Datsyuk or Fedorov

[norrisnick 1]

I see the post coming, so I'll head it off at the pass.

If you don't see Fedorov as a lock for the Hockey Hall of Fame, you've lost touch with reality. Doesn't matter who you are.

[Opie 308]

I think, Opie, you are seriously underrestimating how much the HHoF values the playoffs. Out of all the guys mentioned in our discussion (Shanahan, Selanne, Sundin, Cicarrelli) Fedorov not only has the most individual hardware, the most Cups, but he has BY FAR the most dominating playoff performances. Combined, these guys have one single post-season where they scored 20 points, and Fedorov did it 4 times, in a row! Fedorov also has the unique advantage over these guys in that he alone, for however brief it was, was considered the best player in the world. No player has ever won the Hart and the Selke in one season.

Sundin, lacking a Cup and any major hardware whatsoever, may never make it in.

Selanne may have officially punched his ticket when he won with the Ducks, but prior to that was primarily known as a playoff choker.

Shanahan is in for sure, but not just because of the regular season - 3 Cups is the icing on his cake.

Cicarrelli may never make it in. No Cups. No hardware and a jackass to boot.

Could very well be, but like I said, there are people in the Hall already I don't think should be.

Everyone in the hall of fame has a Stanley cup? No we've already proven that people can get it with no cups, so why then would it be a deciding factor?

NorrisNick,

thanks for adding so much, you're a tool.

[norrisnick 1]

At the very least tools are useful.

[Opie 308]

At the very least tools are useful.

WOW Really that is what you came up with, well played sir!

Moving on, I never said he doesn't deserve the Hall or that he would not get in, I said I didn't think he was Hall of Fame, that was my opinion. I am just defending it in a debate with a few posters.

In my opinion his numbers and two great years (1 I have admitted was UNREAL) are not HOF worthy. Same for Neely, and he is in the hall, I think Dino deserves it and he is not. I am ok with that it is life, I am ok with other people having different opinions. Just defending mine and debating others.

[dicksmack 33]

For all the Hank vs Pav talk, for me it goes like this: You don't put a top 5 scorer in the NHL as primarily a shut down centre unless you're dumb. Hank is turned to on the 5 on 3. That's all he has defensively over Pav. <--- period! Hank on the backcheck/forecheck harasses his target all around the ice. Datysuk stalks, tracks down and neutralizes the target by taking puck off of the player's stick, often times going on the counterattack in a heartbeat. Basically Datsyuk is way more effective at it and he's the best in the world in this area. On the rare occasion Pav makes a defensive mistake, the little bugger usually steals it back anyway!

[egroen 384]

WOW Really that is what you came up with, well played sir!

Moving on, I never said he doesn't deserve the Hall or that he would not get in, I said I didn't think he was Hall of Fame, that was my opinion. I am just defending it in a debate with a few posters.

In my opinion his numbers and two great years (1 I have admitted was UNREAL) are not HOF worthy. Same for Neely, and he is in the hall, I think Dino deserves it and he is not. I am ok with that it is life, I am ok with other people having different opinions. Just defending mine and debating others.

Ultimately, I guess it just depends on what you value more -- Peak performance vs. career numbers.

I tend to value peak performance more, but I still like to take overall careers into consideration.

Guys like Francis, Gilmour, Sundin, Ciccarelli, Andreychuk and to throw a goalie in there, Cujoe (or even Osgood), all have incredible numbers over their long careers and that is a remarkable feat by itself... but I think that alone does not distinguish you as one of the greatest of all time.

Ciccarelli, in my opinion should not even be uttered in the same breath as Sergei Fedorov. For all the goals Dino scored over his career, he never once was in the top 3 in the league in goals for a single season, and only finished in the top 10 twice. He has never been considered for any major award and he has never even earned a 1st or 2nd team All Star.

That just does not "wow" me.

I don't think Neely or Ciccarelli belong in the HoF, but Neely still has more 50+ goal seasons than Ciccarelli and was a much more dominant player at right wing than Dino could ever hope to be. Tackng on an extra 8 mediocore seasons for Ciccarelli does not make his accomplishments better than Neely, IMO.

