JagerMeister Posted December 15, 2015 Author Share Posted December 15, 2015 In 2014/15, before Jagr came, Florida had 65 points in 61 games. In this season they have 32 points in 30 games which is exactly the same racord. So where is the improvement? I bet they would be the same or better without him - history is the proof, last example is New Jersey.He scored only abou three goals in his last 50 play off games :-) Wow, incredible selection of stats to perpetuate the notion of Jagr being a poor playoff performer... he was between the ages of 38-40. And produced 27 points in 47 games. Its comical because rick nash has a lower ppg throughout his whole postseason career in comparison to a 38-40 year old jagr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagerMeister Posted December 15, 2015 Author Share Posted December 15, 2015 @ScottM for number 16 for Jr's hhof analysis, another point could be made for his slow progression when he joined the league. He joined a team with so much depth that he played third line minutes. So his production throughout his early years did not reach their full potential ( particularly the stanley cup years ) I mean, when the team decreased in quality, he won his first art ross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBurger Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 There's a really big problem with a comment like that: He's the team's leading scorer.In New Jersey he was team's leading scorer too and they are now better without him. In the most of the teams he played he was a leading scorer, but these his teams didn't win anything with him as a leading scorer. All team successes Jagr has are with the teams where he wasn't leading scorer. Let's put Jagr to the test and see how he scores...Most of these questions are about his individual skills, I know he is good at this. Only thing I try to tell here is that teams are not succesfull with him as a leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 In New Jersey he was team's leading scorer too and they are now better without him. In the most of the teams he played he was a leading scorer, but these his teams didn't win anything with him as a leading scorer. All team successes Jagr has are with the teams where he wasn't leading scorer. That's being rather selective. In the 21 games the team played after Jagr was traded to Florida, the Devils won only seven games last season, or 33%. In the 61 games that he was on the roster, the team won 25 games, or 41%. In fact, at the end of the season, the team went into a tailspin losing 10 of their last 11. They might not have been good when Jagr was there, but they were better, and they didn't have a streak that bad while he was with them. In fact, while the period while Jagr was still there after DeBoer got the ax was the team's best stretch, as they won 13 out of 25 games, or 52%. Team winning percentages are certainly not the best indication of a player's individual contributions, but there's there's no way those stats suggest that Jagr was a part of the problem. In fact, if anything, they suggest just the opposite. Jagr's departure isn't why they're better now. There's a new coach with a new system that is apparently working better for the team than DeBoer's. Only twice in his career has Mike Cammalleri been an about ppg player, and right now, he's doing that. The defense is playing a bit better, meaning that Schneider isn't having to face quite as many stats. There are several reasons for the improvement, and the absence of Jagr isn't one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBurger Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 That's being rather selective...You sad that NJ is better now because of the new system. But do you think Jagr would fit in this system with his "I will play in the first line or I will go somewhere else" attitude? But his is not only about NJ. All Jagr's teams were unsuccesfull when he was the scoring leader there. All team successes Jagr has are with the teams where he wasn't leading scorer or leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagerMeister Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 You sad that NJ is better now because of the new system. But do you think Jagr would fit in this system with his "I will play in the first line or I will go somewhere else" attitude? But his is not only about NJ. All Jagr's teams were unsuccesfull when he was the scoring leader there. All team successes Jagr has are with the teams where he wasn't leading scorer or leader.That's rather apparent, because when Jagr wasn't the leading scorer Lemieux was...Ofc they advance farther with the addition of Lemieux. He is a top 4 player of all time...While I agree with Jagr's first line minute attitude, it was also a combination of Adam Oates and him. Who seemingly didn't have amiable years together in Washington. And now that is understandable, but Adam Oates doesn't have a good history either... Also, you need some context with Jagr and his teams. They weren't successful because of him. They qualified for the playoffs because of him ( reffering to his Pittsburgh years without Lemieux) In Pittsburgh, he had 45 points in 31 games during his time when he was the leading scorer without Lemieux. And take into account, he never played more then 11 games in the playoffs during this 45 points in 31 games throughout 1996-1997 to 1999-2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.