| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest9671 |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 08:10:21
Who is the best Swedish player of all time? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ryschevy1 |
Posted - 04/02/2007 : 12:09:10
I think it is Peter Forsberg. You could lump him together with Mario Lemieux and say that if he was healthy his whole career, how much better his stats would be. He has his name on the cup, he's had sucess in international play, and still plays very consistently when he is on the ice and healthy, unlike Sundin, who seems to be a streaky type of a player, and doesn't have his name on the cup, and won't anytime soon unless he gets traded.
GO OIL!!! YA!!! |
| semin-rules |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 19:07:15
Active player would be Lidstrom and past player is Salming
~~~~~COME ON STARS, LETS BRING IT HOME~~~~~ |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 17:30:52
Sorry Leafsfan1 for being hard on you, I relieze that you are new and I guess you are 'learning'. I wont say anything about anyone anymore. |
| Kashmire |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 17:25:30
Saku , maybe you should eeze down a bit. He is really new and it hasn't become a real problem yet. Atleast he isn't saying "<insert> sucks" anymore. Babs and Admin don't seem bothered yet and there are still some people on the forum with little to none insight(not naming names). Sorry if it seems I'm moderating. |
| Saku Steen |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 17:11:30
quote:
Originally posted by leafsfan1
peter forsberg by far
Why is it Forsberg? Please explain. |
| Guest0965 |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 16:37:17
there is no question about it. its defenently lidstrom. |
| leafsfan1 |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 15:09:58
peter forsberg by far |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 12:43:17
Drop Crosby now. |
| Guest8410 |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 09:08:58
quote:
Originally posted by Mikhailova
quote:
Originally posted by Guest8410
the reason i didn't include them was because they've only really stepped it up for 2 seasons whereas the other players on the list have had long NHL careers.
Then why is Crosby a choice in every poll? (Not directed at you Guest8410, I'm just pointing it out for everyone who includes/votes for him all the time)
I partially agree with you but I think it's because Crosby has been able to dominate since his rookie season whereas with the Sedin's needed afew years. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 03/31/2007 : 06:57:08
quote:
Originally posted by Guest8410
the reason i didn't include them was because they've only really stepped it up for 2 seasons whereas the other players on the list have had long NHL careers.
Then why is Crosby a choice in every poll? (Not directed at you Guest8410, I'm just pointing it out for everyone who includes/votes for him all the time) |
| Guest8410 |
Posted - 03/30/2007 : 20:50:36
quote:
Originally posted by Guest0975
you have to be kiddin me, why arent the sedin bros on there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I voted for naslund though
Go canucks go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the reason i didn't include them was because they've only really stepped it up for 2 seasons whereas the other players on the list have had long NHL careers. |
| Guest4139 |
Posted - 03/30/2007 : 07:40:33
If Forsberg could've kept his body in one piece for any length of time there wouldn't even be a discussion. But since he can't, I'll have to go with Sundin. The reason he doesn't get much more than a point per game is who he plays with...Have you seen these guys? I'm pretty sure Quinn played him with Antropov and Domi on purpose. The guy has the most GWG over the last ten years except maybe for Jagr. In any international tournament he plays in, he is the best player. He manhandled Canada in O2. As for a runner up, pound for pound, I am with Naslund...Mats that is. Incredible to watch in the 80's and look at for that hipcheck! |
| Guest0975 |
Posted - 03/30/2007 : 07:19:54
you have to be kiddin me, why arent the sedin bros on there!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I voted for naslund though
Go canucks go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
| tctitans |
Posted - 03/29/2007 : 14:23:40
Most talented, Kent Nilsson without a doubt.
Best Player, It's pretty clear to me that it's Peter Forsberg, Forsberg dominated. With his skill, with his grit, with his competetiveness. Noone else comes close when you combine the entire package. Not to take anything away from Salming, Sundin, or Lidstrom who are all good choices and great players, but they just don't have the same package that Forsberg brings. |
| Guest6842 |
Posted - 03/29/2007 : 14:08:31
Easily the best Swedish player has to be MATS NASLUND.
Go HABS GO! |
| 87CrOsBy87 |
Posted - 03/29/2007 : 13:34:39
sedins all the way
Forget about style; worry about results.
Bobby Orr
CROSBY RULES! |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 19:35:18
Great points, thrilling topic, wrong place. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 18:55:18
I am not saying the great players have to win a Cup to be considered great. I just think it solidifies it more. It is the point of playing isn't it?
