Do you want Ovechkin to break Gretzky's goal record?

[Midnight Judges]

Yes don't think anyone has ever argued Crosby to be a better goal scorer.

Of course not. Because Ovechkin kicks the crap out of Crosby as a goal scorer.

If I had told you at the start of their careers that Ovechkin would have roughly 50% more goals, you'd have completely denied it as impossible. You would have taken enormous offense to that.

And yet that is our reality.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Of course not. Because Ovechkin kicks the crap out of Crosby as a goal scorer.

If I had told you at the start of their careers that Ovechkin would have roughly 50% more goals, you'd have completely denied it as impossible. You would have taken enormous offense to that.

And yet that is our reality.

Well it's easy to have a lot more goals when you have played 200 more games. What's not easy is have 30 more points in 200 less games. If they played the same amount crosby would be 350+ ahead. Again it's not close at all

 

[Midnight Judges]

Well it's easy to have a lot more goals when you have played 200 more games.

Ovechkin isn't just ahead. He's nearly 50% ahead across their entire careers. It's an absolute curb stomping.

There's no amount of excuses here that make your case.

 

[nbwingsfan]

I'm curious what our esteemed community thinks? I find earlier on in his career many wanted to see him do it when it seemed unlikely... But now that he is getting pretty close attitudes sort of shifting.

What is your opinion?

Yes, although still a big argument could be made on who’s the best goal scorer of all time even if he doss

 

[nbwingsfan]

Of course... Gretzky is not the best goal scorer in history so at least someone breaking the record will re-establish the fact.

There's about 8-9 players who were/are better at goal scoring than Gretzky was.

Ovechkin, Lemieux, Brett Hull, Maurice Richard, Bobby Hull, Gordie Howe, Phil Esposito, Jagr... IIRC (would have to look in my posting history)

Some guys on the fence because they unfortunately had to retire early so we don't know how they would have aged out (Bure and Bossy notably)

So once Ovechkin breaks the record, the false belief that Gretzky was the best at everything will start to change

this is simply a horrible and indefensible take.

The guy with both the highest career goal total AND the two highest goal scoring seasons of all time is the 10th best goal scorer? Behind Jagr?

 

[pld459666]

Records are made to be broken.

Even what we initially felt may have been unbreakable.

This one felt unbreakable for a long time.

 

[wetcoast]

It's for the boards if its hockey related....which this is. Just like Ovechkin, Gretzky used his hockey celebrity to promote some very heinous actions.

Ovi is an active player, Gretzky was retired and supported something based on bad intelligence provided by Hawks

The hockey community, particularly in NA, intentionally overlook this with Wayne while simultaneously shitting on Ovechkin for it.

Once again the 2 acts by the 2 countries are false equalivacies but ironically Ovi does okay is the false equvilancy Capital eh.

This is done to manufacture an image for a cultural hockey icon, which subsequently brings us to the topic of nationalism.

The USA and Canada are different countries this the nationalism remark doesn't apply.

 

[Hanji]

It's for the boards if its hockey related....which this is. Just like Ovechkin, Gretzky used his hockey celebrity to promote some very heinous actions.

The hockey community, particularly in NA, intentionally overlook this with Wayne while simultaneously shitting on Ovechkin for it.

This is done to manufacture an image for a cultural hockey icon, which subsequently brings us to the topic of nationalism.

That's what I said. Gretzky is a cultural icon. We've invented a squeaky clean image for #99 but don't afford the same to #8. If anything this race has exposed a lot of ugly nationalism that's never stopped bubbling under the surface.

 

[wetcoast]

Ovechkin isn't just ahead. He's nearly 50% ahead across their entire careers. It's an absolute curb stomping.

There's no amount of excuses here that make your case.

You are going to need to change your "nearly 50%" line as one guy has 300,% more goals this season eh.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Of course... Gretzky is not the best goal scorer in history so at least someone breaking the record will re-establish the fact.

There's about 8-9 players who were/are better at goal scoring than Gretzky was.

Ovechkin, Lemieux, Brett Hull, Maurice Richard, Bobby Hull, Gordie Howe, Phil Esposito, Jagr... IIRC (would have to look in my posting history)

Some guys on the fence because they unfortunately had to retire early so we don't know how they would have aged out (Bure and Bossy notably)

So once Ovechkin breaks the record, the false belief that Gretzky was the best at everything will start to change

I don't think Gretzky is the greatest goal-scorer ever, but some of those names don't make a lot of sense. What's the argument for Jagr or Brett Hull over Gretzky? (I see the argument for Esposito, but in order to get there, you'd have to really downplay the impact that Bobby Orr had on his numbers).

