Jaromir Jagr

[L K]

I guess we were talking about him in the general NHL thread.  I think he deserves his own thread now that this beautiful man has passed Brett Hull for 3rd all time in NHL goal scoring.

He scored #741 and #742 against the Jets last night.
http://md-akc.med.nhl.com/mp4/nhl/2016/02/21/ede96b3f-9f36-42c6-b355-d84b640c5799/1456021877850/asset_1800k.mp4

He has 20 goals and 23 assists in 56 games this year.  It's entirely conceivable that he has another 10-15 points in him this year.  That would move him into 3rd in career points and would set him up to have a good shot at top 5 in assists next year.  It's always possible that he could hit a wall but the way he is playing right now, and insulated on a good young team like the Panthers he could conceivably play another 2-3 years the way he is going.  He's a huge fitness nut so it certainly wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility.

Goals
Gretzky 894
Howe    801
Jagr      742

Assists
Gretzky  1963
Francis  1249
Messier  1193
Bourque  1169
Coffey    1135
Jagr        1103

Points
Gretzky  2857
Messier  1887
Howe    1850
Jagr      1845

 

[losveratos]

I guess we were talking about him in the general NHL thread.  I think he deserves his own thread now that this beautiful man has passed Brett Hull for 3rd all time in NHL goal scoring.

He scored #741 and #742 against the Jets last night.
http://md-akc.med.nhl.com/mp4/nhl/2016/02/21/ede96b3f-9f36-42c6-b355-d84b640c5799/1456021877850/asset_1800k.mp4

He has 20 goals and 23 assists in 56 games this year.  It's entirely conceivable that he has another 10-15 points in him this year.  That would move him into 3rd in career points and would set him up to have a good shot at top 5 in assists next year.  It's always possible that he could hit a wall but the way he is playing right now, and insulated on a good young team like the Panthers he could conceivably play another 2-3 years the way he is going.  He's a huge fitness nut so it certainly wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility.

Goals
Gretzky 894
Howe    801
Jagr      742

Assists
Gretzky  1963
Francis  1249
Messier  1193
Bourque  1169
Coffey    1135
Jagr        1103

Points
Gretzky  2857
Messier  1887
Howe    1850
Jagr      1845

Just a casual 1000~ points more than the next guy... man.

 

[Kin]

Just a casual 1000~ points more than the next guy... man.

Sure but quite a bit of that has to do with the conditions he played in. If you use Hockey Reference's adjusted scoring the difference between the two of them shrinks quite a bit. Then it's

Gretzky - 758 G, 1717 A
Jagr -      824 G, 1192 A

Gretzky's still ahead by 400 or so points and in fewer games but that's not taking into account the better part of five seasons Jagr missed due to lockouts or the KHL(or Wayne's 2 WHA seasons).

Point is, they're pretty comparable offensive players. That's just nutty.

 

[losveratos]

Just a casual 1000~ points more than the next guy... man.

Sure but quite a bit of that has to do with the conditions he played in. If you use Hockey Reference's adjusted scoring the difference between the two of them shrinks quite a bit. Then it's

Gretzky - 758 G, 1717 A
Jagr -      824 G, 1192 A

Gretzky's still ahead by 400 or so points and in fewer games but that's not taking into account the better part of five seasons Jagr missed due to lockouts or the KHL(or Wayne's 2 WHA seasons).

Point is, they're pretty comparable offensive players. That's just nutty.

I'm more impressed that you could remove his four best seasons which were all over 200 points and he still beats the next guy.... in four less years... >_>

I'd like to see what happens if you took off every year Jagr was playing with Mario and see how he fairs in comparison.

 

[Kin]

I'd like to see what happens if you took off every year Jagr was playing with Mario and see how he fairs in comparison.

When Lemieux went on hiatus in 96-97, Jagr responded by winning the Art Ross for the next four years, including winning it in a season where he only played 63 games.

 

[losveratos]

I'd like to see what happens if you took off every year Jagr was playing with Mario and see how he fairs in comparison.

When Lemieux went on hiatus in 96-97, Jagr responded by winning the Art Ross for the next four years, including winning it in a season where he only played 63 games.

3 years I think not 4. Unless my stats page surfing is incorrect. He also did it less convincingly than any other generations generational talents. He's performing through longevity (which is certainly a plus of course) which feels rather lessening to me.

He's great... but you have to fudge the numbers quite a bit and squint pretty hard to get him up much higher than he's already proven to be. Which is not on the podium with the top 3. For me that means they're not really comparable.