[Yzersyukstromberg 0]

When posting stat totals and using them as the main point of argument....consider something...Sergei Fedorov's prime was in a completely different 'era' of hockey. Back in the mid 90's, the NHL still had players winning scoring titles with point totals upwards of 150+ points....things were different then. Stats don't tell the whole story. Pavel Datsyuk on the other hand, is playing in the NHL during an era where only a few short years ago, Martin St. Louis won the NHL scoring title with only 94 points (forgive me if I'm off by a point)....THE GAME HAS CHANGED.

I make no argument that Sergei Fedorov was the COMPLETE package, almost completely a natural talent.....but Sergei wasn't the consumate team player Pavel is, and it's shown even more since he left Detroit. He has basically turned into a 3rd line player since his departure.

Long story short.....everyone who's sitting here trying to use statistics as the main point for their argument is completely off. Pavel Datsyuk is nearly averaging 1 point per game in his 6 1/2 year career, in an era where 1.20 points per game puts you in the race for a scoring title. There is something to be said about that........and if you were to factor in the fact that he was used in a 3rd line type of role for the first few years of his career, the stats are even more skewed.

Again, for me it's Pavel Datsyuk.....I'll never sit here and try to diminish the role that Sergei played for the Wings in his time here.....he's a big reason why there are 3 cup banners hanging in the rafters from 97, 98 and 02. No doubt about it. He was an awesome player, and like alot of people say, he probably does deserve to have his number retired in Detroit....but the extracurricular stuff he 'pulled' puts a sour taste in alot of people's mouths.

One last point....Fedorov was on the trade market at the deadline last season, and all the talk was that he was headed back to the Wings........does everyone think the reason why he's not here was because the Wings weren't willing to give up what the Jackets wanted in order to move him??? I don't think so. All of the rumors that I've heard say that at least half of the upper management team wanted nothing to do with him returning to Detroit....something tells me (and this is strictly my opinion) that Stevie Y was one of those guys.

Anyways, just my 2 cents.

[hamip1998 3]

I think that is about all the "give" you are capable of, so thank you!

Consider also, that even in the twilight of their careers, Fedorov is easily the more valuable player. He is still a force all over the ice, putting up points and earning Selke votes... even still playing defense occasionally. He plays on Washington's power play and penalty kill.

Shanahan has turned into a slow, lazy floater just looking for the snipe and is only truly effective on the power play. We would be stringing him up on a regular basis on LGW.com!

It's apples and oranges when comparing Shanny and Fedorov. The type of game that Shanahan played for years is bound to take more of a physical toll on a player than the style that Fedorov played.

Both were great and I loved seeing them both in their prime. Fedorov dominated the ice at both ends for a few years, yes. He hasn't done much of anything since leaving Detroit. Shanny's career has been more consistent. Looking at both careers from beginning to end, I would give the nod to Shanny over Feds for the HHOF.

That said, I would take Feds in his prime over Datsyuk if I were building a team for a championship run. If I wanted a team that was going to be great year after year, I would take Datsyuk for sure.

[T.Low 1,011]

I'd like to be the guy delivering the Little Ceaser's to those meetings.

[egroen 384]

I'd like to be the guy delivering the Little Ceaser's to those meetings.

I agree!

I always got the sense Holland wanted Fedorov back, and was willing to pay a steep price for it. Bowman would have wanted Fedorov back, there is no question in my mind about that. Ilitch - I don't know - I think he was very fond of Sergei, but at the same time may have felt the most betrayed by him. Devellano and Nill? Devallano strikes me as a more unforgiving type than Nill, but also more calculative. These guys may have gone either way as well. Yzerman? Yeeeah, I think he would have felt Sergei was more trouble than he was worth.

[Statts 4]

I agree!

I always got the sense Holland wanted Fedorov back, and was willing to pay a steep price for it. Bowman would have wanted Fedorov back, there is no question in my mind about that. Ilitch - I don't know - I think he was very fond of Sergei, but at the same time may have felt the most betrayed by him. Devellano and Nill? Devallano strikes me as a more unforgiving type than Nill, but also more calculative. These guys may have gone either way as well. Yzerman? Yeeeah, I think he would have felt Sergei was more trouble than he was worth.

I remember hearing the Bj's asking price for Feds would have been Filp and maybe more, for the fact that we're in the same division.

