1995/96 Mario vs. 1996/97 Mario

[daver]

In 95/96, a 30 year old Mario returns after missing a full season and seemingly returns to his video game numbers level of play. His PPG of 2.30 is similarly as far ahead of the pack as it was in 88/89 and 92/93. It is worth noting that he was purposely skipping back-to-back games that season so there is some context needed on his PPG. It is also worth noting that his PP scoring played a larger role in his dominance than it did in 88/89 and a much larger role than in 92/93. Jagr clearly outproduced him at ES.

In the playoffs, the Pens rolled over the Caps and Rangers but then were shutdown by the Panthers. Mario had 10 goals and 20 points thru 11 games then 1 goal and 7 points in 7 games against the Panthers.

In 96/97, his PPG drops to 1.61 as he plays a full season until missing a few games late in the season. His PPG dominance takes a significant drop over the pack which is almost exclusively related to a drop in his PP scoring. While PP opportunities took a big drop in 96/97 from 95/96 league-wide, Mario's numbers took a much bigger drop (79 to 37). He was still among the leaders in ES scoring but still behind Jagr who missed some games.

96/97 was the real first year of the DPE after seeing signs of it starting in 90/91.

Which season do you think was more representative of Mario at age 30/31?

The "close to video game numbers" Mario in 95/96 or the best offensive player with Jagr/Lindros within spitting distance?

Click to read more...

 

[Troubadour]

Probably the latter one. In 95/96, he was sitting out back-to-back games, still had Zubov on the PP, Jagr for every game he played, and the Lemieux, Jagr, Francis PP punch wasn't close to figured out (Lemieux dominated the PP production; ES, not so much).

96/97, PP opportunities go down, Jagr is sitting out nearly 20 games, and no-one in the league is posting record numbers anymore.

95/96 Lemieux numbers still looked miraculous, but Lemieux was not capable of miracles anymore, which became clear in the playoffs, and the following year, so the following year put everyone back to earth I guess.

 

[MadLuke]

In a strange or maybe not because it is reality and relatively healthy sample size both.

95-96 is what happen if older Mario team has over 400 power play on a team with good players, 96-97 if they have less than 340. I think, not necessarily luck or bad luck one way or the other.

The question become which season is the most representative of nhl history and team situation in a sense.

In the last 40 seasons, Penguins averaged 349 ppo by 82 games, so 1997 would be closer of what older Mario would do in a normal year, but older Mario can probably pull-off what he did in 95-96 in the other high pp season a la 92-93, 87-88, 2006, 2007, etc...

 

[overpass]

In 96-97, the Pens ran a stacked first line with Lemieux-Francis-Jagr for almost half the season. Scoring logs suggest it was from November 22, 1996 to February 8, 1997.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

During this time, Lemieux scored 30 goals and 63 points (49 ES, 13 PP) in 32 games, almost one goal and two points per game. When you separate out the remaining RS games in 1996-97, you can see his even strength scoring rate (both goals and points) more than doubled while playing LW on a stacked first line, as compared to centering his own line.

1996-97, playing with Francis and Jagr (32 GP): 0.69 ESG/GP, 1.53 ESP/GP
1996-97, centering his own line (44 GP): 0.22 ESG/GP, 0.68 ESP/GP

Going back to the question in the OP, I think Mario was a bit fortunate to play on the most stacked PP in the league in the 95-96 season, and with the best linemates in the league for half the 96-97 season. I do think his 95-96 season was clearly better than his 96-97 season. I know there's a revisionist take that rates 96-97 higher because he had better ES scoring and plus-minus, but I don't think they have sufficiently considered the benefit he got from playing 40% of the season as LW on an unbelievably stacked line.

So I would simply say that he was a better player in 95-96 than 96-97, without trying to say which season was more representative of the two.

 

[MadLuke]

During this time,

They also were a .765 team during that time outscoring everyone by 18% :

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Would have roll with it to the end

+/- and evp of Lemieux-Jagr seem quite different than Francis, I imagine they still mixed it up a bit, Lemieux-Jagr being in part a duo with someone else from time to time ?

 

[authentic]

In 96-97, the Pens ran a stacked first line with Lemieux-Francis-Jagr for almost half the season. Scoring logs suggest it was from November 22, 1996 to February 8, 1997.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

During this time, Lemieux scored 30 goals and 63 points (49 ES, 13 PP) in 32 games, almost one goal and two points per game. When you separate out the remaining RS games in 1996-97, you can see his even strength scoring rate (both goals and points) more than doubled while playing LW on a stacked first line, as compared to centering his own line.

