Modern scoring in the light of the past - Scoringleaders with relative numbers (20y)

[Ola]

Lately there have been a lot of comparisons between player’s best seasons at this place. Often these discussions amount into comparing stats between different eras’s of the NHL. For a long time I’ve felt that many overrate stats from the 80’s in this perspective. 150 pts scored in 1988 is by many seen as a much bigger achievement then 110 pts scored in 2009. Below I am going to show how that don’t have to be the case.

I've put together some relative stats for the top 5 in scoring the last 20 years. I used the year Gretzky set the record with 215 pts as a reference year. That year 7,94 goals per game were scored in the NHL compared to for example 5,14 in 2004. In other words in 54% more goals were scored in the NHL in 1986 compared to 2004. I’ve split the difference in goals per game between each year and 1986 and multiplied that with the player’s actual stat. I wouldn't be suprised if someone have done something like this before, but I couldn't find it and had a couple of hrs (read bunch) to spare...

First comes the players actual pts and then in bold his relative numbers.

2009
7.94/5.83=1.36
1 Evgeni Malkin Pittsburgh 113 - 154 pts
2 Alexander Ovechkin Washington 110 - 150 pts
3 Sidney Crosby Pittsburgh 103 - 140 pts
4 Pavel Datsyuk Detroit 97 - 132 pts
5 Zach Parise New Jersey 94 - 128 pts

2008
7.94/5.57=1.43
1 Alexander Ovechkin Washington 112 - 160 pts
2 Evgeni Malkin Pittsburgh 106 - 152 pts
3 Jarome Iginla Calgary 98 - 140 pts
4 Pavel Datsyuk Detroit 97 - 139 pts
5 Joe Thornton San Jose 96 - 137 pts

2007
7.94/5.89=1.35
1 Sidney Crosby Pittsburgh 120 - 162 pts
2 Joe Thornton San Jose 114 - 150 pts
3 Vincent Lecavalier Tampa Bay 108 - 146 pts
4 Dany Heatley Ottawa 105 - 142 pts
5 Martin St. Louis Tampa Bay 102 - 138 pts

2006
7.94/6.17=1.29
1 Joe Thornton 2 teams 125 - 161 pts
2 Jaromir Jagr NY Rangers 123 - 159 pts
3 Alexander Ovechkin Washington 106 - 137 pts
4 Dany Heatley Ottawa 103 - 133 pts
4 Daniel Alfredsson Ottawa 103 - 133 pts

2004
7.94/5.14=1.54
1 Martin St. Louis Tampa Bay 94 - 145 pts
2 Joe Sakic Colorado 87 -134 pts
2 Ilya Kovalchuk Atlanta 87 - 134 pts
4 Markus Naslund Vancouver 84 - 129 pts
5 Marian Hossa Ottawa 82 - 126 pts

2003
7.94/5.31=1.50
1 Peter Forsberg Colorado 106 - 159 pts
2 Markus Naslund Vancouver 104 - 156 pts
3 Joe Thornton Boston 101 - 152 pts
4 Milan Hejduk Colorado 98 - 147 pts
5 Todd Bertuzzi Vancouver 97 - 146 pts

2002
7.94/5.24=1.52
1 Jarome Iginla Calgary 96 - 145 pts
2 Markus Naslund Vancouver 90 - 137 pts
3 Todd Bertuzzi Vancouver 85 - 129 pts
4 Mats Sundin Toronto 80 - 122 pts

2001
7.94/5.51=1.44
1 Jaromir Jagr Pittsburgh 121 - 174 pts
2 Joe Sakic Colorado 118 - 170 pts
3 Patrik Elias New Jersey 96 - 138 pts
4 Jason Allison Boston 95 - 137 pts
4 Martin Straka Pittsburgh 95 - 137 pts
4 Alexei Kovalev Pittsburgh 95 - 137 pts

2000
7.94/5.49=1.45
1 Jaromir Jagr Pittsburgh 96 - 139 pts
2 Pavel Bure Florida 94 - 136 pts
3 Mark Recchi Philadelphia 91 - 132 pts
4 Paul Kariya Anaheim 86 - 125 pts
5 Teemu Selanne Anaheim 85 - 124 pts

