Bernie Nicholls: A Great-ish Player in His Own Right?

[romado33]

What do you think?

 

[MadLuke]

Kindish

 

[Bluesguru]

475 goals is a lot of goals. Really tore it up when Gretzky joined Kings. A few more years at that pace with Gretz and his status would be elevated for sure.

 

[MS]

He had a really interesting career in the gets labelled as this 'fluke product of Gretzky' when he was actually one of the most consistent offensive performers in the NHL from 1983-1996. Averaged 95 points/80 GP in the 5 years before Gretzky joined LA.

It's weird how we accept Kurri as a great player when he was obviously *massively* influenced by Gretzky for a lot of years but kind of dump on Nicholls for doing even better (with an older worse Gretzky) for 1.5 years. And Nicholls wasn't even playing with Gretzky much at ES.

 

[crobro]

Bernie’s mid season call up rookie year was amazing

Always wondered if her could of continued in Edmonton

 

[Big Phil]

Definitely a good player in his own right. Near great. Falls short of the HHOF. A couple of things hurt him. He scored points but most of us can't really remember how. Reminds me a bit of Claude Giroux in that regard. Does anyone really know why Giroux scored so much? I can't. Same with Nicholls. What were his weapons that gave him so much scoring? For guy who scored 70 goals and 150 points in a season it is weird that we don't have that image of him scoring a lot of goals or how he did it. Think of a guy like Adam Oates. Not a big goal scorer, but we all know the fantastic passer he was and why he racked up points. Bure scored goals because of his blinding speed. Nearly every single other player who scored as many points as Nicholls did we have a vision of what they looked like. But why did Nicholls score? He wasn't fast, he wasn't a pushover and could be tenacious but he wasn't overpowering physically. I can't remember his shot being unusual. He wasn't massively big.

So I think that hurts him a bit. I did a mock Canada Cup 1989 thread and to be honest I could not find room for him on that team. How is that possible? Well, it was. I could put him as a 13th forward, but there are lots of centres I have ahead of him.

Also, he never won a Stanley Cup, never played in the Cup final, and while his playoff numbers are actually pretty decent, how many of us remember any goals he scored?

 

[Buffalowing1988]

His output for the Blackhawks in the early DPE as he was hitting his mid-30s is pretty impressive. I think he's an absolute Hall-of-Very-Good member and more easily forgotten than he should be. He seemed to be crafty enough to put up points no matter where he was.

Also, as a kid, I always thought he looked just like Nicolas Cage. I don't see it as much nowadays but I was adamant on that. Weird kid, clearly.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Also, as a kid, I always thought he looked just like Nicolas Cage. I don't see it as much nowadays but I was adamant on that. Weird kid, clearly.

as a kid, i thought he looked like amadeus

actually, it totally holds up

 

[The Panther]

He was awesome! One of my favorite players ever, in fact.

I think Nicholls was supremely offensively talented---just as talented as guys like Messier and Yzerman---but two things kept him just off the "superstar" level:
1) His skating was slow and choppy.
2) From 1982 to 1988, he was Mr. Party-Boy, looking for a blonde to take home after practice.

Not much he could do about point 1, but it's a credit to how talented he was that he could rack up three or four 100+ point seasons (incl. a 150-point season!) while moving like molasses.

About point 2, it was perhaps lucky-for-his-career/life but unlucky for his Hall of Fame prognosis to get drafted and started by L.A. in the 1980s. I can only imagine what it was like for small-village Ontario boys to suddenly get brought up to Los Angeles in 1982 (!), this being post-sexual revolution but pre-AIDS California. And since Nicholls scored 32 points in his first 22 games after being brought up, he didn't have to struggle to make the club...

By the way, has anybody ever had an odder first couple months in the NHL as a goal-scorer? In his first 21 games, he had failed to score a goal in 16 of the 21. Yet, in the five games he did score in, this is what he did:
1 - two goals
2 - three goals
3 - three goals
4 - one goal
5 - three goals
Then, in the final game of the season, he again scored two.

Thus, after his 32-game rookie season, he had had:
- Five multi-goal games
- Three hat-tricks
- One 1-goal game


Anyway, Nicholls suddenly got serious when Gretzky came to L.A.,, and he bore down for one-and-a-half seasons and was absolutely knocking it out of the park. To give an idea of how much he was succeeding after Gretzky arrived, here are the NHL scoring leaders on...

