Bossy vs. Brett Hull

[Namba 17]

I continue with regular season

When Hull was the best goalscorer of his team he scored the following % of his team goals:

27,74
25,08
24,41
21,11
19,63
19,15
17,80
16,29
16,18
14,91
13,75

7 times higher that average

Bossy:

19,87
19,27
19,15
18,65
18,15
16,81
16,62
15,87
14,29

5 times higher that average


ESG
Hull: 1, 1, 1, 7, 8, 10, 10
Bossy: 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 8

PPG:
Hull: 1, 1, 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 10
Bossy: 1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 8. 9. 10

SHG:
Hull: 2, 3, 7
Bossy: 7

GWG:
Hull: 1, 1, 1, 2, 5, 6
Bossy: 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 7, 10

Career goals comparison is hard, beacause Hull had very long career - long past his prime and Bossy's career is literary his prime. So I took 9 years of Bossy's career (except for his last) and seasons 88/89 (first time #1 goalscorers on his team) - 96/97 (last time ASG) of Brett Hull's

Hull:
Name Games Goals
Brett Hull 665 494
Mario Lemieux 453 398
Steve Yzerman 668 375
Luc Robitaille 673 364
Pierre Turgeon 674 330
Dave Andreychuk 661 329
Brendan Shanahan 648 328
Mike Gartner 670 325
Theo Fleury 649 307
Joe Sakic 655 307

Bossy

Name Games Goals
Mike Bossy 689 535
Wayne Gretzky 553 481
Marcel Dionne 694 433
Bryan Trottier 678 355
Lanny McDonald 653 351
Rick Middleton 674 338
Michel Goulet 532 317
Dave Taylor 617 303
Jari Kurri 441 300
Charlie Simmer 502 291

PLAY OFF

% of team goals, scored by player who was #1 goalscorer of the team in this season

Hull
90/91 26,83
91/92 21,05
89/90 30,95
93/94 20
95/96 16,22
92/93 33,33
96/97 16,67
94/95 22,22
00/01 9,09
88/89 14,29
02/03 0

Seasons higher than average 8

Bossy
82/83 18,09 SC
78/79 22,22
80/81 17,53 SC
85/86 25,00
79/80 11,36 SC
84/85 20,00
81/82 20,00 SC
77/78 15,38
83/84 12,90

Seasons higher than average 6

Brett Hull was #1 goalscorer in PO twice. His % of team goals are:
99/00 21.15
01/02 13.89
In 01/02 he won SC
In none of these seasons he was #1 goalscorer of his team in RS
He won SC in 98/99 also. He scored 12.5% of his team goals. He was not #1 goalscorer of his team in RS

Bossy was #1 goalscorer in PO 3 times. His % of team goals are
80/81 17.53
81/82 20.00
82/83 18.09
He won SC in any of these seasons and was #1 goalscorer of his team in RS in any of them
He also won SC in 79/80. He was #1 goalscorer of RS on his team. His % of goals of his team in PO is 11.36

 

[The Panther]

When Hull was the best goalscorer of his team he scored the following % of his team goals:

27,74
25,08
24,41
21,11
19,63
19,15
17,80
16,29
16,18
14,91
13,75

7 times higher that average

Bossy:

19,87
19,27
19,15
18,65
18,15
16,81
16,62
15,87
14,29

5 times higher that average

Thanks for the stats, but this one seems unfair to Bossy. If you're (a) playing in a somewhat higher scoring era, and (b) you're on a team with several average / above-average scorers, you're always going to come out lower in this sort of comparison. It might reflect how relatively important the player was to his team's offense, but it doesn't really reflect who was the better scorer.

ESG
Hull: 1, 1, 1, 7, 8, 10, 10
Bossy: 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 8

I would call this a win for Bossy. (I'm more about consistent prime than about short career peaks.)

 

[DitchMarner]

How is scoring the highest GPG in nhl history while playing 18 minutes a night on a dynasty not peaking high enough?


You compared Matthews, who has accomplished nothing but scoring empty points in a similarly diluted league to Bossy directly.

And yet one can argue that Matthews' best goal scoring season is superior to Bossy's. Considering how low your opinion of AM is, that's not too flattering to Bossy, is it?

 

[Namba 17]

Thanks for the stats, but this one seems unfair to Bossy.

It might reflect how relatively important the player was to his team's offense, but it doesn't really reflect who was the better scorer.

Find where I stated that this numbers mean that Hull is better scorer than Bossy

 

[Namba 17]

If you're (a) playing in a somewhat higher scoring era ...you're always going to come out lower in this sort of comparison.

PS. No. It doesn't work this way

 

[Midnight Judges]

The caps have been a contender for almost every season of his career. Now he's been playing not to get hurt for like 7 years to break Gretzky's record lol.