1999
7.94/5.27=1.51
1 Jaromir Jagr Pittsburgh 127 -192 pts
2 Teemu Selanne Anaheim 107 - 162 pts
3 Paul Kariya Anaheim 101 - 153 pts
4 Peter Forsberg Colorado 97 - 146 pts
5 Joe Sakic Colorado 96 - 145 pts

1998
7.94/5.28=1.50
1 Jaromir Jagr Pittsburgh 102 - 153 pts
2 Peter Forsberg Colorado 91 - 137 pts
3 Wayne Gretzky NY Rangers 90 - 136 pts
3 Pavel Bure Vancouver 90 - 136 pts

1997
7.94/5.83=1.36
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 122 - 166 pts
2 Teemu Selanne Anaheim 109 - 148 pts
3 Paul Kariya Anaheim 99 - 137 pts
4 Wayne Gretzky NY Rangers 97 - 132 pts
4 John LeClair Philadelphia 97 - 132 pts

1996
7.94/6.29=1.26
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 161 - 203 pts
2 Jaromir Jagr Pittsburgh 149 - 188 pts
3 Joe Sakic Colorado 120 - 151 pts
4 Ron Francis Pittsburgh 119 - 150 pts
5 Peter Forsberg Colorado 116 - 147 pts

1995
7.94/5.97x82/48=2.27
1 Eric Lindros Philadelphia 70 - 159 pts
1 Jaromir Jagr Pittsburgh 70 - 159 pts
3 Alexei Zhamnov Winnipeg 65 - 148 pts
4 Joe Sakic Quebec 62 - 141 pts
5 Ron Francis Pittsburgh 59 - 134 pts

1994
7.94/6.48=1.23
1 Wayne Gretzky Los Angeles 130 -160 pts
2 Sergei Fedorov Detroit 120 - 148 pts
3 Adam Oates Boston 112 - 138 pts
4 Doug Gilmour Toronto 111 - 137 pts

1993
7.94/7.25=1.10
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 160 - 175 pts
2 Pat LaFontaine Buffalo 148 - 162 pts
3 Adam Oates Boston 142 - 156 pts
4 Steve Yzerman Detroit 137 - 151 pts
5 Pierre Turgeon NY Islanders 132 - 145 pts
5 Teemu Selanne Winnipeg 132 - 145 pts

1992
7.94/6.96=1.14
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 131 - 149 pts
2 Kevin Stevens Pittsburgh 123 - 140 pts
3 Wayne Gretzky Los Angeles 121 - 138 pts
4 Brett Hull St. Louis 109 - 124 pts
5 Luc Robitaille Los Angeles 107 - 122 pts
5 Mark Messier NY Rangers 107 - 122 pts

1991
7.94/6.91=1.15
1 Wayne Gretzky Los Angeles 163 - 187 pts
2 Brett Hull St. Louis 131 - 151 pts
3 Adam Oates St. Louis 115 - 132 pts
4 Mark Recchi Pittsburgh 113 - 130 pts
5 John Cullen 2 teams 110 - 127 pts

1990
7.94/7.48=1.06
1 Wayne Gretzky Los Angeles 142 - 150 pts
2 Mark Messier Edmonton 129 - 137 pts
3 Steve Yzerman Detroit 127 - 135 pts
4 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 123 - 130 pts
5 Brett Hull St. Louis 113 - 120 pts

I would love to hear some input on these numbers. How valid you guys think they are? I think thats a interesting topic. IMO they are atleast more valid then comparing the "actual pts". There are definitly many factors to consider when comparing two seasons that these stats don't cover. For example many say that depth players are better today then 25 years ago -- which makes it harder for the stars. There where a ton of clutching and grabbing in the early 2000's which made it harder for the stars -- for example Crosby is definitly getting more room to skate with the puck today compared to what he would have had in 2003... But these numbers should atleast cover the broad picture, and the goalie aspect too. Goalies saved allot less shots 25 years ago for example. There are over 1200 games played in a regular season (with reservation for my math, I am pretty tired after dooing the stats above... ).

I would also definitly welcome any talk about some of the stats above and such. There is already a thread about Yzerman's 155 pts season, and as we can see above thats a great season -- but hardly a unique season at all. Jagr have had some awsome years in this perspective. AO and Crosby's years at a very young age definitly holds up in comparision with what guys scored in the 80's. Eric Lindros had a pretty awsome year during the lockout.

