| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Seventy7Fifty2 |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 11:56:03
If you only had one vote, would you vote for?
JR drafted 1988, first round and 8th overall
MS drafted 1989, first round and first overall |
| 26 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 08/17/2009 : 18:58:34
I voted Roenick. This was not a hands down vote. Mats was captain for to long for the leafs to no be considered. His gold medal and stats advantage cant be ignored. He was In the lime light more than any other player of his generation in my opinion. What other player gave the same boring sound bite more frequently than Mats Sundin. Mats was a gritty player to he just didnt check with tenacity.
The reason I gave it to Roenick was for all of the intangibles he brought with his once amasing offensive credentials. For most of his early career he was for more potent an offensive star and for a smaller player, he was a game changer with his physical play too. The interviews Roenick gave were anything but boring, in comparison to Sundin, which generated him much more lime light late in his career. In his prime I would have taken roenick hands down on my team, Sundin just had a more steady career to Roenick. Plus hes a 2 time 50+ goal scorer, something Sundin could not do once. |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 12:13:29
Mats cant hear what JR is saying because his Olympic Gold Medal is plugging his ears
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 09:41:17
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
I think you and Willus are way out in right field on this one.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/289508/357503.jpg
Sorry, couldn't help it..... 
|
| n/a |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 08:48:01
So Beans:
Was Roenick ever described as one of the all-time best defensive forwards? Does he have 5 Stanley Cups? Did he play half as many playoff games due to a different format and league size, and yet still manage to rack up 73 points in 182 games as a defensive specialist?
no.
Did Roenick ever play in the 40s and 50s, where with a hugely watered down talent base (WWII) and totally different league which allowed a Calder cup trophy winner (Edgar Laprade) to be 23rd in scoring with 15 goals and 25 assists - 40 points ?!? Was Roenick ever 7th in scoring with (get this!): 3 goals, 5 assists, in 12 games played? We are talking about an era where almost no one got a point per game . . . to compare Roenick, who played during the highest scoring period of time ever in the NHL, with some no-name guy who played during the war is disingenuous at best.
for shame!
And lastly, you'd compare Clark Gillies - the epitome of the term "power forward", a guy who was as tough as nails and could score as well - to Roenick?!? Gillies, as the highest scoring enforcer ever, got 4 stanley cups, and led the Isles (loser in the cup final that year) in scoring in 1983/84 in the playoffs with 12 goals and 19 points in 21 games. Does Roenick have any of that on his resume?
Again - different era, different kind of player, and . . . wait a second. Different argument!
I am not arguing about Roenick getting into the HOF or not - I am arguing that Sundin's HOF VALUE is greater.
Your "eyes" research, btw, is the argument people use when talking about how Lemieux is better than Gretzky because of his amazing moves, rather than his production. I find it a false argument, and frankly, I ain't buying it. Even an argument about grit is false, as if Sundin was that much less gritty, or as if the HOF board would rank players above one another when presented with glaring stats and accomplishment differences like we see here and maybe decide to put Roenick above Sundin because he was a bit more gritty, according to some. Give me a break!
I think you and Willus are way out in right field on this one.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 08:39:35
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
I take Roenick with any day that end in a 'y' over Sundin. I like my team to win, I like my team gritty, and I like my team to have Character.
Sorry Beans, but my week goes like this:
Mondae, Tuesdae, Wednesdae, Thursdae, Fridae, Saturdae, Sundae! If you put either guy on a more competetive team, Sundin would have flourished more (IMO). I know where you're coming from, but i don't care if my team is gritty or has character....as long as it wins! At least you included that in your team "likes".
As for your other post, the +/- thing is really a lot closer than it may look. First off, as most here would agree, it's a stat that isn't the greatest for measuring players. Over the long haul, i agree, it has some bearing, but at the same time, +153 compared to +73 over a 15-20 year career is hardly anything! It's like the difference between +4 or +5 per season, hardly worth mentioning! It has a lot more to do with the quality of team you're playing for than some will ever admit!
