Did Howie Morenz have the best offensive single season ever?

[Ben Grimm]

​

Adjusted Points

1.	Howie Morenz*	190	1927-28
2.	Wayne Gretzky*	170	1985-86
3.	Cooney Weiland*	168	1929-30
4.	Wayne Gretzky*	166	1984-85
5.	Mario Lemieux*	165	1988-89
6.	Wayne Gretzky*	163	1983-84
7.	Frank Boucher*	160	1929-30
8.	Wayne Gretzky*	159	1982-83

What do you think?

Click to read more...

 

[Bear of Bad News]

What do you think?

It's your thread. What do you think?

 

[Ben Grimm]

It's your thread. What do you think?

I think he did.

 

[jigglysquishy]

He didn't.

Hockey reference adjusted stats are garbage and lazy.

Outside Gretzky, he has arguably a top 10 offensive season ever. But garbage stats produce garbage results.

 

[Ben Grimm]

... Hockey reference adjusted stats are garbage and lazy. ...

Why? What is your specific argument with details?

 

[BraveCanadian]

This is a case were adjusted stats are meaningless.

 

[Ben Grimm]

This is a case were adjusted stats are meaningless.

Why? What is your specific argument with details?

 

[MadLuke]

Why? What is your specific argument with details?

7 season of the Top 20 with Hockey reference method come from the 26-27 to 29-30 season

17 of the Top 37.

Well over 100 years of hockey and 45% of the best adjusted season come from 4 of them, the method as a lot of issue and the way they handle roster size, point distribution, etc... show up to an extreme when you go back (the issue are always there, they are just less obvious)

The Hockey reference is not about who was the best over time, it is how much value a goal was and who created more value, would the nhl add 3 players to the roster that barely play next season it would impact the player adjusted points....

It is hard to argue for a non Gretzky season to have that title, maybe a creative argument for Orr when the Bruins scored more than 100 more goals than anyone else, showing how much offense was from Orr play that did not translate into points in the score sheet and because he played more minutes.

This:
Points

1.	Howie Morenz* • MTL	51
2.	Aurele Joliat* • MTL	39
3.	Frank Boucher* • NYR	35
	George Hay* • DTC	35
5.	Nels Stewart* • MTM	34

Should not adjust higher than this (if the goal is too compare and rank offensive season over time):
Points

1.	Wayne Gretzky* • EDM	205
2.	Paul Coffey* • EDM	126
3.	Michel Goulet* • QUE	122
4.	Peter Šťastný* • QUE	119
5.	Mike Bossy* • NYI	118

Points

1.	Wayne Gretzky* • EDM	212
2.	Mike Bossy* • NYI	147
3.	Peter Šťastný* • QUE	139
4.	Dennis Maruk • WSH	136
5.	Bryan Trottier* • NYI	129

Points

1.	Wayne Gretzky* • EDM	208
2.	Jari Kurri* • EDM	135
3.	Dale Hawerchuk* • WIN	130
4.	Marcel Dionne* • LAK	126
5.	Paul Coffey* • EDM	121

Gretzky outscore the 5th in points by 74%, 64% and 72% in those examples, Morenz by 50%
Gretzky outscore the second in points by 63%, 44% and 54% in those examples, Morenz by 30% in a much noisier environment.

No need to even do some league talent adjustment, oversea competition, game volume etc... just in raw numbers Gretzky edge over the elite competition is bigger.

 

[jigglysquishy]

What is your specific argument with details?

GPG/GPG is incredibly lazy. There's no nuance to scoring distribution.

In different eras star players made up a difference distribution of total goals scored.

In the 20s, when many players played all 60 minutes, the number of goals scored by first liners in 90+%.

In the 80s, 4th liners scored more points than ever.

In terms of comparing stars versus stars, this is vitally important. But is treated as a non-entity in GPG/GPG.

They adjust by ice time, but assume a linearity to it. So Beliveau has his ice time greatly reduced in their formula by an equal amount as a Jack LeClair. But if you increase the roster size you obviously are still playing your stars to a greater amount than your depth players.

Additionally, PK time is treated as equal in terms of offense generation as PP time or ES time. Which is obviously incorrect. So a guy like Beliveau, who regularly played the PK, is dinged in the adjustments.


People like the formula because it's easy and is a finger click away. But it's full of errors and just bad assumptions. VsX isn't perfect, but does a far better job of normalizing scoring environments than HRef does. But no one has perfected adjusted scoring yet. It's just than HRef does a worse job than anyone.

