Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary
not to mention he did all of that in the dead puck era. Iginla in his prime was a terror.
Imagine what he could have done in today's games, where you could not obstruct him, hold him and interfere with him.
|
He got enough of a taste of it in the post-lockout era. He played through the great Obstruction Crackdown of 05, and he only had 67 points. But for sure, his 96 point 2002 is something else - Naslund was the only other player to break 90, and none of the other top-10 scorers that year, including Sakic, Jagr, Sundin, Modano, Oates Bertuzzi etc were within 11 points of him.
In this era, I suspect he’s still a top-3 winger in the game, and in a given year, could be the best player in the world.
But I don’t think this era of hockey is set up to produce another Iggy. I think the 1980s were. The man is a sports movie come to life. The Barack Obama of hockey players.
This era is about nitpicking and arguing about what’s sustainable (hint: none of it).
Whereas 80s hockey is more romantic and adventurous. There’s a mythic quality to it, whether it’s the stars of the era, the violence, the Mickey Mousery off the ice, the games against the Soviets when the world was always 45 minutes away from ending (which it still is, but we just pretend it isn’t)… that’s how you end up creating Jarome Iginla.
This age of hockey is lacking that sort of colour. And I understand why it’s the way it is, but I really wish it weren’t. It’s not all about stick handling. Iggy was an okay stick handler, but it was probably his weakest element.
The way Iggy played the game was righteous, and I don’t think very many guys have that in them anymore.