Auston Matthews has more goals and a higher gpg than Ovechkin age for age. And the gap is about to grow. Can he also make a run at 894?

[MadLuke]

Don't follow the complaint. League-wide scoring dipped, so each point becomes harder to obtain.

I am talking why the league-wide scoring change and the adjusted points values do not follow each other.

League scoring went down 3.8%, adjusted points value went up 8.8% (could be mixing the down do, up by, type of talk), I am not sure you get what I am trying to say because I am terrible at writting english.

HR reference do not use simple league average scoring to adjust:

Adjusted Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Explaination of hockey stats adjusted for the era the games were played in.

www.hockey-reference.com

For Howe in 1952-53 this is 49 * 1.17 * 0.86 * 1.32 = 65 adjusted goals.

1.17 is simple schedule length, 1.32 is simple league scoring average, there is a third adjustment for the roster size change over time that people often have the most problem with, for assist you had a new one average assists per goals.

 

[daver]

This is what you need to train your brain away from. 100 guys had 60 or more points in 1981-82 in a 21 team nhl. 38 guys had 60 or more points in 1998-99 in a 27 team nhl.

That doesn't matter when you are comparing relative dominance over their respective peers.

Yes, the # of teams can matter when making a comparison but not as much as you think when discussing all-star talent.

What you seem to not be grasping is things like PP time and overall league trends can create differences between league GPG and the point totals of the leading scorers.

It is faulty to the point almost uselessness and most on the HOH know this.

 

[WarriorofTime]

And?

Not sure your question.

 

[daver]

Not sure your question.

Edited post, see above.

 

[WarriorofTime]

It is faulty to the point almost uselessness and most on the HOH know this.

Not interested in groupthink related appeals to authority. Open to more statistically based arguments, like if you can show separation versus each incremental 10th percentile and making some determinations there. That some teams have a rotating cast of players thrusted into 1st line/PP1 and fail to produce is a rather relevant thing to give consideration towards for “how hard is it score.”

Besides it’s not like we can’t see how many power plays were handed out. It’s not a magical guesswork.

 

[Vilica]

Do you have the top 50 seasons using the average VsX method?

Of all time seasons? Absolutely. Here's a top 75, there's a few caveats involving some adjustments for some seasons, and the 1917-18 season is incorrect (league average is wrong due to the folding of the Wanderers, I've fixed it in the single season but haven't updated my sorted sheets yet).