People forget, at it's core, Hockey Reference is a baseball site. Hockey is just a side business. So things like depth player scoring distribution (generally, a 2nd baseman plays every minute of every game he plays in) is completely lost on them. I've messaged them before about incorrect assumptions and they don't even dignify it with a reply.

 

[dr robbie]

There were only half the games of the current NHL and he had like 10 points over #2. I get that a low scoring environment will alter the results, but when you're looking at a small number of games played, low scoring, and only 10 total teams, I feel like too much gets lost in translation. I also really struggle with the face validity of calling a 50 point season the "best offensive single season ever"

 

[Moose Head]

Good argument for greatest season before Howe had his big years in the early 50’s, but it should end there.

 

[MadLuke]

Just in term of raw numbers before the recent McDavid one, The 20 imo was around:

Adjusted point - using elite Canadians player scoring

With different previous at adjusting players season, the latest attempt has been the following with those goals: 1) Only use the top players in the league to automatically adjust for scoring distribution change over time, if rules change, style of play, power play habit make scoring more...

forums.hfboards.com

players	season	Season Length	Game played	Points	Elite Can average points	adjusted points	PPG	Adjusted ppg
Wayne Gretzky	19851986	80	80	215	98.9	215.0	2.69	2.62
Wayne Gretzky	19841985	80	80	208	101	203.7	2.6	2.48
Wayne Gretzky	19821983	80	80	196	96.3	201.3	2.45	2.45
Wayne Gretzky	19831984	80	74	205	101.6	199.6	2.77	2.63
Wayne Gretzky	19861987	80	79	183	90.9	199.1	2.32	2.46
Mario Lemieux	19881989	80	76	199	99.3	198.2	2.62	2.54
Wayne Gretzky	19811982	80	80	212	106.5	196.9	2.65	2.4
Connor McDavid	20202021	56	56	105	76.8	193.2	1.88	2.36
Jaromir Jagr	19981999	82	81	127	66	185.7	1.57	2.29
Gordie Howe	19521953	70	70	95	60.4	177.8	1.36	2.17
Phil Esposito	19701971	78	78	152	87.1	177.0	1.95	2.16
Mario Lemieux	19951996	82	70	161	88.6	175.3	2.3	2.5
Wayne Gretzky	19901991	80	78	163	93.9	171.7	2.09	2.15
Mario Lemieux	19871988	80	77	168	97	171.3	2.18	2.17
Leon Draisaitl	20192020	70	71	110	74.2	167.6	1.55	2.01
Wayne Gretzky	19881989	80	78	168	99.3	167.3	2.15	2.09
Phil Esposito	19731974	78	78	145	88	167.1	1.86	2.04
Stan Mikita	19661967	70	70	97	66.4	165.1	1.39	2.01
Wayne Gretzky	19801981	80	80	164	98.9	164.0	2.05	2
Jaromir Jagr	19951996	82	82	149	88.6	162.3	1.82	1.98

in ppg, best 27-28 Morenz was similar to Forsberg peak, prime Jagr-Hull when you compare to elite Canadians scoring in the nhl that year, not Gretkzy-Lemieux-Howe-McDavid-peak Jagr/Crosby level, but he was a strong 2 way forward type:

players	season	Game played	Adjusted ppg
Wayne Gretzky	19831984	74	2.63
Wayne Gretzky	19851986	80	2.62
Mario Lemieux	19921993	60	2.58
Mario Lemieux	19881989	76	2.54
Mario Lemieux	19951996	70	2.5
Wayne Gretzky	19841985	80	2.48
Wayne Gretzky	19861987	79	2.46
Wayne Gretzky	19821983	80	2.45
Wayne Gretzky	19811982	80	2.4
Connor McDavid	20202021	56	2.36
Wayne Gretzky	19871988	64	2.32
Jaromir Jagr	19981999	81	2.29
Gordie Howe	19521953	70	2.17
Mario Lemieux	19871988	77	2.17
Jaromir Jagr	19992000	63	2.17
Phil Esposito	19701971	78	2.16
Mario Lemieux	19911992	64	2.16
Wayne Gretzky	19901991	78	2.15
Wayne Gretzky	19881989	78	2.09
Teemu Selanne	19981999	75	2.09
Phil Esposito	19731974	78	2.04
Mario Lemieux	19961997	76	2.04
Leon Draisaitl	20192020	71	2.01
Stan Mikita	19661967	70	2.01
Wayne Gretzky	19801981	80	2
Alex Ovechkin	20092010	72	1.99
Jaromir Jagr	19951996	82	1.98
Bobby Orr	19701971	78	1.97
Evgeni Malkin	20112012	75	1.97
Connor McDavid	20192020	64	1.97
Bobby Orr	19691970	76	1.96
Jaromir Jagr	20002001	81	1.93
Jaromir Jagr	19971998	77	1.93
Howie Morenz	19271928	43	1.92
Bobby Hull	19651966	65	1.92
Peter Forsberg	20022003	75	1.92

 

[jigglysquishy]

I've always been weary about using GPG/GPG.

