Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80
That's the point behind all of this. Is Joe Sakic even a "Joe Sakic," or is he just the product of being surrounded by Hall of Fame teammates his entire career?
Sakic's top five teammates averaged 60 more points per season that Iginla's. When you consider Iginla averaged only 13 less points per season than Sakic did, is it not plausible to also consider he might have had a shot at those 13 points, if opponents had to defend against another 60 points coming from his teammates each season?
|
This notion that Sakic played on stacked teams his whole career has got to die. His first 3-4 seasons in the NHL, the Nordiques were brutal - the worst team in the NHL. And Sakic was still winning the Calder and putting up 100 point seasons. His last 3-4 seasons in the league, the Avalanche were terrible. And Sakic remained among NHL scoring leaders, still played an elite two-way game.
Sakic spent almost half of his career playing on lousy, lousy teams. And he was still an elite player. So we don't have to pose the question
What would Sakic have played like on a team as bad as the Flames? We already know the answer - he shone.