Next, size does not always make you a physical player. Ask guys like Theo Fleury? His size didn't stop him from being physical. Compare him to Olli Jokinen. Not many run and hide from Olli, yet he's considered a big body? Using last season as a comparison is completely skewed. First of all, if i'm understanding what you're saying, you're claiming that last season, Sundin couldn't or wouldn't play as physically and therefore his offense wasn't as good as in his "younger days"? I couldn't disagree more. C'mon, this is one half season from him playing on a not so good TO team and putting up a point a game??? Have a look at Sundin's last 5 or 6 seasons offensive output! Here, lemme help you out:
01/02 - 80 pts in 82 GP
02/03 - 72 pts in 74 GP
03/04 - 75 pts in 81 GP
05/06 - 78 pts in 70 GP
06/07 - 76 pts in 75 GP
07/08 - 78 pts in 74 GP
08/09 - 28 pts in 41 GP
What do you think Sundin's stats woulda been had he started the season and played 80 games last year with the Leafs? I don't see any sign of a sudden drop in points in his later years? Really don't think it had anything to do with physicality (is that a word?) I completely write off last season for Sundin as it was not a wise decision on his part to make such a big change (different team) at such a crazy point in the season.
Roenick may have played a decent role as a checker, but Sundin never had to make that transition as he was/is still believed to be a producer. I really wish we could have seen what Sundin had left as a Leaf had he stayed there for last year, from day 1.
Having said all that, if the HOF gave you and i each a vote on these two it'd be a waste of everyone's time. It'd be a wash.....
I can't believe i'm supporting a long time Leaf 
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 07:01:52
Hey Slozo, I think you are being more than Leaf bias on this. You are being stat bias too.
This of Bob Gainey, Never broke 50 points in a season and he is in the Hall. He does have 5 Cup rings and is considers one of the best defensive forwards of all time though.
Edgar Laprade never won a Cup, played on 10 NHL season, and never cracked 50 pints in a season. He's in the Hall.
Clark Gillis had some fine season, but he has well below a PPG career average (0.72) but he in the Hall.
There are many examples if you look through the list of HOFer's that do not have great offensive statistics. I agree that it appears the HOF is heavily one sided towards offensive stats, but it's not the only thing.
And this ultimately has nothing to do with research. It has to do with my eyes and what they tell me. I take Roenick with any day that end in a 'y' over Sundin. I like my team to win, I like my team gritty, and I like my team to have Character.
|
| n/a |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 06:36:56
Oh yeah, and despite my Leaf bias, I forgot one more career mark:
All-time leader in regular season goals scored, points scored, for the Toronto Maple Leafs: Mats Sundin
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| n/a |
Posted - 08/14/2009 : 06:19:16
Sorry, but everyone's Toronto Maple you-know-who bias is showing. And Mats is getting the short end of the stick because of it . . . right in the groin!
Beans - the numbers are what gets you in the hall of fame. Goals, assists. Then, IF YOU HAVE ENOUGH OF THOSE OR ARE VERY CLOSE TO BEING CONSIDERED, then they might look at number of Stanley Cups won, playoff performance, records broken, trophies, other achievements. There are some exceptions to these first two rules, with players from Europe that spent the bulk of their careers outside the NHL, but that doesn't really happen anymore.
Then, and only then, if you are still VERY VERY CLOSE TO CONSIDERATION, other mitigating factors might come in: leadership/captaincy, physical dominance, hitting/checking ability, and other special factors (highest scoring for their country, etc).
1. Mats Sundin has more goals, more assists, than Roenick.
2. Neither player has a Cup, but Sundin has an Olympic gold medal (serving as captain), and 3 gold medals in World Championships.
3. Sundin was the long time captain of an original 6 team.
4. Sundin is THE ALL TIME HIGHEST SCORING SWEDISH PLAYER - most goals, most assists (he may be passed by Lidstrom next year or soon thereafter), of any Swedish player ever in the NHL. EVER.
Roenick as an American is 3rd in goals and points, 5th in assists.