1996-97, playing with Francis and Jagr (32 GP): 0.69 ESG/GP, 1.53 ESP/GP
1996-97, centering his own line (44 GP): 0.22 ESG/GP, 0.68 ESP/GP

Going back to the question in the OP, I think Mario was a bit fortunate to play on the most stacked PP in the league in the 95-96 season, and with the best linemates in the league for half the 96-97 season. I do think his 95-96 season was clearly better than his 96-97 season. I know there's a revisionist take that rates 96-97 higher because he had better ES scoring and plus-minus, but I don't think they have sufficiently considered the benefit he got from playing 40% of the season as LW on an unbelievably stacked line.

So I would simply say that he was a better player in 95-96 than 96-97, without trying to say which season was more representative of the two.

Funny enough though he had 63 points in his first 34 games in 2002-03 as a 37 year old, although much more on the powerplay again, but Jagr and Francis weren’t on the team any longer. Seems he could almost always find a way to score in bunches greater than anyone besides Gretzky for shorter stretches, right up until he could hardly skate anymore.

 

[authentic]

Also I wonder if a lot of the difference in ES scoring throughout their careers between Gretzky and Lemieux came down to Gretzky just being on a far better team (and Lemieux’s health of course).

 

[Dallas Winston]

Also I wonder if a lot of the difference in ES scoring throughout their careers between Gretzky and Lemieux came down to Gretzky just being on a far better team (and Lemieux’s health of course).

The minute the penguins gained one of the oilers many potent ingredients (Coffey) lemieuxs numbers sky rocketed to 199 points. That was the last time he was ever truly healthy. No question to me if you place mario on those early to mid 80s oilers the numbers would be unfathomable

 

[daver]

In 96-97, the Pens ran a stacked first line with Lemieux-Francis-Jagr for almost half the season. Scoring logs suggest it was from November 22, 1996 to February 8, 1997.

In 95/96, he notably played without Jagr most of the time at ES and had a similar ES PPG for the season.

 

[Staniowski]

Lemieux was definitely better in '95-'96. With Lemieux in those years, it comes down solely to health, and he was healthier in '96 than in '97.

He felt pretty good through most of the '96 season, but his back became a bigger issue again in '97.

His health is relative though. Neither of these seasons were anywhere close to Lemieux at his best.

 

[daver]

In 96-97, the Pens ran a stacked first line with Lemieux-Francis-Jagr for almost half the season. Scoring logs suggest it was from November 22, 1996 to February 8, 1997.

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

During this time, Lemieux scored 30 goals and 63 points (49 ES, 13 PP) in 32 games, almost one goal and two points per game. When you separate out the remaining RS games in 1996-97, you can see his even strength scoring rate (both goals and points) more than doubled while playing LW on a stacked first line, as compared to centering his own line.

1996-97, playing with Francis and Jagr (32 GP): 0.69 ESG/GP, 1.53 ESP/GP
1996-97, centering his own line (44 GP): 0.22 ESG/GP, 0.68 ESP/GP

Going back to the question in the OP, I think Mario was a bit fortunate to play on the most stacked PP in the league in the 95-96 season, and with the best linemates in the league for half the 96-97 season. I do think his 95-96 season was clearly better than his 96-97 season. I know there's a revisionist take that rates 96-97 higher because he had better ES scoring and plus-minus, but I don't think they have sufficiently considered the benefit he got from playing 40% of the season as LW on an unbelievably stacked line.

So I would simply say that he was a better player in 95-96 than 96-97, without trying to say which season was more representative of the two.

Jagr's numbers also were significantly different at ES without Mario before they were put together:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Not sure you can conclude that the benefit of playing together wasn't mutual vs. Mario relying on Jagr to produce at ES. It was really the regression on the PP that brought his numbers down.

 

[overpass]

Jagr's numbers also were significantly different at ES without Mario before they were put together:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Not sure you can conclude that the benefit of playing together wasn't mutual vs. Mario relying on Jagr to produce at ES. It was really the regression on the PP that brought his numbers down.

The discussion is about Mario. I drew no conclusions about Jagr at all.

 

[daver]

The discussion is about Mario. I drew no conclusions about Jagr at all.