[Barrie 900]

I'd take Fedorov over Datsyuk, BUT Zetterberg over Fedorov. I think Z is that good!

[Jersey Wing 1,521]

Well since Sergei Bautin wasn't a choice.....

Right now I'll say Fedorov. Check back with me in 4 or 5 years as Datsyuk exits his 'prime' and I may have a different answer.

Yes, I'd retire his number

[egroen 384]

I remember hearing the Bj's asking price for Feds would have been Filp and maybe more, for the fact that we're in the same division.

I had read it was much higher than what they ended up taking from Washington. That they actually still considered it actually shows what high regard they still felt for him - and not the opposite.

[T.Low 1,011]

Watching the youtube highlight vid of Feds: Wow. The way he could burst right down the middle to fill the lane and just pass guys like they were shoveling snow or something. What a freight train.

[Statts 4]

I had read it was much higher than what they ended up taking from Washington. That they actually still considered it actually shows what high regard they still felt for him - and not the opposite.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at.

I'm curious. Do you remember if specific players/ picks were named?

[Never_Retire_Steve 35]

No, we interpreted the question the same, but at some point in time I questioned someone else's rationale by saying I didn't think feds was HOF shoe in, which completely derailed the thread and had me thinking your post was something it wasn't!!

Nothing like a good hijack to blind someone's opinion.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Ultimately, I guess it just depends on what you value more -- Peak performance vs. career numbers.

I tend to value peak performance more, but I still like to take overall careers into consideration.

Guys like Francis, Gilmour, Sundin, Ciccarelli, Andreychuk and to throw a goalie in there, Cujoe (or even Osgood), all have incredible numbers over their long careers and that is a remarkable feat by itself... but I think that alone does not distinguish you as one of the greatest of all time.

Ciccarelli, in my opinion should not even be uttered in the same breath as Sergei Fedorov. For all the goals Dino scored over his career, he never once was in the top 3 in the league in goals for a single season, and only finished in the top 10 twice. He has never been considered for any major award and he has never even earned a 1st or 2nd team All Star.

That just does not "wow" me.

I don't think Neely or Ciccarelli belong in the HoF, but Neely still has more 50+ goal seasons than Ciccarelli and was a much more dominant player at right wing than Dino could ever hope to be. Tackng on an extra 8 mediocore seasons for Ciccarelli does not make his accomplishments better than Neely, IMO.

Egroen, you and tend to see eye to eye alot so it pains me to say this. But your post is one of the stupidest goddamned things i've read in awhile.

Peak performances more value than career consistency?

I have to respectfully disagree with you about Dino Ciccarelli. 5-10 pipsqueak, undrafted, never supposed to make it in the NHL and scores 608 goals, 16th most ALL-TIME. Nobody currently playing is even close to cracking 600.

Your reasoning is that he didn't have a monster season or didn't have lots of 50 goal seasons. That is baffling to me beyond all comprehension.

What about Mike Gartner? 708 goals, 6th ALL TIME. You know how many 50 goal seasons he had? ONE! That's it.

Look up Mike Gartner's accolades and awards, trophies and first team all star selections and tell me what you find.

IMO, having 1 or 2 "peak" years where you might have league leading numbers being more important than say, Gartner's 17 straight years of 30 or more goals is just bats*** crazy.

By the way, the year Gartner scored 50 goals and 102 points he was 10th in scoring, 5 other guys had more goals and 9 others more points than him that year. John fecking Ogrodnick had 55 goals that year and 105 points. Is that supposed to mean he is more HOF worthy than Dino and Gartner?

Being able to play in the rugged world of the NHL at a high level and to do it for a long, long time is a testament to one's toughness and ability to produce year after year after year.

Maybe i'm not understanding your position but it sounds to me like you'd stick Kovalchuk and AO in the hall of fame if their careers ended tomorrow simply because they had some big years.

[Spinner 6]

While Federov solidified my love for hockey over any other sport, I have to go with Pavel. I get the same feeling I had with Serg when he got the puck, that something amazing was going to happen. I just get that feeling more consistantly with Dats.

[egroen 384]

Yeah, that's what I was getting at.

I'm curious. Do you remember if specific players/ picks were named?

I think I remember they were asking for a roster player, in addition to draft pick(s), but who it was was not named. Good guesses would be Filppula, Hudler or Kronwall.