Dec. 3rd 1988:
67 - Nicholls
64 - Gretzky
62 - Lemieux
(Gretzky didn't overtake Nicholls in scoring until after Christmas.)

Bernie's career really got sidetracked by the trade to New York. He did not want to leave L.A., where he was a fan-favorite and where Wayne was his best buddy. He was obviously taking advantage of opponents' top checkers being focused on Gretzky, and he was living the good life.

After that, he was slightly miscast as a #1 center in New York, which needed offense, but where he didn't get much help. Then, he was separated from his wife when she was pregnant and he got sent to Edmonton, and then their child had a health issue and died while still a baby. He had a near Cup-run in New Jersey, but they lost in game 7 overtime (and then won it all the next year), and had a nice late-career starring period in Chicago, where he outscored Roenick for a couple of seasons.

Supremely talented player, but circumstances kind of limited how big of an impact he left (see: @Big Phil's memories, above). If, like me, you were in the west and followed Edmonton and L.A. in those years, you remember him really well. But I think people in the East (the vast majority) almost never saw him at his best, or consistently.

 

[The Panther]

An oft-overlooked aspect of Nicholls was his adeptness at open-ice hits that were painful, as here on Domi:

 

[Big Phil]

Bernie's career really got sidetracked by the trade to New York. He did not want to leave L.A., where he was a fan-favorite and where Wayne was his best buddy. He was obviously taking advantage of opponents' top checkers being focused on Gretzky, and he was living the good life.

That was such a lousy trade for the Kings. Did they not think they were much better off with Gretzky, Nicholls and Robitaille as their star forwards?

 

[Legionnaire11]

Also, as a kid, I always thought he looked just like Nicolas Cage. I don't see it as much nowadays but I was adamant on that. Weird kid, clearly.

I always thought young Mike Modano looked like Jerry Seinfeld.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I always thought young Mike Modano looked like Jerry Seinfeld.

i have one for young modano too

 

[Dingo]

He had a really interesting career in the gets labelled as this 'fluke product of Gretzky' when he was actually one of the most consistent offensive performers in the NHL from 1983-1996. Averaged 95 points/80 GP in the 5 years before Gretzky joined LA.

It's weird how we accept Kurri as a great player when he was obviously *massively* influenced by Gretzky for a lot of years but kind of dump on Nicholls for doing even better (with an older worse Gretzky) for 1.5 years. And Nicholls wasn't even playing with Gretzky much at ES.

thats a really good point. Kurri is more a product of gretz than Bernie was.

 

[Dingo]

His output for the Blackhawks in the early DPE as he was hitting his mid-30s is pretty impressive. I think he's an absolute Hall-of-Very-Good member and more easily forgotten than he should be. He seemed to be crafty enough to put up points no matter where he was.

Also, as a kid, I always thought he looked just like Nicolas Cage. I don't see it as much nowadays but I was adamant on that. Weird kid, clearly.

he really did!

 

[The Panther]

thats a really good point. Kurri is more a product of gretz than Bernie was.

Uhh... It's correct to point out that Nicholls was a great player in his own right, but it's incorrect to say "Kurri is more a product of gretz".

Kurri was a 2nd-team NHL All Star, Oilers' team MVP, and Stanley Cup winner without Gretzky. Nicholls did none of those.

 

[Dingo]

Uhh... It's correct to point out that Nicholls was a great player in his own right, but it's incorrect to say "Kurri is more a product of gretz".

Kurri was a 2nd-team NHL All Star, Oilers' team MVP, and Stanley Cup winner without Gretzky. Nicholls did none of those.

uhhhh, its harder to make AS at center, its way harder to make Oilers’ team MVP when your prime is in LA, and winning a Cup is a team accomplishment (see: Gretzky never won a Cup without that cast)

for the record, ill take Kurri over Nicholls, due to his defensive play mostly, but the man made a solid point - Nicholls gets beat up on for his best year, which was super elite, being while playing on the same team (not even line, like Jari) as gretzky. the bulk of his prime was not with gretzky. kurri had one solid (Nicholls-level) season without Wayner. its a good point.