	Pts Rank	Name	Year	Team	Games	Goals	Assists	Points	Team GF	LA GF	% LA	G%	P%	VsX	VsX Season		Avg VsX
1	1	Wayne Gretzky	85-86	EDM	80	52	163	215	426	317	1.344	0.122	0.505	141	152.48		154.72
2	1	Wayne Gretzky	84-85	EDM	80	73	135	208	401	311	1.289	0.182	0.519	135	154.07		152.57
3	1	Mario Lemieux	88-89	PIT	76	85	114	199	347	299	1.161	0.245	0.573	139	143.17		151.82
4	1	Wayne Gretzky	81-82	EDM	80	92	120	212	417	321	1.299	0.221	0.508	147	144.22		150.66
5	1	Wayne Gretzky	83-84	EDM	74	87	118	205	446	316	1.411	0.195	0.460	121	169.42		147.99
6	1	Connor McDavid	20-21	EDM	56	33	72	105	183	165	1.109	0.180	0.574	69	152.17		145.17
7	1	Wayne Gretzky	82-83	EDM	80	71	125	196	424	309	1.372	0.167	0.462	124	158.06		144.70
	1	Mario Lemieux	95-96	PIT	70	69	92	161	362	258	1.403	0.191	0.445	120	134.17	UA	142.35
	1	Phil Esposito	70-71	BOS	78	76	76	152	399	244	1.635	0.190	0.381	90	168.89	UA	142.11
8	1	Wayne Gretzky	86-87	EDM	79	62	121	183	372	294	1.265	0.167	0.492	108	169.44		141.99
9	1	Howie Morenz	27-28	MTL	43	33	18	51	116	84	1.381	0.284	0.440	35	145.71		138.50
	1	Connor McDavid	22-23	EDM	82	64	89	153	325	258	1.260	0.197	0.471	113	135.40		135.28
10	1	Wayne Gretzky	90-91	LAK	78	41	122	163	340	276	1.232	0.121	0.479	115	141.74		134.72
11	1	Jaromir Jagr	98-99	PIT	81	44	83	127	242	216	1.120	0.182	0.525	107	118.69		134.12
	1	Phil Esposito	73-74	BOS	78	68	77	145	349	249	1.402	0.195	0.415	91	159.34	UA	132.84
12	1	Mario Lemieux	95-96	PIT	70	69	92	161	362	278	1.302	0.191	0.445	120	134.17	Adj	132.11
	2	Jaromir Jagr	95-96	PIT	82	62	87	149	362	258	1.403	0.171	0.412	120	124.17	UA	131.74
	2	Bobby Orr	70-71	BOS	78	37	102	139	399	244	1.635	0.093	0.348	90	154.44	UA	129.95
13	1	Mario Lemieux	87-88	PIT	77	70	98	168	319	297	1.074	0.219	0.527	131	128.24		129.04
14	1	Gordie Howe	52-53	DET	70	49	46	95	222	168	1.321	0.221	0.428	61	155.74		128.99
15	2	Wayne Gretzky	88-89	LAK	78	54	114	168	376	299	1.258	0.144	0.447	139	120.86		128.17
16	1	Cooney Weiland	29-30	BOS	44	43	30	73	179	130	1.377	0.240	0.408	62	117.74		128.10
17	1	Joe Malone	17-18	MTL	20	44	4	48	115	86	1.337	0.383	0.417	46	104.35		127.32
	1	Phil Esposito	71-72	BOS	76	66	67	133	330	239	1.381	0.200	0.403	109	122.02	UA	126.94
	1	Phil Esposito	68-69	BOS	74	49	77	126	303	227	1.335	0.162	0.416	107	117.76	UA	126.62
18	1	Bobby Orr	69-70	BOS	76	33	87	120	277	221	1.253	0.119	0.433	86	139.53		123.86
19	1	Phil Esposito	70-71	BOS	78	76	76	152	399	281	1.420	0.190	0.381	90	168.89	Adj	123.39
20	2	Jaromir Jagr	95-96	PIT	82	62	87	149	362	278	1.302	0.171	0.412	120	124.17	Adj	122.26
21	1	Jaromir Jagr	00-01	PIT	81	52	69	121	281	226	1.243	0.185	0.431	96	126.04		122.13