And to your points:
1) If Messier would not have won (and lead) his team to two more guse, he still would have have been considered a great player. But with an asterisks beside his name pre se becuase of the time with Gretzky. Same as Kurri,Coffey, Fuhr. If any of those guys would have won (and contributed to) Cups after they left, it would have taken them out of Gretzky's shadow. Messier is not the best example, but I think you get my point. Anderson is the player that breaks this rule. He won every Cup that Messier did and he is one of the most clutch playoff performers of all time. Over 1000 points and 2 goals shy of 500. Why is he not in the HOF?? I'll never know. His 6 Cups don't seem to matter.
2) If Ray Bourque would have retired in Boston, I personally think that when he was talked about, people would have said, "Great player, too bad he never won a Cup."
And the Bourque and Messier comparisons are hard to gauge as they have not been gone from the league for that long. People still remember their play. Ask that question in 20 years when all people have are stats and youtube footage.
What will Ray Bourque be remembers for in 20 years?? What will Mark Messier be remember for in 20 years?? Bourque for being a great player, and going to Colorado to win the CUP. Messier for his leadership and talent, and winning the CUP 6 times, 2 without you know who.
But we will have to agree to disagree on this. I personally think that you Name on the Cup a bunch of times is a true measure of a guy who is a G.O.A.T. And maybe I should clarify my thoughts. It is the contributions to winning the Cup that is the most important.
And, just for kicks, who was it who considered Lemiuex a better player than Gretzky because of his performances to win the Cup?? Would those performances been remembers and as highly regarded if they were in the regular season?? The Cup matters..........
PS- You are a great guy to debate with. You challenge me think. Cudos to you and Willus. Oldies, but goodies!
|
| Blubberboy |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 18:48:43
Nikolas Lindstrom is the best.
Go Canucks. |
| andyhack |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 18:29:12
Beans,
I gotta strongly disagree with you here! On a couple of counts actually.
1. I believe that Messier would not have been considered "a rider on Gretzky's coat tails" even if he wouldn't have won the extra 2 cups without Gretzky. Also, he would not have been grouped with Anderson and Kurri (who were no slouches in their own right, but very far from Messier in terms of greatness in my opinion). I think you are underestimating people's hockey knowledge with that. Most know how great Messier was (and I'm sure you do!). The extra cups are significant for elevating that greatness in the public's mind, yes, but even without them, he would and should still be regarded as one of the greatest players and leaders ever.
2. Related to the above, as a long-time Bourque fan, I think the Cup thing should not be nearly as big an indicator of the G.O.A.T. status as you think. I will say though that in this case you may NOT be underestimating fans/media, because I think most do put too much emphasis on this point. And what happened to Bourque shows precisely why it is silly to put too much weight on it. Are you telling me that if Bourque would have stayed in Boston and finished his career there that people would have been right in considering him in a drastically lower light than he is now considered? I agree that he probably would have been considered differently but, in terms of assessing his greatness, I don't think that would have been right.
Just to stay on topic, I'd personally take Forsberg over Sundin cause I'd simply rather have his combination of toughness, skill and creativity. The cup thing played a minor factor in the choice for me. The main influence it had actually was indirect. What I mean is that generally, because Forsberg played in quite a number of pressure situations due to his team's success, I was able to think of how well he played under pressure situations. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 17:47:13
It is Lidstrom in my books. Better than Sundin because he has won more Cups and was a huge contributor to his team winning those Cups.
And I disagree with anyone who says Cup's don't define players. Why else would you play?? Like Herm said:
YOU PLAY THE GAME TO WIN! (that still makes me laugh)
So, I agree that there are many great player who have not won a Cup, but a great player's legacy is set in stone with Cup wins.
Let me give an example. Mark Messier is considered as the best(or one of the best) leaders in NHL history. Why?? Because he lead his team to the Cup 6 times. If he didn't win those Cups, he would have been considered much like Kurri or Anderson. A rider of Gretzky's coat tails.
I'll give another example. Anyone one here under the age of 20 know who Bernie Nicholls is without looking it up?? He's in the top 40 all time leading scorers. He had a great and productive career yet he is rarely if every brought up in conversations. Is his name on the Cup?? Nope.
So, yes there are great players who have not won the Stanley Cup. But the number of times a name is on the Cup is a huge indicator of how highly a player is regarded as one of the G.O.A.T.
And all of this to me says that Lidstrom is the best of this bunch. Over Sundin because he is a multiple time Stanley Cup Champion. |
| Novie |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 15:37:00
It killed me to say it, but I went with Mats
Go Sens
Crosby is God
Tucker is a douche |
| dummy101 |
Posted - 03/28/2007 : 05:09:21
Salming.Played til 40 or so in NHL then went and played with the"skilled"international hockey crowd for 2 or 3 more yrs back in Europe.As for Sundin and Forsberg it's a toss up,I think,however if Sundin had the talent on his wings that Forsberg has had I think sundin would be way more than point/game career. |
| ED11 |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 21:29:56
quote:
Originally posted by bablaboushka
quote:
Originally posted by semin-rules
Niklas Lidstrom first, with the Sedin's second.