From years 1980 through to 1986 Gretzky just took off. Going from a mere 30 points higher than his next competition to a steady ever increasing 75 points higher than the next player. He was so far removed from his competition that there was him then every other player in the league. It was just that stupid. Jagr was never and has never been that much better than the next guy in my opinion. But there have been other players that approach that conversation. Hell... if this year continues to progress at the current rates of PPG then even Kane has shown more dominance (PPG% wise) than he ever did to his direct date relevant competition.

TL;DR... I just don't see the comparison.

 

[Joe S.]

Is it me or is the most unimpressive name on that list messier? I'm totally biased but I just never liked him... It always felt,  to me anyway,  that his points were a mirage...

 

[Kin]

3 years I think not 4. Unless my stats page surfing is incorrect.

It is.

He's great... but you have to fudge the numbers quite a bit and squint pretty hard to get him up much higher than he's already proven to be.

Not really, you just have to take into account leaguewide goal scoring rates and remember that Gretzky was shooting at this:

And Jagr's been shooting at this:

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Not really, you just have to take into account leaguewide goal scoring rates and remember that Gretzky was shooting at this:

Not an NHL goal but this is my favourite "what sport is this goalie playing" Gretzky goal:

[tweet]692010819232632832[/tweet]

 

[losveratos]

3 years I think not 4. Unless my stats page surfing is incorrect.

It is.

He's great... but you have to fudge the numbers quite a bit and squint pretty hard to get him up much higher than he's already proven to be.

Not really, you just have to take into account leaguewide goal scoring rates and remember that Gretzky was shooting at this:

And Jagr's been shooting at this:

Except you completely disregarded the entire point of my message. Every single player in those years with Gretzky were playing against those exact same goalies... and every single player at the same time as Jagr was playing against those. And as you pointed out earlier Gretzky still wins by an impressive amount of adjusted points in less games.

Comparing them against their peers at the times that they played Gretzky is the most dominate player of all time followed by a few players not named Jagr. So I stand by my statement that they're not really comparable.

Not sure which segments you'll grab this time to try and not pay heed to the entirety of my point. I mean kudos... thats what people do in debates when they're on the side that doesn't have the stats to back up their arguments. Doesn't mean it's any less annoying to have your main point ignored.

And yeah, I was wrong about the Art Ross thing ^_^ I misread the stats lines for 96-97. Easier to look up on the wiki page for the list of winners

 

[losveratos]

In case it comes up later since I'm making a mental list now...

Gretzky - Lemieux
Howe - Bobby Hull

There might be one more player up there before Jagr. But if he plays for another couple years and racks up more points at a reasonable pace he has an outside shot of cracking my short list.

The problem however is once you chance the statement from best "offensive" players of their time to best players of their time he drops around 10 names for me. Several defencemen and goalies jump in there ahead of him but those names I put there stay there. Thats the difference and thats why I still can't "compare" him with The Great One(s).

 

[Kin]

Except you completely disregarded the entire point of my message. Every single player in those years with Gretzky were playing against those exact same goalies... and every single player at the same time as Jagr was playing against those. And as you pointed out earlier Gretzky still wins by an impressive amount of adjusted points in less games.

Comparing them against their peers at the times that they played Gretzky is the most dominate player of all time followed by a few players not named Jagr. So I stand by my statement that they're not really comparable.

Not sure which segments you'll grab this time to try and not pay heed to the entirety of my point. I mean kudos... thats what people do in debates when they're on the side that doesn't have the stats to back up their arguments. Doesn't mean it's any less annoying to have your main point ignored.

The only thing I'm ignoring is the parts of what you're saying that seem to be an attempt to refute an argument that nobody is making, which is that Jagr has a better offensive record than Gretzky does.

So if you want to talk about purposefully ignoring the point someone is making going on and on about Gretzky's PPG being higher than Jagr after I said that the two were "comparable" and that the difference between them disappears "quite a bit" is doing just that. You want to think Gretzky's offensive record than Jagr's, great, personally I think Lemieux's is better than both.

But they are comparable. One was the greatest scorer in his era, the other the greatest in his. Gretzky's margins are higher, sure, but aside from the fact that more goals in a league will generally lead to higher margins there's a whole bunch of other mitigating factors that weight things towards looking at Jagr more favourably. The league in the 90's, for instance, was probably at it's strongest with the influx of European talent but before they heavily expanded towards the end of the decade. As a general rule, the better the overall level of competition the harder it is to separate yourself from the pack.

