in a fraternity-club team environment. The thing is, this was not a rookie player. Just a mental coach's acquaintance. He had no idea anything like that could ever happen. Still, admittedly, I always laugh just imagining. But some people have a very hard time being humiliated, good intentions or not, sometimes because of childhood traumas, so these jokes can really do a lot of harm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dennis Bonvie
I've always felt Jagr's production went down a bit in Washington partly because he wasn't allowed to roam free to the same extent as he was in Pittsburgh. Blaming everything on effort level seems a bit simplistic to me. It's a very small sample size, but Jagr's scoring wasn't earth shattering in the 98 Olympics either, just kinda normal. Was that because of low effort level or because the Czechs employed a defensive system where he just wasn't allowed to roam around to the same extent?

Is ice time went down a bit

98-99: 25:51 (that is quite something)
99-00: 23:12
00-01: 23:19
01-02: 21:43
02-03: 21:18

That could have been mostly or even only the late 90s pens effect, Kovalev went from 24:00 minutes to 20:00 minutes on the Rangers in the same season, so less drastic drop for Jagr.

That said a 39 year's old Oates was the most used forward in 01-02 and Bondra played the exact same has Jagr, so maybe it is still an indication
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rexor
He was reluctant to help with defense.

This may be true but Jagr tilted the ice like few players in history.

He had no grit, which often comes along with clutch, but it is not the same thing. Jagr was clutch, but he wasn't gritty.

If you brushed up on the amount of abuse Jagr was taking in the dead puck era, as well as the injuries he played through during his playoffs, you'd probably see his performances in a better light.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG
If you brushed up on the amount of abuse Jagr was taking in the dead puck era, as well as the injuries he played through during his playoffs, you'd probably see his performances in a better light.

in this respect i admire jagr’s character far more than mario’s

you sometimes got the sense that jagr thought he was too good for a bunch of things, but never this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sadekuuro and Rexor
This may be true but Jagr tilted the ice like few players in history.



If you brushed up on the amount of abuse Jagr was taking in the dead puck era, as well as the injuries he played through during his playoffs, you'd probably see his performances in a better light.

It's true, yes. But there were also moments when he was on the ice, the opposing teams were on the offensive, and Jaro would hover around his blue line waiting for his defense to take care of it and pass him the puck so he can do what he partially correctly considered his job -- carry it forward and create a scoring chance. It was very frustrating to watch sometimes, because you thought, "hm, maybe if you bothered to help out, you wouldn't have to wait so long."

This thread is about his weaknesses, so I think it's fair to point them out, although not many sane people would expect a first line RW to be a defensive stalwart.

Also, yeah, it's true he had to put up with a lot of abuse. I just believe that especially the last portion of his NHL journey showed he could have played with more... mental resilience, had he wanted to/felt the need to. He did seem to work harder as he aged and actually had to fight for his spot on the top lines. In his prime, it felt less so. His ability to effortlessly overwhelm the opposition allowed him to beat people without so much toil, and once it got tougher, he sometimes seemed put off and annoyed rather than determined to fight through it.

My theory is, if you could put the old Jagr's mind in the prime Jagr's body, the resulting player would probably be better than Jagr ever was.
 
i didnt watch a ton of Pens games then, but I always did hear about him being soft or a floater... but that was really common to hear about Euros in that era, and it was often, i found, very exaggerated.
When i did watch them mid 90s, i felt he had more energy than Lemieux, for whatever that is worth.

He impressed me in the 2005 worlds, which was a quasi best on best, he had a fractured finger and couldnt shoot too hard and did a ton of digging and dishing off the boards. It was that tournament that i realized just how elite he was in terms of strength and size.
 
i didnt watch a ton of Pens games then, but I always did hear about him being soft or a floater... but that was really common to hear about Euros in that era, and it was often, i found, very exaggerated.
When i did watch them mid 90s, i felt he had more energy than Lemieux, for whatever that is worth.

He impressed me in the 2005 worlds, which was a quasi best on best, he had a fractured finger and couldnt shoot too hard and did a ton of digging and dishing off the boards. It was that tournament that i realized just how elite he was in terms of strength and size.

Lemieux never looked like he was trying.

Don't forget two things though. He was older than Jagr. He was also taking radiation therapy for cancer which makes you feel fatigued.
 
Lemieux never looked like he was trying.

Don't forget two things though. He was older than Jagr. He was also taking radiation therapy for cancer which makes you feel fatigued.
oh ya, no doubt there were reasons, and he hustled way more when he was younger. I just thought Jagr got too much flak when there was another great example of a one dimensional forward standing right there.
 
My only nitpick of prime Jagr is the Pittsburgh Penguins of the mid to late 90s seemed like a real country club atmosphere suffering from some massive Stanley Cup hangover from their 1991, 1992 wins and the 1993 upset. Before the sell off, the Penguins were still stacked even with Lemieux drifting in and out of injury plagued seasons and retirement. Fire wagon hockey was not a problem, but you knew that the Penguins would be defeated by a harder working, more physical, more organized opponent and hotter goaltending (Florida, Philadelphia, New Jersey) and increasingly didn't belong in the class of Detroit, Colorado as skilled contenders even if they did make it out of the East. Where does Jagr fit into all of this? If wasn't quite as offensively inclined and bought into more of a team structure, I don't see why Pittsburgh should have gone into decline like they did.
Yes but you need to consider the effect of the DPE. Florida could not play with the Pens so they hooked and held their way to a series win. Yes they outworked the Pens but if you're constantly being interfered with it plays on the psyche.
 
I remember many goals of Mario winding up. He had all the weapons so he didn't use it too often but he it was part of his arsenal. I can't think of a single Jagr goal like that, but maybe I'm wrong.

Crosby doesn't have a great slapshot, true.

Really cant think of anybody in the last 25 years that regularly scores with a slapshot as a forward, so its really a moot point

Seems that practical jokes have always been an acceptable part of team sports at the highest levels.

Hopefully its a tradition that's fading away.

Id hate to see it die out entirely,

Habs clown prince Guy Lapointe cast a wide net of mischief | Montreal Gazette

Also worth noting, Dryden explains it a little bit in The Game, the reason for the endless lace cutting was to punish the guys who showed up late in a humourous way, and the ability for the team to self-regulate that is important
 
Really cant think of anybody in the last 25 years that regularly scores with a slapshot as a forward, so its really a moot point



Id hate to see it die out entirely,

Habs clown prince Guy Lapointe cast a wide net of mischief | Montreal Gazette

Also worth noting, Dryden explains it a little bit in The Game, the reason for the endless lace cutting was to punish the guys who showed up late in a humourous way, and the ability for the team to self-regulate that is important

There is that Ovechkin guy.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad