Bossy vs. Brett Hull

[Sentinel]

The more I learn about Bossy, the more I think he is overrated. But let's compare him and Hull Jr. Bossy led the league in goals twice, Hull -- three times. Bossy never touched 70 goals, Hull -- three times, including 86 goals (#1 all time adjusted). Sure, Bossy's nine straight 50+ goal seasons is unsurpassed but Hull had five, then 29 in 48 GP (lockout), which prorates to 50 in 82, and then the DPE began (though 43 in 70 in 95-96 also prorates to 50).

So, peak: Hull >> Bossy
Prime: Hull > Bossy
Consistency: Hull <~ Bossy
Career: Hull by default because every goal he scored after 30 is more than Bossy.
Playoffs: Hull << Bossy (the only area where Bossy is clearly superior, although Hull led both Cup-winning teams in goals and even scored the golden goal in 99).

Teammates: Bossy played on a dynasty. Hull's peak was with Oates. So it's a wash.

As an overall player, Hull won the Hart, while Bossy never rose above a third place in votes.

Overall, I find that Bossy is not even a top 7 goalscorer of all time (Ovechkin, Gretzky, Hull Sr, Esposito, Lemieux, Richard, Howe, Hull Jr).

Now eat me up.

Click to read more...

 

[Staniowski]

As goal-scorers among these six players only:

Lemieux > Bure > Bossy > Krutov > Hull > Gretzky

Lemieux and Gretzky are easy as the strongest and weakest, and I'd be inclined to say the other four are close to a tie, although I like Bure at #2.

 

[Cruor]

The more I learn about Bossy, the more I think he is overrated...

Really? I feel the opposite. Atleast two posters on this board have made a convincing argument that he was better than Gretzky.

Hull is a good comparison in being underrated though.

 

[MadLuke]

So, peak: Hull >> Bossy

?

On what this is based, 35 pts in 18 playoffs games followed by a 147 pts season and again scoring another 17 goals in 19 playoff games is probably not far from Hull peak, a lot of people would put it above. 8 goals in 7 Canada cup that summer.

Hull can be said to be a better goalscorer than Bossy (by a very small amount and people will debate about it), but everything else about their games Bossy has an good argument. Bossy had 3 top 10 in assists in his career, Hull could have (1998 for example), but not when he was scoring 80 goals.

Maybe that thread was about goal scoring alone ? Seeing the last sentence.

Career: Hull by default because every goal he scored after 30 is more than Bossy.

With that logic, Hull and a lot of people > Orr career.... Being a main player, winning 4 cups for a franchise do a lot for a career versus a player that was so little focused about winning that had a philosophy about empty net goal.

 

[Frank Cannon PI]

The more I learn about Bossy, the more I think he is overrated. But let's compare him and Hull Jr. Bossy led the league in goals twice, Hull -- three times. Bossy never touched 70 goals, Hull -- three times, including 86 goals (#1 all time adjusted). Sure, Bossy's nine straight 50+ goal seasons is unsurpassed but Hull had five, then 29 in 48 GP (lockout), which prorates to 50 in 82, and then the DPE began (though 43 in 70 in 95-96 also prorates to 50).

So, peak: Hull >> Bossy
Prime: Hull > Bossy
Consistency: Hull <~ Bossy
Career: Hull by default because every goal he scored after 30 is more than Bossy.
Playoffs: Hull << Bossy (the only area where Bossy is clearly superior, although Hull led both Cup-winning teams in goals and even scored the golden goal in 99).

Teammates: Bossy played on a dynasty. Hull's peak was with Oates. So it's a wash.

As an overall player, Hull won the Hart, while Bossy never rose above a third place in votes.

Overall, I find that Bossy is not even a top 7 goalscorer of all time (Ovechkin, Gretzky, Hull Sr, Esposito, Lemieux, Richard, Howe, Hull Jr).

Now eat me up.

I think Brett Hull should get more love, but not at the expense of Bossy. Now, compared to Ovechkin, Hull is massively underappreciated by comparison.