 

[The Panther]

its a good point.

That's why I said it was correct.

But let's put down the Kool-Aid. Jari Kurri is a legend. Bernie Nicholls (one of my favorite players of all time, btw) was an elite skilled player of far less accomplishment.

 

[Dingo]

That's why I said it was correct.

But let's put down the Kool-Aid. Jari Kurri is a legend. Bernie Nicholls (one of my favorite players of all time, btw) was an elite skilled player of far less accomplishment.

i think its an interesting angle, though.

Nicholls on the Oilers, Kurri on the Kings (throughout their prime 80s of course)

i wonder what it all looks like.

i mean - Messier maybe has to stay on LW, or someone gets traded. Kurri possibly doesnt outshine Robitaille.

They might be closer than we think.

that 150pt season really does get put down to, “well, Gretzky” which, i get, but, how come we dont devalue Kurri’s 130+pt seasons? is it because he had more time with Gretz, and therefore it cant be passed off and forgotten, because it isnt a one off?

its just interesting, thats all. Rob Brown and Blair MacDonald show that 100+pts with a demigod is achievable for a regular player. its a n interesting perspective.

 

[Buffalowing1988]

i think its an interesting angle, though.

Nicholls on the Oilers, Kurri on the Kings (throughout their prime 80s of course)

i wonder what it all looks like.

i mean - Messier maybe has to stay on LW, or someone gets traded. Kurri possibly doesnt outshine Robitaille.

They might be closer than we think.

that 150pt season really does get put down to, “well, Gretzky” which, i get, but, how come we dont devalue Kurri’s 130+pt seasons? is it because he had more time with Gretz, and therefore it cant be passed off and forgotten, because it isnt a one off?

its just interesting, thats all. Rob Brown and Blair MacDonald show that 100+pts with a demigod is achievable for a regular player. its a n interesting perspective.

It's certainly interesting. I think I trust @The Panther on the 80s Oilers insights in general but I wonder if Nicholls has gotten underrated to some extent while Kurri has gotten a tad bit overrated. I love me some Kurry and his complete game, I just would be curious to hear what some things are that Nicholls does better. I'd say he was certainly craftier in the offensive zone. Not always easy to quantify that but he was very much driving the play in that end even when he played with Gretzky sometimes.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

for the record, ill take Kurri over Nicholls, due to his defensive play mostly, but the man made a solid point - Nicholls gets beat up on for his best year, which was super elite, being while playing on the same team (not even line, like Jari) as gretzky. the bulk of his prime was not with gretzky. kurri had one solid (Nicholls-level) season without Wayner. its a good point.

i think the reason ppl don’t really give nicholls his due for the 89 season is because the year after, he was scoring at a really high pace up to the trade (128 pts/80), then fell so dramatically after it (93 pts/80).

there are two ways to look at it: you can either focus on the enormity of the 35 pt drop in scoring pace, or acknowledge that in the exact same season kurri also scored 93 pts, although to be totally fair his per 80 pace was 95.

that said, kurri was very likely the better offensive talent with or without gretzky. nicholls as a center had three peak years in LA before gretzky got there where he scored 95, 100, and 97 pts. in those years he finished 15th, 13th, and 15th in the scoring race and only in the 100 pt year was he reasonably close to the top ten (he was two pts out).

whereas in his first post-gretzky year, as a winger, kurri finished 8th, with 102 pts, eight pts clear of 12th, twelve pts clear of 15th. that’s just not a level nicholls ever reached without gretzky on his team. in post-gretzky year two, he finished 19th with the aforementioned 93 pts but followed it up with a 25 pt playoff run.

