• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Nightfall

Retire Sergei Fedorov’s Jersey Immediately

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

2. How do we assume this without factual evidence? The only fact we have is each person up there has 3 cups. Nothing less. Anyways the original point I made was that the bar would be set lower if someone with less than 3 cups was retired. And you can't use the "Maltby, Draper or McCarty" argument because they don't have the other "Categories" I listed. Remember the "cup" is just one category. This is a point of what the standard is set to on paper. On paper, there are minimum 3 cups earn by each up on the rafters. Now, if someone with 2 cups ended up having their jersey retired.. would that be blasphemous? No. It would just lower the bar is all. Which to be honest would get Pav in and also make Z's case even stronger. <-- which for me is a win win because I love both players. 3 cups - shoe-in. 2 cups = debate. If Pav won another cup, no one would in their right mind even question if he meets the "cup" category, because he would. That debate would be settled. And like I mentioned before, he has all the other cards lined up (loyalty, franchise numbers, fan/organization appreciation, generational).

4. A generational player would have a tremendous effect on the fans who would admire his skill. It may be a popularity contest but I don't see how that would stop him from being voted in. I mean if you look at the votes, he wasn't even close to being voted in. Ever. Believe it or not Sidney Crosby is one of the more disliked players amongst fans (overall), yet almost every year he makes the voting. I hate Crosby I think he's a whiner and subpar leader, yet I won't deny his pure talent. His one ice vision is second to none. No one can deny that.

There are some outliers, like Girgensons yes. Additionally if you really want to dwell on this then lets set aside the top 5 starters aspect of the all star game since it's a "popularity contest". The rest of the squad isn't chosen by the fans. It's by the NHL operations. Now thenwhy is it that Datsyuk STILL didn't make the all-stars most of his career, even when the rest of the rosters aren't purely based off popularity amongst fans? Lastly, if it is so much harder to get into the all-star game now, (which it is), then why have Ovechkin, Chara, etc made it year in and year out? You can't make these excuses for just Pav when it obviously doesn't apply to a lot of players in this league. Most of the "top" superstars make it year in and year out. Ok lets even put the whole "all-star" game aside and talk about "NHL First All-Star team". Which is based off skills and performance and contributions. Datsyuk has never made it on there. Remember I'm playing devils advocate with you on the whole "generational" point.

5. I'm not so sure. Yzerman was a legend for almost 15 straight years. Datsyuk was a lethal player for about 5 straight years or so (2007-2012ish). But I still relate more Pav than Yzerman. Actually I probably loved watching Z more than both of them in his prime but that's just me. Yzerman was my idol growing up but over the years I've moved on and have loved the whole "euro twin" thing a lot more. Probably because these two players were 6th and 7th round players that were the most complete players in history. So my point is, I am a bigger euro twin fan now than I am an Yzerman fan like I used to be. But someone asks me "do you think #13 will be up there?" my response usually is "I really hope so, but to be honest, the guys up there right now have made it pretty hard for these guys".

You mentioned Pavel's 2009 season, I'll add in the 2008 season because he did well that season as well. But that's the other point, he had 2 excellent seasons and he never reached that number again. In 2011 he played 70 games and scored 67 points. Now you're also saying that the other three (Lindsay, Abel, and Delv) aren't any more special than Pav. Actually, the fact of the matter is while Datsyuk produced well in 2 seasons, the guys, they consistently produced the amount of points they did. I think Lindsay even had a season where he produced close to 90 points well into his 30s. And I know for a fact that Delveccio had an 80+ points at the age of 38! Quiet a feat actually.

6. Actually I don't put too much stalk into Trophies I'm one of the few on here that thinks Zetterberg has a good chance of getting it retired even though he has only one trophy. But this STILL doesn't change my original point. That point being that the Red Wings have a high standard with multiple "categories", only one of which include the trophies. And currently, all members who have been retired have at least 3 cups. Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would set the "trophies category" bar to a lower point.

2. I dont need factual evidence to tell me that "3 cups" is not a requirement to have your jersey retired. Like I said, if Stevie didnt win a cup in 2002, there isnt a chance in hell his jersey would not still be up there.