[rallymaster19]

I think you made a valiant effort trying to compare seasons from different times but there are too many problems inherent with this simple calculation. There are far too many variables to take into consideration that to just extrapolate mass data under the same simple math formula renders the information inaccurate. It's interesting to see these numbers, but they provide little insight into comparing seasons.

Choosing '86 as the basis year is interesting. If you take out Gretzky, his teammates and Lemiuex, the best season statistically is Mike Bossy with 123 points. Last year Malkin led the scoring race with 113 points. Yet he registers 154 points on your adjusted system. Can you in good faith tell me Malkin would have been worth 31 more points than Bossy was in 1986. Can you tell me that Malkin would have been worth 13 more points than Lemiuex was in '86 too?

Just looking at the adjusted numbers, you can tell they are grossly inflated. Removing Gretzky and Lemiuex from the scoring races in the 80s, and the best seasons by other players aren't nearly the same as your adjusted stats for future players are. For example, you have 5 players registering at least 147 points in 1996. There's never been a single season where 5 players have registered 147 points at the same time. In fact, in the history of the game, only 8 players have scored at least 147 points in a single season- two were Gretzky and Lemiuex, and another 2 were their linemates.

Your list is nice to look at but it's ultimately unreliable as a barometer to measure players.

[overpass]

I'd say this method is fairly accurate in terms of comparing the value of a player's points across eras.

It's certainly true that top forwards of the last 15 years score better on this than top non-99/66 forwards of the 15 years before that. That's probably because most of the decline in scoring has come at even strength. Power play scoring hasn't declined as much, so first line forwards score a higher percentage of points and are more valuable.

I'll say that again: Top (non 99/66) forwards are more valuable in the last 15 years than in the '80s, because the game has changed.

Because of the power play issue, I don't think it's not really accurate in measuring how many points a player "would have" scored, but it's pretty good for comparing the relative impact that players had in terms of wins.

[DJ Man]

You'll find that Gordie Howe scored 48 or 49 goals in some low-scoring 1950s season. If you adjust that for league goals and expand it to 82 games, it looks better than Gretzky's record season. I think. I ran the math myself long ago.

[FissionFire]

I've never been a fan of adjusted scoring. There are certain eras where after you adjust modern players blow away records. Adjusted numbers are nice, but you can't take them as gospel. You have to consider history and context as well. The more the game has changed between the two eras, the more inaccurate the adjusted numbers IMO.

[Cup 2010 Sens Rule]

It is an interesting job.

I'd venture to say ALL of your numbers are too high. It seems to me all the numbers are too high thru-out your analysis. But then again they are all valid relative to each other. I would cut all of those numbers by 15-25%. Even in the highest scoring parts of the 70's and 80's anything over 140 points is very rare. You show FIFTY adjusted 140 point seasons. And if you are not Wayne of Mario 140 is a truly rare occurance that would happen only a few times a decade.

Another thing is the style played. In the 70's and 80's it was far more common for top forwards to not play a ton of defence. More common than it is now. So probably top players now would score a little less now relative to what they do now.

Also it is just kind of random whether the top 5 or ten scorers top out at 120+ points or just barely break 100 points even with the average number of goals scored in each game is almost identical. I don't think 92/93 is a high scoring year overall but a bunch of the top scorers had HUGE point totals.

I am not trying to criticize what you have done.. I find it interesting but I think ALL the totals are on the very high end.

[seventieslord]

This is similar to any other adjusted stats that were done in the past, except you're using a different control season. Usually adjustments are made to an "average" season which is about 3.10 GPG/team or 6.20 in total.

If you want to see adjusted stats that are already done, very systematically, and with more things considered than just the scoring level of the season, check hockey-reference.com. BM67 and Hockey Outsider, respected members of this history section, have also done their own systems that yield interesting results.

Just don't rely on them too much. They are nice to look at, to get an idea of if 45 goals in this season is more impressive than 55 in another. But once you start adding up career adjusted totals you're going down a slippery slope.

[Cast]

Originally Posted by rallymaster19

I think you made a valiant effort trying to compare seasons from different times but there are too many problems inherent with this simple calculation. There are far too many variables to take into consideration that to just extrapolate mass data under the same simple math formula renders the information inaccurate. It's interesting to see these numbers, but they provide little insight into comparing seasons.