22	2	Cy Denneny	17-18	OTT	21	36	10	46	102	86	1.186	0.353	0.451	46	100.00		122.02
23	1	Wayne Gretzky	80-81	EDM	80	55	109	164	328	307	1.068	0.168	0.500	135	121.48		121.86
24	1	Leon Draisaitl	19-20	EDM	71	43	67	110	223	208	1.072	0.193	0.493	97	113.40		120.64
25	1	Mario Lemieux	92-93	PIT	60	69	91	160	367	305	1.203	0.188	0.436	148	108.11		119.67
26	1	Nikita Kucherov	18-19	TBL	82	41	87	128	319	244	1.307	0.129	0.401	116	110.34		119.67
27	2	Joe Sakic	00-01	COL	82	54	64	118	270	226	1.195	0.200	0.437	96	122.92		119.11
28	3	Steve Yzerman	88-89	DET	80	65	90	155	313	299	1.047	0.208	0.495	139	111.51		118.25
29	1	Babe Dye	24-25	TOR	29	38	8	46	90	89	1.011	0.422	0.511	42	109.52		117.90
30	1	Babe Dye	22-23	TOR	22	27	13	40	82	78	1.051	0.329	0.488	33	121.21		116.98
	1	Guy Lafleur	76-77	MTL	80	56	80	136	387	266	1.455	0.145	0.351	105	129.52	UA	116.63
31	1	Mario Lemieux	96-97	PIT	76	50	72	122	285	239	1.192	0.175	0.428	109	111.93		116.44
32	2	Leon Draisaitl	20-21	EDM	56	31	53	84	183	165	1.109	0.169	0.459	69	121.74		116.13
33	1	Sidney Crosby	06-07	PIT	79	36	84	120	267	236	1.131	0.135	0.449	114	105.26		115.99
	1	Phil Esposito	72-73	BOS	78	55	75	130	330	256	1.289	0.167	0.394	104	125.00	UA	115.84
34	1	Nels Stewart	25-26	MTM	36	34	8	42	91	83	1.096	0.374	0.462	36	116.67		115.43
35	1	Joe Thornton	05-06		81	29	96	125	275	248	1.109	0.105	0.455	106	117.92		114.98
36	1	Alex Ovechkin	07-08	WAS	82	65	47	112	238	223	1.067	0.273	0.471	106	105.66		114.57
37	2	Wayne Gretzky	87-88	EDM	64	40	109	149	363	297	1.222	0.110	0.410	131	113.74		114.44
38	4	Bernie Nicholls	88-89	LAK	79	70	80	150	376	299	1.258	0.186	0.399	139	107.91		114.44
39	1	Ace Bailey	28-29	TOR	44	22	10	32	85	64	1.328	0.259	0.376	29	110.34		114.06
40	1	Evgeni Malkin	11-12	PIT	75	50	59	109	273	218	1.252	0.183	0.399	97	112.37		114.06
	1	Guy Lafleur	77-78	MTL	78	60	72	132	359	264	1.360	0.167	0.368	109	121.10	UA	114.06
41	1	Phil Esposito	73-74	BOS	78	68	77	145	349	291	1.199	0.195	0.415	91	159.34	Adj	113.67
42	1	Jean Beliveau	55-56	MTL	70	47	41	88	222	177	1.254	0.212	0.396	71	123.94		113.41
43	1	Bill Cowley	40-41	BOS	46	17	47	64	168	129	1.302	0.101	0.381	44	145.45		113.17
	2	Leon Draisaitl	22-23	EDM	80	52	76	128	325	258	1.260	0.160	0.394	113	113.27		113.17
44	2	Jaromir Jagr	05-06	NYR	82	54	69	123	250	248	1.008	0.216	0.492	106	116.04		113.14
45	2	Teemu Selanne	98-99	ANA	75	47	60	107	215	216	0.995	0.219	0.498	107	100.00		113.00
46	2	Bobby Orr	70-71	BOS	78	37	102	139	399	281	1.420	0.093	0.348	90	154.44	Adj	112.84
47	1	Henrik Sedin	09-10	VAN	82	29	83	112	268	227	1.181	0.108	0.418	109	102.75		112.55
	1	Bobby Orr	74-75	BOS	80	46	89	135	345	274	1.259	0.133	0.391	121	111.57	UA	112.39