4. I dont base my opinion on if a player is "generational" or not based on fan votes. I base it on what the players bring to the ice day in day out. I believe that Datsyuk brings something that nobody of his generation brings, this is evident by the way he talked about amongst his peers. I also dont like to go by fan votes, because historically casual fans are more incline to vote for players who excel on the offensive end of the ice, and ignore the defensive end of things. Of course their are outliers, but this is typically the way casual fans vote.

As to why Datsyuk hasn't made the all star game as much as the other guys, if I had to guess it would be due to injuries. He hasn't played a full season since 2010. You are not going to make an all star game or especially make first team all star when you play 56, 70, 47, 45, and 63 games a year. (his GP totals since 2010)

Look, I'm not going to dismiss everything you are saying. You do bring up some valid points, I just don't think they are strong enough to justify him as not being a generational player.

You make it sound like the other guys were great into their 30's and Datsyuk was a flash in the pan who was good for a couple years. You do realize that last year at 36 years old Datsyuk was 6th in the NHL in points per game. Delveccio did score more then 80 points in the 1968-69 season, and that season he ranked 7th in points (I would use points per game to keep in consistent, but I couldn't find it).

Now I personally think total points really mean don't much to me as point totals change based on what generation you are in. To me it is more of an indication where you rank amongst your peers during your generation. If we compare 1968-69 for Delveccio (the year you referenced where he was a similar age to Datsyuk last year) he scored 83 points, it was his career year, and he was 7th in the league in points (43 points below the leader). Had Datsyuk played an entire season healthy last year, he would have likely scored in the 75-85 point range and been right around the leaders, pretty close to #1. Pretty comparable if you ask me.

If your statement is "Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would set the "trophies category" bar to a lower point" then obviously I cannot disagree with you as that is basic math. If your statement is "Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would lower the bar" I still completely disagree and maintain that the argument is weak.

Can we please end this debate now lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. I dont need factual evidence to tell me that "3 cups" is not a requirement to have your jersey retired. Like I said, if Stevie didnt win a cup in 2002, there isnt a chance in hell his jersey would not still be up there.

4. I dont base my opinion on if a player is "generational" or not based on fan votes. I base it on what the players bring to the ice day in day out. I believe that Datsyuk brings something that nobody of his generation brings, this is evident by the way he talked about amongst his peers. I also dont like to go by fan votes, because historically casual fans are more incline to vote for players who excel on the offensive end of the ice, and ignore the defensive end of things. Of course their are outliers, but this is typically the way casual fans vote.

As to why Datsyuk hasn't made the all star game as much as the other guys, if I had to guess it would be due to injuries. He hasn't played a full season since 2010. You are not going to make an all star game or especially make first team all star when you play 56, 70, 47, 45, and 63 games a year. (his GP totals since 2010)

Look, I'm not going to dismiss everything you are saying. You do bring up some valid points, I just don't think they are strong enough to justify him as not being a generational player.

You make it sound like the other guys were great into their 30's and Datsyuk was a flash in the pan who was good for a couple years. You do realize that last year at 36 years old Datsyuk was 6th in the NHL in points per game. Delveccio did score more then 80 points in the 1968-69 season, and that season he ranked 7th in points (I would use points per game to keep in consistent, but I couldn't find it).

5. Now I personally think total points really mean don't much to me as point totals change based on what generation you are in. To me it is more of an indication where you rank amongst your peers during your generation. If we compare 1968-69 for Delveccio (the year you referenced where he was a similar age to Datsyuk last year) he scored 83 points, it was his career year, and he was 7th in the league in points (43 points below the leader). Had Datsyuk played an entire season healthy last year, he would have likely scored in the 75-85 point range and been right around the leaders, pretty close to #1. Pretty comparable if you ask me.

If your statement is "Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would set the "trophies category" bar to a lower point" then obviously I cannot disagree with you as that is basic math. If your statement is "Anyone getting their jersey retired with less cups would lower the bar" I still completely disagree and maintain that the argument is weak.