 

[Sentinel]

As goal-scorers among these six players only:

Lemieux > Bure > Bossy > Krutov > Hull > Gretzky

Lemieux and Gretzky are easy as the strongest and weakest, and I'd be inclined to say the other four are close to a tie, although I like Bure at #2.

"Easily"? Gretzky scored the most goals in history, as peak and career.

Really? I feel the opposite. Atleast two posters on this board have made a convincing argument that he was better than Gretzky.

Hull is a good comparison in being underrated though.

Even though Bossy lost to Gretzky in 6 of 8 seasons they were in the league together? That's some twisted logic right there!

 

[Sentinel]

?

On what this is based, 35 pts in 18 playoffs games followed by a 147 pts and against scoring 17 goals in 19 playoff games is probably not far from Hull peak, a lot of people would put it above. 8 goals in 7 Canada cup that summer.

Hull can be said to be a better goalscorer than Bossy (by a very small amount and people will debate about it), but everything else about their games Bossy has an good argument. Bossy had 3 top 10 in assists in his career, Hull could have (1998 for example), but not when he was scoring 80 goals.

Maybe that thread was about goal scoring alone ? Seeing the last sentence.


With that logic, Hull and a lot of people > Orr career.... Being a main player, winning 4 cups for a franchise do a lot for a career versus a player that was so little focused about winning that had a philosophy about empty net goal.

Yes, I talked mostly about goalscoring. But I don't know about Bossy being "the main player". Trottier won the Hart, Bossy never rose about a third place.

And I compared playoffs separately.

 

[MadLuke]

But I don't know about Bossy being "the main player".

A main player was maybe strangely stated, I wanted to say something like; one of the important piece of the team on all the cup win. One of the main player, not that he was more important than Potvin.

 

[Sentinel]

A main player was maybe strangely stated, I wanted to say something one of the important piece of the team on all the cup win. One of the main player, not that he was more important than Potvin.

That's fair but Hull was not exactly a passenger either.

 

[Staniowski]

I think Bossy vs Brett Hull is a good comparison, they are relatively close. Same as the Bossy vs Bure comparison. They are certainly three of the very best goal-scorers ever.

I, personally, wouldn't spend a lot of time trying to determine which one is a little better.

Bossy and Hull have quite a lot in common and, of course, some differences, but both are almost as good as it gets for goal-scorers.

 

[authentic]

As goal-scorers among these six players only:

Lemieux > Bure > Bossy > Krutov > Hull > Gretzky

Lemieux and Gretzky are easy as the strongest and weakest, and I'd be inclined to say the other four are close to a tie, although I like Bure at #2.

Is this just since 1980?

I think Bossy vs Brett Hull is a good comparison, they are relatively close. Same as the Bossy vs Bure comparison. They are certainly three of the very best goal-scorers ever.

I, personally, wouldn't spend a lot of time trying to determine which one is a little better.

Bossy and Hull have quite a lot in common and, of course, some differences, but both are almost as good as it gets for goal-scorers.

What do you make of the difference in their peak levels of goal scoring? Does this one come down to ice time in favour of Hull?

 

[Staniowski]

Is this just since 1980?

I just chose these six players, who played mostly in the '80s and 90s, to compare as goal-scorers. It's not a complete ranking for any time period.

 

[Gerulaitis]

If I wanted to win the Stanley cup or the Olympics I'd rather have Bossy on my team than Brett Hull. Peak or prime, still Bossy

 

[tabness]

In terms of peak as a goalscorer I don't think it's particularly close, and this isn't so much an dig of Bossy as it is me feeling the Brett Hull at his zenith is probably the best goal scorer there was (who else here? Mario Lemieux? maybe...).

In the Gretzky vs Bossy as goal scorer topic, one of the points bought up to explain the statistical advantage Gretzky had over Bossy was scoring in blowouts and such. I ran some numbers on goal scoring based on game score effects for a bunch of notable goal scorers, and was shocked to see how insanely good Brett Hull looked here in 1990-1991, he dwarfs the others in scoring his goals when it really matters (go ahead and tying goals).

Most of the notable goal scorers throughout history score at best in the twenties to thirties for just go ahead/tying goals. The best are in the high thirties (Gretzky, Mogilny). Brett Hull 1990-1991 tops them with go ahead goals alone.

