Bossy vs Brett Hull

[overpass]

Not to distract from all this, but as someone that has tracked shifts and ice time many times before, how on earth are you doing it for all players?!?! Even if it's just Blues forwards, that's several runs through the whole game, no? That would take me at least all day...

It takes some time, I just do a few different sessions to split it up. I feel like it's not too much to do all forwards, as I can usually get a feel for what the coach is doing and the rhythm of the game, especially if the lines and units are consistent. And it gives more team context for how the player is being used.

This 1991 Blues-North Stars game was a tough one. No consistent lines. It's not so easy to read the blue jerseys, and the commentators frequently said the wrong names. For example, it took a long time for them to catch Hull as a fourth forward, and at one point the commentator said "Stew Gavin is out there, but Hull isn't", missing that Hull was back at the right point.

 

[Sentinel]

Bossy was the straw that stirred the drink offensively and he could do it with anyone. Even 2nd and 3rd liners. And he proved it in years Trottier was injured and relegated to lower lines. He could propeller lower line guys to superstar numbers

Bossy was also an excellent backbreaker

If anything he is underrated because he was teammates with Trottier and Potvin

It's a little like guys saying Lidstrom and peak Fedorov were much better than Yzerman and more key to the wings success. It doesn't jive to put Bossy down

It was a trifecta of success and he was just as important


Bossy scored near equally with checking line Sutter and career 2nd liner Tonelli as his linemates while Trottier was recovering from knee surgery.

This argument of yours is fiction

This is all fine and good but facts remain.

1. Bossy's peak is significantly below Hull's.
2. Bossy never went above 3rd in Hart voting, while Trottier routinely finished higher than him.
3. Bossy is often named (a) the greatest Islander, (b) the greatest goalscorer of all time, and (c) even a Top 10 player of all time. Not on this forum but there is life outside HFBoards as well.

I am quite willing to accept that Bossy was the better overall player player Brett Hull, but all three arguments in #3 are pure fiction.

 

[Gorskyontario]

This is all fine and good but facts remain.

1. Bossy's peak is significantly below Hull's.
2. Bossy never went above 3rd in Hart voting, while Trottier routinely finished higher than him.

No, his peak was not below Hulls when you factor in ice time, play style and playoff performance.

Bossy finished lower than Trottier in Hart voting because Trottier was better. Lets not pretend Brett Hull had anything beyond goal scoring on Prime Trottier either.

 

[The Panther]

This is all fine and good but facts remain.

Note that of what you list, below, only 1 point is an actual "fact".

1. Bossy's peak is significantly below Hull's.

I probably agree that Hull's peak (obviously 1989-90 to 1991-92) is a bit above Bossy's, but "significantly"...? I don't see it. Going by the ever-flawed Hockey Ref.'s top "adjusted points" seasons:
Bossy
108, 106, 97, 95, 93, 93, 92
(One of Bossy's "93" seasons was while missing 13 games.)
Hull
118, 97, 95, 88, 86, 86, 86
(Hull's "97" season was while missing 7 games.)

So, in the 7 best seasons, Bossy beats Hull in every one except for the 1st position.

Hull has a definite edge in peak goal-scoring, but I'd say that's easily compensated by Bossy's vastly better ES results. Now, obviously, you have to apply era/team context to that (a straight comparison is clearly unfair to Hull), but still, it's pretty jarring when Hull's top three seasons are at +20 (two of them being 'minuses'), while Bossy's top three seasons are at +162.

Both were great in the playoffs. Like, all-time greats.

So, maybe at peak, Hull has a slight edge...? But if he does, it's very close and certainly not by a "significant" margin.

2. Bossy never went above 3rd in Hart voting, while Trottier routinely finished higher than him.

This is an interesting and seemingly substantial point. Hull's peak-season Hart finishes are 1, 3, 3, while Bossy's big two are 2, 4.