The conclusion would be that both players either:

(1) benefited from playing together equally, as their numbers suggest i.e. their ES numbers would have both regressed from 95/96 if they didn't play together

(2) both would have produced the same over the course of the season as they did in 95/96 if they didn't play together. I would be more inclined to believe the latter

The idea that Mario was more injured in 96/97 seems not as likely given the ES numbers he put up during that stretch particularly his ES goalscoring. It was the regression in PP scoring, partially due to less PPs being called, that caused the drop in PPG dominance. He got points on 72% of the Pens PP goals (104 total) in 95/96, and got points on 50% of the Pens PP goals (74 total) in 96/97.

 

[Crosby2010]

He was better in 1996 for sure. There was some flirting with 200 points the first half of the season. He was truly remarkable that season. I think taking the previous season off helped and made him healthier and fresher. I honestly think that was probably the difference from 1996 to 1997. He went from 2.30 PPG to 1.61. Yes scoring dropped a bit from one season to another, and the trap truly started to take form and 1996 was probably the last season at that time of firewagon hockey being played by the most successful teams. But you just can't explain away that sort of drop in production without a reason. And I can remember Mario's back flaring up in 1997 too. I know it always did, but it seemed to affect him that year. He played 76 games in 1997, up from 70 in 1996. That was close to the last time he did this in back to back years and that was 77 in 1988 and 76 in 1989. Mario just didn't play a full season like this. 77 was his career high, and he nearly hit that in 1997. He was still the best player in the NHL in 1997 but the gap was narrowing and the Jagr/Lindros/Forsberg/Kariya group was getting closer. I would have loved to have seen what happened in 1998. The Pens would have been a really good team with Mario. They were still pretty good without him. But I think we forget just how banged up he was in 1997. He retired and people didn't expect him to come back, this was a legitimate retirement.

Mario had 8 shorthanded goals in 1996. Brian Rolston had 9 in 2002 and he's the only one whose had that many in a season since. 1996 he was just so far ahead of the pack. He really looked like vintage Mario. He didn't have the 1-on-1 dekes like he did in the late 1980s/early 1990s, but he was so smart on the ice and such a great shooter that he still scored goals at a torrid pace even if it was in a different manner.

 

[daver]

He was better in 1996 for sure. There was some flirting with 200 points the first half of the season. He was truly remarkable that season. I think taking the previous season off helped and made him healthier and fresher. I honestly think that was probably the difference from 1996 to 1997. He went from 2.30 PPG to 1.61. Yes scoring dropped a bit from one season to another, and the trap truly started to take form and 1996 was probably the last season at that time of firewagon hockey being played by the most successful teams. But you just can't explain away that sort of drop in production without a reason. And I can remember Mario's back flaring up in 1997 too. I know it always did, but it seemed to affect him that year. He played 76 games in 1997, up from 70 in 1996. That was close to the last time he did this in back to back years and that was 77 in 1988 and 76 in 1989. Mario just didn't play a full season like this. 77 was his career high, and he nearly hit that in 1997. He was still the best player in the NHL in 1997 but the gap was narrowing and the Jagr/Lindros/Forsberg/Kariya group was getting closer. I would have loved to have seen what happened in 1998. The Pens would have been a really good team with Mario. They were still pretty good without him. But I think we forget just how banged up he was in 1997. He retired and people didn't expect him to come back, this was a legitimate retirement.

Mario had 8 shorthanded goals in 1996. Brian Rolston had 9 in 2002 and he's the only one whose had that many in a season since. 1996 he was just so far ahead of the pack. He really looked like vintage Mario. He didn't have the 1-on-1 dekes like he did in the late 1980s/early 1990s, but he was so smart on the ice and such a great shooter that he still scored goals at a torrid pace even if it was in a different manner.

The drop in PPG was almost exclusively related to a drop in PP scoring. His PP points/game went from 1.13 to 0.49. And only part of that can be blamed on an overall drop in PP opportunities overall, which would have affected the other elite forwards too. His ES scoring per game was about the same.

I guess you can point to injuries/mentally checking out but it seems strange that it didn't seem to necessarily affect his ES production. And it wasn't clear that Jagr was carrying him at ES that year; it seemed to be equally beneficial. One would think injuries would affect ES scoring moreso than PP scoring.

So what happened to his PP scoring that year?

Or perhaps the question is what happened to PP scoring in 95/96? Was that a statistical anomaly as much as 96/97 was that also needs explanation?

 

[overpass]

I guess you can point to injuries/mentally checking out but it seems strange that it didn't seem to necessarily affect his ES production. And it wasn't clear that Jagr was carrying him at ES that year; it seemed to be equally beneficial. One would think injuries would affect ES scoring moreso than PP scoring.

