All time greatest Maple Leaf

[JagerMeister]

But how? based on points per game only? sure using that one individual stat Nilsson(1.241) and Forsberg(1.250) managed more points per game but nothing really worth arguing considering Sundin beats all other Swedes in goal production, and pretty much ever other existing stat... Sundin is even 7th all time in NHL history in game winning goals with 96. The next Swede Alfredsson is 38th all time with 73. Sundin is 3rd all time points per game among Swedes at 1.002. Where do the Sedins fit into this? there is no way they are or will be remembered as being better than Mats.

 

Sundin is the highest point producer in Swedish hockey history and clocks in at 27th all time in NHL history with 1,349 points just behind Guy Lafleur and just ahead of Dave Andreychuk. In terms of goals no Swede has scored more than him and he clocks in at the 22nd most prolific goal scorer in NHL history…the next most prolific offensive producer was Alfredsson and he clocks in at 51st all time points with 1,157 and a significantly lower 62nd most prolific goal scorer in NHL history.

 

In terms of the sheer numbers, Mats Sundin was essentially Sweden's Wayne Gretzky. If he played his career with the Red Wings he would have won numerous cups and individual awards too, in Toronto he never had an amazing supporting cast but he still managed to carry them through some exciting playoff rounds. 

 

There is a reason he was named the Swedish captain in 2006 when there were other guys on that team like Lidstrom, Alfredsson, Sedins, Forsberg, Zetterberg etc

 

So because Mats Sundin beats Peter Forsberg, Henrik Zetterberg and Henrik Sedin in goal scoring that makes him the best swedish forward? Is Alexander Ovechkin better than Crosby?

 

Mats Sundin has the most points amongst swedish players because he was a complier and he had the longevity that Forsberg lacked.

 

Also you forgot one major detail, Mats Sundin started his career in the early 90s, which was almost as high a scoring era as the 80s. Peter Forsberg, Sedins and Zetterberg started their careers in the midst of the dead puck era. There's a reason all those players took home much more hardware then Sundin, because they peaked higher as players.

 

I'll give you one thing though, Sundin was the most consistent of the bunch and because his prime lasted so damn long, he can put up a more then decent argument against Zetterberg and the Sedins, but Peter Forsberg peaked too high as a player for me to put Sundin above him..

[92WickedHockey]

So because Mats Sundin beats Peter Forsberg, Henrik Zetterberg and Henrik Sedin in goal scoring that makes him the best swedish forward? Is Alexander Ovechkin better than Crosby?

 

Mats Sundin has the most points amongst swedish players because he was a complier and he had the longevity that Forsberg lacked.

 

Also you forgot one major detail, Mats Sundin started his career in the early 90s, which was almost as high a scoring era as the 80s. Peter Forsberg, Sedins and Zetterberg started their careers in the midst of the dead puck era. There's a reason all those players took home much more hardware then Sundin, because they peaked higher as players.

 

I'll give you one thing though, Sundin was the most consistent of the bunch and because his prime lasted so damn long, he can put up a more then decent argument against Zetterberg and the Sedins, but Peter Forsberg peaked too high as a player for me to put Sundin above him..

Ovechkin is Russian, Crosby is Canadian. With Sundin I am comparing him relative to his countrymen not other players from elsewhere. In terms of Swedes Sundin was the most prolific forward…period. This is an established fact.

 

Exactly, Sundin had the longevity and that is a vital factor that needs to be fulfilled in order to be considered as being the best forward a certain country has ever produced. Perhaps if Mario Lemieux had that longevity, if he didn't run into those health problems maybe he would be considered the best Canadian forward ever, some already argue that but at the end of the day he didn't have the longevity.. it was Gretzky who had it. Similar to how at the end of the day Forsberg didn't have that longevity but Sundin did.

 

I think longevity and realiablity is a huge factor, I'd rather have a player who puts up solid 75-80 point seasons for a dozen straight seasons than a player who puts up 5 really solid 90-100 point seasons and 7 up and down disappointing seasons.