But here's the thing: In 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986, Bossy outscored Trottier every year, sometimes by large amounts. Yet, as you note, he never finished higher than 3rd in Hart voting. Trottier got there first, and was the kind of two-way forward voters at that time loved. In 1982, Bossy had 14 more goals than Trottier and almost 20 more points, and yet the Hart votes were 41% for Trottier and 11% for Bossy. Do you think that was probably quite accurate, or is that more so votes being split down the middle and old voters preferring the old-school player? (On a related note, has anyone ever had a worse Hart finish for a spectacular season than Bossy in 1978-79? He had 69 goals, 126 points, went +63... and finished 7th in Hart voting. Tough crowd!)

What I'm pointing out is that it's actually harder (esp. if you're not a physical center in that old-school era) to rack up big Hart votes when you're on a Dynasty team. For comparison, consider that Denis Potvin never won a Conn Smythe, but Butch Goring, Ron Hextall, and Ryan O'Reilly all have. It's about relativity.

And, as I noted before, Hull was in a "perfect storm" situation in 1991 to win his Hart. If you roll the dice five times, maybe he wins that one once. If Gretzky wasn't in his 12th season, he'd have been over Hull in voting. If Lemieux had played 70+ games, he'd have been over Hull. And, most notably, if Adam Oates hadn't gotten injured mid-season, he'd have outscored Hull on the Blues. If Oates had put up 150 points or whatever that season (thus becoming the 5th player in history to do so), the votes for Hull would now be split with him (as the Trottier / Bossy votes were often split).

So, I dunno. Full marks to Hull for his epic 1990-91 season, and I do think that one season of his is probably (?) better than any season Bossy ever had. But I don't think his Hart win is really that significant in this comparison.

3. Bossy is often named (a) the greatest Islander, (b) the greatest goalscorer of all time, and (c) even a Top 10 player of all time. Not on this forum but there is life outside HFBoards as well.

There may be people on Long Island who say this, but I've heard / read of a single hockey fan ranking Bossy that high. Certainly not a top-10 player of all time!

 

[Jets4Life]

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.

I completely disagree, with Gretzky as weakest. I would put him as #2. Gretzky also transitioned from a goal scorer, to more of a playmaker by the mid 80s, so he could have potted 70 goals a year, if he wanted to up until 1994.

Ovechkin would be #1. Krutov only played one mediocre season in the NHL, and also played on a larger ice surface, so it's too hard to rate him.

I would rank them:

Ovechkin> Lemieux> Gretzky> Bure> Hull> Bossy.

Bossy was a terrific goal scorer, but he played from 1977-87, which was a time when scoring was nearly double what it was in Ovechkin's prime.

 

[Sentinel]

Note that of what you list, below, only 1 point is an actual "fact".

I probably agree that Hull's peak (obviously 1989-90 to 1991-92) is a bit above Bossy's, but "significantly"...? I don't see it. Going by the ever-flawed Hockey Ref.'s top "adjusted points" seasons:
Bossy
108, 106, 97, 95, 93, 93, 92
(One of Bossy's "93" seasons was while missing 13 games.)
Hull
118, 97, 95, 88, 86, 86, 86
(Hull's "97" season was while missing 7 games.)

I was talking GOALS. I already specified, numerous times, that I rank Bossy ahead of Hull as an overall player. And vice versa FOR GOALS.

There may be people on Long Island who say this, but I've heard / read of a single hockey fan ranking Bossy that high. Certainly not a top-10 player of all time!

I presume you missed a "NOT" in there.

Guess what: I see it all the time on Facebook. Every time Bossy is mentioned. And they are all not from LI either.

 

[MadLuke]

I was talking GOALS. I already specified, numerous times, that I rank Bossy ahead of Hull as an overall player. And vice versa FOR GOALS.

I mean, are you surprised that the statement:
1. Bossy's peak is significantly below Hull's.

That talk about Hart finish just after.

Made in the thread called Bossy vs Brett hull , that people cannot know you are talking about goals ? This seem to be obtuse for no reason. Why bring hart finish in a conversation about better goalscorer ?

 

[Gorskyontario]

I was talking GOALS. I already specified, numerous times, that I rank Bossy ahead of Hull as an overall player. And vice versa FOR GOALS.

You're trying to paint on a level far above Brett Hull as a goal scorer. Which is wasn't. Bossy was as great or better than Hull as a goal scorer.