The Capitals have indeed had tons of success with Alex Ovechkin as the 20 year centerpiece.

He's dished out almost 1100 hits in that span - top 25 in the NHL and head and shoulders above any other elite player.

NHL Stats

That is the opposite of "playing not to get hurt."

 

[Sentinel]

Bossy was better, Hull was more of a star though. Hull had a better shot because he got more power on it and didn't sacrifice much accuracy, otherwise Bossy was probably better at everything. That said I don't think it is a huge gap or anything, they are fairly similar players a things considered.

I do find it funny that a poster who is quite familiar with Detroit of the 90s and how Detroit used its roster has in recent times taken up the mantle of declaring Bossy and Beliveau and Richard overrated. You'd think that the very obvious similarities would stand out.

If you are referring to me, then yes I do consider all three overrated but only because their actual individual awards do not reflect their legendary status. And you will not see me claiming "if only Fedorov played under someone other than Bowman, he would score 50 goals every season." He may very well have (and, as a result, not coasted through RS like he did) but we don't know that. We are only judging him and others based on what they actually did.

I don't think ranking Richard over Bossy is such a controversial take. I also don't think ranking Esposito (6 goal titles and a record 76 goals high) over both should be all that controversial either.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I think we should generally assume NHL coaches actually know what they are doing - and deploying players to the optimal benefit of the team.

 

[MadLuke]

We are only judging him and others based on what they actually did.

Do we judge Fedorov really as a player that scored around 60-70 pts a season that was 43 in the league in scoring during his team cup window era or we do it a bit on a curve, knowing what he did before and the playoff a bit on a curve ? more talents than the what he did numbers could say to some.

you just say that he coasted, i.e. implying that he was better than that (and if he would needed to do more offensively for his team to make the playoff to be able to win the cup he would have done it) and not judging him on what he actually did.

 

[Gorskyontario]

And yet one can argue that Matthews' best goal scoring season is superior to Bossy's. Considering how low your opinion of AM is, that's not too flattering to Bossy, is it?

I would never say Matthews isn't a talented goal scorer. Yet despite all this Bossy was the main trigger man on a team that won 19 playoff series in a row.

Matthews has been out of the first round once when Nylander carried him.

The Capitals have indeed had tons of success with Alex Ovechkin as the 20 year centerpiece.

He's dished out almost 1100 hits in that span - top 25 in the NHL and head and shoulders above any other elite player.

NHL Stats

That is the opposite of "playing not to get hurt."

I watched his playoff series last year, it was one of the most pathetic performances I have ever seen. Literally playing to avoid injury to score goals in the next regular season.

 

[JackSlater]

If you are referring to me, then yes I do consider all three overrated but only because their actual individual awards do not reflect their legendary status. And you will not see me claiming "if only Fedorov played under someone other than Bowman, he would score 50 goals every season." He may very well have (and, as a result, not coasted through RS like he did) but we don't know that. We are only judging him and others based on what they actually did.

I don't think ranking Richard over Bossy is such a controversial take. I also don't think ranking Esposito (6 goal titles and a record 76 goals high) over both should be all that controversial either.

I am not talking about Richard vs Bossy or anyone vs Esposito, I am saying that most teams are focused on winning championships and that they make decisions to that end, even if those decisions don't yield trophies for individual players. This is not to say that St. Louis used Hull in a stupid way, but recognizing that the deep, elite Islanders had a choice that was not really an option for a strong but not quite that level St. Louis. Bossy and Hull, at their peaks, each played with an elite playmaker at centre. Bossy played on a deeper team that was a bigger contender, and consequently he played less (and won more). Bossy also had some defensive expectations beyond what Hull was required to do until he moved from St. Louis. Mindlessly looking at trophies or marginal differences in scoring finishes would reward Bossy had the Islanders made a stupid decision to ride their top line more in the regular season.

The same is true of other players (Yzerman and Fedorov have become underrated for the same reason, for example) throughout history. Generally people at the time understand this - Bossy was held in higher regard at the time than a cursory glance at a trophy case would indicate, just as Yzerman and Fedorov were, Richard and Beliveau were and so on. I don't think it's because people could not read the newspaper and see who won a trophy in a given season either. If the thread is really just asking which of Hull or Bossy has a Hart trophy, which seems to be almost all that you are getting at, then we can drop the pretenses of comparing players and just look at wikipedia. Yes, Hull has a Hart trophy and Bossy does not. Wonderful. The case for Hull needs to be based on heavily weighing his biggest peak goal scoring year vs Bossy's, and the less that context is applied the better.

 

[tabness]

The case for Hull needs to be based on heavily weighing his biggest peak goal scoring year vs Bossy's, and the less that context is applied the better.