	2	Bobby Orr	73-74	BOS	74	32	90	122	349	249	1.402	0.092	0.350	91	134.07	UA	111.77
	2	Bobby Orr	71-72	BOS	76	37	80	117	330	239	1.381	0.112	0.355	109	107.34	UA	111.67
48	1	Jaromir Jagr	94-95	PIT	48	32	38	70	181	143	1.266	0.177	0.387	70	100.00		111.67
49	2	Eric Lindros	94-95	PHL	46	29	41	70	150	143	1.049	0.193	0.467	70	100.00		111.67
50	1	Marcel Dionne	79-80	LAK	80	53	84	137	290	281	1.032	0.183	0.472	119	115.13		111.22
51	2	Wayne Gretzky	79-80	EDM	79	51	86	137	301	281	1.071	0.169	0.455	119	115.13		111.22
52	1	Peter Forsberg	02-03	COL	75	29	77	106	251	218	1.151	0.116	0.422	104	101.92		110.92
53	1	Howie Morenz	30-31	MTL	39	28	23	51	129	105	1.229	0.217	0.395	43	118.60		110.80
54	2	Pat LaFontaine	92-93	BUF	84	53	95	148	335	305	1.098	0.158	0.442	148	100.00		110.69
55	1	Phil Esposito	68-69	BOS	74	49	77	126	303	260	1.165	0.162	0.416	107	117.76	Adj	110.55
56	1	Patrick Kane	15-16	CHI	82	46	60	106	234	219	1.068	0.197	0.453	89	119.10		110.41
57	2	Joe Thornton	06-07	SJS	82	22	92	114	256	236	1.085	0.086	0.445	114	100.00		110.19
58	1	Evgeni Malkin	08-09	PIT	82	35	78	113	258	234	1.103	0.136	0.438	110	102.73		110.16
59	1	Connor McDavid	21-22	EDM	80	44	79	123	285	255	1.118	0.154	0.432	115	106.96		110.03
60	1	Gordie Howe	53-54	DET	70	33	48	81	191	168	1.137	0.173	0.424	61	132.79		109.98
61	1	Wayne Gretzky	89-90	LAK	73	40	102	142	338	295	1.146	0.118	0.420	129	110.08		109.81
62	1	Guy Lafleur	76-77	MTL	80	56	80	136	387	283	1.367	0.145	0.351	105	129.52	Adj	109.62
63	2	Sidney Crosby	09-10	PIT	81	51	58	109	249	227	1.097	0.205	0.438	109	100.00		109.54
64	3	Alex Ovechkin	09-10	WAS	72	50	59	109	313	227	1.379	0.160	0.348	109	100.00		109.54
65	1	Bryan Trottier	78-79	NYI	76	47	87	134	358	280	1.279	0.131	0.374	116	115.52		109.17
66	1	Wayne Gretzky	93-94	LAK	81	38	92	130	294	272	1.081	0.129	0.442	120	108.33		109.03
67	2	Markus Naslund	02-03	VAN	82	48	56	104	264	218	1.211	0.182	0.394	104	100.00		108.83
68	2	Frank Boucher	29-30	NYR	42	26	36	62	136	130	1.046	0.191	0.456	62	100.00		108.79
	3	John Bucyk	70-71	BOS	78	51	65	116	399	244	1.635	0.128	0.291	90	128.89	UA	108.45
69	2	Connor McDavid	18-19	EDM	78	41	75	116	229	244	0.939	0.179	0.507	116	100.00		108.45
70	2	Evgeni Malkin	07-08	PIT	82	47	59	106	240	223	1.076	0.196	0.442	106	100.00		108.43
71	1	Phil Esposito	71-72	BOS	76	66	67	133	330	280	1.179	0.200	0.403	109	122.02	Adj	108.36
72	1	Sidney Crosby	13-14	PIT	80	36	68	104	242	219	1.105	0.149	0.430	87	119.54		108.33
73	2	Brett Hull	90-91	STL	78	86	45	131	310	276	1.123	0.277	0.423	115	113.91		108.27
74	1	Punch Broadbent	21-22	OTT	24	31	14	45	106	95	1.116	0.292	0.425	40	112.50		108.06
75	1	Gordie Howe	56-57	DET	70	44	45	89	198	188	1.053	0.222	0.449	77	115.58		107.99