6. Can we please end this debate now lol.

2. You would if you want to claim that 3 cups is a weaker argument than anything else. Otherwise anything else is a bigger assumption than "what is". The "if" doesn't mean much because well.. it's an "if". The world of debate negates those words.

4. The only thing Datsyuk brings that is unique is his puck handling, but a lot of players now can do that, such as Patrick Kane. Fans and the NHL operations actually do vote quiet a bit for defensive forwards. Look at Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron, Kesler and Zetterberg. All these players have been elected into all star games. Toews was elected by fan vote. None of these are outliers these are all former Selke finalists or winners.

Also, the injuries thing is just an excuse. If he's injured for (5 years like you listed) in a row and had just 2 or 3 good years of hockey, I don't see how that's helping his "generational" player case. Patrick Kane played in less games than Datsyuk this year and was elected to play in the all-star game. Plenty of injured players have been considered. Injury is just an excuse. Howard was elected but he was injured so had to be replaced. They announce these things and it's listed if you look at the database.

5. 38 year old putting as many points up as those is a bigger feat (even if it's not as high as the leagues highest) than a player than didn't play a full season due to age or injuries. The latter is based on assumption that "what if he played those many games" PPG can have it's weak sides. Zetterberg was a PPG player for like the first 50 something games then dropped terribly the last 30 games.

6. I end when you end. :)

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. You would if you want to claim that 3 cups is a weaker argument than anything else. Otherwise anything else is a bigger assumption than "what is". The "if" doesn't mean much because well.. it's an "if". The world of debate negates those words.

4. The only thing Datsyuk brings that is unique is his puck handling, but a lot of players now can do that, such as Patrick Kane. Fans and the NHL operations actually do vote quiet a bit for defensive forwards. Look at Toews, Kopitar, Bergeron, Kesler and Zetterberg. All these players have been elected into all star games. Toews was elected by fan vote. None of these are outliers these are all former Selke finalists or winners.

Also, the injuries thing is just an excuse. If he's injured for (5 years like you listed) in a row and had just 2 or 3 good years of hockey, I don't see how that's helping his "generational" player case. Patrick Kane played in less games than Datsyuk this year and was elected to play in the all-star game. Plenty of injured players have been considered. Injury is just an excuse. Howard was elected but he was injured so had to be replaced. They announce these things and it's listed if you look at the database.

5. 38 year old putting as many points up as those is a bigger feat (even if it's not as high as the leagues highest) than a player than didn't play a full season due to age or injuries. The latter is based on assumption that "what if he played those many games" PPG can have it's weak sides. Zetterberg was a PPG player for like the first 50 something games then dropped terribly the last 30 games.

6. I end when you end. :)

We are going in circles, I think you got your point across, I think I got my point across........Ended lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a huge fan of both Datsyuk and Zetterberg, I think they're both world class players and were two of the best in the business in their prime. In saying that, I'm not sure if either should have their numbers retired. If they do, awesome, if they don't, it's definitely not a knock on either's career. I however agree 100% with what kliq has been saying in this entire debate. kickazz, you seem to repeating the same stance over and over again, most of which I disagree with. I'm not saying either opinion is correct but I do agree with kliq's arguments. We shall see how it all plays out... Anyway, I'm drunk. Can't wait for the draft / training camp... I miss hockey... Go Wings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a huge fan of both Datsyuk and Zetterberg, I think they're both world class players and were two of the best in the business in their prime. In saying that, I'm not sure if either should have their numbers retired. If they do, awesome, if they don't, it's definitely not a knock on either's career. I however agree 100% with what kliq has been saying in this entire debate. kickazz, you seem to repeating the same stance over and over again, most of which I disagree with. I'm not saying either opinion is correct but I do agree with kliq's arguments. We shall see how it all plays out... Anyway, I'm drunk. Can't wait for the draft / training camp... I miss hockey... Go Wings!

Thanks....that's why I ended the debate, it was going in circles. I don't want debate the correlation between a player being "generational" and the way fans vote in an all star game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now back to this "bar" thing -

It seems like guys up on the rafters have (1) - atleast 3 cups. (2)- Had organizational loyalty, and (3)- won unique individual awards.