Here is a graph of GPG/GPG for the player who finished 10th in points. I have adjusted season lengths and scoring to 21-22 scoring levels.

The variation is massive. We would expect some season to season variance of the 10th scorer, but not a 16 point spread. It adjusts the 18-19 10th place scorer to 9th this season, while adjusting the 14-15 10th place scorer to 24th this season.

Even in a short time duration GPG/GPG completely breaks down.

You see a 15 point jump within a couple of seasons for 10th place scorer.

You expect large variation at the top, with it tapering down. But 10th place to 10th place should have minor variation within a short time frame.

 

[pnep]

7 season of the Top 20 with Hockey reference method come from the 26-27 to 29-30 season

17 of the Top 37.

Adjusted stats - Hockeyoutsider, Pnep...

In light of the recent posts I was wondering if anyone has the adjusted stats for Orr. Possibly compared to a few d-men from today. Lidstrom, Niedermeyer, guys of that ilk. Curious to see how that turns out. Most appreciated.

forums.hfboards.com

 

[MS]

I love adjusted stats for post 1967 but they fall apart for earlier years and are totally useless pre-WW2.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I love adjusted stats for post 1967 but they fall apart for earlier years and are totally useless pre-WW2.

For the same reasons, but to a lesser degree, they fall apart post 1967 too.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Never been a fan of adjusted stats, they're a solution searching for a problem.

If you want to compare seasons across eras you're better off comparing against #2/#5/#10 in the league in the respective seasons (and to a lesser extent who those players were).

For example, '28 Morenz was 31% above #2 in points while '86 Gretzky was 52% above #2

 

[MS]

For the same reasons, but to a lesser degree, they fall apart post 1967 too.

Eh, I wouldn’t use it as a bible but it’s a handy tool for comparing the careers of, like, a Dave Andreychuk to a Marian Hossa.

 

[Strangle]

He didn't.

Hockey reference adjusted stats are garbage and lazy.

Outside Gretzky, he has arguably a top 10 offensive season ever. But garbage stats produce garbage results.

Adjusted stats themselves are garbage and lazy, imo

Never been a fan of adjusted stats, they're a solution searching for a problem.

If you want to compare seasons across eras you're better off comparing against #2/#5/#10 in the league in the respective seasons (and to a lesser extent who those players were).

For example, '28 Morenz was 31% above #2 in points while '86 Gretzky was 52% above #2

The problem they’re searching for is to somehow make gretzky’s insane numbers make sense.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Adjusted stats themselves are garbage and lazy, imo



The problem they’re searching for is to somehow make gretzky’s insane numbers make sense.

Yup.

Part of me thinks its indirectly because of Lebron James and Tom Brady. Hockey fans are watching 1 sport have it's GOAT, and another have someone that at least has made it a discussion. Meanwhile hockey fans had to sit and watch their current batch of generational stars struggle to put up point totals that would've barely cracked the Top 10 in past eras.

 

[Strangle]

Yup.

Part of me thinks its indirectly because of Lebron James and Tom Brady. Hockey fans are watching 1 sport have it's GOAT, and another have someone that at least has made it a discussion. Meanwhile hockey fans had to sit and watch their current batch of generational stars struggle to put up point totals that would've barely cracked the Top 10 in past eras.

This is exactly it. Newer or younger fans can’t wrap their heads around not having the best player ever playing in front of them right now and they can’t fathom that players of the past could be just that good.

Spoiler, we who lived through it couldn’t believe it either!

 

[Dingo]

Yup.

Part of me thinks its indirectly because of Lebron James and Tom Brady. Hockey fans are watching 1 sport have it's GOAT, and another have someone that at least has made it a discussion. Meanwhile hockey fans had to sit and watch their current batch of generational stars struggle to put up point totals that would've barely cracked the Top 10 in past eras.

no, in ONE past era.