The adjustments have me changing the league average for a few teams, mostly Boston in the 70s, whereby instead of setting league average as all teams, I just used the O6 teams, so for the 70-71 season where Boston scored 399, league average is set at 281 instead of 244. Even with that season still being 42% above average instead of 63.5%, I feel like the adjustment makes sense in terms of rankings. I also adjusted some Montreal and New York teams in the 70s, as well as the 95-96 Penguins. Basically, the seasons that were more than 30-40% above league average got pulled back.

You can also see how little P% has changed in 100 years. A great season is still between 40-50%, though obviously you have goal/assist balance issues for pre-WW2 players. You have player-seasons from every decade of play, the 1910s, 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, 2010s, 2020s. It may seem like post-expansion seasons dominate pre-expansion ones, but that's just due to sample size. We've added as many forward seasons in the past 7 seasons as we had from 1917 to 1967.

 

[daver]

Not interested in groupthink related appeals to authority.

And using non NHL data like Hockey Reference's "adjusted" data to make claims isn't also an appeal to authority?

That some teams have a rotating cast of players thrusted into 1st line/PP1 and fail to produce is a rather relevant thing to give consideration towards for “how hard is it score.”

What exactly is your issue with the Top 5/10/20 etc,,, peer method? Is there some sort of statistical anomaly that needs context? That one player or the other is hurt using this method in comparison to "adusting"?

You seem to be arguing for one or two 'possible' statistical anomalies. OV's and Matthews' peers are the other elite goalscorers in the league. If a player fails to produce on the PP, then they are not "elite" and most likely not reaching the Top XX in the league.

My issue with "adjusting" is that it introduces an unnecessary hypothetical element . It assumes that Player X would do better or do worse if they played in another season. Comparing relative domimance over respective peers does not introduce an unnecessary hypothetical element.

 

[Midnight Judges]

And using non NHL data like Hockey Reference's "adjusted" data to make claims isn't also an appeal to authority?

Absolutely not.

It is a simple mathematical equation that has complete transparency and is built on statistics that are readily available to all of us. It is easily independently verifiable for all of us.

There is no faith or trust required, nor is the data so complex or obscure that there is a need to take someone's word for it.

 

[Midnight Judges]

My issue with "adjusting" is that it introduces an unnecessary hypothetical element . It assumes that Player X would do better or do worse if they played in another season. Comparing relative domimance over respective peers does not introduce an unnecessary hypothetical element.

Indeed, it merely substitutes massive volatility for reliable large sample size data.

Except that volatility serves your agenda, and so you prefer it.

 

[Crosby2010]

Right now at this point it seems less likely everyday that Ovechkin can do it, and he's actually 64 goals away from breaking it. But I just can't see him carrying on if he is a 20 goal guy - or less - this year. That isn't the Ovie we know. But either way he is in the running.

As for Matthews I will say he doesn't do it. He has too many 40 goal seasons to start his career. Nothing wrong with that, but other than 60 in 2022 and probably a similar number this year he doesn't have the gaudy and eye popping goal totals to compete with Gretzky.

Right now you have to look at it this way and compare each of them to their first few years in the NHL:

Gretzky first 8 years:
543 goals
Matthews first 7.5 years:
339 goals

Sorry, that is just too lofty of a gap to make up for. Even Ovechkin wasn't starting to get close until he kept racking up 50 goal seasons later in his career at a time when star players aren't doing them anymore. In other words, Matthews has a lot of ground to make up. Those 70, 80, 90 goal seasons are not comparable to Matthews' 40+ years. I know Gretzky slowed down with the goals after 1989 or so, but he was just so dominant before hand. Matthews just hasn't been in that universe, who is? I just don't see him doing it, or even getting 800. Ovie just like Gretzky was blessed with good health and a lack of injuries. Matthews has been dogged with a few nagging but not major injuries. For example 62 and 68 games played in a season early in his career. Never played more than 74 games, maybe he will this year. But he is already well off the pace of Gretzky.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Off topic, but there are a number of fans on the main boards who argue that Matthews (through age 26) has been a better goal-scorer than Ovechkin, because #8 got so much more powerplay time. There might be some truth there (Ovechkin did get a lot of ice time with the man advantage) - but it ignores the reality that leaguewide scoring was a fair bit higher during Matthews' career (both at ES and on the PP). Plus, Matthews obviously has a stronger supporting cast.

Barring a catastrophic career-ending injury, Matthews has a good chance of reaching 600 goals, and even 700 goals isn't out of the question. But the most popular comparison ("through age 26") is as favourable as it will get for Matthews. It's highly improbable that he'll win seven of the next eight goal-scoring titles (which is what Ovechkin did from ages 27 to 34).