 

[Dingo]

i think the reason ppl don’t really give nicholls his due for the 89 season is because the year after, he was scoring at a really high pace up to the trade (128 pts/80), then fell so dramatically after it (93 pts/80).

there are two ways to look at it: you can either focus on the enormity of the 35 pt drop in scoring pace, or acknowledge that in the exact same season kurri also scored 93 pts, although to be totally fair his per 80 pace was 95.

that said, kurri was very likely the better offensive talent with or without gretzky. nicholls as a center had three peak years in LA before gretzky got there where he scored 95, 100, and 97 pts. in those years he finished 15th, 13th, and 15th in the scoring race and only in the 100 pt year was he reasonably close to the top ten (he was two pts out).

whereas in his first post-gretzky year, as a winger, kurri finished 8th, with 102 pts, eight pts clear of 12th, twelve pts clear of 15th. that’s just not a level nicholls ever reached without gretzky on his team. in post-gretzky year two, he finished 19th with the aforementioned 93 pts but followed it up with a 25 pt playoff run.

good argument.

it nearly looks like nicholls had even better chemistry with old wayne. or perhaps, older Wayne was more forced to lean on his teammates than younger Wayne.

its too bad we didnt have a few more seasons with Bernie and Wayne, and maybe a few more prime seasons for Kurri with Moose.

I guess id just say that they look closer to me than they looked before. Id still have Kurri ahead, but i think Bernie maybe gets the shaft a bit.

 

[frisco]

My favorite Bernie Nicholls story is how he got two speeding tickets on the way to the airport in Edmonton after hearing he was dealt out of there.

My Best-Carey

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

good argument.

it nearly looks like nicholls had even better chemistry with old wayne. or perhaps, older Wayne was more forced to lean on his teammates than younger Wayne.

its too bad we didnt have a few more seasons with Bernie and Wayne, and maybe a few more prime seasons for Kurri with Moose.

I guess id just say that they look closer to me than they looked before. Id still have Kurri ahead, but i think Bernie maybe gets the shaft a bit.

to be precise, in 1989 nicholls scored a boatload on the PP with gretzky, and a ridiculous amount at SH, also with gretzky. however, he played almost not at all with gretzky at ES, where he put up 87 points on a line with robitaille and dave taylor.

kurri played very little with messier at ES, PK, or on the PP. his ES linemates most of the year were tikkanen and carson, tik was his PK partner, and according to the game logs it looks like edmonton’s PP had two pretty distinct and evenly matched forward units: kurri with carson and anderson, and messier with simpson and tikkanen.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

a 1989 / 1990 bernie nicholls stat dump to try to understand the anomaly of his 150 season better

(without trying to account for the different scoring rates of the two seasons, which imo is effectively just statistical noise)



nicholls in 1989: 87 ES, 49 PP, 14 SH (79 games)

gretzky in 1989: 100 ES, 53 PP, 15 SH (78 games)

robitaille in 1989: 74 ES, 24 PP (78 games)

nicholls in 1990: 44 ES, 30 PP, 1 SH (47 games)

nicholls in 1990: 74 ES, 50 PP, 2 SH, 126 pts (prorated to 79 games)

gretzky in 1990: 96 ES, 40 PP, 6 SH (73 games)

robitaille in 1990: 67 ES, 33 PP, 1 SH (80 games)



gretzky pre-trade: 68 ES, 26 PP, 4 SH, 98 pts (47 games)

gretzky pre-trade: 113 ES, 43 PP, 7 SH, 163 pts (prorated to 78 games)

gretzky post-trade: 28 ES, 14 PP, 2 SH, 44 pts (26 games)

gretzky post-trade: 84 ES, 42 PP, 6 SH, 132 (prorated to 78 games)

sandstrom post-trade: 21 ES, 11 PP, 1 SH, 33 pts (28 games)

sandstrom post-trade: 60 ES, 31 PP, 3 SH, 94 pts (prorated to 80 games)



scoring race up to the trade (rank, player, games played, pts):

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]gretzky[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]98[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]mario[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD]92[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]nicholls[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]75[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]messier[/TD]
[TD]48[/TD]
[TD]74[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]yzerman[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]71[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]hull[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]67[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]lafontaine[/TD]
[TD]48[/TD]
[TD]67[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]robitaille[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]66[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]savard[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]63[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]turgeon/francis[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[TD]62[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


scoring race from the trade to end of season:

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]yzerman[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD]56[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]messier[/TD]
[TD]31[/TD]
[TD]55[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]coffey[/TD]
[TD]34[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]cullen[/TD]
[TD]34[/TD]
[TD]47[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]hull[/TD]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]verbeek/sakic[/TD]
[TD]33/34[/TD]
[TD]45[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]gretzky[/TD]
[TD]26[/TD]
[TD]44[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8[/TD]
[TD]turgeon[/TD]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]44[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]20[/TD]
[TD]nicholls[/TD]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD]37[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]26[/TD]
[TD]robitaille[/TD]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]35[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