[JagerMeister]

Ovechkin is Russian, Crosby is Canadian. With Sundin I am comparing him relative to his countrymen not other players from elsewhere. In terms of Swedes Sundin was the most prolific forward…period. This is an established fact.

 

Exactly, Sundin had the longevity and that is a vital factor that needs to be fulfilled in order to be considered as being the best forward a certain country has ever produced. Perhaps if Mario Lemieux had that longevity, if he didn't run into those health problems maybe he would be considered the best Canadian forward ever, some already argue that but at the end of the day he didn't have the longevity.. it was Gretzky who had it. Similar to how at the end of the day Forsberg didn't have that longevity but Sundin did.

 

I think longevity and realiablity is a huge factor, I'd rather have a player who puts up solid 75-80 point seasons for a dozen straight seasons than a player who puts up 5 really solid 90-100 point seasons and 7 up and down disappointing seasons.

 

 

There is a vast difference between the two comparisons, seeing as how Mario Lemieux peak to peak was never considered better than Gretzky, It's all hypothetical. Before his health problems, Lemieux still had a lower ppg then Gretzky by a small but noticeable margin. Forsberg however, was always considered a better forward than Sundin at their respective peaks. Even then, a past his prime Forsberg still had better ppg seasons than Mats Sundin. And its not like their ppg margins are close. In fact, Forsbergs ppg is significantly better than Mats Sundin. Sundin was one of the best compliers, Peter Forsberg was one of the best centres during the dead puck era, Only surpassed my Sakic and Lemieux.

 

So would you take Mike Modano over Pat Lafontaine? 

[92WickedHockey]

There is a vast difference between the two comparisons, seeing as how Mario Lemieux peak to peak was never considered better than Gretzky, It's all hypothetical. Before his health problems, Lemieux still had a lower ppg then Gretzky by a small but noticeable margin. Forsberg however, was always considered a better forward than Sundin at their respective peaks. Even then, a past his prime Forsberg still had better ppg seasons than Mats Sundin. And its not like their ppg margins are close. In fact, Forsbergs ppg is significantly better than Mats Sundin. Sundin was one of the best compliers, Peter Forsberg was one of the best centres during the dead puck era, Only surpassed my Sakic and Lemieux.

 

So would you take Mike Modano over Pat Lafontaine? 

One can argue that PPG is relative to the team one plays on, or at least plays a significant role. The Colorado Avalanche were a complete juggernaut in the 90's and early 00's, the Leafs not so much. But the bolded part couldn't be more wrong. Forsberg has the best PPG of all Swedes at 1.250, Sundin comes in still top 3 with 1.002 so the its not like they were far apart like you suggest, only 3 Swedes in NHL history averaged more than 1 point a game, Mats Sundin, Peter Forsberg and Kent Nilsson…pick your poison. But this is off topic now, this isn't about which Swede was the best, its about the greatest Maple Leaf and I say its Sundin.

[WordsOfWisdom]

There is a vast difference between the two comparisons, seeing as how Mario Lemieux peak to peak was never considered better than Gretzky, It's all hypothetical. Before his health problems, Lemieux still had a lower ppg then Gretzky by a small but noticeable margin. Forsberg however, was always considered a better forward than Sundin at their respective peaks. Even then, a past his prime Forsberg still had better ppg seasons than Mats Sundin. And its not like their ppg margins are close. In fact, Forsbergs ppg is significantly better than Mats Sundin. Sundin was one of the best compliers, Peter Forsberg was one of the best centres during the dead puck era, Only surpassed my Sakic and Lemieux.

 

So would you take Mike Modano over Pat Lafontaine? 

 

Weighing in with my two cents.....  

 

Yes, Peter Forsberg was a better center than Mats Sundin during his prime. This is like the Orr vs Bourque debate again. (I know it's not really a debate but I tried to make it one lol.)    Forsberg had some amazing seasons during his time, especially considering the era he played through, but it's a shame his career was cut short.

 

So I'm happy to call Sundin one of Sweden's best players ever, but not necessarily the best. 

