Sign in to follow this  
apollo

How would Sedin point totals differ had they debuted in the "new" NHL?

Rate this topic

If the Sedins debuted in 2020, what point totals would they retire with?  

43 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

So I could go on and on about my opinion but I don't wana be called a homer so I've made a poll and would love to hear what people think :P

 

The Sedins would have certainly fared better in the new NHL. I think everyone can agree on that - but how much better exactly?

 

The lack of hooking and cheap shots in the game today would certainly help players of their stature. Their point totals in the early years would have sky rocketed 

 

Canucks also probably sweep the Wings in 2002 had The Sedins not been turned into punching bags. Wings can thank no salary cup for their cup... their 70 mill vs our 35~ mill?! 

 

 

 

 

PS: Bold & Blue from now on for The Sedins! In my books the most lethal duo in the history of sports - they played on the same pro teams for close to 23 years - no other duo has ever done what they done for over 2 decades (not even mentioning their countless off ice contributions)  

:goat::goat:

  • Like 3
  • Sedinery 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I want to say not that much different, that the Sedins still had to find their way...

 

But their point totals were literally night and day after the 2005 lockout.  I guess maybe with the 2005 rules in place they would have had...20 more points a year in their first four years.  Maybe 30 if being generous?  So anyway, maybe 100 more points each, not a huge difference.  They had the new rules for the vast bulk of their careers.

 

Where we'd really see a difference is guys like Cliff Ronning, I think.  He'd have been a 1,000 point player easily.  He played a large part of his career in the dead puck era and then his career ended with the lockout that produced the new rules.

 

I wonder how much of his career was spent taking Derian Hatcher waterskiing.

 

 

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, apollo said:

Canucks also probably sweep the Wings in 2002 had The Sedins not been turned into punching bags. Wings can thank no salary cup for their cup... their 70 mill vs our 35~ mill?!

 

Canucks would have perhaps won one of the final 2 games against Boston in 2011 if Gino / Tiger / Curt Fraser / Garth Butcher / Dana Murzyn / Gerald Diduck / Dave Babych / Tim Hunter / Ron Delorme / Stan Smyl had been there to punch Ratchand and have the Canucks distribute some street justice instead of pick up stray Bruins equipment and hand it to them.

  • Like 3
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think the current NHL is more conducive to their style than the one they entered into, but I don't think we would've seen a drastic difference. There's definitely more offense now, though 2005-06 was a pretty offensive year too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure exactly how much different it would have been, however, I would not change the fact they came into the league and were thrown on a 3rd line with Trent Klatt.

I believe it helped them become solid, versatile, and stronger possession players. They spent their 1st few seasons getting their asses kicked in the corners, but they still kept coming. Maybe they come in now and their 2-way game isn't as polished? Who knows.

 

I don't think anything infuriates me more (Canucks related) then when people refer to the Sedins as the sisters. A duo that fell under constant scrutiny for being soft....except they went to the tough areas against opponents #1 and #2 defenseman, regularly. Oh, and played over 1,300 NHL games (Is that good?).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if they get to play with a consistent 30 goal scoring power forward on their wing would make a huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it foolish to suggest on this forum that they would've done worse?  Hockey has become more and more North-South over this past decade.  Smaller players have flourished.  The Sedins play their best game behind the net and against the boards.  They wear down defenders with the cycle and spread the ice out.  Their game has very little to do with speed and counterattacking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me ,over the years you look at some of the players that the Sedins had a linemates.

If they had some better and more talented capable linemates they would have been absolutely unstoppable,even more than they were.

They would have ruled the league and gotten many more points, if they were to have a JT Miller type on their wing they would have just brutalized other teams,

I mean lets face it, they were not given the best talent to help them along,even Burrows a fan favorite was given a career because of their talents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What matters is how the game changes in the playoffs, the Sedin era Canucks we’re not built for the playoffs as we are not now so my answer is it doesn’t matter we still wouldn’t have a cup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Canucks would have perhaps won one of the final 2 games against Boston in 2011 if Gino / Tiger / Curt Fraser / Garth Butcher / Dana Murzyn / Gerald Diduck / Dave Babych / Tim Hunter / Ron Delorme / Stan Smyl had been there to punch Ratchand and have the Canucks distribute some street justice instead of pick up stray Bruins equipment and hand it to them.

Oddly enough, it were guys like Bernier, Ohlund, and Shane O'Brien were the types of players the Canucks needed against Boston..... players too slow for the "new" NHL.  

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin Biestra probably nailed this one - around 20 more points their first couple of seasons.   It's a difficult question because they really had to work on their games to deal with it - and to stick with it (in their own words they themselves weren't sure they would make it early on) and that extra punishment made them almost impervious of getting beat on after the lock-out.   Another poster mentioned speed was never their game either...which became increasingly hard to watch late in their careers when they lost a step.  

 

Wonder how many extra points Mogilny and Bure would have too...no red line and what they could still do in the start - mid and peak of the dead puck era despite obstruction was pretty incredible (especially Bure).   Break away after break away and 70 goal seasons don't seem like a stretch.   Zubov was a perrenial 50-55 point guy during the dead puck era (and think he led his team in scoring two years before it started early in his career) - then exploded for mid 70's post lockout as a 37 ish year old....others like Visnovksy also had their best seasons in their 30's after toiling in their primes in the dead puck era so this subject is definitely valid.   The Sedins really didn't play much of their career in it though...just the first few seasons.   Hard to say for sure.   Look at Naslund....he did ALL his damage in the dead puck era  ( same with Bertuzzi) - after the lock-out they faded fast.   And Ohlund and Jovo didn't explode for a bunch more points either - although Jovo PPG stayed at a high level throughout his career.   Think maybe the Sedins would have between 50-100 points given they were top level guys - but thats about it.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is one of those butterfly and hurricane situations that are impossible to predict. Would they have scored more points? Probably, but there are an infinite number of factors that could affect a hypothetical situation like this. 