As an overall player, I think people generally forget how bright Brett's star shined in the early nineties, how much he added to his game to get to that level then, and so on. He's basically just stereotyped as a otherwise unremarkable player with a great shot now when he was anything but in his peak.

Gretzky and Bossy situational goal scoring

• blowout: goal scored means leading by 4 or more
• insurance: goal scored means leading by 2 or 3
• go ahead: goal scored means leading by 1
• tie: goal scored means game tied
• comeback: goal scored means trailing by 1
• rally: goal scored means trailing by 2 or more
• first: first goal of the game
• second: second goal of the game

Spoiler: Gretzky

1980 51 total
blowout:  6 11.76%
insurance:  12 23.53%
go ahead:  8 15.69%
tie:  12 23.53%
comeback:  7 13.73%
rally:  6 11.76%
first:  2  3.92%
second:  7 13.73%

1981 51 total
blowout:  12 23.53%
insurance:  9 17.65%
go ahead:  10 19.61%
tie:  9 17.65%
comeback:  6 11.76%
rally:  5  9.8%
first:  4  7.84%
second:  3  5.88%

1982 92 total
blowout:  18 19.57%
insurance:  30 32.61%
go ahead:  24 26.09%
tie:  13 14.13%
comeback:  5  5.43%
rally:  2  2.17%
first:  7  7.61%
second:  9  9.78%

1983 71 total
blowout:  13 18.31%
insurance:  20 28.17%
go ahead:  16 22.54%
tie:  9 12.68%
comeback:  7  9.86%
rally:  6  8.45%
first:  3  4.23%
second:  6  8.45%

1984 87 total
blowout:  24 27.59%
insurance:  30 34.48%
go ahead:  15 17.24%
tie:  5  5.75%
comeback:  7  8.05%
rally:  6  6.9%
first:  8  9.2%
second:  5  5.75%

1985 72 total
blowout:  14 19.44%
insurance:  19 26.39%
go ahead:  23 31.94%
tie:  10 13.89%
comeback:  3  4.17%
rally:  3  4.17%
first:  12 16.67%
second:  8 11.11%

1986 52 total
blowout:  6 11.54%
insurance:  24 46.15%
go ahead:  8 15.38%
tie:  6 11.54%
comeback:  4  7.69%
rally:  4  7.69%
first:  2  3.85%
second:  7 13.46%

1987 61 total
blowout:  7 11.48%
insurance:  31 50.82%
go ahead:  10 16.39%
tie:  6  9.84%
comeback:  5  8.2%
rally:  2  3.28%
first:  5  8.2%
second:  9 14.75%

Spoiler: Bossy

1978 51 total
blowout:  10 19.61%
insurance:  10 19.61%
go ahead:  20 39.22%
tie:  4  7.84%
comeback:  4  7.84%
rally:  3  5.88%
first:  13 25.49%
second:  2  3.92%

1979 67 total
blowout:  13  19.4%
insurance:  27  40.3%
go ahead:  11 16.42%
tie:  9 13.43%
comeback:  4  5.97%
rally:  3  4.48%
first:  6  8.96%
second:  14  20.9%

1980 51 total
blowout:  8 15.69%
insurance:  15 29.41%
go ahead:  14 27.45%
tie:  6 11.76%
comeback:  3  5.88%
rally:  5  9.8%
first:  5  9.8%
second:  5  9.8%

1981 63 total
blowout:  10 15.87%
insurance:  29 46.03%
go ahead:  13 20.63%
tie:  9 14.29%
comeback:  2  3.17%
rally:  0  0%
first:  8  12.7%
second:  11 17.46%

1982 62 total
blowout:  9 14.52%
insurance:  29 46.77%
go ahead:  11 17.74%
tie:  5  8.06%
comeback:  8  12.9%
rally:  0  0%
first:  1  1.61%
second:  6  9.68%

1983 60 total
blowout:  8 13.33%
insurance:  17 28.33%
go ahead:  20 33.33%
tie:  9  15%
comeback:  5  8.33%
rally:  1  1.67%
first:  12  20%
second:  5  8.33%