[JagerMeister]

@92WickedHockey How is it not a significant difference? Peter forsbergs career ppg through 82 games is 102 points, while sundim has averaged 82 points throughout his whole career. That's exactly a 20 point difference, I would say that's quite the huge gap. It's what separated Crosby from the rest of the league in 2014. All the while Forsberg started his career around the dead puck era. As for ppg relative to team, I'm pretty sure the majority of hockey fans would agree Sundin never possessed the offensive talent or two way play Forsberg had.

[92WickedHockey]

@92WickedHockey How is it not a significant difference? Peter forsbergs career ppg through 82 games is 102 points, while sundim has averaged 82 points throughout his whole career. That's exactly a 20 point difference, I would say that's quite the huge gap. It's what separated Crosby from the rest of the league in 2014. All the while Forsberg started his career around the dead puck era. As for ppg relative to team, I'm pretty sure the majority of hockey fans would agree Sundin never possessed the offensive talent or two way play Forsberg had.

Like I already said, durability is a major factor in what makes legends legends, Forsberg was a glass man, he was kind of like a Joffery Lupul except he actually had talent. Sundin on the other hand wasn't made of glass and had the longevity and durability Forsberg lacked. If both were to be drafted and do it all over again the same way I'd take Sundin because of this.

[JagerMeister]

Like I already said, durability is a major factor in what makes legends legends, Forsberg was a glass man, he was kind of like a Joffery Lupul except he actually had talent. Sundin on the other hand wasn't made of glass and had the longevity and durability Forsberg lacked. If both were to be drafted and do it all over again the same way I'd take Sundin because of this.

A factor? yes. Major? Im not sure about that, Orr and Lemieux are prime examples of legends that lacked durability. Ron Francis possessed  longevity that the majorit of players lacked, but im not sure anyone considers him a legend of hockey. Plus, if both were to be drafted all over again, how would you possibly figure out knowing Sundin would become more durable?. Im sure if you just watched them play without knowing what was gonna happen in the future, Forsberg would look like the more impactful player on the ice.

[92WickedHockey]

A factor? yes. Major? Im not sure about that, Orr and Lemieux are prime examples of legends that lacked durability. Ron Francis possessed  longevity that the majorit of players lacked, but im not sure anyone considers him a legend of hockey. Plus, if both were to be drafted all over again, how would you possibly figure out knowing Sundin would become more durable?. Im sure if you just watched them play without knowing what was gonna happen in the future, Forsberg would look like the more impactful player on the ice.

I said ". "If both were to be drafted and do it all over again the same way"

 

​I would definitely consider Ron Francis a legend of hockey, are you serious? he is 5th all time in NHL points, and stands second all-time in career assists to only Wayne Gretzky. He was inducted into the HHOF in 2007.

[JR Ewing]

Using yave's line in the sand, I'd go with:

1. Davey Keon

2. Mats Sundin

3. Borje Salming

 

Going all-time, my list would be:

1. Davey Keon

2. George Armstrong

3. Mats Sundin

4. Borje Salming

5. Teeder Kennedy

[JR Ewing]

IMO, Dave Keon is the most complete player the Maple Leafs have ever had, and found himself always doing the heavy lifting. His stats, era-adjusted, come out to a 60-70 point player, but the real thing with him was everything else he did. Insane speed and anticipation; exceptionally elusive hockey player. Keon's game was all about upsetting timing, as he was an astonishingly diligent forechecker whose PKing ability drove teams absolutely nuts. He was a stealth backchecker, ala Pavel Datsyuk, who would sneak up, lift your stick and then he was gone with the puck.

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

How did Peter Forsberg slip into this discussion? Look, the Leafs have never had a forward as elite as Forsberg in their entire history. That's just the honest truth.

 

I already picked Sundin as the best Leaf player ever because he leads the franchise in basically every offensive stat. That being said, Sundin was always a "TOP 30" type of guy, but never TOP 10. Forsberg was either the best forward in the NHL, or you picked between him and Jagr or Lindros. Forsberg was always in the conversation of "best player in the NHL today". He didn't score tons of goals (because he didn't shoot enough), but he was the best playmaker in the game for sure during his time, and he took an incredible amount of physical abuse during the dead puck / slash and hold era. He also played a lot of games in the playoffs.