LA in 1989: 4th overall, 1st in goals, 5th most GA, 13th in PP goals, 11th in PP%, 3rd in SH goals

LA in 1989: 376 goals, 272 ES, 82 PP, 22 SH

LA in 1990: 15th overall, 2nd in goals, 4th most GA, 13th in PP goals, 8th in PP%, 8th in SH goals

LA in 1990: 338 goals, 251 ES, 76 PP, 11 SH

pre-trade: 11th overall, 2nd in goals, 356 per 80 pace

post-trade: 16th overall, 4th in goals, 313 per 80 pace



so observations: LA was a much better team in 1989 under robbie ftorek than it was in 1990 under tom webster. defensively, they seem equally bad, but the '89 team could outscore their problems; the 1990 team, while still excellent offensively, couldn't. that said, in the playoffs the results were the same: upset edmonton in '89 before getting whomped by the calgary cup team; upset calgary in '90 before getting whomped by the edmonton cup team.

the 1990 team was also significantly better offensively with nicholls than without, and also better overall before the trade.

the 1989 team was killer at ES. iirc, it was a three line attack: gretzky with random plugs (mike allison, half a year of bobby carpenter, guys like that), robitaille/nicholls/taylor, and tonelli/ron duguay until he was replaced by steve kasper/krushelnyski. gretzky was 3rd in pts, but only two pts behind mario for the lead; nicholls was 4th, robitaillle was 5th, tonelli was 20th, krusher was 28th, taylor was 40th.

the 1990 team had gretzky in 1st place in ES scoring, pre-trade nicholls on pace for 3rd, robitaille 8th, and no one else in the top 50. the next highest were tonelli at 60, and kasper and duchesne tied for 83rd. post-trade sandstrom was on pace for 18th. which is also to say that it wasn't necessarily a case of changing coaches, it might also have been the older guys who were still good in '89 being way less good in 1990 (taylor missed 1/4 of the year and finished outside of the top 100). this, i believe, was one of the reasons they traded nicholls for two younger, up and coming guys: scoring depth had fallen off.

as for nicholls himself, in 1989 the distance between him and gretzky was just ES scoring. at special teams, he was right there with gretz, but gretzky outscored him by thirteen pts at ES, which itself is a remarkable feat by nicholls being that gretzky put up 100 at ES.

the difference between 1989 and 1990 pre-trade nicholls, is entirely at ES and in SH scoring. nicholls and gretzky scored at an absolutely bonkers level on the PK in 1989. nicholls seems to have either stopped killing penalties at all, or just was taken off gretzky's PK pair. prorated, he lost thirteen pts in SH scoring, as well as thirteen at ES. weirdly, robitaille lost eight pts at ES (prorated), but gained it back and more on the PP in 1990. but robitaille's rank at ES didn't really change: he was 5th in 1989 and two pts out of 5th in 1990, which if you consider that he downgraded centers from nicholls to todd elik 2/3 into the season may not really be a drop at all. (in new york, nicholls' ES scoring fell way off, going from a 74 ES pt pace to scoring less than half an ES pt/game, with only his PP scoring keeping him in the overall scoring race.)

and the difference between 1989 and 1990 pre-trade gretzky is practically nothing, other than he lost some special teams scoring and gained it all back at ES. the difference between pre-and post-trade gretzky is entirely at ES, a 30 pts/80 drop in ES scoring rate. and this is gaining good linemates in sandstrom and granato, vs the scrubs he was playing with pre-trade.

which is all to say, it looks like nicholls was replaceable on the PP, but not at ES. he and gretzky had a symbiotic relationship at ES where they likely took defensive attention away from each other and split extra matchup minutes against poor competition. that said, gretzky post-trade is still 4th in ES scoring and averaging north of an ES pt/game. he wasn't scoring at gretzky ES rates, but he was scoring at a very high rate. nicholls post-trade fell off completely at ES. which brings me to my other hypothesis, that nicholls in that magical one and a half LA years benefited at ES from robitaille, but not the other way around. post-trade, robitaille is still chugging along at 7th in ES scoring, one single pt behind gretzky.