5. Other notables, higher ranking player: All-time record for . . .
Regular Season O/T Goals: Sundin tied for 1st (15)
Regular Season Points: Sundin is 25th (4 behind Lafleur)
Regular Season Goals: Sundin tied with Nieuwendyk for 20th
Regular Season Power Play Goals: Roenick is 20th
Regular Season Short-Handed Goals: Sundin is tied for 17th
Regular Season Game-Winning Goals: Sundin is 5th (1 behind Lafleur)
Regular Season Assists: Sundin is 32nd
If we are talking statistics, Sundin wins hands down. If we are talking achievements, Sundin wins hands down. If we are talking intangibles . . . don't tell me that having more hits as a high scoring forward overshadow a long-time captain of an NHL team, captain of an Olympic gold-medal winner, and the fact that one is the all-time highest scoring forward for their country.
It's plain and simple: if you voted for Roenick, you either didn't do the research, or you voted with your anti-Leaf bias because of all those years he spent here.
Sundin in a walk.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Porkchop73 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 16:27:10
Ok this one I believe is hard to pick. I believe both players were equally valuable to their teams. The stats are too similar to pick between. I choose Sundin though as I think he was more complete and consistent player. One thing you have to consider is that Sundin is a massive icon in Sweden. Roenick is not on the same level in his home country. Most US citizens hold players like Modano and Lafontaine as better US players. Sundin also did not run his mouth with verbal diahrea that I consider detrimental to the game at times.
The problem I have is the statement of Roenick being the most competitive player of his time. I can think of a guy named Cam Neely who by far out competed and outscored JR on every aspect of the came. He also had class and still does. I consider JR the trailer trash of the NHL. Neely drafted in 83 is certainly in the same generation of players as JR. It is to bad some big dumb guy named Ulf ended his career with a stupid knee on knee. |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 15:07:50
just to be fair, this video is pretty awesome as well
Jeremey Roenick - The Blackhawk years
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEB7EjJ7xf4
So is this one, this is way too funny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKXZklI35s4&feature=related
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 14:58:43
half a season at 38 doesnt make or break a HOF career.
Beans - points well taken.
7752 - you hate to say it? c'mon dont lie. Also, this is the HHOF, not the NHLHOF, you absolutley have to count playoffs and international play.
Mats wasn't overly physical in nature, but really he didnt have to be. The only guys in the NHL who was better at protecting the puck down low were Forsberg and Jagr during Sundins prime. He was extremley hard to knock off balance and could easily just lean on a guy to knock him off the puck. He didnt have to try and drill them through the boards.
Here are a couple big hits Sundin threw just to prove he could hit. I know I know, me posting these links doesnt make Sundin more physical than Roenick, but im just trying to show that he wasnt scared of throwing the body.
This one was on Brad May
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qljQjmV-eB0&NR=1&feature=fvwp
This one is a favorite of mine, Sundin destroys Jason Blake
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zK3BrNmCe8M&feature=related
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| Guest7752 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 13:39:14
for Alex116, you said:
He's in the Hall already, deservingly so with numbers like that. As for a crap team, yeah, they weren't great, but he had one helluva line he played on there (triple crown line).
The reason i brought Dionne into the picture is so that people will not measure JR and MS based on Cups won, or Olympic medal colors.
Since numbers/stats are similar between JR and MS - it's a wash therefore - your vote should be based on other factors.
Dionne has no cups (i think), no Olympic medals, etc... but he is deservedly in the HHOF. He must have done something right (other than stats) to get in.
Like everyone is saying, points are not ONLY based on your skills but also on the support from linemates.
That's where JR beats MS - the "other" factors which he has absolute control over: Grit, Leadership, Sportmanship, Team Work, etc...
Hands Down, JR over MS any time.
I'm going to get crapped on for saying this..., but look at Sundin's past (half) season... "most" of his high-production games or contributions to the team was when Canucks were terribly out scoring the other team.
|
| Guest7752 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 13:22:30
i hate to say this, but beans is right.
hands down - roenick.
He's done more for teams he's been on the Sundin. (forget the points)
He's busted his a**, while Sundin must have given and received a dozen "bodychecks" in his carrer. Hence, the more consistent numbers later in his carrer.
