The fact is that you said Pancev wasn't a great player because he didn't play well in Inter, but the truth is he chose the wrong team, a team that played boring "catenaco" (not sure about the spelling) football where even strikers had to go back to defense and fight for the ball, at which Pancev wasn't very good at.
Anyway, the only games you have seen Pancev play is the couple of Champions League games in Red Star so I don't know why I even bother discussing this with you.
But he was voted second best player in Europe in '91 by people who know way better than me or you who is good and who isn't.
About Kezman, comparing him and Pancev can only make me laugh (at this moment), you will maybe say Pancev played in a great team, but Pancev was the leagues best scorer even in Vardar (in fact, I think the youngest in Yugoslavian football's history) and that was what brought him to Red Star...so it wasn't just Savicevic, Prosinecki and the others feeding him with balls...
And all this in a league that was 10 times stronger than todays..with Dinamo, Hajduk, Olimpija, Zeljeznicar.....and so on..
Talking about Suker, I am aware that Suker is a better striker, I didn't answer IVO's post mostly because I agreed with him, he is above all more versatile compared to Pancev, but now in Arsenal he isn't actually doing too good..
So does that mean he's not a great player????