Choosing '86 as the basis year is interesting. If you take out Gretzky, his teammates and Lemiuex, the best season statistically is Mike Bossy with 123 points. Last year Malkin led the scoring race with 113 points. Yet he registers 154 points on your adjusted system. Can you in good faith tell me Malkin would have been worth 31 more points than Bossy was in 1986. Can you tell me that Malkin would have been worth 13 more points than Lemiuex was in '86 too?

Just looking at the adjusted numbers, you can tell they are grossly inflated. Removing Gretzky and Lemiuex from the scoring races in the 80s, and the best seasons by other players aren't nearly the same as your adjusted stats for future players are. For example, you have 5 players registering at least 147 points in 1996. There's never been a single season where 5 players have registered 147 points at the same time. In fact, in the history of the game, only 8 players have scored at least 147 points in a single season- two were Gretzky and Lemiuex, and another 2 were their linemates.

Your list is nice to look at but it's ultimately unreliable as a barometer to measure players.

This.

The game has changed so much. It's difficult to compare and your list is very inaccurate because it's missing many of the factors that are important when trying to calculate something like this. It was something worth looking at, though.

[Ola]

First of all I would like to say that I agree with everyone who is saying that you can't read to much into stats -- I couldn't agree more. I would never look at someone who scored 130 pts and say that he, for that reason, is per automatic better then someone who scored 110 pts. There is always a ton of other factors to weight in.

Stats will always in the game of hockey be merely stats!

Originally Posted by rallymaster19

Choosing '86 as the basis year is interesting. If you take out Gretzky, his teammates and Lemiuex, the best season statistically is Mike Bossy with 123 points. Last year Malkin led the scoring race with 113 points. Yet he registers 154 points on your adjusted system. Can you in good faith tell me Malkin would have been worth 31 more points than Bossy was in 1986. Can you tell me that Malkin would have been worth 13 more points than Lemiuex was in '86 too?

Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule

Even in the highest scoring parts of the 70's and 80's anything over 140 points is very rare. You show FIFTY adjusted 140 point seasons. And if you are not Wayne of Mario 140 is a truly rare occurance that would happen only a few times a decade.

This leads to a very interesting question -- should we per automatic never calculate with Gretzky and Marios stats? Should they always be excluded? Were Mario and Gretzky out-of-this-world-completely-superhuman?

I am not so sure about that. Because looking at the numbers above 1. they aren't out of this world anymore 2. but they are still the best numbers by far in the last 30 years. Watching Mario and Gretzky play that was kind of my impression -- they weren't superhuman but they were the best I've ever seen. The numbers above tell the same story.

You show FIFTY adjusted 140 point seasons. And if you are not Wayne of Mario 140 is a truly rare occurance that would happen only a few times a decade.

(all bolded parts by me)

Actually if you count the number of 140 pts seasons in the 80's and compare then with the 90's and 00's you will see that the numbers add up extremely well!

1980
7.94/7.03=1.13
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 137 - 155
1 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 137 - 155
3 Guy Lafleur Mtl. Canadiens 125 -141
4 Gilbert Perreault Buffalo 106 - 119
5 Mike Rogers Hartford 105 - 119

1981
7.94/7.69=1.03
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 164 -169
2 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 135 - 139
3 Kent Nilsson Calgary 131 - 135
4 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 119 - 123
5 Dave Taylor Los Angeles 112 - 115

1982
7.94/8.03=0.99
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 212 - 210
2 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 147 - 146
3 Peter Stastny Quebec 139 - 138
4 Dennis Maruk Washington 136 - 134
5 Bryan Trottier NY Islanders 129 - 128

1983
7.94/7.73=1.03
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 196 - 201
2 Peter Stastny Quebec 124 - 128
3 Denis Savard Chicago 121 - 125
4 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 118 - 122
5 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 107 - 110

1984
7.94/7.89=1.01
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 205 - 207
2 Paul Coffey Edmonton 126 - 127
3 Michel Goulet Quebec 121 - 122
4 Peter Stastny Quebec 119 - 120
5 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 118 - 119

1985
7.94/7.77=1.02
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 208 - 212
2 Jari Kurri Edmonton 135 - 138
3 Dale Hawerchuk Winnipeg 130 - 133
4 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 126 - 129
5 Paul Coffey Edmonton 121 - 123

1986 - reference year
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 215
2 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 141
3 Paul Coffey Edmonton 138
4 Jari Kurri Edmonton 131
5 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 123