In the later years, Roenick may have been a "shell" of what he was when he was younger, but that's probably due to the harder physical style of play.
And PLEASE do not take playoffs or Olympics into consideration - those are both entirely differnt conditions to measured on. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 12:03:12
Matt Roberts, the only guy on the list of players you named that even comes close to Roenick's competativeness is Stevie Y. I will not argue that. But I would not put one ahead of the other. Roenick would have taken a career ending injury to see his team win. Rarely does a player do that.
Slozo, value is more than offensive production. Roenick was more of a complete player (+153 career compared to +73 for Sundin and let's not forget how weak the late Blackhawk and Coyote teams Roenick played for.) And, considering that Sundin is 4" taller and 30 lbs heavier, it's very lopsided when you think Roenick was a far more physical player than Sundin in. I think we really noticed this in the past season. Sundin's offensive ability is reduced from his younger days and he has limited value to the Canucks. Roenick's offensive abilities were also reduced, but he played a very solid check game for the Sharks all the way to his final game, often marking up the other teams best line.
I still give it easily to Roenick, even if Sundin's offensive numbers are slightly better, Roenick was a more complete player, more physical, and would give anything to win. He has that over Sundin.
Take nothing away from Sundin, he is a brilliant player in his own right and I also think he will be in the HOF in the end. But the question is I have one vote and who does it go to??? It's Roenick hands down.
|
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 10:36:00
Not to mention Sundin was the captain for a gold medal winning swedish team.
Beans - Roenick was the MOST competitive pkayer of his generation?! really... what about Steve Yzerman? Joe Sakic? Pat Roy? Shannahan? Scott Stevens? He is a good choice to be sure, and maybe i just didnt watch him enough, but I would probably put those guys ahead of him...
JR was a good player with impressive numbers, but Since '04 he has been a shell of his former self. Sundin had an almost 80 point season at the age of 37. The guy was a model of consistancy his entire career, the only subpar season he ever had was last year with the canucks.
To be honest, i think both guys are boarderline HOFers at best...
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
| n/a |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 09:29:16
Looking over the stats, I have to say Sundin looks a bit better. Here's why . . .
Willus - your comment about Roenick's peak seasons with Chicago being better than anything Sundin ever did is just plain wrong.
Roenick's peak years (a point per game or better):
90/91 - 41g 53a 94pts
91/92 - 53g 50a 103pts
92/93 - 50g 57a 107pts
93/94 - 46g 61a 107pts
94/95 - 10g 24a 34pts (strike shortened season, 33gp)
95/96 - 32g 35a 67pts (66 gp)
99/00 - 34g 44a 78pts (75 gp)
Roenick has a clear cut peak for 4 years, and never again reaches 80 points afterward. Roenick's peak years happen in the highest scoring years in history, playing on a very good Chicago team.
Sundin's peak years (a point per game or better):
92/93 - 47g 67a 117pts
93/94 - 32g 53a 85pts
94/95 - 23g 24a 47pts (strike shortened season, 47gp)
95/96 - 33g 50a 83pts
96/97 - 41g 53a 94pts
98/99 - 31g 52a 83pts
99/00 - 32g 41a 73pts (73gp)
05/06 - 31g 47a 78pts (70gp)
06/07 - 27g 49a 76pts (75gp)
07/08 - 32g 46a 78pts (74gp)
The differenc here is that there is no clear-cut peak for Sundin . . . even in the years not listed, other than his rookie season and his season last year, he is not far off from a PPG pace. And, his best season is better than Roenick's. Although Roenick's 4 best years are better than Sundin's, Sundin's 8 best years beat Roenick's. Sundin doesn't ever score 50 goals (Roenick does twice), but Sundin scores 30 goals or more 13 times to Roenick's 7. Neither player won a stanley cup, but Roenick got closer on a very good Chicago team that was a perennial contender. Their stats are not all that different in the playoffs in terms of pts/game - Roenick 154gp, 53g, 69a, 122pts - Sundin 91gp, 38g, 44a, 82pts.