Likewise, Jagr did a lot of this on some Pittsburgh teams that were pretty bad. Gretzky's teams were full of HOFers. Jagr was winning Art Ross trophies on teams with German Titov and Martin Straka. How about an in his prime Paul Coffey vs. Kevin Hatcher? Because those were the #1 defensemen on both players' teams in their respective best seasons.

And the difference in goal rate per season didn't manifest itself randomly. It specifically affected skill players in a way that shut them down in a way it didn't for others. We all remember the hockey of that era. One of the best ways to score goals was to plant someone like Keith Tkachuk in front of the net and just fire away in the hopes of a tip or a rebound. It's called the hook and grab era for a reason. We saw the manifestation of it further after the cancelled season when guys whose slow play worked fine in those conditions but left them laughably unable to keep up in a league that emphasized skill/speed.

And at the end of it, Jagr still has better adjusted goal scoring numbers. That's not a mystery either. Look at Gretzky's goal scoring numbers. Look at how they drop drastically as soon as the more athletic goalies come into the league.

Personally I rate the three best offensive forwards in the history of the game like this:

1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Jagr

And, honestly, I think there's a bigger gap between 3 and 4 than 2 and 3. But, heck, you're certainly free to think differently.

 

[losveratos]

The only thing I'm ignoring is the parts of what you're saying that seem to be an attempt to refute an argument that nobody is making, which is that Jagr has a better offensive record than Gretzky does.

I specifically took the time to mention PPG% so no I wasn't saying that.

So if you want to talk about purposefully ignoring the point someone is making going on and on about Gretzky's PPG being higher than Jagr after I said that the two were "comparable" and that the difference between them disappears "quite a bit" is doing just that. You want to think Gretzky's offensive record than Jagr's, great, personally I think Lemieux's is better than both.

Again I specifically mentioned % better than peers and how it was incredibly significant and more than any other player point gap in the history of the sport. (I just added that last part now for emphasis)

But they are comparable. One was the greatest scorer in his era, the other the greatest in his.

I guess if you call the couple of years that Mario was gone from the game an Era... then be my guest. But Mario was probably still a better player in a hospital bed than Jagr on the ice while he was gone. (obviously in jest)

Personally I rate the three best offensive forwards in the history of the game like this:

1. Lemieux
2. Gretzky
3. Jagr

And, honestly, I think there's a bigger gap between 3 and 4 than 2 and 3. But, heck, you're certainly free to think differently.

And I think you're missing a few names but, heck, you're certainly free to think differently.

 

[losveratos]

But they are comparable. One was the greatest scorer in his era, the other the greatest in his. Gretzky's margins are higher, sure, but aside from the fact that more goals in a league will generally lead to higher margins there's a whole bunch of other mitigating factors that weight things towards looking at Jagr more favourably. The league in the 90's, for instance, was probably at it's strongest with the influx of European talent but before they heavily expanded towards the end of the decade. As a general rule, the better the overall level of competition the harder it is to separate yourself from the pack.

And I wanted to comment on this separately. Because I think it's important.

Gretzky vs Jagr comparing years when they were playing simultaneously in the 90's. And I'm saying now that I don't care that Jagr was only 18 during the first comparison year seeing as Gretzky led the league in scoring in his first year.

1990 - 163 to 57
91 - 121 to 69
92 - 65 to 94 (Gretzky only played 45 games and had a higher PPG total. Probably would have beat him this year but congrats to jagr)
93 - 130 to 99
94 - 48 to 70 (Jagr finally overtakes Gretzky as a 22 year old man entering his prime against a 33-34 year old now declining Gretzky)
Then continues to dominate his ever declining totals.

I just don't understand how the argument can be made that Jagr is number three when other players were more dominate from day one of their careers, more dominate against their peers in their respective eras, and considerably higher PPG than he has.

If you can explain it to me differently maybe I can see where you're coming from. But a lot of players really should be up there ahead of him in my opinion. Especially since you want to add the word "history" into your point.

 

[Kin]

I specifically took the time to mention PPG% so no I wasn't saying that.

I don't know what you're trying to say here.

Again I specifically mentioned % better than peers and how it was incredibly significant and more than any other player point gap in the history of the sport. (I just added that last part now for emphasis)

Yeah, I disagree with that though. If you look at, say, the basketball player who led his league in scoring by the highest amount you'd get Wilt Chamberlain. If you looked at what Baseball player led his league by the most homeruns you'd get Babe Ruth. Does that make either of them the best ever at those things? I don't buy it. Chamberlain, for instance, at his best not only outscored someone like Michael Jordan by a huge amount, he outscored the #2 guy during his time frame by more than twice as much as Jordan would.