 

[tom_servo]

No, but it's more pro-Gretz than anti-Ovi. I like the fact that Wayne holds all those records. I also think Ovechkin has an argument as the true best goalscorer of all time, regardless.

 

[Xspyrit]

I'm amused how you proclaim that Gretzky is only the 9th or 10th best goal scorer in history. He has the most career goals AND the 2 best single seasons for goal scoring -- so both longevity and peak.

And before anyone argues high goal scoring era, check out how he fared against his peers in his best years: In '81-'82, he scored 92 goals. Second place was Bossy with 64 goals.
In '83-'84, he scored 87 goals. Next best was Michel Goulet with 56. He was roughly 50% ahead of #2.

Ovi's best season was 2007-98, when he scored 65 goals (which is incredible - but only 24th best all time). Kovalchuk was second best that year with 52.

Gretzky may be better known for his vision and passing, but you're comically under-rating his goal scoring.

I always forget that you can't really make short posts on the internet without explaining everything, particularly on a site like HF

I am not "proclaiming" anything, it is MY opinion and it is of course based on facts (which is not that often the case on the internet)

For me, the first thing to look at is ERA ADJUSTED stats... Why? Simply because the game varies from an era to another. Comparing stats from the highest scoring era with the DPE for example is going to misleading, even stupid I would say. Goalie equipment and technique is some of the factors but it shouldn't be really necessary to explain all of that unless it would be to someone who has very little knowledge of the game

So without saying more, I'll go straight to the facts. If you look at pure GPG, this is what it looks like :

1- Mike Bossy 752 GP 0.76 GPG
2- Mario Lemieux 915 GP 0.75 GPG
3- Cy Denneny 329 GP 0.75 GPG
4- Babe Dye 272 GP 0.75 GPG
5- Auston Matthews 508 GP 0.63 GPG
6- Pavel Bure 702 GP 0.62 GPG
7- Alex Ovechkin 1,373 GP 0.60 GPG
8- Wayne Gretzky 1,487 GP 0.60 GPG
9- Brett Hull 1,269 GP 0.58 GPG
10- Bobby Hull 1,063 GP 0.57 GPG
13- Phil Esposito 1,282 GP 0.56 GPG
14- Maurice Richard 978 GP 0.56 GPG
etc

Below is what it looks like era-adjusted. I removed Denneny and Dye from the equation right away for obvious reasons :

Alex Ovechkin 1,373 GP 0.68 GPG
Mario Lemieux 915 GP 0.67 GPG
Maurice Richard 978 GP 0.67 GPG
Pavel Bure 702 GP 0.66 GPG
Mike Bossy 752 GP 0.61 GPG
Bobby Hull 1063 GP 0.61 GPG
Steven Stamkos 1031 GP 0.61 GPG
Brett Hull 1269 GP 0.58 GPG
Sidney Crosby 1218 GP 0.54 GPG
Gordie Howe 1767 GP 0.52 GPG
Phil Esposito 1282 GP 0.52 GPG
Teemu Selänne 1451 GP 0.51 GPG
Jean Béliveau 1125 GP 0.51 GPG
Peter Bondra 1081 GP 0.51 GPG
Wayne Gretzky 1487 GP 0.51 GPG
Jaromír Jágr 1733 GP 0.49 GPG


Also leaving a few guys out of this because they're still young so it's impossible to know how the rest of their careers will go. As of now, McDavid has a 0.61 GP, Matthews 0.79 GPG (wow), Draisaitl 0.55 GPG and Pastrnak 0.60 GPG

I was purely going off memory (which is why I said IIRC) and didn't remember correctly regarding Jagr but the real list would be more : Ovechkin, Lemieux, Richard, Hull, Stamkos, Hull, Crosby, Howe and Esposito

We didn't count Bure and Bossy because they retired too young.