~~~~~GO STARS~~~~~
1. It's Nicklas. It's spelled out for you guys right up there...
2. Sedins should not even be near this list.
Thank you babs. I was just going to post the exact same thing. |
| SlowShot |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 20:43:24
First on my list is Sundin because he has amazing heart and has never requested a trade from the leafs through all those bad years. My second would probably be Borje Salming just because he was my dad's idol when he played.
Go LEAFS |
| bablaboushka |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 20:06:39
quote:
Originally posted by semin-rules
Niklas Lidstrom first, with the Sedin's second.
~~~~~GO STARS~~~~~
1. It's Nicklas. It's spelled out for you guys right up there...
2. Sedins should not even be near this list. |
| Kashmire |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 19:54:51
Sedin's over all those greats?! |
| semin-rules |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 19:48:07
Niklas Lidstrom first, with the Sedin's second.
~~~~~GO STARS~~~~~ |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 18:29:51
Ahh...Niklas Lidstrom is an infamous name in my book. He scored the winning goal in the Finland-Sweden gold medal game in the Olympics, which allowed Sweden to defeat my favorite (foreign) team, the one I was sure was going to win, Finland.
Of course, Lundqvist isn't on my favorite list either... |
| 1 Crosby fan |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 18:24:09
NICKLAS LIDSTROUM |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 18:14:27
quote:
Originally posted by wyntyre
Pelle Lindberg
He was in Miracle (when the US played Sweden)
Ya, only I would know that  |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 18:12:38
quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
I want to vote for Kent Nilsson but I do not see him on the poll, who is Kent Nislon?
I'm sure he means Kent Nilsson. ;)
Kent was certainly the most talented Swede to ever play, but I would not consider him the best. He just didnt have his heart into it. |
| jbraiter |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 18:12:23
NASLUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 18:11:19
I agree. Sundin is a great player but if he played to the level of his abilities (even on a Toronto) he woujld have done even better. He should have at least a few 100 point seasons with his talent. at LEAST. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:51:23
I want to vote for Kent Nilsson but I do not see him on the poll, who is Kent Nislon?
I would rather have a bottle in front of me, than a frontal lobotomy…
|
| ED11 |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:49:33
Thanks Mik. But I meant that they have been struggling for a long time and probably will be for a long time. Yet he is still point per game. |
| Mikhailova |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:44:22
quote:
Originally posted by ED11
Sundin has played on a team that is struggling to win the cup.
Heck, right now he's playing on a team that's struggling to even make it to the playoffs... |
| ED11 |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:31:09
quote:
Originally posted by tctitans
IMO, Sundin has been a career disappointment. The guy has everything, size, speed, and skill but has come far short of his potential. Yes, he's been a good player for a long time, and I give him kudos for that. However, with his skills, he should be much better than a point-a-game player. The guy needs more heart.
Don't get me wrong, he's a great player... he just could have been a lot better.
Are you serious? Career disappointment??? How many players have +1,200pts? Sundin has played on a team that is struggling to win the cup. He will be traded to team contender in the next couple of years. Thats what they did with Bourque. Being a point per game player in the NHL is amazing. Especially with the wingers that he has played with. I'm not getting you wrong, I know you think he is a great player but I do not think he is a "career disapointment."
And for you guys who are basing your opinion on cups won. Forsberg played with guys like Sakic, Kariya, and Selanne. Lidstrom played with guys like Yzerman, Federov...not to mention coached by Bowman. I'm not taking anything away from those guys or anyone on that list. But best Swede ever? Being a point per game player is amazing especially being on the leafs. |
| Patchy |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:12:48
So maybe he is an underacheiver...he still acheived more than all of these players, (minus stanley cups). My vote goes to Mats.
~~Go Leafs Go~~ |
| andyhack |
Posted - 03/27/2007 : 15:05:17
I went with Forsberg. I know this is subjective but I happen to have seen Forsberg live a few times (just by coincidence), which is a lot more than most of the others, and my opinion is largely swayed by the great impression he left me with after watching those live games. He was absolutely amazing skill-wise, and also extremely "feisty" to say the least. I really felt that feistiness even moreso live than on TV. Generally that's the case with live games, but with him that difference seemed to stand out even more than usual.
Yes, he is injury-prone, but even with that factor he still has very good numbers on his Resume. |
