Who was a better player: Vincent Damphousse or Eric Staal?

[dalewood12]

Curious to read your thoughts.

Click to read more...

 

[DitchMarner]

I think Staal was considered a bit more of a true star. If we're comparing them to active players, he would be equivalent to someone like Hughes (although I think Hughes is better) whereas Damphousse would be more like a Larkin, I guess.

I think statistically Staal wins, but I wasn't a big fan of his. He seemed to mail it in quite often after a strong four or five year run after the Lockout.

When you factor in compete, intangibles, clutch factor, all-around play etc, I might be inclined to take Damphousse. But when he was on, Staal was better.

 

[Shroud of Orrin]

Vinny all day long.

Name me another player to lead his team in scoring three consecutive years on three different teams. His IQ and class made Stall look like a sod farmer….

 

[Albatros]

Vinny all day long.

Name me another player to lead his team in scoring three consecutive years on three different teams. His IQ and class made Stall look like a sod farmer….

While true, his best placement in league scoring even those three years was 18th. Staal was anyhow 6th and 7th.

 

[ijuka]

Vinny all day long.

Name me another player to lead his team in scoring three consecutive years on three different teams. His IQ and class made Stall look like a sod farmer….

When you need to use such obscure arguments, the point you're making is likely not very strong.

For this comparison, Eric Staal likely suffers simply because he played during a lower-scoring era.

 

[tarheelhockey]

lead his team in scoring three consecutive years on three different teams.

Bit of a backhanded compliment to be that guy.

 

[Hennessy]

No knock on Damphousse, who gets overlooked a lot, imo, but Staal takes this.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Staal but I think it’s close.

Damphousse was a very good player and I really liked him as a young guy on the Leafs.. but he didn’t top out as high as Staal offensively and, personally, I find his later career defensive reputation a bit made up. It is just the usual wily vet narrative.

 

[biturbo19]

I voted Damphousse mostly out of nostalgia. The answer is probably actually Staal though. It's just so hard to vote for him, because he's like the most boring, unimpressive "star" of his entire era.

 

[authentic]

Yeah Staal was comfortably the better player in each of their primes

 

[Cup or Bust]

At their best, Staal is the better player. I Loved the Nicholls, Damphouse, and Murphy line in 1992 on the Oilers though.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

Staal had the better peak.

 

[the valiant effort]

Vinny was a solid contributor right till the end, whereas Staal hung on 6+ years too long. Most of us asked for his retirement papers in 2016.

 

[biturbo19]

I think it's also understated, just how much of an advantage a Jofa helmet is in a poll like this.

 

[Albatros]

I think it's also understated, just how much of an advantage a Jofa helmet is in a poll like this.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

I only remember Damphousse as an old timer on the Sharks. Staal showed flashes of brilliance and was one of the better centres during his prime.

 

[Shroud of Orrin]

When you need to use such obscure arguments, the point you're making is likely not very strong.

Obscure, eh? I’m going to have to respectfully disagree. I’d say remarkable if anything. He led the Leafs offensively in ‘90/‘91, then adjusts to a completely different system and teammates and leads the Oilers in ‘91/‘92. He then moves again to Montreal in ‘92/‘93, leads the team in one of his better performances and they win the cup. It’s called hockey history.

 

[wetcoast]

I think Staal was considered a bit more of a true star. If we're comparing them to active players, he would be equivalent to someone like Hughes (although I think Hughes is better) whereas Damphousse would be more like a Larkin, I guess.

I think statistically Staal wins, but I wasn't a big fan of his. He seemed to mail it in quite often after a strong four or five year run after the Lockout.

When you factor in compete, intangibles, clutch factor, all-around play etc, I might be inclined to take Damphousse. But when he was on, Staal was better.

This was my gut reaction to the question as well but I haven't done a deep dive into it.

But they probably aren't really all that far apart.

 

[Stephen]

At the end of the 2005-06 Stanley Cup run by the Hurricanes, Eric Staal was a 100 point, cup winning number one franchise center, 21 years old. Peaked early for sure and had a lot of so so years relative to his abilities but Damphousse never touched that level in isolation, snapshot in time. That’s a special level not a lot of guys can match, probably one of the highest trade values in the post lockout era at that moment.

 

[Voight]

Vinny was a solid contributor right till the end, whereas Staal hung on 6+ years too long. Most of us asked for his retirement papers in 2016.

Damphousse's final season - 42 points in 82 games

Staal's final season - 29 points in 72 games.

Staal also cored 42 goals in 2018 and was 17th in Hart voting. Damphousse didn't receive any Hart votes at all in his career.

Saying he hung on 6+ years too long is hogwash.

 

[gary559]

Damphousse had a lot more swag but Staal was more dominant in his prime.

 

[the valiant effort]

Damphousse's final season - 42 points in 82 games

Staal's final season - 29 points in 72 games.

Staal also cored 42 goals in 2018 and was 17th in Hart voting. Damphousse didn't receive any Hart votes at all in his career.

Saying he hung on 6+ years too long is hogwash.

Vin led the Sharks in playoff scoring that last season. In fact I think Vinzo might have had more playoff points in that final run than Staal had post-2009.

 

[RandV]

At their best, Staal is the better player. I Loved the Nicholls, Damphouse, and Murphy line in 1992 on the Oilers though.

Off topic but just looking at Damphousse on hockeydb, the '92 Oilers just look weird. Made it to the 4rd round lead by a25 and under core of Vincent Damphousse, Joe Murphy, Craig Simpson, Bernie Nicholls, and Dave Manson, plus 30 year old Bernie Nichols? Simpson aside none of those guys you'd associate with Edmonton from either the 80's or 90's.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Props to the OP for having an "even" option.

 

[ijuka]

Obscure, eh? I’m going to have to respectfully disagree. I’d say remarkable if anything. He led the Leafs offensively in ‘90/‘91, then adjusts to a completely different system and teammates and leads the Oilers in ‘91/‘92. He then moves again to Montreal in ‘92/‘93, leads the team in one of his better performances and they win the cup. It’s called hockey history.

Essentially, it requires you to get traded between three relatively low-scoring teams, so yes. It's quite obscure. For example, Wayne Gretzky would be holding the record had he gotten traded between each season in his prime. He didn't, so he doesn't hold the record.

These are obscure statistics dictated by external circumstances.

And yes, you could make the argument, based on these stats, that he was good at adapting to new environments. That's fine. But this poll is about how good they were as hockey players in general. Since Staal played his entire prime with the Hurricanes, this stat is meaningless for this comparison. The wording you used made it sound like some dominant argument, when the players aren't even comparable in this regard, as the data doesn't exist for the other.