If playing as a line for part of 96-97 was equally beneficial to Lemieux and Jagr, it was at least beneficial for Lemieux. Which is relevant because you're comparing 96-97 Lemieux (with Jagr for part of the season at ES) to 95-96 Lemieux (without Jagr at ES). Not comparing Lemieux to Jagr.

It's just basic hockey that if you stack your top two forwards on the same line rather than having them each lead their own line, they'll score more together, with a better plus-minus, and the second line will be worse. Which is what actually happened with Pittsburgh in the 96-97 season. Right through to the playoffs, when Lemieux and Jagr matched Lindros and Leclair in scoring, but the Pens got next to nothing from their bottom three lines and lost in five.

 

[daver]

If playing as a line for part of 96-97 was equally beneficial to Lemieux and Jagr, it was at least beneficial for Lemieux. Which is relevant because you're comparing 96-97 Lemieux (with Jagr for part of the season at ES) to 95-96 Lemieux (without Jagr at ES). Not comparing Lemieux to Jagr.

They seemed to have put them together in late November as the Pens were struggling as a team (2nd to last in Point %) and Mario (1.37 PPG) and Jagr (1.15 PPG) were both underperforming. Their GF had dropped to 2.91 from 4.40 the year before.

What do you think happens if they weren't put together? Surely both of them would have gotten closer to expected numbers as the season went on. I think it's bit too much to believe that a regression in ES scoring, which didn't actually happen, is less the reason rather than a huge drop in PP scoring which I am not sure is explained away by injuries.

 

[overpass]

They seemed to have put them together in late November as the Pens were struggling as a team (2nd to last in Point %) and Mario (1.37 PPG) and Jagr (1.15 PPG) were both underperforming. Their GF had dropped to 2.91 from 4.40 the year before.

This article from December 27 says the trio had been together for 16 games, meaning their first game together was November 22. Which is what the scoring logs say.

This is an article from the first game they were put together, on November 22.

In truth, however, they could have begun to breathe easier when they saw how the Jaromir Jagr-Francis-Lemieux line that Johnston assembled was playing.

It's no coincidence that Lemieux produced one of his best games of the season after getting a couple of world-class linemates.

Lemieux finished with a game-high nine shots and, despite being held to one assist, was a major force in the attacking zone.

"He could have had five or six goals," Jagr said. "Easily."

"Yags gave me a couple of layups that didn't go in, once again," Lemieux said. "But as long as I get the chances, they'll start going in."

Francis does much of the defensive work for that line, freeing Lemieux and Jagr to concentrate on offense. What's more, Francis and Jagr are able to keep Lemieux moving, something he hasn't done much this season.

"He was standing still a lot more," Francis said. "He wasn't keeping his legs moving. When he has his speed, he's a lot more dangerous than when he's standing still."

It seems everyone agreed that playing with Jagr and Francis helped him in this game, even if he only finished with one assist.

What do you think happens if they weren't put together? Surely both of them would have gotten closer to expected numbers as the season went on. I think it's bit too much to believe that a regression in ES scoring, which didn't actually happen, is less the reason rather than a huge drop in PP scoring which I am not sure is explained away by injuries.

Maybe 15 fewer points for Mario and 10 fewer for Jagr, if Francis stayed on Jagr's line as he did in 95-96?

I think it's very relevant that Mario retired after the 96-97 season and not after the 95-96 season. Clearly he thought there was something wrong. He said when he retired that he couldn't beat players one-on-one like he had in the past, and he didn't have the stamina that he did when he was younger. Based on Francis's comment above, he probably didn't have the legs to drive a line as a centre by himself anymore.

I think decline often shows against top opponents more than anything, and Mario was much worse against the best in 96-97. In 95-96, he had 25 goals and 47 points in 21 games against teams with 0.550+ records (DET, COL, PHI, NYR, CHI, FLA, BOS). In 1996-97, he had only 5 goals and 17 points in 16 games against teams with 0.550+ records (COL, NJD, DAL, PHI, DET, BUF). Less than half the rate that he scored against them in 95-96.

He was just on the decline and worse in every way in 96-97. Playing wing on a stacked line for almost half the season helped mask his statistical decline at even strength.

 

[MadLuke]

Look at the ES scoring with Jagr-Francis make you think.... what happen if they would have been a line pretty much all season long in 1996 with that year powerplay....

Does Jagr score 70 goals-160pts !?