You might be "amused" but what amuses me EVEN MORE is people drawing conclusions and laughing before even knowing the whole argument

 

[Golden_Jet]

I always forget that you can't really make short posts on the internet without explaining everything, particularly on a site like HF

I am not "proclaiming" anything, it is MY opinion and it is of course based on facts (which is not that often the case on the internet)

For me, the first thing to look at is ERA ADJUSTED stats... Why? Simply because the game varies from an era to another. Comparing stats from the highest scoring era with the DPE for example is going to misleading, even stupid I would say. Goalie equipment and technique is some of the factors but it shouldn't be really necessary to explain all of that unless it would be to someone who has very little knowledge of the game

So without saying more, I'll go straight to the facts. If you look at pure GPG, this is what it looks like :

1- Mike Bossy 752 GP 0.76 GPG
2- Mario Lemieux 915 GP 0.75 GPG
3- Cy Denneny 329 GP 0.75 GPG
4- Babe Dye 272 GP 0.75 GPG
5- Auston Matthews 508 GP 0.63 GPG
6- Pavel Bure 702 GP 0.62 GPG
7- Alex Ovechkin 1,373 GP 0.60 GPG
8- Wayne Gretzky 1,487 GP 0.60 GPG
9- Brett Hull 1,269 GP 0.58 GPG
10- Bobby Hull 1,063 GP 0.50 GPG
13- Phil Esposito 1,282 GP 0.56 GPG
14- Maurice Richard 978 GP 0.56 GPG
etc

Below is what it looks like era-adjusted. I removed Denneny and Dye from the equation right away for obvious reasons :

Alex Ovechkin 1,373 GP 0.68 GPG
Mario Lemieux 915 GP 0.67 GPG
Maurice Richard 978 GP 0.67 GPG
Pavel Bure 702 GP 0.66 GPG
Mike Bossy 752 GP 0.61 GPG
Bobby Hull 1063 GP 0.61 GPG
Steven Stamkos 1031 GP 0.61 GPG
Brett Hull 1269 GP 0.58 GPG
Sidney Crosby 1218 GP 0.54 GPG
Gordie Howe 1767 GP 0.52 GPG
Phil Esposito 1282 GP 0.52 GPG
Teemu Selänne 1451 GP 0.51 GPG
Jean Béliveau 1125 GP 0.51 GPG
Peter Bondra 1081 GP 0.51 GPG
Wayne Gretzky 1487 GP 0.51 GPG
Jaromír Jágr 1733 GP 0.49 GPG


Also leaving a few guys out of this because they're still young so it's impossible to know how the rest of their careers will go. As of now, McDavid has a 0.61 GP, Matthews 0.79 GPG (wow), Draisaitl 0.55 GPG and Pastrnak 0.60 GPG

I was purely going off memory (which is why I said IIRC) and didn't remember correctly regarding Jagr but the real list would be more : Ovechkin, Lemieux, Richard, Hull, Stamkos, Hull, Crosby, Howe and Esposito

We didn't count Bure and Bossy because they retired too young.

You might be "amused" but what amuses me EVEN MORE is people drawing conclusions and laughing before even knowing why something was said

FYI, Bobby Hull’s gpg is wrong in first list, didn’t check the others.

 

[wetcoast]

I always forget that you can't really make short posts on the internet without explaining everything, particularly on a site like HF

I am not "proclaiming" anything, it is MY opinion and it is of course based on facts (which is not that often the case on the internet)

For me, the first thing to look at is ERA ADJUSTED stats... Why? Simply because the game varies from an era to another. Comparing stats from the highest scoring era with the DPE for example is going to misleading, even stupid I would say. Goalie equipment and technique is some of the factors but it shouldn't be really necessary to explain all of that unless it would be to someone who has very little knowledge of the game

So without saying more, I'll go straight to the facts. If you look at pure GPG, this is what it looks like :

1- Mike Bossy 752 GP 0.76 GPG
2- Mario Lemieux 915 GP 0.75 GPG
3- Cy Denneny 329 GP 0.75 GPG
4- Babe Dye 272 GP 0.75 GPG
5- Auston Matthews 508 GP 0.63 GPG
6- Pavel Bure 702 GP 0.62 GPG
7- Alex Ovechkin 1,373 GP 0.60 GPG
8- Wayne Gretzky 1,487 GP 0.60 GPG
9- Brett Hull 1,269 GP 0.58 GPG
10- Bobby Hull 1,063 GP 0.50 GPG
13- Phil Esposito 1,282 GP 0.56 GPG
14- Maurice Richard 978 GP 0.56 GPG
etc

Below is what it looks like era-adjusted. I removed Denneny and Dye from the equation right away for obvious reasons :

