Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Well, most of this is between you and the other poster, I mainly just gave the numbers. But for all you want to argue that Niewuendyk was "waning", the truth is, this time frame encompasses most of Joe's prime as well, so please stop being disingenuous with the "Nieuwendyk's decline vs. Iginla's prime" argument.
I would also point to the caveats, which you completely glossed over - the fact that Niewuendyk played on vastly superior teams. Teams with better players to draw off top opposing defencemen, and to set up more goals for Nieuwendyk to both score and assist on.
I've never argued that this comparison is a blowout, but the numbers argue that Iginla is the better offensive player. Also, we well know how Iginla turned Craig Conroy from a checking-line centre into a 70 point player. IMO, he was also the one driving the bus on Cammalleri's 50-goal season. Did Nieuwendyk make anyone better like that? (this, btw, is not a flippant question. But I can't think of anyone offhand.)
There is also the trophy case.
Nieuwendyk won the Calder. Iginla finished second in his rookie year. Both made their respective All-Rookie Teams. Both have won the Clancy. As mentioned, Nieuwendyk has a Conn Smythe, while Iginla fell one un-reviewed goal short.
After that, the comparisons end. Iginla has been named to four post-season All-Star teams. Nieuwendyk, zero. Nieuwendyk was named to play in four All-Star Games. Iginla has played in six, turned down a seventh, was injured for an eighth, and would have played two or three more if not for Olympic breaks. Nieuwendyk never led the league in goals or points. Iginla has, twice and once respectively. Iginla won the Lester B. Pearson and was jobbed out of the Hart. Iginla won the NHL Foundation award. He also won the Messier, but that one is irrelevant since Nieuwendyk's career ended prior to its creation.
For those that trumpet the Stanley Cup/team success argument, Iginla has two Olympic Golds to Nieuwendyk's one. Iginla also has a WJHC, WHC and world Cup title, against Nieuwendyk's lone silver medal at the worlds.
-----------------------
CliffFletcher - I grew up on the 80s/90s Flames. Watched both players throughout their entire careers. We were extremely fortunate to have both. But of the two, Iginla was better.
|
You're missing 3 significant trophies from Nieuwendyk's case.
The 'stacked' team argument is for me, the worst.
What does it say when two stacked teams go out of their way and pay a big price, to acquire a player who just happens to push them over the top to win the championship?
Is this just some huge accident that Stanley Cup teams were falling all over themselves, trading players like Iginla and Arnott, for some schmuck of a third line centre that never made anyone around him better? Did Nieuwendyk just luck into being the second highest scorer in the playoffs for Dallas the year they won the cup?
There is a corollary here. Good players can play for crap teams, and crap players can play for good teams, but guys don't win multiple cups on multiple teams as key contributors by accident. That's the domain of great players.
You know what is one of the things that made these teams stacked? Having Nieuwendyk on their rosters.
Relying on these kinds of 'could've reviewed the goal', 'would've won the Conn' (highly, highly debatable btw), 'should've won the Hart' sort of illustrates the meat of the issue. The hypotheticals are needed to give weight to the argument against Nieuwendyk's actual accomplishment.
Quote:
|
Point: Nieuwendyk won the Conn Smythe. Counter-Point: Iginla might have won the Conn Smythe had a favourable goal review happened and the team had held on for the rest of the period.
|
This comparison should be obvious for what it is.