Keeping pace with Ovechkin through age 26 isn't enough. What makes #8 (arguably) the greatest goal-scorer ever is his extraordinary longevity. He's fallen off a cliff this year[*], but he averaged 43 goals per year from ages 30 to 37 (two of which were COVID-shortened seasons). That's absurd. In order for Matthews to surpass Ovechkin, he'll need freakish longevity himself. And although we can't say it's impossible, I wouldn't bet on it today.

[*] Not literally. Apparently we need to add legal disclaimers when talking about Ovechkin now.

 

[MadLuke]

There is a bit of kept up with Howe or Bourque in points until age 26 that people would never think to do without a huge caveat that can happen with Ovechkin and goal scoring longevity.

stuff like this after turning 26 when it come to goal scoring...

win seven of the next eight goal-scoring titles

Is quite insane, at least historically, maybe we are in a new world that we just not know about yet.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I sort of agree with @Midnight Judges point that it can be useful to consider the context of surrounding seasons.

It can tell you a lot in a steady environment. The league was fairly stable from 1997 to 2004. The only players to score 120+ points were Jagr (twice, and both times over 120), and an aging Lemieux. It's obvious that the top scorer of the era was Jagr, and (when healthy/motivated) Lemieux. So, in this example, the results line up with what we'd expect.

The problem is, scoring levels can change suddenly. Sometimes that's due to an obvious external cause (ie during WWII, around half the league joined the Armed Forces, and scoring skyrocketed when those who stayed behind beat up on much weaker opponents). Or 2006 (when the league mandated that anything and everything results in a powerplay). Sometimes the cause is mysterious (scoring rose more than 20% in the six years since Howe's landmark 1953 season, and there don't appear to be any obvious explanations).

The point is - sometimes it can be useful to consider data from surrounding seasons. Other times, it's completely useless (Sakic scored 87 points in both 2004 and 2006 - one year he was T-2nd in scoring, and in the other year, he was T-17th). This type of information can be useful when discussing a player ("Jagr had the highest scoring in the span of 20+ years"), but because leaguewide scoring rises and falls quickly, I don't see how it can be incorporated into any of the adjusted scoring stats that exist. We'd have to make so many judgment calls about what counts as a comparable season that the "rules" would be horrendously complicated.

And that's fine - not everything needs to be captured in a spreadsheet.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

One final post for now. Quoting an older post where I'm showing the flaws in how hockey-reference.com does its adjustments:

Another example (re 1987 and 1993). Leaguewide GPG was virtually the same both years. In fact, it was a bit higher in 1987! But the actual top ten looks like:

Obviously, some type of adjustment is needed. HR.com's solution is:

Granted, that's less misleading than comparing the unadjusted stats straight-up. But it's still pretty misleading. HR.com is telling us that Jari Kurri (a HOFer, in his prime at age 26, playing with peak Gretzky), wouldn't have placed in the top ten just six years later. Or that Mark Recchi (10th place in scoring in 1993) was clearly better than anyone aside from peak Gretzky in 1987. Yes there were a few more European players by 1993 (5 of the top thirty vs 4 of the top thirty), but the league simply didn't change that much in six years.

The reason again is due to powerplays. There was far more PP time in 1993. 43 PP points would have put you in 2nd place (to peak Gretzky) in 1987. That would tie you for 25th in 1993. Even though the leaguewide GPG is the same, there was vastly more PP scoring in 1993. That (generally) gets concentrated among the best players. And HR.com's adjusted stats produce a distorted result, because it doesn't capture any of that.

 

[Boxscore]

Even as a Leafs fan, I don't think it's feasible for Matthews to make a run at Ovie and Gretz. Based on his career so far, Matthews doesn't seem nearly as durable or "machine like" as Ovechkin. If all goes well for him, he might be able to touch Yzerman in the 690+ range. I don't see him reaching Espo though due to time lost.

 

[The Panther]

As for Matthews I will say he doesn't do it. He has too many 40 goal seasons to start his career.