Fedorov has the cups and won the awards but lost on the loyalty.

Datsyuk has 2 cups, organizational loyalty (we almost freaked out in 2013 thinking he'd leave us for Russia and lots of fans had great disdrain towards Datsyuk for that), and zero MVPs or point/goal scoring titles. Ok well say the 3 Selkes are pretty frickin awsome. So he's ok on the awards stuff.

So Feds doesn't meet the bar (threshold) because he didn't meet #(2) and Datsyuk doesn't meet the bar (threshold) because he didn't meet #(1).

Given all that, I think Datsyuk is closer to having his jersey retired than Feds because he still has a shot at another cup and building upon his legacy. Feds? Well that guy left us and hes long retired from the NHL. There's no changing his case. It's already written.

Very interesting post. If Datsyuk gets another Cup and reaches 1,000 points, I find it hard to make a case against retiring his number, regardless of whether he has individual awards or not.

Only thing that has prevented Fedorov's number from getting retired is the lack of loyalty to the organization, and I actually agree with that. The guy was a dynamic player, obtained a plethora of individual awards, but bailed on Detroit when all was said and done. Can't have a guy like that in the rafters when you've got the likes of Lindsay, Lidstrom, and Delvecchio up there. Part of me really wants to see his number retired just because of how instrumental he was in the '97, '98, and '02 Championship teams, but it would lower the bar, in fact.

We're one of the very few organizations that won't retire a player's number just because they played 10 years with the team and won a few Championships. Guys like Fedorov, Osgood, and Holmstrom would've had their numbers retired by now if they played with just about any other organization in the NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting post. If Datsyuk gets another Cup and reaches 1,000 points, I find it hard to make a case against retiring his number, regardless of whether he has individual awards or not.

Only thing that has prevented Fedorov's number from getting retired is the lack of loyalty to the organization, and I actually agree with that. The guy was a dynamic player, obtained a plethora of individual awards, but bailed on Detroit when all was said and done. Can't have a guy like that in the rafters when you've got the likes of Lindsay, Lidstrom, and Delvecchio up there. Part of me really wants to see his number retired just because of how instrumental he was in the '97, '98, and '02 Championship teams, but it would lower the bar, in fact.

We're one of the very few organizations that won't retire a player's number just because they played 10 years with the team and won a few Championships. Guys like Fedorov, Osgood, and Holmstrom would've had their numbers retired by now if they played with just about any other organization in the NHL.

Agreed.

The organization is pretty stringent in the process. We've had so much success and so many great players, it's incredibly hard. But yeah Datsyuk and both Z in my opinion have the best shot at the moment.

We are going in circles, I think you got your point across, I think I got my point across........Ended lol.

Aye now that post ^ shows an end. Not one with paragraphs.

I however agree 100% with what kliq has been saying in this entire debate. kickazz, you seem to repeating the same stance over and over again, most of which I disagree with. I'm not saying either opinion is correct but I do agree with kliq's arguments. We shall see how it all plays out... Anyway, I'm drunk. Can't wait for the draft / training camp... I miss hockey... Go Wings!

This may be the most generic post I have ever seen on these forums. Even for a drunk guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lift this #91 to the rafters...it's time.

Well half those highlights are assists. Would be better if they were all goals.

The Feds argument always boils down to he left. If he had stayed he probably would be in the rafters. But he left. And not only did he leave, but he was never the same again after he shipped out. No one thinks as highly of him as wings fans do. Why? Cause he was amazing here. He was just good everywhere else. IDK why he didn't perform elsewhere like he did here, but he sealed his fate when he left. You gotta be a Wing for life to retire that number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main difference between Fedorov and Datsyuk/Zetterberg is, Dats and Z both JOINED great teams and learned to be great within the organization...Fedorov lead in MAKING this team great. His number should be right there next to #5. It's a no brainer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number9, you say you have to be a Wing for life to retire that number?