Hardly just his best year, this comment would be more fair to make if it was about his three year peak. As it is it seems like a uncharitable dismissal such as saying the case for Bossy simply rests on his career goals per game average and the less context is applied the better or whatever.

 

[JackFr]

Not really related to the specifics of Hull vs. Bossy, but illustrative of the impact of scoring eras, is that if you adjust Bossy's numbers to the hypothetical of him starting his career in 1994-95 instead of 1977-78 he hits 50 goals one time.

1994-95 53 -> 48
1995-96 69 -> 62
1996-97 51 -> 42
1997-98 68 -> 47
1998-99 64 -> 42
1999-00 60 -> 43
2000-01 51 -> 36
2001-02 58 -> 39
2002-03 61 -> 41
2003-04 38 -> 27

This kind of thing is why younger fans (millennial and younger) just aren't going to share the Bossy worship. Raw numbers from the 1980s just aren't going to hold as much weight to fans who came up in depressed scoring environments where even all time greats struggled to crack 50

 

[Midnight Judges]

I watched his playoff series last year, it was one of the most pathetic performances I have ever seen. Literally playing to avoid injury to score goals in the next regular season.

Ovechkin laid 12 hits in 4 games in the playoffs last season. That's a 246 hit pace over the course of an NHL season - which would generally equate to being top 10 in hits in the entire NHL. At age 38.

So once again your assertion is eliminated by the facts.

 

[Thenameless]

Bossy never rose higher than the 3rd place in Hart votes. Hull WON (over Gretzky).

We need to be a bit careful about some of these arguments. While I do like most of your case, name-dropping Gretzky is a bit off here. Gretzky in 1990 is still great, but he's no longer otherworldly Gretzky at this point. Early to mid 1980's Gretzky is a different animal that likely no one beats for a Hart (not even Orr or Lemieux), and that's the version that Bossy faced - everyone else plays for a distant second place.

 

[MadLuke]

if you adjust Bossy's numbers to the hypothetical of him starting his career in 1994-95 instead of 1977-78 he hits 50 goals one time.

1994-95 53 -> 48
1995-96 69 -> 62
1996-97 51 -> 42
1997-98 68 -> 47

Not sure how this is done but I am not sure how this season:

Goals
1. Mike Bossy*....• NYI 68
2. Marcel Dionne* • LAK 58
3. Charlie Simmer • LAK 56
4. Wayne Gretzky* • EDM 55


Would be below 50 goals in 1998
Teemu Selänne* • MDA 52
Peter Bondra.. • WSH 52
Pavel Bure*... • VAN 51
John LeClair.. • PHI 51
Žigmund Pálffy • NYI 45

From winning the rocket by a nice 10 goals lead to out of the top 4 ? Possible you can score 47 and still be the highest scoring Canadians in the NHL that year, but that quite the hypothetical.

This kind of thing is why younger fans (millennial and younger) just aren't going to share the Bossy worship. Raw numbers from the 1980s just aren't going to hold as much weight to fans who came up in depressed scoring environments where even all time greats struggled to crack 50

Feel a bit counterintuitive, are they not more likely to "fall for that trap"

 

[WarriorofTime]

Consistency without longevity is a bit of a tougher nut to crack the more years go by and in turn make Bossy's career look unbelievably short by comparison to many.

 

[JackFr]

Not sure how this is done but I am not sure how this season:

Goals
1. Mike Bossy*....• NYI 68
2. Marcel Dionne* • LAK 58
3. Charlie Simmer • LAK 56
4. Wayne Gretzky* • EDM 55


Would be below 50 goals in 1998
Teemu Selänne* • MDA 52
Peter Bondra.. • WSH 52
Pavel Bure*... • VAN 51
John LeClair.. • PHI 51
Žigmund Pálffy • NYI 45

From winning the rocket by a nice 10 goals lead to out of the top 4 ? Possible you can score 47 and still be the highest scoring Canadians in the NHL that year, but that quite the hypothetical.


Feel a bit counterintuitive, are they not more likely to "fall for that trap"

1. I agree it does look a bit wonky, but there were 1.2 fewer goals per game (per team) in 1998 than 1981. Hockey-Ref's adjusted scoring puts that Selanne season at 60 *neutral environment* goals and Bossy at 52. Of course as you point out if you're looking relative to other scorers it does look much better.

2. I don't think so. Honestly, most younger fans straight up do not think that anything before the mid-1990s is even "real hockey" at this point because of how silly the goaltending looks in highlights. Anybody who cares about hockey history enough to even care about Mike Bossy understands that the 1980s were super high scoring relative to every other time in NHL history

 

[MadLuke]

Hockey-Ref's adjusted scoring

I would hesitate to use that one when talking about elite goal scorer, they use league wide scoring, roster size, etc....

for them the fact that roster size was 17 instead of 18 players in 1981 is not only a significant variable, but a linear one, but for the top 10 player in the league on the first PP unit, that not necessarily that relevant.

before the mid-1990s is even "real hockey" at this point because of how silly the goaltending looks in highlights.