1987
7.94/7.34=1.08
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 183 - 198
2 Jari Kurri Edmonton 108 - 117
3 Mark Messier Edmonton 107 - 116
3 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 107 -116
5 Doug Gilmour St. Louis 105 - 113

1988
7.94/7.43=1.07
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 168 - 180
2 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 149 - 159
3 Denis Savard Chicago 131 - 140
4 Dale Hawerchuk Winnipeg 121 - 129
5 Peter Stastny Quebec 111 - 119

1989
7.94/7.43=1.07
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 199 - 213
2 Wayne Gretzky Los Angeles 168 - 180
3 Steve Yzerman Detroit 155 - 166
4 Bernie Nicholls Los Angeles 150 - 161
5 Rob Brown Pittsburgh 115 - 124

During 2 decades (90's and 00's) I got 51 individual 140 pts season. During the 80's I got 19. You also have to factor in that there is 43% more teams in this league during the time frame from 00-09' compared to the 80's. A very logical and direct result from that is that you get better depth in the scoring race.

With 43% more teams and natrually 43% more players in the league its a very logical result that depth scoring is better -- right?

My numbers show 51/2= 25 individual 140 pts seasons per decade. If you take the 19 individual 140 pts seasons during the 80's and times that with 43% more precent you get 19x1.43=27. The stats is actually extremely compareable for once when comparing the 80's with the 90's and 00's.

I also think its interesting that when counting Mario and Gretzky's seasons the 80's for once is compareable with the 90's and 00's. And what does the number tell you?

These are some very safe and moderate conclusions that I draw from this topic so far:
1. Mario and Gretzky was not out of this world -- but they were the most dominating offensive players in the 80's, 90's and 00's. I don't want to go back to the Howe days et c -- because I haven't seen any hockey from that time so I can't check stats against my own very individual opinion. But Mario and Gretsky still, according to the relative stats, scored a substansial more amount of pts then any of the best players in the 00's.

Thats also my impression from watching them -- they are the best I've ever seen but they wheren't superhuman, and they didn't score a bunch of pts because everyone else sucked tremendously. They were just the best ever during a era when the scoring in this league was up.

2. The best players of the late 90's and 00's were as good as the best players after 66/99 during the 80's. In other words -- the 3rd best player during the 80's was not atleast a lot better then any player in this league during the last 2 decades.

Thats something I've always tryed to argue and it definitly the impression I have after watching actual hockeygames. For example, I love Steve Yzerman but while he scored 155 pts I would not say that he dominated more then Jagr, Forsberg, Crosby and Lindros in his absolute prime when dooing so. (I would actually say that the scale should be leaning to the opposite -- and my numbers also show that, but thats more subjective and is up for debate)

3. Depth scoring is actually higher today then during the happy days of the 80's -- but thats a natrual and direct result from 43% more players playing in the league today then compared to thoose days.

[foame]

Some links about adjusted scoring:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/lead...ed_yearly.html

http://web.archive.org/web/200512221...nor_points.htm


I think the adjusted scoring in the links above is great if you want to compare post-expansion seasons (though you have to take the eras talent-level in account), but for earlier seasons I think BM67/Hockey Outsider's method is better.

Adjusted Scoring by Hockey Outsider

[RabbinsDuck]

I think it is a helpful barometer, but obviously not the only one.
It is definitely more helpful to adjust seasons stats to a 'normal' year for comparison.

Just like taking PPG and factoring where a player 'would' have been for an injury reduced season is helpful, but far from gospel.

[tony d]

Really good job on this. I always enjoying looking back and comparing different stats for different players through different eras, good job.

[ushvinder]

If you take out gretzky, lemieux and devalue thier linemates. Then Marcel dionne would have 2 scoring titles, bossy would have 2, goulet, savard, hawerchuk, yzerman, lafontaine and stastny would have 1. Messier and Brett Hull would be 2 time art ross trophy winners.

However, only coffey and kurri should count as Gretzky linemates because Messier produced his own points on the second line.

Goulet and Lafontaine don't really compare career wise, but I think Hawerchuk and Savard would be held in a much higher regard if Gretzky got injured and they won the scoring titles during thier peak seasons.

