Board index » Word on the Street... » Sports




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Administrator
 Profile

Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm
Posts: 20537
Location: The City Of Trees
Skitch Patterson wrote:
at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?
Spoiler: show
Image
may disagree at the answer.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:36 pm
Posts: 25824
Location: south jersey
Peeps wrote:
and its not like i am saying stevie or marty arent great players

but they are second tier when it comes to orr, gretz and mario

broduer is arguable the greatest goalie of all time, he's not second tier to anyone

_________________
Feel the path of every day,... Which road you taking?,...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:36 pm
Posts: 25824
Location: south jersey
Peeps wrote:
and its not like i am saying stevie or marty arent great players

but they are second tier when it comes to orr, gretz and mario

broduer is arguable the greatest goalie of all time, he's not second tier to anyone

_________________
Feel the path of every day,... Which road you taking?,...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:36 pm
Posts: 25824
Location: south jersey
PhilPritchard wrote:
pearljamfan80 wrote:
Brodeur has won two postseason series since the retirement of Scott Stevens so I'm going to have to disagree here.


They basically replaced Niedermayer and Stevens's minutes with Martin and Lukowich after the lockout. Of course the team isn't going to be as successful. He still led the NHL in wins three times after losing two Hall Of Fame defensemen.

:thumbsup:

_________________
Feel the path of every day,... Which road you taking?,...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
Green Habit wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?
Spoiler: show
Image
may disagree at the answer.



Spoiler: show
Image

Seems to agree.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar
In a van down by the river
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:15 am
Posts: 33031
love the more points argument that is being made...

lets say mario isnt decimated by injury. figure he scored at a clip of 1.85 pts per game. even taking into account a decline, lets move that down to 1.3 pts per game. steve played 688 more games than mario. that still would put mario around 2700 pts

so yea, good luck with saying steve is better cause he put up bigger numbers. a whopping 32 more points in more than 688 games :)

injuries and durability have no bearing on this thread. its titled best player to play for one team.

mario wins

_________________
maybe we can hum along...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:34 am
Posts: 12700
Location: ...a town in north Ontario...
Skitch Patterson wrote:
It's the Sandy Koufax discussion.

I agree Mario is one of the top 2 or 3 most talented players of all time, especially offensively (I will not, however, classify him as a good defensive player). His amazing offensive abilities more than make up for his defense. But guys like Yzerman and Sakic had value to their teams in 400-600 more games then Mario did to his team. And I'm not talking accumulator guys like Ronnie Francis or Mark Recchi- I'm talking about players that were at one point or another in that same "Top 3-5 players in the game" discussion.

Same debate with Orr and Lidstrom really. by the time it's all said and done, Lidstrom will have played about a thousand more games than Orr. THOUSAND. Orr was absolutely dominant for a short period, where as guys like Lidstrom, and Bourque were important fixtures and provided value to their teams for nearly 20 years. Which would you say is the better player? The guy that absolutely awesome for 5 years? Or the guy that is one of the best in the league for 20?

at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?


I've always had kind of a soft spot for high-peak guys who's careers were derailed by injuries like Orr, Neely, Koufax, etc. Not sure why. I think lack of durability comes into play with most players, but there's a certain level where it almost doesn't matter any more. Lemieux's production makes up for any difference in games played between him and guys like Yzerman and Sakic. Overall, they're stats are pretty close... but Lemieux was just so unbelievably dominant.

If you have the option of Lemieux for 60-65 games a season for 15 years or Yzerman/Sakic for 80 games a season for 20 years, who do you take?

_________________
I think we relinquished enough... and it's still dark enough... and it goes on and on and on...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:52 pm
Posts: 10620
Location: Chicago, IL
Gender: Male
PhilPritchard wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
It's the Sandy Koufax discussion.

I agree Mario is one of the top 2 or 3 most talented players of all time, especially offensively (I will not, however, classify him as a good defensive player). His amazing offensive abilities more than make up for his defense. But guys like Yzerman and Sakic had value to their teams in 400-600 more games then Mario did to his team. And I'm not talking accumulator guys like Ronnie Francis or Mark Recchi- I'm talking about players that were at one point or another in that same "Top 3-5 players in the game" discussion.