1984 50 total
blowout:  5  10%
insurance:  21  42%
go ahead:  11  22%
tie:  9  18%
comeback:  3  6%
rally:  1  2%
first:  4  8%
second:  9  18%

1985 57 total
blowout:  8 14.04%
insurance:  18 31.58%
go ahead:  13 22.81%
tie:  12 21.05%
comeback:  2  3.51%
rally:  4  7.02%
first:  7 12.28%
second:  9 15.79%

1986 57 total
blowout:  9 15.79%
insurance:  19 33.33%
go ahead:  9 15.79%
tie:  10 17.54%
comeback:  6 10.53%
rally:  4  7.02%
first:  4  7.02%
second:  5  8.77%

1987 38 total
blowout:  3  7.89%
insurance:  7 18.42%
go ahead:  10 26.32%
tie:  10 26.32%
comeback:  7 18.42%
rally:  1  2.63%
first:  3  7.89%
second:  6 15.79%

Gretzky definitely got a lot of goals and points on blowouts, but he still scored so much that his top goal scoring seasons still see him with high goal totals of what would be considered the most important goals (tying and go ahead). To be honest Bossy scored quite a bit in blowouts himself...

Total tying/go ahead goals as compared to total goals

Gretzky
1980: 20/51
1981: 19/51
1982: 37/92
1983: 25/71
1984: 20/87
1985: 33/72
1986: 14/52
1987: 16/61

184 total

Bossy:
1978: 24/51
1979: 20/67
1980: 20/51
1981: 21/63
1982: 16/62
1983: 29/60
1984: 20/50
1985: 25/57
1986: 19/57
1987: 20/38

214 total

Kurri's peak "important" (tying/go ahead) goal scoring is like Bossy's, high twenties/low thirties.

Brett Hull has a pretty amazing 1990-1991 season (otherwise in high twenties/low thirties): 39 go ahead goals alone seems to be more than other players go ahead and tying combined! He then adds 14 tying goals to those 39. A real 50 goal scorer lol

Ovechkin is pretty consistently ranging from in the low twenties to low thirties for his 50 goal years throughout his career (tops out at 32 twice in 2006 and 2008). Honestly thought he'd do better in an era where the scores are closer.

Bobby Hull tops out in the low to mid twenties. Also thought he'd do better given the era.

Lemieux tops out in the low thirties.

Bure is so interesting. Tops out in the low thirties, but look at 1999-2000. 28 go ahead goals! Sadly only 1 tying lol!

Esposito tops out in the low thirties.

Mogilny 36 in 1993 is impressive.

Selanne tops out in the low thirties.

Stamkos tops out in the high twenties.

Yzerman tops out in the high twenties.

Jagr tops out in the high twenties.

Nicholls tops out in the mid twenties.

Lafleur tops out in the low/mid twenties.

Dionne tops out in the high twenties.

Bondra tops out in the low thirties.

Leclair tops out at thirty.

Sakic tops out in the low thirties.

Gordie Howe tops at low twenties, Maurice Richard low to mid twenties, Jean Beliveau high teens, honestly surprising to see the original six players not do a little better here, even accounting for the shorter seasons.

The data is from the NHL JSON stats APIs, and some games are missing (every season has missing games except the early ones before 1942-1943). So things might be slightly different, a preemptive disclaimer that I was not trying to nickel and dime your favorite player.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Bossy was a better player and more consistent goal scorer. Maybe Hull peaked higher with 86-70-70 or whatever he had.

 

[authentic]

Bossy was a better player and more consistent goal scorer. Maybe Hull peaked higher with 86-70-70 or whatever he had.

How is it a maybe though? This is why I’ve asked if there’s some major difference in their ice time or powerplay time or something at their peaks. If not, it’s Brett Hull hands down. I think tabness post is correct, I believe Brett Hull at his peak level that lasted a good 3 seasons (same as Ovechkin) has become underrated.

 

[Sentinel]

Bossy was a better player and more consistent goal scorer. Maybe Hull peaked higher with 86-70-70 or whatever he had.