The way I look at it is this: Sundin had the best year, Roenick had the best 4 years, Sundin had the best career and was an NHL star for a much longer time.
Sundin by a stride.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 09:18:53
I am not even looking at offensive numbers as the two players were pretty close. However, one stat that is very telling is hits. Roenick was a completely beast with multiple seasons over 100 hits. In many accounts, he was the most physically dominating forward of the 90's outside of Eric Lindros. However, at 6'1 - 200 lbs, there were many forwards that were as big or bigger. But Roenick was a tank. Sundin, with his 6'5"-231 lbs frame was not nearly as physically impactful as Roenick. It's not even close.
The second and most important thing I look at is this. Jeremy Roenick, without question, what the most competative hockey player of his generation. He never, never took a shift off, worked his a$$ off, gave every piece of this body to win. Every single shift out. In my opinion, no one of his genereration even comes close.
I agree whole-heartedly with Willus. This takes very little thought and Roenick is way over on Sundin.
|
| Rambo2305 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 09:15:24
quote:
Originally posted by Seventy7Fifty2
Mr. Alex116 - you said:
Amazing how similar these guys are if you compare their stats! Never really thought they'd be this close:
But I will bet that you never even thought of:
Marcel Dionne:
Drafted 1971 - First round / 2nd over all with 1,348 games played.
731 goals and 1,040 assists for 1,771 points.
AND all this on a crap team!!!
Alomst the same for Roenick....
But as for Sundin... well he was on the best team in the universe!!!
Hence, the nod to Roenick instead of Sundin.
LOL...ohh, what a laugh. So all those years Roenick played with Amonte, Gagne, Primeau and those stacked Philly teams. Or those surprisingly skilled teams in Chi-town. Hell, even Phoenix had better rosters then Toronto. So to say Sundin played with better players? Ok, he played with Sakic for what, 2 years?
"Most people spend time and energy going around problems, rather than trying to solve them" - Henry Ford |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 08:07:53
quote:
Originally posted by Seventy7Fifty2
Mr. Alex116 - you said:
Amazing how similar these guys are if you compare their stats! Never really thought they'd be this close:
But I will bet that you never even thought of:
Marcel Dionne:
Drafted 1971 - First round / 2nd over all with 1,348 games played.
731 goals and 1,040 assists for 1,771 points.
AND all this on a crap team!!!
Alomst the same for Roenick....
But as for Sundin... well he was on the best team in the universe!!!
Hence, the nod to Roenick instead of Sundin.
Actually got a chuckle out of the "best team in the universe" part, but i don't understand the reference to Dionne? He's in the Hall already, deservingly so with numbers like that. As for a crap team, yeah, they weren't great, but he had one helluva line he played on there (triple crown line). They were the first linemates to each top 100 points in a season (thank you Wikipedia). |
| Seventy7Fifty2 |
Posted - 08/13/2009 : 07:00:08
Mr. Alex116 - you said:
Amazing how similar these guys are if you compare their stats! Never really thought they'd be this close:
But I will bet that you never even thought of:
Marcel Dionne:
Drafted 1971 - First round / 2nd over all with 1,348 games played.
731 goals and 1,040 assists for 1,771 points.
AND all this on a crap team!!!
Alomst the same for Roenick....
But as for Sundin... well he was on the best team in the universe!!!
Hence, the nod to Roenick instead of Sundin.
|
| Guest0494 |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 20:35:24
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
You're all about peak value, eh Willus? Without a thought though?!?
I chose Sundin . . . I think it's close, but the edge has to go to the better playoff stats, team captain for a good length, and longer "star" status. Both were not the first or best, but trailblazers nonetheless for their respective countries. Roenick it can be argued had a slightly higher peak value, but it was only for two or three years, while Sundin's career was very good for a very long time. This is all off the top of my head mind you, I will research this more tomorrow.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
why does edge go to playoffs stats just because Sundin wasn't a good enough Captain to lead his team to the playoffs as many years as JR? If anything Roenick has the edge Mats +/- +2 compared to Roenicks +21 makes it seem Sundin wasn't that much of Captain defensivly. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 20:29:20
Slozo, he gave it thought, just not a "second thought"!