Same debate with Orr and Lidstrom really. by the time it's all said and done, Lidstrom will have played about a thousand more games than Orr. THOUSAND. Orr was absolutely dominant for a short period, where as guys like Lidstrom, and Bourque were important fixtures and provided value to their teams for nearly 20 years. Which would you say is the better player? The guy that absolutely awesome for 5 years? Or the guy that is one of the best in the league for 20?

at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?


I've always had kind of a soft spot for high-peak guys who's careers were derailed by injuries like Orr, Neely, Koufax, etc. Not sure why. I think lack of durability comes into play with most players, but there's a certain level where it almost doesn't matter any more. Lemieux's production makes up for any difference in games played between him and guys like Yzerman and Sakic. Overall, they're stats are pretty close... but Lemieux was just so unbelievably dominant.


Will you be in favor of Sidney Crosby being considered a HOFer after he announces his retirement this summer?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:36 pm
Posts: 25824
Location: south jersey
PhilPritchard wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
It's the Sandy Koufax discussion.

I agree Mario is one of the top 2 or 3 most talented players of all time, especially offensively (I will not, however, classify him as a good defensive player). His amazing offensive abilities more than make up for his defense. But guys like Yzerman and Sakic had value to their teams in 400-600 more games then Mario did to his team. And I'm not talking accumulator guys like Ronnie Francis or Mark Recchi- I'm talking about players that were at one point or another in that same "Top 3-5 players in the game" discussion.

Same debate with Orr and Lidstrom really. by the time it's all said and done, Lidstrom will have played about a thousand more games than Orr. THOUSAND. Orr was absolutely dominant for a short period, where as guys like Lidstrom, and Bourque were important fixtures and provided value to their teams for nearly 20 years. Which would you say is the better player? The guy that absolutely awesome for 5 years? Or the guy that is one of the best in the league for 20?

at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?


I've always had kind of a soft spot for high-peak guys who's careers were derailed by injuries like Orr, Neely, Koufax, etc. Not sure why. I think lack of durability comes into play with most players, but there's a certain level where it almost doesn't matter any more. Lemieux's production makes up for any difference in games played between him and guys like Yzerman and Sakic. Overall, they're stats are pretty close... but Lemieux was just so unbelievably dominant.

If you have the option of Lemieux for 60-65 games a season for 15 years or Yzerman/Sakic for 80 games a season for 20 years, who do you take?

marty

_________________
Feel the path of every day,... Which road you taking?,...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar
In a van down by the river
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 6:15 am
Posts: 33031
Chris_H_2 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
It's the Sandy Koufax discussion.

I agree Mario is one of the top 2 or 3 most talented players of all time, especially offensively (I will not, however, classify him as a good defensive player). His amazing offensive abilities more than make up for his defense. But guys like Yzerman and Sakic had value to their teams in 400-600 more games then Mario did to his team. And I'm not talking accumulator guys like Ronnie Francis or Mark Recchi- I'm talking about players that were at one point or another in that same "Top 3-5 players in the game" discussion.

Same debate with Orr and Lidstrom really. by the time it's all said and done, Lidstrom will have played about a thousand more games than Orr. THOUSAND. Orr was absolutely dominant for a short period, where as guys like Lidstrom, and Bourque were important fixtures and provided value to their teams for nearly 20 years. Which would you say is the better player? The guy that absolutely awesome for 5 years? Or the guy that is one of the best in the league for 20?

at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?


I've always had kind of a soft spot for high-peak guys who's careers were derailed by injuries like Orr, Neely, Koufax, etc. Not sure why. I think lack of durability comes into play with most players, but there's a certain level where it almost doesn't matter any more. Lemieux's production makes up for any difference in games played between him and guys like Yzerman and Sakic. Overall, they're stats are pretty close... but Lemieux was just so unbelievably dominant.


Will you be in favor of Sidney Crosby being considered a HOFer after he announces his retirement this summer?


i thought you were a lawyer?

_________________
maybe we can hum along...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:52 pm
Posts: 10620
Location: Chicago, IL
Gender: Male
Peeps wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
It's the Sandy Koufax discussion.

