Why was Jagr so underwhelming in the playoffs?

[PistolPete]

wait were you suggesting that Jagr did not had individual success in the playoff during his prime ? 22-27 jagr scored at a different pace than anyone that were not Gretzky-Lemieux:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

PPG
Jagr: 1.36 (+17, move even strength points than Sakic in 26 less games)
Lindros: 1.14
Forsberg: 1.12
Sakic: 1.11

I thought you meant a lack of team success during his prime.

I was wondering why you mentioned Bobby Hull in response to daver's post about Jagr being a goat without PO success.

I think Jagr was fine as a PO performer

 

[MadLuke]

I was wondering why you mentioned Bobby Hull in response to daver's post about Jagr being a goat without PO success.

He was saying that Jagr was the first goat talent without PO success during his prime, if Jagr had a no playoff success under a set of criteria, did Bobby Hull not a precedent ?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Eddie Shore is not a GOAT talent? Is it because of the era he played or is there something else missing with him?

Not so much era, I just think he was a big "highlights" player. Big hits, big head long rushes, so he attracted a little more praise than I think he deserved. I'm also taking "GOAT talent" more literally than is probably necessary for the purposes of this thread.

 

[MS]

3-22-25 in 52 playoff games at the ages of 18, 40 and 43 really tanks his career averages.

otherwise he's 156-75-101-176. That would be a statline that would be the envy of all but a handful of players of the past 35 years.

On one hand, there's not really a "signature run" there, but also, to average 1.13 points per game over a very large sample during your entire 20s and 30s in almost the lowest scoring 22 year span in modern history... WITHOUT the benefit of one or two 28-30 point runs... that ain't bad.

Saw the thread and went to post essentially this.

I'd also add his 11-1-7-8 in 2012 to make it 4-29-33 in 63 playoff games at age 18 and 40+ which leaves him at 145-74-94-168 over a 17-season stretch from 1991-2008. That's a 42-53-95 82-game pace over a huge length of time which encompassed basically the entire DPE when 95 points was competing for a scoring title most years.

Nothing wrong with Jagr's playoff production, at all.

 

[daver]

He was saying that Jagr was the first goat talent without PO success during his prime, if Jagr had a no playoff success under a set of criteria, did Bobby Hull not a precedent ?

He was 21 years old with a goalscoring title and Art Ross on his resume. It's debatable that he had already hit his prime. Jagr was clearly farther away from his prime.

That being said, one Cup for Hull is a bit dissappointing given multiple Cups for the other O6 legends. It's a bit like McDrai; a team with multiple Art Ross/Hart/Rocket winner that couldn't win (again).

Hard to truly critique Jagr (with Mario) given they won two together. His era rivals, Sakic and Forsberg, certainly benefitted from being on the same team with other talents but they do close the gap between them and Jagr all-time with their playoff resumes.

 

[PistolPete]

He was saying that Jagr was the first goat talent without PO success during his prime, if Jagr had a no playoff success under a set of criteria, did Bobby Hull not a precedent ?

PO success as in personal stats or being on a Cup winner?

 

[jigglysquishy]

Not so much era, I just think he was a big "highlights" player. Big hits, big head long rushes, so he attracted a little more praise than I think he deserved. I'm also taking "GOAT talent" more literally than is probably necessary for the purposes of this thread.

I think there's something to this, but I think it's more localized. Boston was "new" in Shore's prime. The NHL had only been there for 10 years and had minimal familiarity with high end hockey. Compared to Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal, where major hockey was 40-50 years old by the mid 30s.

So the Bruins fans were wow'd more by the violence and hits and rushes. While contemporary praise is always muted outside the home market, it is more muted for Shore than others of the era. In Boston media, Shore>>>>Hitchman. In Canadian media, Shore>>Hitchman

That being said, he was still the clear biggest star of his era and got more praise out of traditional markets than anyone else. I'll have him higher in the dman project on my initial list than he'll end up on the final list.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Re: Bobby Hull in the playoffs

Hull benefits in that he has a genuine, all-time, hero run in 1971. He's the best player on the Hawks (by quite a bit) and drags them to one game away from a Cup against dynasty Habs. He's in on 42% of their playoff goals.

In the finals, he puts up 9 points in 7 games, again tops of anyone (in on 50% of points). In the do-or-die back two games he puts up 3 in 2.

The media is all over him too, praised as the best in the playoffs, taking the Blackhawks further than they should have gone including upsetting the Rangers.

It's not a Cup. It's not McDavid 2024. But it is dragging a team through the playoffs.

His 1965 is really strong too. Upsets the Wings, and takes the dynasty Habs to 7. Not as strong in the finals, but demolishes the Wings.

 

[CokenoPepsi]

Jagr just lacks that one big run that you would expect from someone that people try and talk about as a top 10 guy.

He has two cups but they were won his first two years in the league...as the guy he just couldn't really get it done.

Jagr had quite the image make over near the end of his career as this goofy clown type that everyone suddenly loved it odd to see

 

[CokenoPepsi]

He was awesome for the Rangers his last season in 2007-08 after he’d taken a step back as a player.

Pretty sure I remember Jagr said he was burnt out and stopped trying as much so he wouldn't trigger his option year for New York

 

[DingerMcSlapshot]

He wasn't.

 

[daver]

Re: Bobby Hull in the playoffs

Hull benefits in that he has a genuine, all-time, hero run in 1971. He's the best player on the Hawks (by quite a bit) and drags them to one game away from a Cup against dynasty Habs. He's in on 42% of their playoff goals.

In the finals, he puts up 9 points in 7 games, again tops of anyone (in on 50% of points). In the do-or-die back two games he puts up 3 in 2.

The media is all over him too, praised as the best in the playoffs, taking the Blackhawks further than they should have gone including upsetting the Rangers.

It's not a Cup. It's not McDavid 2024. But it is dragging a team through the playoffs.

His 1965 is really strong too. Upsets the Wings, and takes the dynasty Habs to 7. Not as strong in the finals, but demolishes the Wings.

Why isn't it "McDavid 2024"?

He had a better SCF against a better team. Points in 6 of 7 games including 5 points that helped the Hawks get up 2-0 in the series and up 2-0 going into the 2nd period of Game 3. McDavid had one point through the first 8 periods in 2024 and his team was down 2-0 and 4-1 going into the 3rd of Game 3. He had points in 4 of 7 games.

Hull was the hero in the SF with a three points in Game 7 whereas McDavid was pointless in their Game 7 against the Canucks.

Hull put up 8 points in 4 games vs. an overwhlemed first round opponent, McDavid puts up 12 in 5 games against an overwhelmed opponent.

 

[PistolPete]

Jagr just lacks that one big run that you would expect from someone that people try and talk about as a top 10 guy.

He has two cups but they were won his first two years in the league...as the guy he just couldn't really get it done.

Hockey. Is. A. Team. Sport.

It's not tennis or golf.

So, it was the team that couldn't get it done.