[Ola]

Originally Posted by ushvinder

If you take out gretzky, lemieux and devalue thier linemates. Then Marcel dionne would have 2 scoring titles, bossy would have 2, goulet, savard, hawerchuk, yzerman, lafontaine and stastny would have 1. Messier and Brett Hull would be 2 time art ross trophy winners.

However, only coffey and kurri should count as Gretzky linemates because Messier produced his own points on the second line.

Goulet and Lafontaine don't really compare career wise, but I think Hawerchuk and Savard would be held in a much higher regard if Gretzky got injured and they won the scoring titles during thier peak seasons.

Agreed. And why take them out completely, like if we are talking about 140 pts seasons in the 00's vs 80's, and Gretz scored 215 pts you could atleast count him as a 140 pts player.

[Cup 2010 Sens Rule]

Originally Posted by Ola

First of all I would like to say that I agree with everyone who is saying that you can't read to much into stats -- I couldn't agree more. I would never look at someone who scored 130 pts and say that he, for that reason, is per automatic better then someone who scored 110 pts. There is always a ton of other factors to weight in.

Stats will always in the game of hockey be merely stats!





This leads to a very interesting question -- should we per automatic never calculate with Gretzky and Marios stats? Should they always be excluded? Were Mario and Gretzky out-of-this-world-completely-superhuman?

I am not so sure about that. Because looking at the numbers above 1. they aren't out of this world anymore 2. but they are still the best numbers by far in the last 30 years. Watching Mario and Gretzky play that was kind of my impression -- they weren't superhuman but they were the best I've ever seen. The numbers above tell the same story.


(all bolded parts by me)

Actually if you count the number of 140 pts seasons in the 80's and compare then with the 90's and 00's you will see that the numbers add up extremely well!

1980
7.94/7.03=1.13
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 137 - 155
1 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 137 - 155
3 Guy Lafleur Mtl. Canadiens 125 -141
4 Gilbert Perreault Buffalo 106 - 119
5 Mike Rogers Hartford 105 - 119

1981
7.94/7.69=1.03
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 164 -169
2 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 135 - 139
3 Kent Nilsson Calgary 131 - 135
4 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 119 - 123
5 Dave Taylor Los Angeles 112 - 115

1982
7.94/8.03=0.99
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 212 - 210
2 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 147 - 146
3 Peter Stastny Quebec 139 - 138
4 Dennis Maruk Washington 136 - 134
5 Bryan Trottier NY Islanders 129 - 128

1983
7.94/7.73=1.03
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 196 - 201
2 Peter Stastny Quebec 124 - 128
3 Denis Savard Chicago 121 - 125
4 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 118 - 122
5 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 107 - 110

1984
7.94/7.89=1.01
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 205 - 207
2 Paul Coffey Edmonton 126 - 127
3 Michel Goulet Quebec 121 - 122
4 Peter Stastny Quebec 119 - 120
5 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 118 - 119

1985
7.94/7.77=1.02
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 208 - 212
2 Jari Kurri Edmonton 135 - 138
3 Dale Hawerchuk Winnipeg 130 - 133
4 Marcel Dionne Los Angeles 126 - 129
5 Paul Coffey Edmonton 121 - 123

1986 - reference year
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 215
2 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 141
3 Paul Coffey Edmonton 138
4 Jari Kurri Edmonton 131
5 Mike Bossy NY Islanders 123

1987
7.94/7.34=1.08
1 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 183 - 198
2 Jari Kurri Edmonton 108 - 117
3 Mark Messier Edmonton 107 - 116
3 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 107 -116
5 Doug Gilmour St. Louis 105 - 113

1988
7.94/7.43=1.07
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 168 - 180
2 Wayne Gretzky Edmonton 149 - 159
3 Denis Savard Chicago 131 - 140
4 Dale Hawerchuk Winnipeg 121 - 129
5 Peter Stastny Quebec 111 - 119

1989
7.94/7.43=1.07
1 Mario Lemieux Pittsburgh 199 - 213
2 Wayne Gretzky Los Angeles 168 - 180
3 Steve Yzerman Detroit 155 - 166
4 Bernie Nicholls Los Angeles 150 - 161
5 Rob Brown Pittsburgh 115 - 124

During 2 decades (90's and 00's) I got 51 individual 140 pts season. During the 80's I got 19. You also have to factor in that there is 43% more teams in this league during the time frame from 00-09' compared to the 80's. A very logical and direct result from that is that you get better depth in the scoring race.