They think the same for the low scoring original 6 and like you say do not respect it in general, but Bossy higher numbers from having played in an higher scoring era probably help them more than hurt or being neutral.

It is not like that kind of person argument is Howe > Bossy as a goalscorer, played strong system against HOF goaltender, Bossy was in the mickeymouse league era

 

[authentic]

How is scoring the highest GPG in nhl history while playing 18 minutes a night on a dynasty not peaking high enough?


You compared Matthews, who has accomplished nothing but scoring empty points in a similarly diluted league to Bossy directly.

Well Matthews has scored 69 goals in the modern era and is known for his less than favourable ice time and usage on the PP compared to Ovechkin. Matthews is actually ahead of Ovechkin in goals scored after the same amount of games and you’re acting like it’s an insult to compare him to Bossy as a goal scorer.

 

[Gorskyontario]

Ovechkin laid 12 hits in 4 games in the playoffs last season. That's a 246 hit pace over the course of an NHL season - which would generally equate to being top 10 in hits in the entire NHL. At age 38.

So once again your assertion is eliminated by the facts.

I disagree, I watched the games and know what I saw

Well Matthews has scored 69 goals in the modern era and is known for his less than favourable ice time and usage on the PP compared to Ovechkin. Matthews is actually ahead of Ovechkin in goals scored after the same amount of games and you’re acting like it’s an insult to compare him to Bossy as a goal scorer.

Ovechkin has been miles ahead of Matthews in the playoffs. Ovechkin was more impressive in the 08 playoffs than Matthews entire career thus far.

 

[authentic]

I would never say Matthews isn't a talented goal scorer. Yet despite all this Bossy was the main trigger man on a team that won 19 playoff series in a row.

Matthews has been out of the first round once when Nylander carried him.



I watched his playoff series last year, it was one of the most pathetic performances I have ever seen. Literally playing to avoid injury to score goals in the next regular season.

Nylander did not carry Matthews in their win against Tampa. Matthews was the most valuable player whenever Toronto faced Tampa in the playoffs.

 

[MadLuke]

Did not watch all the game but that seem vastly unfair to matthews at a glance.

Matthews was playing 22 minutes a night, +3, scored 5 goals in 6 games against Tampa, Nylander was playing 17-18, minus 2.. Maybe meant Marner ?

 

[JackSlater]

Hardly just his best year, this comment would be more fair to make if it was about his three year peak. As it is it seems like a uncharitable dismissal such as saying the case for Bossy simply rests on his career goals per game average and the less context is applied the better or whatever.

Pretty bad comparison. Remove the peak season for each player and "on paper" Bossy is way ahead of Hull, and if you look at how they played and how they were used the gap gets bigger. The only thing that makes it a conversation at all is Hull's 1991 season, so yes if someone wants to put Hull ahead they'd have to be putting a massive amount of weight on one season. I'm very open to a comparison of them as players and not resumes as well, but I don't think that that comparison will help Hull.

 

[Sentinel]

We need to be a bit careful about some of these arguments. While I do like most of your case, name-dropping Gretzky is a bit off here. Gretzky in 1990 is still great, but he's no longer otherworldly Gretzky at this point. Early to mid 1980's Gretzky is a different animal that likely no one beats for a Hart (not even Orr or Lemieux), and that's the version that Bossy faced - everyone else plays for a distant second place.

That's true. But.

If we insert peak Gretzky into any era, he will come out on top and no player win a Hart over his eight season stretch. Not Lemieux, not Crosby, not Ovechkin, not Hull Sr. Howe won his six over a 12 season span, so he may win one. Orr may be the sole exception... possibly Hasek. Hull's 86 goals might be as close to upending peak Gretzky as one can get, but still. Bossy's top season certainly is not overtaking Hull's top.

But Bossy didn't just not win the Hart. He was never even #2. And his teammate almost always ended up higher than him in votes. To me, that's important.

Pretty bad comparison. Remove the peak season for each player and "on paper" Bossy is way ahead of Hull, and if you look at how they played and how they were used the gap gets bigger. The only thing that makes it a conversation at all is Hull's 1991 season, so yes if someone wants to put Hull ahead they'd have to be putting a massive amount of weight on one season. I'm very open to a comparison of them as players and not resumes as well, but I don't think that that comparison will help Hull.

Why just one season and not three? In what world are 69, 68, and 64 better than 86, 72, and 71?