This is really it, I think. And it applies to a lot of players. The reason Gretzky rests at #1 in goals (despite not being primarily is a goal scorer) is that he was so good, so young, and put up huge totals when he was very young. Gretzky scored only about 180 goals or something after turning 30.

It's just better to score in huge numbers while young than while older, because while older it's way more likely that other factors are going to interfere (aging, rule changes, team changes, injuries, fatigue, etc.). If you don't get that head-start on the pack, you're extremely unlikely to ever catch the leader... unless you have the most freakish longevity ever (like Howe, Ovechkin), and even then you're not going to do it unless you have basically no injuries (like Howe after age 20 and Ovechkin).

So, basically, Matthews' only chance is if he has the same "extended-prime" longevity as Ovechkin, of which about 1 out of 1000 players has.

 

[Crosby2010]

This is really it, I think. And it applies to a lot of players. The reason Gretzky rests at #1 in goals (despite not being primarily is a goal scorer) is that he was so good, so young, and put up huge totals when he was very young. Gretzky scored only about 180 goals or something after turning 30.

It's just better to score in huge numbers while young than while older, because while older it's way more likely that other factors are going to interfere (aging, rule changes, team changes, injuries, fatigue, etc.). If you don't get that head-start on the pack, you're extremely unlikely to ever catch the leader... unless you have the most freakish longevity ever (like Howe, Ovechkin), and even then you're not going to do it unless you have basically no injuries (like Howe after age 20 and Ovechkin).

So, basically, Matthews' only chance is if he has the same "extended-prime" longevity as Ovechkin, of which about 1 out of 1000 players has.

Like someone said above, Matthews doesn't seem as durable. Also, there is the work ethic factor. Early in Ovie's career I would say he worked extremely hard and it showed. The Ovie we know now as a guy who floats around the last few years (but until now still scored pretty well) isn't the same guy as in 2008 or 2009 or 2010. He was driven then. I think the same applies for Gretzky, he was a tireless worker off of the ice when it came to his game. John Muckler once said that it was unique seeing the best player in the world at the time always trying to get better. Imagine scoring 200 points and significantly more than anyone else but trying to do better!

Good call on Gretzky. He scored 176 goals from 1991-'99, his final 8 seasons. There were some injuries, the back issues flaring up from the Suter hit and just a general slow down and reliance on more playmaking that caused this. Outside of Ovechkin in NHL history there are not players that rack up 50 goal seasons in their 30s. Even Esposito last did it at 32. So is Matthews going to be that guy? No, I don't think so, but either way he is already well off of Gretzky's pace.

 

[Breakers]

They had a pretty big panel of former players talking on TSN about observations of todays game and they said the drop off in todays older players from Father Time is so drastic it seems like

It used to be more gradual like in the decline:
Good->good->good->pretty good-> solid-> decent

Now??? It’s like:
Good-> Good-> Good-> this guy should be on waivers because he can't skate

It is guy’s just show up from an offseason and are absolutely cooked

Interesting to see how Matthews ages and stays healthy.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Re: the last post. Player value is now viewed through a salary cap lens. In 1998, Wade Redden doesn't spend years in the minors. It's circumstance. So guys may have hung on longer, but performed at a similar level...but that's all evaluation stuff.

Also, and this unique to the thread at large...Ovechkin game us like, what, seven 50 or 50ish goal seasons in what should have been the downside of his career...? Let me get half that from AM34 before this is a legit conversation for me. You can get within an arm's reach in your prime, sure...but can you out last that human howitzer...? Probably not

 

[larek]

You never know especially since the league is pretty well a no hit league now and very little. Contact
Mathews in the tough days would have probably gone home crying

 

[daver]

I sort of agree with @Midnight Judges point that it can be useful to consider the context of surrounding seasons.

It can tell you a lot in a steady environment. The league was fairly stable from 1997 to 2004. The only players to score 120+ points were Jagr (twice, and both times over 120), and an aging Lemieux. It's obvious that the top scorer of the era was Jagr, and (when healthy/motivated) Lemieux. So, in this example, the results line up with what we'd expect.