With 43% more teams and natrually 43% more players in the league its a very logical result that depth scoring is better -- right?

My numbers show 51/2= 25 individual 140 pts seasons per decade. If you take the 19 individual 140 pts seasons during the 80's and times that with 43% more precent you get 19x1.43=27. The stats is actually extremely compareable for once when comparing the 80's with the 90's and 00's.

I also think its interesting that when counting Mario and Gretzky's seasons the 80's for once is compareable with the 90's and 00's. And what does the number tell you?

These are some very safe and moderate conclusions that I draw from this topic so far:
1. Mario and Gretzky was not out of this world -- but they were the most dominating offensive players in the 80's, 90's and 00's. I don't want to go back to the Howe days et c -- because I haven't seen any hockey from that time so I can't check stats against my own very individual opinion. But Mario and Gretsky still, according to the relative stats, scored a substansial more amount of pts then any of the best players in the 00's.

Thats also my impression from watching them -- they are the best I've ever seen but they wheren't superhuman, and they didn't score a bunch of pts because everyone else sucked tremendously. They were just the best ever during a era when the scoring in this league was up.

2. The best players of the late 90's and 00's were as good as the best players after 66/99 during the 80's. In other words -- the 3rd best player during the 80's was not atleast a lot better then any player in this league during the last 2 decades.

Thats something I've always tryed to argue and it definitly the impression I have after watching actual hockeygames. For example, I love Steve Yzerman but while he scored 155 pts I would not say that he dominated more then Jagr, Forsberg, Crosby and Lindros in his absolute prime when dooing so. (I would actually say that the scale should be leaning to the opposite -- and my numbers also show that, but thats more subjective and is up for debate)

3. Depth scoring is actually higher today then during the happy days of the 80's -- but thats a natrual and direct result from 43% more players playing in the league today then compared to thoose days.

My main point is thst choosing the reference year you did you round up ALL scoring.... You make ALL or Mario's and 99's seasons higher in adjusted numbers accept Gretzky's 212 season which goes down to 210. You pick the absolute highest possible reference season.. so while all you adjusted numbers are relatively valid.. they are on a scale that is the highest possible.

Think about it.. you adjust Gretzky's prime scoring years UP.. and that is the highest scoring era of all time.... so all the numbers you adjust are inflated. Most adjusted stats adjust Gretzxky's 200 point years DOWN not UP.

[Ola]

Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule

My main point is thst choosing the reference year you did you round up ALL scoring.... You make ALL or Mario's and 99's seasons higher in adjusted numbers accept Gretzky's 212 season which goes down to 210. You pick the absolute highest possible reference season.. so while all you adjusted numbers are relatively valid.. they are on a scale that is the highest possible.

Think about it.. you adjust Gretzky's prime scoring years UP.. and that is the highest scoring era of all time.... so all the numbers you adjust are inflated. Most adjusted stats adjust Gretzxky's 200 point years DOWN not UP.

Ah ok, I misunderstood you a little -- I am sorry about that.

[Czech Your Math]

Points relative to league scoring is an important step in comparing different seasons. It's not perfect, but the relative value of a goal, assist or point fluctuates in proportion to general scoring level.

I believe there has been better scoring depth since the mid-90s, mainly due to the influx of European skill players.

Stastny and Kurri were the only really elite Euros from '82 on, until a wave of Euros/Russians broke onto the scene in the '90s.

In 4 seasons from '89 to '92, Euros only managed a total of one top ten finish in each category, none higher than seventh.

While there previously hadn't been more than one Euro in top ten in goals, Selanne and Mogilny shared title in '93, with Bure 5th. Bure followed up with goal title in '94, while Fedorov finished runner-up to Gretzky in Ross and third in goals. Jagr won the Ross in '95 and finished second to Bondra in goals. European/Russian players became an even greater force in second half of '90s, ironically during a period when league scoring took a nosedive.