If someone comes into the game and is a revolutionary, who sees the game differently than his peers or who has the physical abilities to play the game in a slightly different way, then they're going to stand out from the field to an absurd degree but, at some point, the sport will catch up to them and that advantage will disappear. Gretzky was that kind of player but his gigantic advantage over the league disappeared well before he left his athletic prime, just like it did with Chamberlain and Ruth. It doesn't make them the best, just the first.

Because honestly, if that's the yardstick then it's not close. The player with the most impressive NHL offensive output isn't Gretzky or Lemieux or Jagr. It's Bobby Orr. By miles. When Orr scored 120 points in 69-70 the next highest scoring defenseman had 44 points. Gretzky never outscored other forwards by that kind of a rate.

 

[losveratos]

Because honestly, if that's the yardstick then it's not close. The player with the most impressive NHL offensive output isn't Gretzky or Lemieux or Jagr. It's Bobby Orr. By miles. When Orr scored 120 points in 69-70 the next highest scoring defenseman had 44 points. Gretzky never outscored other forwards by that kind of a rate.

That is my Yardstick. And I would absolutely put Orr as my #1 all time best player of any position. Probably something along the lines of
Orr then one of Mario or Gretzky then about a dozen names before Jagr. Several of them being offensive forwards to boot.

 

[Kin]

I just don't understand how the argument can be made that Jagr is number three when other players were more dominate from day one of their careers, more dominate against their peers in their respective eras, and considerably higher PPG than he has.

Ok, first of all, dominate is a verb. Dominant is the adjective you're looking for.

Second, in the years you mention re: Gretzky(although again, nobody is saying that Gretzky has a less impressive career output) Jagr actually out scores Gretzky 157 to 137(pro-rate Gretzky's 92-93 season to 75 games and the gap narrows but it's still Jagr by 10 or so goals).

So Jagr at 18-22 was a better goal scorer than Gretzky at the same time. That's remarkable. That's why I'm comfortable saying that Jagr was a better goalscorer than Gretzky overall.

As for the issue of historical context, I addressed that talking about Wilt/The Babe.

 

[losveratos]

I specifically took the time to mention PPG% so no I wasn't saying that.

I don't know what you're trying to say here.

I was rather poorly saying that I never meant to imply that Gretzky was better due to sheer number totals compared directly. But rather that their PPG% above their peers shows how much more dominate he was. But it seemed to me that you kept implying that I just meant A player has bigger number thus better than B which I didn't (try to) say.

 

[dappleganger]

Jagr is one of the best all-time.

 

[losveratos]

I just don't understand how the argument can be made that Jagr is number three when other players were more dominate from day one of their careers, more dominate against their peers in their respective eras, and considerably higher PPG than he has.

Ok, first of all, dominate is a verb. Dominant is the adjective you're looking for.

Second, in the years you mention re: Gretzky(although again, nobody is saying that Gretzky has a less impressive career output) Jagr actually out scores Gretzky 157 to 137(pro-rate Gretzky's 92-93 season to 75 games and the gap narrows but it's still Jagr by 10 or so goals).

So Jagr at 18-22 was a better goal scorer than Gretzky at the same time. That's remarkable. That's why I'm comfortable saying that Jagr was a better goalscorer than Gretzky overall.

As for the issue of historical context, I addressed that talking about Wilt/The Babe.

OMG I misspelled a word twice. Thanks for pointing it out. For context it's 1:38am here in Shanghai and I obviously know the difference between those words. I just fumbled my way across my keyboard it seems. But glad to see that you feel pressured here and you're on the ropes. Historically you always (not hyperbole here) resort to grammar/spelling mistakes when you're in one of these long winded relatively evenly matched debates with anyone that I've read on this site. So good sign for me ^_^
I know you're not suppose to tell your opponent their tell but this one I just personally find obnoxious and annoying.

Getting back to the argument at hand. I'm not going to go back and quote every single time you didn't mention the word goalscorer and just said offensive forward or whatever other phrasing you used each time you used them. But I'm glad to see that you're moving the goal post now and saying that OH.... you meant GOALscorer... not just points... but goals.

Keep moving the goal line if you want but that doesn't win an argument. In my opinion it's just kinda sad.

Anyways... congrats. When Jagr was a very young man and Gretzky was on his way out... Jagr marginally beat him out in total goals. I concede that point.

I would also like to add that even with that measuring stick of just goals. Jagr is 43 of all time for Goals per games played. Brett Hull was obviously better than him in that regard... I'm sure you could find several more comparisons there that put him even further below Mario and Wayne.