Do you also think that prime Gordie Howe was an 80-90 point player?
What do you think he changed in his game in the late 60s that allowed him to become a 100pt player?
Was Teemu Selanne actually better as a rookie than ever again in his life?
Did, for some reason, every single goalie who came to fruition in the 1980s actually fail to play at a level that would put him in the AHL today? Was there something in hockey development in the 70s that produced tremendous scorers and abysmal goaltenders? Why were the hockey minds of that time so negligent of one aspect of the game, yet so genius at developing offensive talent, wherein even a guy who couldnt stay in the league for long like Blaine Stoughton was arguably a better peak hockey player than Patrick Kane or Steven Stamkos, and knocking on Crosby's door?
Speaking of Crosby, how was he at his best at 19 yrs old? 120 points. Did he refuse to train after that point, never replicating his offensive ability, until 2018 when something magically changed and he reverted back tobeing better than he had been for many years previous as an older player?

These are mysteries.

 

[MadLuke]

Yup.

Part of me thinks its indirectly because of Lebron James and Tom Brady. Hockey fans are watching 1 sport have it's GOAT, and another have someone that at least has made it a discussion. Meanwhile hockey fans had to sit and watch their current batch of generational stars struggle to put up point totals that would've barely cracked the Top 10 in past eras.

It is not like some adjustment goes in people mind when they compare 50ppg Chamberlain or 3 pts era scoring to the 90s-00s, same for passing stats.

It will be hard for anyone brain to not adjust in some ways stats from 50-70 games season to 84 games seasons.

We do not see peak Bernie Nicholls vs McDavid or Maruk > Ovechkin debate for good reason.

There 2 groups
1) It is an impossible task to do, not only in the obvious cannot be perfect style, but even good enough style and bring just misleading noise, the only way to do it its by a general gut feel or only watch video/read testimony of those who saw people play and not look at stats at all.

2) If we are to look at stats at all, the league change too much for it to not be possible to have an adjustment system that make it better than nothing, would it be really sample (put all season in a pro-rated 82 games pace for example) or more complex, in the 20s-30s the better than nothing would be hard to achieve and almost mostly revert to 1, sample size being small has well, playoff that that time it became like looking at stats for an Olympic tourney, you need a large enough sample size for stats to speak of quality of play.

 

[MadLuke]

Never been a fan of adjusted stats, they're a solution searching for a problem.

If you want to compare seasons across eras you're better off comparing against #2/#5/#10 in the league in the respective seasons (and to a lesser extent who those players were).

For example, '28 Morenz was 31% above #2 in points while '86 Gretzky was 52% above #2

Seem to me the only way to adjust is with something you suggest. (But I feel that adjusting stats when we compare to peers)

But number 2 vary yearly way to much to be used

In 96 second place was jagr 149pts, 1989 it was prime Gretzky putting 168 pts.

The compare to number 2 would give 1989 155pts Yzerman peak season a .92 score, Elias scoring 81 pts in 2004, finisihing 6th in scoring score .93, it could be a worst method than HR adjusted pts.

Comparing to number 2-5 and 10, sound already much better, at least if you look in very similar seasons, but 10th place in 1954 vs Robitaille-Recchi of 93 or Federov-Mogilny of 96, the who the player were can get important and we enter a circular problem, if we prejudge who those players were we start we the answer we want and enter a very adjusted stats thing. it is not just talent pool but when there is just not that many first line-first pp unit on a good team and they have to face MTL-DET 28 time a year spots, how much outscoring them when you are on DET-MTL first line and first PP unit and not play DET-MTL 28 times a year mean.

There a real problem, imo, with no that good answer, I like comparing to the an average of a large number of the best canadians nhler over time with the size that adjust a little bit to never go bigger than the number of first liner and look at a bunch of close season more than single one, which seem the best compromise but it is far from perfect.

And even if you would have some perfect adjusted stats, hockey stats are not numerous and far from telling most of the story, no sport does, but Soccer-Hockey are from baseball or modern basketball. Would RNH get close to 104 pts on the BlackHawks, Coyote or Flyers last year ? DId he and Hyman turn a massive corner past 29?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Never been a fan of adjusted stats, they're a solution searching for a problem.

If you want to compare seasons across eras you're better off comparing against #2/#5/#10 in the league in the respective seasons (and to a lesser extent who those players were).

For example, '28 Morenz was 31% above #2 in points while '86 Gretzky was 52% above #2

For those who are stat-minded, I’m curious whether VsX could be converted into a “points” format for the sake of intuitive understanding? Like could you create a baseline for what 1 universal-point is worth, then apply that VsX percentage and express the result as an adjusted point?

For the sort of questions that hockey fans often want to answer (e.g. who scored the most adjusted points, Lafleur or Hull?) it would be much more intuitive to work with a points system rather than a percentage system.

BTW, I’m not trying to volun-tell anyone to tackle such a project. Just curious whether it’s a viable idea.