  • Sedinery 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I bet their plus minus would also take a hit. 
Their defensive game was not very good, nor did have have the foot speed to handle takeaways or break up plays. 
 

I bet the Sedins led the Canucks for stick infractions, which weren’t called as much at that time. Today? Maybe they’d be 80 PIM guys, for stick infractions alone, trying to keep up or get the puck back. Can’t rack up points in the box, unless you're Lindros, etc. 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to say really. Sure, the style of play now (less physical, more skill based) would definitely suit them but at the same time, their style did a lot to influence the current style of hockey being played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I bet their plus minus would also take a hit. 
Their defensive game was not very good, nor did have have the foot speed to handle takeaways or break up plays. 
 

I bet the Sedins led the Canucks for stick infractions, which weren’t called as much at that time. Today? Maybe they’d be 80 PIM guys, for stick infractions alone, trying to keep up or get the puck back. Can’t rack up points in the box, unless you're Lindros, etc. 

 

I found the constant Sedin hooking and holding penalties to be very frustrating, for the entirety of their careers.  I think the only reason they didn't line their walls with Lady Byng Trophies was because their penalty minute total was always moderately high, due to their constant gentlemanly hooking.

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

I found the constant Sedin hooking and holding penalties to be very frustrating, for the entirety of their careers.  I think the only reason they didn't line their walls with Lady Byng Trophies was because their penalty minute total was always moderately high, due to their constant gentlemanly hooking.

Glad I wasn’t the only casual observer noting this ”constant”. 
 

If someone had the time and means, it would be interesting to dissect the Sedins’ annual PIMs to see just how many of their penalties were stick infractions. 
 

I assume that of their 20 penalties a year, 19 of them were from hooking, triping or slashing and whatever else constitutes a stick infraction. 
 

40 minutes a season of stick infraction PIM is ridiculous, selfish even, if this were found to be the case. 
 

I better be careful, I’ve been suspended for less “trolling” when it comes to comments about the Sedins’ play. 

  • Vintage 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Glad I wasn’t the only casual observer noting this ”constant”. 
 

If someone had the time and means, it would be interesting to dissect the Sedins’ annual PIMs to see just how many of their penalties were stick infractions. 
 

I assume that of their 20 penalties a year, 19 of them were from hooking, triping or slashing and whatever else constitutes a stick infraction. 
 

40 minutes a season of stick infraction PIM is ridiculous, selfish even, if this were found to be the case. 
 

I better be careful, I’ve been suspended for less “trolling” when it comes to comments about the Sedins’ play. 

 

I love the Sedins but one of them would get a hooking or holding call every other game pretty much.  It was inevitable and the refs were totally onto them and looking for it, so it would have really just been better to let guys go by those however many times a game and avoid the penalty.  It's not like their hooking was providing Selke worthy defensive results.

 

They were each good for around 40 PIM a year or whatever and absolutely at least 34 of those minutes were hooks and similar infractions.

 

But hey, nobody's perfect.  I'd gladly have traded those penalties for a bit of roughing or charging though.

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

I love the Sedins but one of them would get a hooking or holding call every other game pretty much.  It was inevitable and the refs were totally onto them and looking for it, so it would have really just been better to let guys go by those however many times a game and avoid the penalty.  It's not like their hooking was providing Selke worthy defensive results.

 

They were each good for around 40 PIM a year or whatever and absolutely at least 34 of those minutes were hooks and similar infractions.

 

But hey, nobody's perfect.  I'd gladly have traded those penalties for a bit of roughing or charging though.

This entire hypothetical likely has a lot to do with the "trial by fire" initiation they had starting their careers in the deepest part of the dead puck era - where holds and hooks were commonplace and not called.   Part of their stickwork likely occured as a result of this - trying to find the line - which was pretty accepting for all little hooks, slashes and holds, and only the more blatant ones were called.  The other thing to consider was they did get murdered often - and to survive the rodeo they certainly had to defend themselves and a six foot piece of lumber was the best equalizer for things like this.  Other players were aware they were not complete push overs and would have to risk getting a high-stick or a slash to the hands if they played them too rough.   And they definitely were not the only ones doing this.  When the new rules became enforced things got much easier for them - and the rest of the skilled players and they shined pretty bright for half their careers as result.  If things stayed the same I have doubts they would have evolved into the players they became and instead we'd be talking about how many points they would lose - which I believe would be a lot higher then what we are considering they would add to their totals.  Probably career stats in the Linden or Naslund range.  Fortunately for us and for them after two years of cracking down the game went an entirely new direction.  Hitting was also a casualty unfortunately....and eventually the enforcers died out too...those stick infractions I didn't mind so much - the hooks maybe a little but definitely not the slashes - the only thing that did bother me was the lack of reaction from one brother if one did take a hard hit or a dirty play.   If it was my brother I would have lost it every single time. Probably a cultural thing - or maybe something they had talked about and came upon a mutual agreement about.  Keith would of had a target on his head every time we played CHI for what he did....

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

Honestly who cares about the Sedins Pavel Bure is the real question?

I’d think he’d be right there with Jesus, but with less assists and more goals. 
 

Even Almo or Selanne today would be absolutely lethal. 
 

Fun to think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.