How? Hull CLEARLY peaked higher, and not by small margin. He has a Hart that Bossy never came close to. And Hull's prorated seven 50+ goal seasons are not that far behind Bossy, given the DPE.

And I absolutely refuse to rank Bossy anywhere near Gretzky as a goalscorer. 92 >> 69, 5 >> 2, and 6 >> 2

 

[The Panther]

In the Gretzky vs Bossy as goal scorer topic, one of the points bought up to explain the statistical advantage Gretzky had over Bossy was scoring in blowouts and such. I ran some numbers on goal scoring based on game score effects for a bunch of notable goal scorers, and was shocked to see how insanely good Brett Hull looked here in 1990-1991, he dwarfs the others in scoring his goals when it really matters (go ahead and tying goals).

I think a lot of this has to do with the respective teams they played on (and a little bit by era). Gretzky and Bossy were playing on clubs that could score 350-to-400+ goals per season, whereas Hull's Blues of the late-80s through mid-90 were scoring 270-to-310 goals per season. As the designated "go-to" trigger guy, Hull was certainly going to score far more "significant" goals than Gretzky and Bossy, even if he'd scored less.

That being said, I do think Hull's 1990-91 season is probably the #1 goal-scoring season in NHL history. It's parly because his club wasn't that amazing offensively, but also because he was so consistent (and no empty-netters!). In 1990-91, Hull scored goals in 56 different NHL games (of 78 that he dressed for), more than any other player in any season in history.

 

[The Panther]

Bossy led the league in goals twice, Hull -- three times.

I mean, Bossy is competing with 92-goal Gretzky in 1982, so even Hull's 86-season would have been 2nd. I think we can say that their times leading the NHL are basically a tie.

Hull won the Hart trophy in 1991, but does he win it in any of the following three situations?: 1) It's was Gretzky's first 160+ season, instead of his 10th; 2) Oates played the full season, thus Hull was outscored by his own teammate; 3) Lemieux was healthy and played 80 games, scoring 180-200 points or whatever. Debatable.

Obviously when a guy hits 86 goals (for a previously very un-sexy franchise and he's a US player... sort of... to boot) he's going to get lots of Hart attention in any case, BUT I would suggest that whereas Hull had his peak season coincide with a "perfect-storm" situation to help him win the Hart, Bossy never had that "perfect-storm" with his peak seasons.

I do think Bossy was a more complete and defensively responsible player than Hull. Now, Bossy had a lot more help, of course, so there's that. But one thing about Hull's career -- including his peak seasons -- that are notably unimpressive is his results at even-strength (his plus/minus, basically). From 1988-89 though 1992-93, Hull went -24. It's not like the Blues were Cup winners, but even as a .500-ish club (somewhat better, I think) you'd expect the top guy, at his peak, to tilt the ice a little more.

One thing I'd say about playoffs, though, is that I don't think Bossy wins the comparison, as some are saying. Bossy had his amazing 1981, 1982, and 1983 playoffs, yes, and those three are in a row are deservedly legendary. But outside of those three magical runs, Bossy otherwise scored at a 37-goal pace in the playoffs, which for a normal top forward is good, but for him, considering era and everything, is just okay.

Hull, meanwhile, had a staggering 103 playoffs goals in 202 games. So, I think maintaining a 40+ goal pace over nineteen playoff years (seven in the DPE), is overall at least as impressive, if not more impressive, than Bossy.

 

[MadLuke]

I think a lot of this has to do with the respective teams they played on

I was going something similar, we see Gretzky going from 40% to 25% when he goes from an under .500 negative goal differential team, with a lot of occasion to tie a game to a 110+pts team that outscore the opposition by more than 100 goals.... a lot of those goals will be scored with a lead.

Can be a nice stats to look at, but it will be team dependents a lot and we can be lost if we go granular, scoring your first team goal to make a 2-1 in the second period do not seem specially less important than tying it. To take it a bit extreme, a player so good that never trailed during an nhl game could have never scored a tying goal.

