• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Broken 16

Shades of Fedorov?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Let's take a look at Russians vs. Swedes.

Larionov vs. Zetterberg - Z holds the clear advantage, as the better player in most respects.

Fedorov vs. Franzen - Fedorov is obviously the better player, being that he is better than Franzen at even Franzen's best talent.

Kozlov vs. Holmstrom - Slava has been a much more prolific scorer than Homer over their careers, and is a more versatile offensive player with better two-way skills.

Konstantinov vs. Kronwall - Vladdie is clearly the choice for the punishing defensive defenseman with puck talents.

Fetisov vs. Lidstrom - Fetisov was 40 when the Wings won the 1998 Cup, Lidstrom is 40 now. One of them is a Norris trophy favorite, the other was a solid top-four defenseman.

Who the f*** is talking about Russia?

We're talking about the Russian Five vs the Swedish Five. One would assume that would mean the current Swedes vs. the Russian Five circa 1997. Larionov was not better in 1997 than Zetterberg is now. Not even close.

There's a whole lot of contradictions there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crymson   
Guest Crymson

Either you're dense...or dense. YZERMAN SAID IT. YZERMAN SAID IT. YZERMAN SAID IT.

Also, being a hypocrite doesn't invalidate my argument. Rule 23 of Fallacies. People who smoke that tell people not to smoke may be hypocrites, but it doesn't mean they are wrong.

Gee, wow. Yzerman said it. Does that make it automatically true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a whole lot of contradictions there.

The comparison was between the Russian Five and the Swedish Five; not between the players who made them up. There is a difference.

You bring up Larionov's impressive career in Russia, and you failed to mention something. Many consider Slava Fetisov to be one of the top two of three defensemen to ever play. If my comparison was based on players in their primes, that would be something that was definitely missing. Based on their primes, it's definitely the Russians; Larionov and Fetisov are the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also get the comparison, although Johan is not the inate talent that Feds was. Fedorov was easily the most gifted under-achiever ever to grace the NHL. I remember thinking that when he was on his game (or chose to play to his potential, if that is what was happening), there was no one better than Fedorov.

He was simply beautiful to watch, at least when you were not wanting to kill him for not showing up. :ph34r:

Mule isn't pretty, but he's damned effective when it really, really counts. Now, if he could just show that same fire on a regular basis, I guess we'd all just have to shut up. :P

I don't think Franzen could pull a Kournikova, but then again, he's damned effective when it really, really counts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No way. Franzen couldn't hold Fedorov's jockstrap in the playoffs. Unlinke Franzen, Fedorov was actually a great two-way player.

Wow - this might be a 1st...We actually agree on something :lol:

Yeah - we wish we could have a Fedorov clone; I'd take Fedorov in his prime over Franzen any day of the week .

:lol: at how this thread has gotten way off topic! BUT to keep it off topic, put the Russian 5 up against Franzen - Zetterberg - Holmstrom Lidstrom - Kronwall. I think the Russians would prevail.

I'd be close, but I agree...The Russian 5 were something else!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Franzen doesn't have the pure level of talent that Fedorov has. However, his ego and general level of conceit also doesn't hold a candle to what 91 had. Fedorov was extremely full of himself and often behaved childishly when it came to anything that threatened his massive ego.

True, and it didn't help by pissing off Holland, and Ilitch with his holding out (and signing a contract with the Canes) back in the 1997/1998 season...Franzen comes across as a more amicable fellow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, and it didn't help by pissing off Holland, and Ilitch with his holding out (and signing a contract with the Canes) back in the 1997/1998 season...Franzen comes across as a more amicable fellow.

I agree! The holdout didn't sit too well with Mr. I, but more so than that,I think it is who actually signed Fedorov is what REALLY pissed Ilitch off! Pete Karmanos and Iltich are BITTER, BITTER, BITTER (did I mention BITTER?) rivals and generally do not like each other. Then, during his contract year 2002-2003, Iltich offered him TOP salary and Fedorov didn't want to sign until AFTER the season, that also offended Ilitch and after he pulled that 5yr offer off the table, his offer after the season shrunk to 4 yrs. Fedorov said he would accept the earlier offer and Iltich told him that offer was gone. So Feds signed for the same amount in Anaheim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is why I titled the thread SHADES of Fedorov. I think it's pretty much common knowledge that Fedorov was one of the most talented to ever lace them up. 5 goals is a pretty dominant performance, no matter what era. It's no coincidence that the last Wing to do it was Fedorov. It takes a natural goal scorer to to do that. It just so happens that Fedorov was a natural goal scorer (or could be if he wanted to) on top of everything else.

I don't agree on the coasting part. I went to a lot of games in the 90's and it was pretty obvious when Fedorov was on auto-pilot. Franzen, I can't say with any certainty. I haven't seen as many games since Stevie retired, so I don't know if my perception of Franzen coasting is legit.

You've heard Babcock use the term "engage". Sometimes it took Fedorov a while or an incident in order to engage. Sometimes he didn't engage at all. But he was good enough that he still wasn't a liability.

Yes he's a shade because he doesnt consistently play at 100%, and when he does he dominates relatively. That's where the comparison ends.

We call Franzen the Mule because he's stubborn, and you really don't want to piss him off if you're on the other team. He carries his load and gets the job done. Piss him off, and all bets are off. We call Federov the best underachiever because he was as stated before so elite that 80% effort still dominated the average opponent. He lacked the heart of Yzerman, Gretzky etc. When he was on he was on. I think we should retire his number. He's part of what built the dynasty we enjoy today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this