Hmmmm..... Sid Abel played for the Blackhawks, Terry Sawchuk played for 5 different teams (won a Cup with Toronto) Ted Lindsay also played for the Blackhawks. Gordie Howe played for the Whalers (even though Mr. Hockey would've gotten a pass anyhow) but he DID leave Detroit to sign with the WHL Whalers.

So really, the only players up there that played for Detroit their entire career is Delvecchio, Yzerman, Lidstrom. And Yzerman was once traded until Mrs. Ilitch stepped in and negated it. What then? What if he became a Senator? Does that deny the greatness he brought to this team from 1983 to 1994?

Its time to put #91 up...

Edited by LeftWinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number9, you say you have to be a Wing for life to retire that number?

Hmmmm..... Sid Abel played for the Blackhawks, Terry Sawchuk played for 5 different teams (won a Cup with Toronto) Ted Lindsay also played for the Blackhawks. Gordie Howe played for the Whalers (even though Mr. Hockey would've gotten a pass anyhow) but he DID leave Detroit to sign with the WHL Whalers.

So really, the only players up there that played for Detroit their entire career is Delvecchio, Yzerman, Lidstrom. And Yzerman was once traded until Mrs. Ilitch stepped in and negated it. What then? What if he became a Senator? Does that deny the greatness he brought to this team from 1983 to 1994?

Its time to put #91 up...

Yup, I do suggest exactly that.

You're talking about a whole different era of hockey. Everyone on the production line got retired, naturally. That was the heritage of original 6 hockey. Nowadays we have Yzerman Lidstrom and the guy who high tailed it to California during the height of his career. Do you want to honestly suggest that Abel or Lindsay jumped ship to Chicago during the prime of their careers?

FEDS BAILED THATS THE POINT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So really, the only players up there that played for Detroit their entire career is Delvecchio, Yzerman, Lidstrom. And Yzerman was once traded until Mrs. Ilitch stepped in and negated it. What then? What if he became a Senator? Does that deny the greatness he brought to this team from 1983 to 1994?

If Yzerman was traded in 1994, I dont see his jersey being in the rafters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You make it sound like the other guys were great into their 30's and Datsyuk was a flash in the pan who was good for a couple years. You do realize that last year at 36 years old Datsyuk was 6th in the NHL in points per game. Delveccio did score more then 80 points in the 1968-69 season, and that season he ranked 7th in points (I would use points per game to keep in consistent, but I couldn't find it).

Now I personally think total points really mean don't much to me as point totals change based on what generation you are in. To me it is more of an indication where you rank amongst your peers during your generation. If we compare 1968-69 for Delveccio (the year you referenced where he was a similar age to Datsyuk last year) he scored 83 points, it was his career year, and he was 7th in the league in points (43 points below the leader). Had Datsyuk played an entire season healthy last year, he would have likely scored in the 75-85 point range and been right around the leaders, pretty close to #1. Pretty comparable if you ask me.

You could easily argue that had Pavel stayed healthy all season, he would be closer to 100 points than 80. He was scoring at a clip pretty near that for, what, his first 20 or so games? Too lazy to look it up, but I distinctly recall a good stretch where I did the math on an 82 game season and it was more than 100 points.

And then, once he was injured, he probably wasn't near 100% the rest of the season. Just sayin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could easily argue that had Pavel stayed healthy all season, he would be closer to 100 points than 80. He was scoring at a clip pretty near that for, what, his first 20 or so games? Too lazy to look it up, but I distinctly recall a good stretch where I did the math on an 82 game season and it was more than 100 points.

And then, once he was injured, he probably wasn't near 100% the rest of the season. Just sayin.

Scoring 100 points this season would be tough, that would put him 13 points above 2nd place in points. He scored 1.03 points per game this year, meaning theoretically in an 82 game season he would score 84 points. We're on the same page though, its damn impressive for a 36 year old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scoring 100 points this season would be tough, that would put him 13 points above 2nd place in points. He scored 1.03 points per game this year, meaning theoretically in an 82 game season he would score 84 points. We're on the same page though, its damn impressive for a 36 year old.

Yeah, we're lucky when anyone scores 100 points in today's league.

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