Back in the day on tv you saw stats in the style goals scored when the goal differential was 3 goals or less (i.e. goal not scored once a game was a blowout type of stats), which could be adjusted a bit for league scoring and if only 2 minutes or less left... but that something that I feel could make more sense.

. But outside of those three magical runs,

That removing ~50% of Bossy non-Rookie or last a bit broken season playoff career and the best part of it, that will turn great resume into rough one to almost anyone, keeping only the worst half of someone career with their Rookie and last run....

 

[Sentinel]

If Hull ranks over Bossy, then Bossy suddenly becomes #9

Ovechkin
Gretzky / Hull Sr
Esposito
Richard / Howe / Lemieux
Hull Jr / Bossy

 

[Mike C]

The more I learn about Bossy, the more I think he is overrated. But let's compare him and Hull Jr. Bossy led the league in goals twice, Hull -- three times. Bossy never touched 70 goals, Hull -- three times, including 86 goals (#1 all time adjusted). Sure, Bossy's nine straight 50+ goal seasons is unsurpassed but Hull had five, then 29 in 48 GP (lockout), which prorates to 50 in 82, and then the DPE began (though 43 in 70 in 95-96 also prorates to 50).

So, peak: Hull >> Bossy
Prime: Hull > Bossy
Consistency: Hull <~ Bossy
Career: Hull by default because every goal he scored after 30 is more than Bossy.
Playoffs: Hull << Bossy (the only area where Bossy is clearly superior, although Hull led both Cup-winning teams in goals and even scored the golden goal in 99).

Teammates: Bossy played on a dynasty. Hull's peak was with Oates. So it's a wash.

As an overall player, Hull won the Hart, while Bossy never rose above a third place in votes.

Overall, I find that Bossy is not even a top 7 goalscorer of all time (Ovechkin, Gretzky, Hull Sr, Esposito, Lemieux, Richard, Howe, Hull Jr).

Now eat me up.

Maybe the team was a dynasty in large part BECAUSE of Bossy!

 

[Frank Cannon PI]

One thing I'd say about playoffs, though, is that I don't think Bossy wins the comparison, as some are saying. Bossy had his amazing 1981, 1982, and 1983 playoffs, yes, and those three are in a row are deservedly legendary. But outside of those three magical runs, Bossy otherwise scored at a 37-goal pace in the playoffs, which for a normal top forward is good, but for him, considering era and everything, is just okay.

Hull, meanwhile, had a staggering 103 playoffs goals in 202 games. So, I think maintaining a 40+ goal pace over nineteen playoff years (seven in the DPE), is overall at least as impressive, if not more impressive, than Bossy.

Prop Bossy up with his own stats, his peak playoffs? We're propping up Hull for his 3-year regular season run (1989-1992), but we're removing Bossy's best 3-year playoff run? They're also winning the cup those 3 years (not that you're not fully aware of this). [edited to add "that"]

If we're doing this, let's remove Hull's best 3-year run, just to see how he'd normally do.

Does anyone have a goal per game ratio, regular season and playoffs, goals that matter and are put towards winning, higher than Mike Bossy? Fascinating, the more someone looks at Bossy, the more unimpressed they are. Ridiculous. (Is anyone more punished from the '80s and is anyone more punished for playing with quality teammates than Bossy?)

It's funny, some of us realize how Gretzky didn't need to call his own number past a certain point, having to bend the game to grab as many goals as he could by the mid-80s, but perhaps Bossy figured this out early on enough because they were already winning.

This qualifier, that you had to surpass a 70 goal, 80 goal threshold, to be considered the greatest goal scorer, is just throwing out putting team-first concepts.

Perhaps Bossy should have put up 80 goal, 30 assist seasons, and play on okay-ish teams that can only win it in years if/when everything lines up perfectly for his teams.

 

[The Panther]

Prop Bossy up with his own stats, his peak playoffs? We're propping up Hull for his 3-year regular season run (1989-1992), but we're removing Bossy's best 3-year playoff run? They're also winning the cup those 3 years (not you're not fully aware of this).

If we're doing this, let's remove Hull's best 3-year run, just to see how he'd normally do.