 

Ron Francis was a great player, but Mario Lemieux was even better. Everyone knows that given the same playing time, Lemieux would have Francis beat by another 1000 points. If Forsberg stayed healthy, and played in a higher scoring era, he would have finished with ~1800 points in his career.  This isn't even a debate lol.

[ScottM]

How did Peter Forsberg slip into this discussion? Look, the Leafs have never had a forward as elite as Forsberg in their entire history. That's just the honest truth.

 

As much as I enjoy poking fun at and making jokes about the Leafs, I have to disagree. Post-expansion, it may be true, but if we're talking the entire history of the Leafs, I'd throw Syl Apps's name out there as well as possibly Ted Kennedy. Although he never won the trophy, Apps finished in the top three in Hart Trophy voting five times, and in addition to his win, Kennedy finished in the top five on three other occasions. Frank Mahovlich didn't have as many high Hart Trophy finishes, but he had a ridiculously long list of first and second team all-star selections. Plus, as much as I like Forsberg, and as talented as I think he was, his injury proneness hurts him in my mind. He wasn't revolutionary like Orr or at the supremely elite level that Orr, Lemieux, or Bossy were to allow him to overcome it to the level they did. I just can't view him as highly as so many seem to.

 

 

Forsberg was always in the conversation of "best player in the NHL today". He didn't score tons of goals (because he didn't shoot enough), but he was the best playmaker in the game for sure during his time

 

Actually, his Hart Trophy year is the only season I would seriously view him as being in the "best player in the NHL" conversation. As often as not during Forsberg's prime, Sakic was the best player on the Avs team. I could entertain the notion of him being the top playmaker in the league for a while, and he was very good defensively, but with Fedorov in the league and playing at top level at the same time, he was outshone in that respect as well.

 

Anyway, I say all of that to say that I think that there are a handful of Leafs that compare well with Forsberg. I don't think those guys should be sold short even if they did play for a team I don't like.

[JagerMeister]

I said ". "If both were to be drafted and do it all over again the same way"

 

​I would definitely consider Ron Francis a legend of hockey, are you serious? he is 5th all time in NHL points, and stands second all-time in career assists to only Wayne Gretzky. He was inducted into the HHOF in 2007.

Im just gonna say this, Peak is more of an essential factor in what makes a legendary hockey player then say, longevity.

 Almost all of the greatest hockey players where the best in the world at one point in their careers. How can a player be a legend when he was never at one point in his career, considered one of the best players in the world?

[radoran]

I'm voting for {This Space Intentionally Left Blank}

 

[92WickedHockey]

Im just gonna say this, Peak is more of an essential factor in what makes a legendary hockey player then say, longevity.

 Almost all of the greatest hockey players where the best in the world at one point in their careers. How can a player be a legend when he was never at one point in his career, considered one of the best players in the world?

In the late 90's Francis consistently finished in the top 10 point leaders though, in the 95-96 season for example he put up more than Forsberg's 116 point campaign, Lindros, Kariya, Selanne, Mogilny and Fedorov also had 100+ seasons and he finished ahead of them too, who says he was never considered one of the best players in his time? That is a matter of personal opinion.

 

I'm sorry but you just can't call a player who is..

 

• Currently in 5th place of all-time regular season NHL point leaders with 1,798 points
• Currently in 27th place of all-time regular season NHL goals with 549 goals
• Currently in 2nd place of all-time regular season NHL assists with 1,249 assists
• Currently in 3rd place on all-time NHL regular season games played with 1,731 games

 

Not a legend. Call him criminally underrated sure but they don't just induct nobodies into the HOF.

[JagerMeister]

In the late 90's Francis consistently finished in the top 10 point leaders though, in the 95-96 season for example he put up more than Forsberg's 116 point campaign, Lindros, Kariya, Selanne, Mogilny and Fedorov also had 100+ seasons and he finished ahead of them too, who says he was never considered one of the best players in his time? That is a matter of personal opinion.