Amazing how similar these guys are if you compare their stats! Never really thought they'd be this close:
Sundin 1.002 pts per game (reg season) for his career (couple more games with the 'Nucks and he'd be sub point a game  )
Roenick .892 pts per game (reg season) for his career. What's interesting is that if you take off Roenick's final 4 years where his production fell drastically, he'd be at .996 points per game! That's pretty much a wash with Sundin.
Sundin had a higher best season at 114 to Roenick's 107 (two years in a row) but Roenick cracked 100 3 times to Sundin's 1. Roenick had two 50(+) goal seasons (50 and 53) to Sundin's career high of 47. I wanna say Sundin was more of a playmaker but if you look at their assists, they're not all that far off!
Career playoff stats are Sundin .901 points per game to Roenick's .792, but keep in mind Roenick played in 154 playoff games to Sundin's 91? Did Roenick play for better teams? Yeah, probably?
Any way you look at it, these two guys were both great players, especially in their prime. I'd really hate to have to pick between them. If i really had to, maybe i'd have to take Roenick based on the lockout year? I mean, he did average 1.333 points per game for the Cologne Sharks (4 points in 3 games) vs Sundin's paltry .75 points per game with Djurgardens IF Stockholm (9 points in 12 games)
Funny thing, i accidently clicked on the Djurgardens stats page when looking up these numbers and Sundin was 14th in scoring. Fine, most of the guys ahead of him played 30-40 games. BUT, who's this Charles Bergland character who led the team with 31 points in only 19 games? Apparently he was on the Swedish gold medal winning Olympic team in "94. |
| n/a |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 19:39:37
You're all about peak value, eh Willus? Without a thought though?!?
I chose Sundin . . . I think it's close, but the edge has to go to the better playoff stats, team captain for a good length, and longer "star" status. Both were not the first or best, but trailblazers nonetheless for their respective countries. Roenick it can be argued had a slightly higher peak value, but it was only for two or three years, while Sundin's career was very good for a very long time. This is all off the top of my head mind you, I will research this more tomorrow.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| willus3 |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 18:12:42
Roenick's peak seasons with Chicago were better than anything Sundin ever did. Roenick without a second thought.
|
| Alex116 |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 13:17:14
I voted for Sundin. I just feel that his time in Vancouver put him over the top......  Then again, Roenick had a good time here in Vancouver once too. Can't remember what year it was but a few years back, he was scratched from the lineup and none too happy about it. Later, during the game, a reporter finds him at a local Keg restaurant chowing down on a steak! He was so mad, he didn't even stick around the rink. Went and changed, grabbed a cab, went for dinner! THAT, was JR!
Okay, in all seriousness, they both were studs for periods of time and prob both will get into the Hall which now seems a bit watered down? However, with only one pick, it'd be Sundin with more points in fewer games, a more all around player and a better team leader and role model. Sundin was a point a game player in his last full season in the league on what was, no offense Leaf fans, a pretty sub par team! Okay, they were slighly above .500 as a team, but you get the picture.
I think his final TO season is why so many of us 'Nucks fans thought he'd bring more to the table. Having said that, considering when he started and without a training camp, i don't think he did all that bad. Let's face it, he wasn't worth the salary given, but if he'd come back this year to a team willing to give him 3.5 mill, i think he'd be a solid acquisition. Oh shoot....hope i don't start something here...... |
| Matt_Roberts85 |
Posted - 08/12/2009 : 12:02:40
hmm... if i had to guess, id say that 7752 voted for JR. Haha, this is great. We'll be able to argue about Sundin until camp starts. All over again! yay!
7752 - I love how you chose 7752 as your screenname lol.
JR - No cups, no gold medals, weaker stats, was never a captain. (i dont think)
Mats - No cups, 1 Gold Medal (Team Captain), TML captain for 13 years and better stats.
There is no "I" in team, but there is an "M" and an "E". |
|
|