I agree Mario is one of the top 2 or 3 most talented players of all time, especially offensively (I will not, however, classify him as a good defensive player). His amazing offensive abilities more than make up for his defense. But guys like Yzerman and Sakic had value to their teams in 400-600 more games then Mario did to his team. And I'm not talking accumulator guys like Ronnie Francis or Mark Recchi- I'm talking about players that were at one point or another in that same "Top 3-5 players in the game" discussion.

Same debate with Orr and Lidstrom really. by the time it's all said and done, Lidstrom will have played about a thousand more games than Orr. THOUSAND. Orr was absolutely dominant for a short period, where as guys like Lidstrom, and Bourque were important fixtures and provided value to their teams for nearly 20 years. Which would you say is the better player? The guy that absolutely awesome for 5 years? Or the guy that is one of the best in the league for 20?

at what point in sports do we hold the lack of durability against great players?


I've always had kind of a soft spot for high-peak guys who's careers were derailed by injuries like Orr, Neely, Koufax, etc. Not sure why. I think lack of durability comes into play with most players, but there's a certain level where it almost doesn't matter any more. Lemieux's production makes up for any difference in games played between him and guys like Yzerman and Sakic. Overall, they're stats are pretty close... but Lemieux was just so unbelievably dominant.


Will you be in favor of Sidney Crosby being considered a HOFer after he announces his retirement this summer?


i thought you were a lawyer?


Just on some days . . .


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:34 am
Posts: 12700
Location: ...a town in north Ontario...
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Will you be in favor of Sidney Crosby being considered a HOFer after he announces his retirement this summer?


I pretty much expected to answer "No" pretty easily, but I'm actually not too sure. If it happened, Cam Neely would probably be the best comparison and Crosby has him beat in almost every individual and team category...

_________________
I think we relinquished enough... and it's still dark enough... and it goes on and on and on...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:36 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:24 pm
Posts: 6501
Location: Massachusetts
Gender: Male
PhilPritchard wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Will you be in favor of Sidney Crosby being considered a HOFer after he announces his retirement this summer?


I pretty much expected to answer "No" pretty easily, but I'm actually not too sure. If it happened, Cam Neely would probably be the best comparison and Crosby has him beat in almost every individual and team category...


Yeah but Neely played 13 seasons.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 2:35 am 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:34 am
Posts: 12700
Location: ...a town in north Ontario...
mick7184 wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
Will you be in favor of Sidney Crosby being considered a HOFer after he announces his retirement this summer?


I pretty much expected to answer "No" pretty easily, but I'm actually not too sure. If it happened, Cam Neely would probably be the best comparison and Crosby has him beat in almost every individual and team category...


Yeah but Neely played 13 seasons.


And in his last five seasons he averaged 32 games a year...

As good as Neely was, Crosby has been way more dominant and has put up more impressive offensive numbers in an era where offense is significantly depressed. Crosby's also 5th all-time in points per game.

I'm not arguing against Neely at all, but even though Crosby's had only seven seasons (really six, but Neely really only has 11 :lol: ) they've been possibly the most dominant first seven seasons in the NHL that anyone has ever had.

_________________
I think we relinquished enough... and it's still dark enough... and it goes on and on and on...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:29 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:35 pm
Posts: 8770
Location: flap flap flap hey no fair i made my saving throw
PhilPritchard wrote:
even though Crosby's had only seven seasons (really six, but Neely really only has 11 :lol: ) they've been possibly the most dominant first seven seasons in the NHL that anyone has ever had.


Ok, what?

_________________
New Age bullshit is just a bunch of homo shit that some rich fuck came up with to scam people. It's exactly the same as scientology and every other religion: fake.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Best Players to Play for One Team - Any Sport
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:34 am
Posts: 12700
Location: ...a town in north Ontario...
Echoes wrote:
PhilPritchard wrote:
even though Crosby's had only seven seasons (really six, but Neely really only has 11 :lol: ) they've been possibly the most dominant first seven seasons in the NHL that anyone has ever had.


Ok, what?


What what? I meant to say "among" the most dominant... I know it's not on Gretzky/Lemieux levels, but I'm not sure anyone else has ever dominated the league the way he has before turning 24.

_________________
I think we relinquished enough... and it's still dark enough... and it goes on and on and on...


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Board index » Word on the Street... » Sports


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
It is currently Sun May 26, 2019 9:58 am