 

[67 others]

Note that of what you list, below, only 1 point is an actual "fact".

I probably agree that Hull's peak (obviously 1989-90 to 1991-92) is a bit above Bossy's, but "significantly"...? I don't see it. Going by the ever-flawed Hockey Ref.'s top "adjusted points" seasons:
Bossy
108, 106, 97, 95, 93, 93, 92
(One of Bossy's "93" seasons was while missing 13 games.)
Hull
118, 97, 95, 88, 86, 86, 86
(Hull's "97" season was while missing 7 games.)

So, in the 7 best seasons, Bossy beats Hull in every one except for the 1st position.

Hull has a definite edge in peak goal-scoring, but I'd say that's easily compensated by Bossy's vastly better ES results. Now, obviously, you have to apply era/team context to that (a straight comparison is clearly unfair to Hull), but still, it's pretty jarring when Hull's top three seasons are at +20 (two of them being 'minuses'), while Bossy's top three seasons are at +162.

Both were great in the playoffs. Like, all-time greats.

So, maybe at peak, Hull has a slight edge...? But if he does, it's very close and certainly not by a "significant" margin.

This is an interesting and seemingly substantial point. Hull's peak-season Hart finishes are 1, 3, 3, while Bossy's big two are 2, 4.

But here's the thing: In 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986, Bossy outscored Trottier every year, sometimes by large amounts. Yet, as you note, he never finished higher than 3rd in Hart voting. Trottier got there first, and was the kind of two-way forward voters at that time loved. In 1982, Bossy had 14 more goals than Trottier and almost 20 more points, and yet the Hart votes were 41% for Trottier and 11% for Bossy. Do you think that was probably quite accurate, or is that more so votes being split down the middle and old voters preferring the old-school player? (On a related note, has anyone ever had a worse Hart finish for a spectacular season than Bossy in 1978-79? He had 69 goals, 126 points, went +63... and finished 7th in Hart voting. Tough crowd!)

What I'm pointing out is that it's actually harder (esp. if you're not a physical center in that old-school era) to rack up big Hart votes when you're on a Dynasty team. For comparison, consider that Denis Potvin never won a Conn Smythe, but Butch Goring, Ron Hextall, and Ryan O'Reilly all have. It's about relativity.

And, as I noted before, Hull was in a "perfect storm" situation in 1991 to win his Hart. If you roll the dice five times, maybe he wins that one once. If Gretzky wasn't in his 12th season, he'd have been over Hull in voting. If Lemieux had played 70+ games, he'd have been over Hull. And, most notably, if Adam Oates hadn't gotten injured mid-season, he'd have outscored Hull on the Blues. If Oates had put up 150 points or whatever that season (thus becoming the 5th player in history to do so), the votes for Hull would now be split with him (as the Trottier / Bossy votes were often split).

So, I dunno. Full marks to Hull for his epic 1990-91 season, and I do think that one season of his is probably (?) better than any season Bossy ever had. But I don't think his Hart win is really that significant in this comparison.

There may be people on Long Island who say this, but I've heard / read of a single hockey fan ranking Bossy that high. Certainly not a top-10 player of all time!

Yes Brett Hull's peak was fabulous when paired with one of thr consensus greatest playmaker of all time.

Oates was a fabulous assist man who achieved massive totals even when Hull wasn't his triggerman.

Likewise, Bossy even when Trottier was not his linemate, elevated lesser scorers like Sutter to superstar numbers and Bossy maintained his scoring.

Hull? Well, when Oates left for Boston, Hull scored 16 more goals that season. But he scored 54 goals in 54 games while Oates was there for that 70 goal season. So while it wasn't a drastic haircut to his numbers, it was still a noted drop

His goal scoring without Oates as his playmaker was still never reaching those lofty heights. Bossy's did without Trottier. In fact, Sutter scored on average 40-60 points except the year he was with Bossy and scored 102 lol

Tonelli had that 100 point season and another 93 point season.....but Bossy factored heavily into both those years.

The man could do it with anyone.