Year P5 10 G5 10 A5 10 (Top 5 or 10 in Points, Goals, Assists)
===================================
1993 01 02 03 03 00 00
1994 02 03 02 02 01 02
1995 02 02 03 03 00 03
1996 02 05 03 03 02 04
1997 01 04 02 04 00 02
1998 04 06 04 07 03 04
1999 03 05 03 04 03 05
2000 02 02 02 03 03 04
2001 04 07 04 09 02 05
2002 03 04 02 05 03 04
2003 03 05 03 07 03 04
2004 02 06 02 05 00 02
2006 03 04 03 05 01 06
2007 00 02 04 05 02 03
2008 03 06 04 06 03 04
2009 03 05 04 04 03 04

Stastny and Kurri were the only Euros who finished in the top 5 in either points, goals, or assists from '82 to '92.

Season Ranking in Points, Goals or Assists for Euros '81-'92:

Top 3: Kurri 5, Stastny 4, Nilsson 2
Top 5: Stastny 8, Kurri 7, Nilsson 2
Top 10: Stastny 13, Kurri 12, Nilsson 3

Remember, Stastny and Kurri didn't have numerous other elite Euros to compete against in scoring races, although they did have to contend with Gretzky's prime (which didn't exactly hurt Kurri's stats). How do they stack up against later Euros?

Top 3: Jagr 18, Selanne 7, Bure 7, Ovechkin 6, Forsberg 5, Kurri 5, Stastny 4, Malkin 3, Kovalchuk 3, Naslund 3

Top 5: Jagr 21, Selanne 10, Bure 9, Forsbeg 8, Stastny 8, Ovechkin 7, Kurri 7, Naslund 5, Malkin 4, Kovalchuk 4, Datsyuk 4, Hossa 4, Bondra 4, Lidstrom 3

Top 10: Jagr 28, Selanne 16, Stastny 13, Forsberg 12, Kurri 12, Kovalchuk 10, Naslund 10, Bure 9, Ovechkin 8, Alfredsson 8, Palffy 7... Malkin 5, Datsyuk 5, Hossa 5... Lidstrom 4.

If there were only a couple of elite Euros in the NHL, they would often have finished higher than they did in scoring categories.

From '82 to '92 (11 seasons), Kurri and Stastny were the only two players with at least three top ten finishes in G/A/P and the only players with even a single top five finish in any of those three statistics. From '93 to present (16 seasons), 29 different Euros had at least three top ten rankings, 25 finished in the top five at least once, and 18 in the top three at least once.

From '81 to '92, Euros had 11 top 3, 17 top 5, and 35 top 10.
That's about 9-10% of possible total.

From '93 to present, Euros had 64 top 3, 117 top 5, and 201 top 10.
That's about 42-49% of the possible total.

Focusing only on points:

Top 3: Jagr 7, Ovechkin 3, Forsberg 2, Malkin 2, Selanne 2, Naslund 2, Bure 2, Stastny 2, Kurri 2

Top 5: Jagr 8, Forsberg 4, Selanne 4, Stastny 4, Ovechkin 3, Naslund 3, Bure 3, Kurri 3, Malkin 2, Datsyuk 2

Top 10: Jagr 10, Selanne 6, Stastny 6, Kurri 6, Forsberg 5, Kovalchuk 4, Bure 4, Palffy 4, Ovechkin 3, Naslund 3, Alfredsson 3, Demitra 3, Malkin 2, Datsyuk 2, Hossa 2

There was plenty of top talent in the '80s, I just don't think there was the depth of later seasons. Just as Stastny, Kurri, Bossy, Trottier, Dionne, Hawerchuk, Messier, Yzerman, Savard, etc. would have benefitted from not competing against Gretzky and in some seasons Lemieux... players of more recent years have had many more elite Euros to compete against... Jagr, Selanne, Forsberg, Bure, Ovechkin, Malkin, Kovalchuk, Datsyuk, Fedorov, Naslund, Hossa, Alfredsson, Bondra, Palffy, etc. would all have benefitted from being one of the only elite Euros in the league, and many still had competition from Lemieux, Gretzky, Messier, Lindros, Sakic, Yzerman, Kariya, Hull, Oates, Francis, Leclair, Recchi, Thornton, Iginla, Heatley, etc.

No doubt it was almost impossible to win scoring titles during Gretzky's reign, but then having to beat out Lemieux or Jagr was no easy task either.

I don't have any difficulty believing that most of the stars of the past two decades could have put up the numbers suggested by the adjusted stats during the mid-80s. If anything, skill players were probably affected disproportionately by the dead puck era... the grunts likely suffered a less drastic decline in "garbage" goals than did those who were snipers or scored often on breakaways and odd man rushes.