Does anyone have a goal per game ratio, regular season and playoffs, goals that matter and are put towards winning, higher than Mike Bossy? Fascinating, the more someone looks at Bossy, the more unimpressed they are. Ridiculous. (Is anyone more punished from the '80s and is anyone more punished for playing with quality teammates than Bossy?)

It's funny, some of us realize how Gretzky didn't need to call his own number past a certain point, having to bend the game to grab as many goals as he could by the mid-80s, but perhaps Bossy figured this out early on enough because they were already winning.

This qualifier, that you had to surpass a 70 goal, 80 goal threshold, to be considered the greatest goal scorer, is just throwing out putting team-first concepts.

Perhaps Bossy should have put up 80 goal, 30 assist seasons, and play on okay-ish teams that can only win it in years if/when everything lines up perfectly for his teams.

I wasn't trying to prop either up at the expense of the other. I don't have a dog in this fight, so to speak. I'm just presenting the position that by looking at their overall playoff careers (Hull's being much longer, but with fewer long runs), Hull doesn't really lose anything to Bossy. I mean, Hull has the most playoff goals in history other than 3 guys who played for the Edmonton dynasty.

I agree that Bossy's peak years of 1981-83 are hugely impressive, which is why I said he's deservedly a legend.

 

[Frank Cannon PI]

How many shots on net were they taking? Here's Bossy's best nine seasons:

Brett Hull by comparison:

Shots on Goal (league leaders):

Bossy:

Brett Hull:

The Islanders scored a lot of goals, sure, but how many shots did they take as a team vs the league?

Islanders SOG:

1977-78: 2490 (4th out of 18 teams) --- Goals For: 334 (2nd of 18)
1978-79: 2301 (9th out of 17 teams) --- Goals For: 358 (1st of 17)
1979-80: 2216 (18th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 281 (12th of 21)
1980-81: 2417 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 355 (1st of 21)
1981-82: 2469 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 385 (2nd of 21)
1982-83: 2429 (11th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 302 (15th of 21)
1983-84: 2422 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 357 (3rd of 21)
1984-85: 2415 (12th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 345 (5th of 21)
1985-86: 2352 (19th out of 21 teams) -- Goals For: 327 (8th of 21)

Blues SOG:

1988-89: 2327 (15th out of 21 teams) ---- Goals For: 275 (16th of 21)
1989-90: 2333 (15th out of 21 teams) --- Goals For: 295 (8th of 21)
1990-91: 2550 (4th out of 21 teams) ------ Goals For: 310 (4th of 21)
1991-92: 2376 (15th out of 22 teams) ---- Goals For: 279 (12th of 22)
1992-93: 2439 (20th out of 24 teams) ---- Goals For: 282 (18th of 24)
1993-94: 2570 (11th out of 26 teams) ---- Goals For: 270 (17th of 26)
1994-95: 1411 (15th out of 26 teams) ---- Goals For: 178 (4th of 26)
1995-96: 2548 (9th out of 26 teams) ------ Goals For: 219 (24th of 26)
1996-97: 2415 (15th out of 26 teams) ----- Goals For: 236 (14th of 26)

Did Bossy have to score more goals, in order for the Islanders to perform better? Would it have been more beneficial, for him to play closer to 30 minutes per game, rather than the Islanders being a 4-line team?

For all of the talk about the high scoring '80s, the Islanders shot a high percentage, were middle-of-the-pack for shots on net, yet were near the top in goals scored throughout (most of) Bossy's prime.

Hull doesn't really lose anything to Bossy. I mean, Hull has the most playoff goals in history other than 3 guys who played for the Edmonton dynasty.

I mean, Bossy has 18 fewer goals in the playoffs, while playing 73 fewer games. Not to mention 4 cups...

If we're isolating shooting, and the ability to be in the right spot at the right time, coming out of nowhere, these guys are probably #1a and #1b in league history.

Bossy's a better all around player, he should pass more because he could. You don't need to force it every single time (that's not a dig at Hull but guys chasing numbers).

Gretzky left goals on the table - you're aware of this - but throw that logic out with Bossy for some reason. (No, I'm not suggesting that Bossy's on Gretzky's level as a passer.)