[dat's sick 1,002]

First of all.. I love, love, love Datsyuk. I think he's the best player in the league right now, and I thought he was right up there last season as well.

There's no player currently active or even that I've ever seen that can match his stickhandling and the moves he makes. Every time he touches the puck you get the feeling something great is about to happen, and you don't dare to take your eyes of him because at any moment he can do something that you've never seen before.

He's probably my 2nd favorite player of all time.

Because..

..for me Fedorov will always be no.1.

Fedorov made me a Wings fan. Hell, he was almost the one who made me a real hockey fan.

The only authentic jersey I have is a white RW Fedorov one (I really should get a Datsyuk/Z jersey now that I think about it though).

Even now when he's not exactly in his prime anymore, I love seeing Sergei play. Like in the WC's last year, when he was absolutely dominant and was the deciding factor in the final game.

And in the Washington game the other day when he made this perfect little flip-pass to create a goal. He doesn't do as much of the "big" stuff that he used to do, but there's something about his style of play that still appeals to me so damn much. And despite all the contract bs with Detroit, I like the guy. He seems like an awesome guy imo.

Do I wish he would have stayed in Detroit? Hell yes. He kinda "disappeared" for a few years there.. I know he played pretty good in Anaheim and Columbus, but when you live over here in Sweden those are not teams that you see or hear much about.

But now Washington has quickly become my 2nd favorite team in the league, and I'm so damn glad that he is back to being on a really good team and playing really good hockey. I'm really looking forward to the Caps-Wings game next weekend, and that matchup for the SCF would be just awesome.

EDIT: I have to say though that I have seen probably 5 times as many Datsyuk games than I have Fedorov games. When Feds was in his prime, things like atdhe.net didn't exist and I mostly got to see him on highlight footage on an NHL-show once a week, during the playoffs when they showed games on TV here, and in his rare appearances in the Russian International team. So I've pretty much always seen the best of Feds, and not so much the average regular season-performance by him.

Edited January 23, 2009 by dat's sick

[egroen 384]

Egroen, you and tend to see eye to eye alot so it pains me to say this. But your post is one of the stupidest goddamned things i've read in awhile.

Peak performances more value than career consistency?

I think both are important, but I tend to place more weight on peak performance over consistency.

For instance, take two players' careers:

Player 1: 80 pts 100 pts 100 pts 100 pts 100 pts 100 pts 80 pts 80 pts 60 pts 60 pts

Player 2: 80 pts ''90 pts 120 pts '140 pts 120 pts ''80 pts 70 pts 70 pts 40 pts 50 pts

Both these players put up the exact same points in their careers, but Player 2 obviously had a much higher peak, where he was one of the best players in the world. Player 1 was a consistently good player year-in-and-year-out, which is indeed impressive, but I view Player 2 as the better player.

Someone like Brodeur (or even Cujoe) has a ton more wins than Hasek, but I think Hasek was a much better goaltender and would rank him better all-time.

I have to respectfully disagree with you about Dino Ciccarelli. 5-10 pipsqueak, undrafted, never supposed to make it in the NHL and scores 608 goals, 16th most ALL-TIME. Nobody currently playing is even close to cracking 600.

Your reasoning is that he didn't have a monster season or didn't have lots of 50 goal seasons. That is baffling to me beyond all comprehension.

Ciccarelli played in by far the highest scoring era of all time in the NHL. I take that into account, and prefer to look at how he did against his peers from the same era -- and while a 50+ goal season nowadays would put you in the running for the scoring title, it barely got you in the top 5 at that time.

What about Mike Gartner? 708 goals, 6th ALL TIME. You know how many 50 goal seasons he had? ONE! That's it.

Look up Mike Gartner's accolades and awards, trophies and first team all star selections and tell me what you find.

IMO, having 1 or 2 "peak" years where you might have league leading numbers being more important than say, Gartner's 17 straight years of 30 or more goals is just bats*** crazy.

By the way, the year Gartner scored 50 goals and 102 points he was 10th in scoring, 5 other guys had more goals and 9 others more points than him that year. John fecking Ogrodnick had 55 goals that year and 105 points. Is that supposed to mean he is more HOF worthy than Dino and Gartner?