The problem is, scoring levels can change suddenly. Sometimes that's due to an obvious external cause (ie during WWII, around half the league joined the Armed Forces, and scoring skyrocketed when those who stayed behind beat up on much weaker opponents). Or 2006 (when the league mandated that anything and everything results in a powerplay). Sometimes the cause is mysterious (scoring rose more than 20% in the six years since Howe's landmark 1953 season, and there don't appear to be any obvious explanations).

The point is - sometimes it can be useful to consider data from surrounding seasons. Other times, it's completely useless (Sakic scored 87 points in both 2004 and 2006 - one year he was T-2nd in scoring, and in the other year, he was T-17th). This type of information can be useful when discussing a player ("Jagr had the highest scoring in the span of 20+ years"), but because leaguewide scoring rises and falls quickly, I don't see how it can be incorporated into any of the adjusted scoring stats that exist. We'd have to make so many judgment calls about what counts as a comparable season that the "rules" would be horrendously complicated.

And that's fine - not everything needs to be captured in a spreadsheet.

If we dial everything back, or least reference the OP, it should be clear that if you want to try to compare seasons from different years, raw numbers alone aren't reasonable. The issue is that some people think that adjusting is the accepted method then usually because it fits their own bias or narrative they dismiss the obvious shortcomings like the '87 and '93 example you provided.

'97 to '04 is a good example as there was a fairly good swing in that time period where the majority of the elite scorers saw their PPGs go up in a season then down in a season based on the PPs called. But this is not captured in the league GPG.

So using data from the Top 5/10/20 etc. is clearly the best way. With context for league size, which is less accepted it seems.

 

[VanIslander]

Keep up the pace Matthews and you will pass Gretzky in goals in 2036!

(OV never will.)

 

[Matsun]

Here is Ovechkins scoring finishes after age 26.
1
1
1
1
13
1
1
1
13
4
9

I don't think Matthews will match this but with the way things are looking now I think he has a shot at matching the goal totals. I think league scoring will dry up again though because people are starting to miss the big hits already, but the question is how many more high scoring seasons we get?

 

[bobholly39]

Off topic, but there are a number of fans on the main boards who argue that Matthews (through age 26) has been a better goal-scorer than Ovechkin, because #8 got so much more powerplay time. There might be some truth there (Ovechkin did get a lot of ice time with the man advantage) - but it ignores the reality that leaguewide scoring was a fair bit higher during Matthews' career (both at ES and on the PP). Plus, Matthews obviously has a stronger supporting cast.

Barring a catastrophic career-ending injury, Matthews has a good chance of reaching 600 goals, and even 700 goals isn't out of the question. But the most popular comparison ("through age 26") is as favourable as it will get for Matthews. It's highly improbable that he'll win seven of the next eight goal-scoring titles (which is what Ovechkin did from ages 27 to 34).

Keeping pace with Ovechkin through age 26 isn't enough. What makes #8 (arguably) the greatest goal-scorer ever is his extraordinary longevity. He's fallen off a cliff this year[*], but he averaged 43 goals per year from ages 30 to 37 (two of which were COVID-shortened seasons). That's absurd. In order for Matthews to surpass Ovechkin, he'll need freakish longevity himself. And although we can't say it's impossible, I wouldn't bet on it today.

[*] Not literally. Apparently we need to add legal disclaimers when talking about Ovechkin now.

The bolded seems a very extreme under-exaggeration. "good chance of 600"?

If Matthews scores 8 more goals this season, and averages 23 goals a year till age 37, he's at 600+ career goals.

A 23 goal average in that age range would be the equivalent of what Adam Oates or Ron Francis scored at those ages. You really think there's only a "good chance" Auston Matthews can match Adam Oates's or Ron Francis's raw goal-scoring in a higher scoring era vs Oates/Francis in the DPE?

 

[RomanianLeafs]

he is the best scorer in the league since he entered the league, haters can hate as much as they want, he is a leafs player and i am happy about that