 

[tabness]

I'll try and get em up this weekend

unlisted except for game 1 to keep it up longer before the copyright strikes come in

didnt have game 7 on hand unfortunately

games 4 and 6 were a bit messed up on the transfer and this may have issues in the videos uploaded (skips and stuff that cause some parts to be missed) so sorry about that

didnt bother editing out the commercials and all that this time since it takes time only for youtube to take down some of the videos and lock my account soon enough anyway (yes im still pissed from the last time they locked my account lol f*** google)

 

[tabness]

I mean, are you surprised that the statement:
1. Bossy's peak is significantly below Hull's.

That talk about Hart finish

Made in the thread called Bossy vs Brett hull , that people cannot know you are talking about goals ? This seem to be obtuse for no reason. Why bring hart finish in a conversation about better goalscorer ?

I mean the first post of @Sentinel very clearly focuses on about goal scoring. The Hart thing is literally the only thing about overall play, seems to be more of a throwaway addition than a core part of the argument (as I've went on about earlier in this topic, I feel there is a lot more there for a case for Hull to be as good as Bossy as an overall player at his best, but again, it's just something to think about rather than the stronger and more detailed argument about goal scoring).

It somewhat floors me that there is an issue beyond the usual ambiguity present in language lol

And, as I noted before, Hull was in a "perfect storm" situation in 1991 to win his Hart. If you roll the dice five times, maybe he wins that one once. If Gretzky wasn't in his 12th season, he'd have been over Hull in voting. If Lemieux had played 70+ games, he'd have been over Hull. And, most notably, if Adam Oates hadn't gotten injured mid-season, he'd have outscored Hull on the Blues. If Oates had put up 150 points or whatever that season (thus becoming the 5th player in history to do so), the votes for Hull would now be split with him (as the Trottier / Bossy votes were often split).

I don't think it makes much sense for Hull's year to be considered a perfect storm compared to before and after. Lemieux for example missed time in all years.

I also don't think if Oates played and scored more points and got to 150 that it would somehow hurt Hull's chances whatsoever. Hull would have a solid chance score more and hit his own milestones as well (90, maybe 93). Hull's star power was on another level that entire year, he had the narrative for the MVP down pat.

 

[The Panther]

I also don't think if Oates played and scored more points and got to 150 that it would somehow hurt Hull's chances whatsoever. Hull would have a solid chance score more and hit his own milestones as well (90, maybe 93). Hull's star power was on another level that entire year, he had the narrative for the MVP down pat.

Yeah, I think if Oates plays all games, Hull still beats him in Hart voting since Hull was the sexier, media-friendly, big-smile player, while Oates had all the social charisma of a wet noodle.

However, if the scoring race had ended up like this...
168 -- Gretzky (team in 1st)
151 -- Oates (team in 1st)
135 -- Hull (team in 1st)

...would Hull still have won it? As it actually was, Hull's vote share over Gretzky was only 84% to 67%, so pretty close. Now, Hull's got a teammate who outscored him and had one of the biggest offensive seasons of all time. I could see Hull's votes coming down.

 

[Staniowski]

This is all fine and good but facts remain.

1. Bossy's peak is significantly below Hull's.
2. Bossy never went above 3rd in Hart voting, while Trottier routinely finished higher than him.
3. Bossy is often named (a) the greatest Islander, (b) the greatest goalscorer of all time, and (c) even a Top 10 player of all time. Not on this forum but there is life outside HFBoards as well.

I am quite willing to accept that Bossy was the better overall player player Brett Hull, but all three arguments in #3 are pure fiction.

If I remember correctly, I believe Bossy finished ahead of Trottier in Hart voting as much as the other way around.

What really happened is that Trottier was already an established star before Bossy arrived in the NHL. Trottier was very talented, and a true all-around player, and everybody liked him and respected him. So, while Bossy was an immediate hit, I think most people were skeptical to say he was as good as Trottier. But it eventually changed, and more and more people thought Bossy was actually the better player.

I think you can correctly say that each of Potvin, Trottier, and Bossy were the best of the three at one time or another (similar to the Habs Big 3 defensemen- each of them were the best of the 3 at one time).