I do not consider Gartner as impressive as someone like Fedorov either. You yourself pointed out what the scoring was like back then (and Ogrodnick is a perfect example):

85-86: Wayne Gretzky was the scroring leader with 215pts. Neil Broten was 10th with 105.

86-87: Gretzky lead the league with 183pts and 7 players had over 100 pts.

87-88: Mario Lemieux won the scoring title with 168pts while Michel Goulet finished 10th with 106.

88-89: Lemieux again with 199pts and 9 players had over 100pts.

89-90: Gretzky took back the scoring lead with 142pts. Adam Oates finished 10th with 102pts.

90-91: Gretzky again with 163pts with Steve Larmer 10th with 101.

91-92: Lemieux storms back with 131pts and again, 9 players had over 100pts.

92-93: Lemieux had 160pts and with 123pts, Mark Recchi finished 10th!

So Ciccarelli scoring a lot of goals during that time period is impressive, and the fact he was able to grind it out for so many years is impressive... but he placed in the top ten in goals only twice in his entire career; that is not very impressive. At least Gartner placed in the top ten in goals five times, though even Gartner only finished as high as 10th in points in a single season. Neither one of them was ever considered one of the best in the league at their position. They just were fortunate to enjoy long careers during the highest scoring era of the NHL ever.

Gartner has more goals than Steve Yzerman, but I do not think they are even close to being on the same level -- Yzerman obviously had a much greater peak, brought defensive play and has 3 Cups. I rate Robitaille and Shanahan higher than Gartner because they have consistent goal scoring as well, but at least dominated their positions over a period of time. Selanne has a carrer of consistent goal scoring, but has scored over 60 and even over 70 goals in a season - so even though he has a lot less career goals, I would rank Selanne over Gartner. Neely dominated his position and scored 50 goals in only 49 games once. I rank Neely higher than Gartner.

I understand Gartner got in because of consistency, but he is truly a unique example. Ciccarelli scored over 30 goals 11 times. Very impressive, but Gartner did it 17 times. That is why he is in the Hall of Fame (and his speed and character). To put that into context:

Kurri had 11-30 goal seasons,

Messier had 11-30 goal seasons,

Gretzky had 14-30 goal seasons,

Brett hull has 14-30 goal seasons,

Hawerchuk had 10-30 goal seasons,

Lafleur had 7-30 goal seasons.

If I were voting on the Hall of Fame comittee, I'm not sure I would vote for Gartner or Neely, but I would definitely vote in Neely before him. Both guys are well ahead of Ciccarelli.

Being able to play in the rugged world of the NHL at a high level and to do it for a long, long time is a testament to one's toughness and ability to produce year after year after year.

Maybe i'm not understanding your position but it sounds to me like you'd stick Kovalchuk and AO in the hall of fame if their careers ended tomorrow simply because they had some big years

I agree - I think it is very impressive. I just don't know if it is "Hall of Fame" impressive. I flip-flop on Osgood for this very same reason. Osgood piling on the wins alone would not have me vote him in the HoF -- but the fact he was a starter on two Cups, picked up his play significantly in the playoffs (enough to be a legitimate candidate for the Conn Smythe) and was a runner-up for the Vezina as well as a being voted a team all-star would be what bumps him significantly in my mind.

Edited January 23, 2009 by egroen

[Never_Retire_Steve 35]

How the hell did this thread turn into a HoF debate?

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

How the hell did this thread turn into a HoF debate?

Because LGWers are great multi-taskers.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

I think both are important, but I tend to place more weight on peak performance over consistency.

Fair enough. I tend to value consistency more because it shows that you can succeed no matter your linemates, the strength of your team, the changing nature of the game. If you can continue to produce year after year even when people are gunning to shut you down, I think that shows true talent and Hall worthiness when you reach the lofty totals of guys like Dino or Gartner.

Would I say either guy was a better or more skilled player than Feds? No. But it doesn't diminish their accomplishments.

I guess I don't value peak performances much because they are flukey alot of times. Look at a guy like Johathan Cheechoo. He's got a 50 goal season under his belt. I kind of shrug my shoulders at that though because he was on a great team, had Joe Thornton feeding him pucks and quite frankly, not much has changed for him yet he cannot maintain even close to that high level of play.

Different strokes I guess.