 

I'm sorry but you just can't call a player who is..

 

• Currently in 5th place of all-time regular season NHL point leaders with 1,798 points
• Currently in 27th place of all-time regular season NHL goals with 549 goals
• Currently in 2nd place of all-time regular season NHL assists with 1,249 assists
• Currently in 3rd place on all-time NHL regular season games played with 1,731 games

 

Not a legend. Call him criminally underrated sure but they don't just induct nobodies into the HOF.

Actually, looking back at his stats, he also led the league in assists twice and just like you said, he had quite a few top ten point finishes.

So calling him a complier is seriously undervaluing his career, you are right regarding this matter. But Im still not convinced with Sundin, he rarely cracked top ten in points and was not an exceptional two way forward like Francis. Which is mostly why I believe he is not the greatest swedish forward ever, Atleast if he was consistently a top ten point producer, I could be made persuaded into believing he was better than Forsberg, but he was not... Even him being the greatest Leafs player after expansion is debatable, Borje Salming was considered a top 5 defenseman in the league for almost the entirety of his prime, same cant be said for Sundin.

[WordsOfWisdom]

I'm voting for {This Space Intentionally Left Blank}

 

 

LOL. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

Peter Forsberg...... if he could have played 1346 games........

 

• 473 goals
• 1209 assists
• 1682 points

[JagerMeister]

 

Peter Forsberg...... if he could have played 1346 games........

 

• 473 goals
• 1209 assists
• 1682 points

 

Assuming he keeps his ppg at the same pace throughout the majority of his career, this is all hypothetical, and I doubt it's accurate at all.

 

And again, I have a hard time believing he would be able to keep his ppg pace because of two crucial reasons.

  age and the way he played the game was why his career was cut short in the first place.

[jammer2]

  Awesome skill and talent aside, Forsberg gets knocked down a few pegs due to the unmanly diving through his career. By the time Peter got to Philly, the diving was taken to another level.....downright disgraceful I'd say.

[WordsOfWisdom]

Assuming he keeps his ppg at the same pace throughout the majority of his career, this is all hypothetical, and I doubt it's accurate at all.

 

And again, I have a hard time believing he would be able to keep his ppg pace because of two crucial reasons.

  age and the way he played the game was why his career was cut short in the first place.

 

True. It's all hypothetical. But considering the era he played in (the dead puck era), to say that he would have amassed 1682 points isn't far off because his diminished performance with age is offset by the fact that he never got to enjoy any 80's or early 90's "easy pickin's" when it comes to collecting points. (Mats Sundin had his best season in 1992-93 when he collected 47 goals and 114 pts. He never came close to those numbers again, reflecting the decrease in scoring league-wide.) So because Forsberg never got to benefit from the high scoring era, I'm not going to punish him for reduced performance with advancing age. Therefore, his 1682 points are a realistic estimate of what a healthy Peter Forsberg could have done, adjusted to allow for some playing time in an era other than the dead puck era. 

 

Also, Sundin's best season came in his third year. Forsberg's first full year in the NHL was the year in which he got 116 points. If we give Forsberg his best year under 1992-93 league average scoring, how many points does 116 turn into? 130? 140? 150?

[radoran]

Also, Sundin's best season came in his third year.

 

Many around here know this already, but this has been my lifelong impression of Mats Sundin.

 

 

"I tried to think of the most harmless thing... * ...something that could never, ever possibly destroy us....Mats Sundin!"

 

 

 

* Sundin never played during "my childhood"

[WordsOfWisdom]

@radoran LOL. 

[flyercanuck]

Many around here know this already, but this has been my lifelong impression of Mats Sundin.

 

 

"I tried to think of the most harmless thing... * ...something that could never, ever possibly destroy us....Mats Sundin!"

 

 

 

* Sundin never played during "my childhood"

 

 

I was going to post that....but believed you deserved the honor.