Alex Ovechkin 1,373 GP 0.68 GPG
Mario Lemieux 915 GP 0.67 GPG
Maurice Richard 978 GP 0.67 GPG
Pavel Bure 702 GP 0.66 GPG
Mike Bossy 752 GP 0.61 GPG
Bobby Hull 1063 GP 0.61 GPG
Steven Stamkos 1031 GP 0.61 GPG
Brett Hull 1269 GP 0.58 GPG
Sidney Crosby 1218 GP 0.54 GPG
Gordie Howe 1767 GP 0.52 GPG
Phil Esposito 1282 GP 0.52 GPG
Teemu Selänne 1451 GP 0.51 GPG
Jean Béliveau 1125 GP 0.51 GPG
Peter Bondra 1081 GP 0.51 GPG
Wayne Gretzky 1487 GP 0.51 GPG
Jaromír Jágr 1733 GP 0.49 GPG


Also leaving a few guys out of this because they're still young so it's impossible to know how the rest of their careers will go. As of now, McDavid has a 0.61 GP, Matthews 0.79 GPG (wow), Draisaitl 0.55 GPG and Pastrnak 0.60 GPG

I was purely going off memory (which is why I said IIRC) and didn't remember correctly regarding Jagr but the real list would be more : Ovechkin, Lemieux, Richard, Hull, Stamkos, Hull, Crosby, Howe and Esposito

We didn't count Bure and Bossy because they retired too young.

You might be "amused" but what amuses me EVEN MORE is people drawing conclusions and laughing before even knowing why something was said

My first thought is that if Ovi sticks around for the goal scoring record his adjusted GPG could easily drop to 5th place.

 

[Ghetty Green]

No one should surpass The Great One.


And even if he does he will never sniff 92 goals in a season which is the more impressive record

 

[Xspyrit]

I would refer all these quotes to what I wrote in post #143

Lol

Gretzky scores nearly 900 goals in 1400 odd games.

Then you get gems like this


8th ? 9th ?

I am assuming you never heard of era-adjusted stats

Yeah, 9th or 10th is clearly ridiculous. No way players like Espo or Jagr rank ahead of him.

But it's as simple as that either. There were 620 players in the NHL in 83-84 with virtually no Russians or Americans, there were 973 in 07-08. Point being the talent pool Ovi competed against was much larger. Gretzky also doesn't have the record for greatest margin, that's Hull 90-91 when he scored 86 and the next best had 51.

Jagr was a memory mistake (IIRC is used to say that ),you're not 100% certain) but Esposito has a higher era adjusted GPG yes. A statician would understand these things

this is simply a horrible and indefensible take.

The guy with both the highest career goal total AND the two highest goal scoring seasons of all time is the 10th best goal scorer? Behind Jagr?

Well, sorry to not be a simpleton.

I don't think Gretzky is the greatest goal-scorer ever, but some of those names don't make a lot of sense. What's the argument for Jagr or Brett Hull over Gretzky? (I see the argument for Esposito, but in order to get there, you'd have to really downplay the impact that Bobby Orr had on his numbers).

Again, Jagr was a memory mistake but Hull was not. He played the whole DPE by the way

And regarding the Orr argument... I mean Gretzky was not the only good player on the Oilers.

My first thought is that if Ovi sticks around for the goal scoring record his adjusted GPG could easily drop to 5th place.

Yes and Matthews has a very impressive GPG so far, curious to look at this again in 10 years. Oh and Bedard just arrived, maybe he'll enter this conversation by then

 

[nbwingsfan]

I would refer all these quotes to what I wrote in post #143



I am assuming you never heard of era-adjusted stats



Jagr was a memory mistake (IIRC is used to say that ),you're not 100% certain) but Esposito has a higher era adjusted GPG yes. A statician would understand these things



Well, sorry to not be a simpleton.



Again, Jagr was a memory mistake but Hull was not. He played the whole DPE by the way

And regarding the Orr argument... I mean Gretzky was not the only good player on the Oilers.



Yes and Matthews has a very impressive GPG so far, curious to look at this again in 10 years. Oh and Bedard just arrived, maybe he'll enter this conversation by then

you’re right…, Jagr, who never once led the league in goals, is a better goal scorer than a guy who did it numerous times while also having the two highest goal scoring seasons of all time

What a ridiculous take.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I am assuming you never heard of era-adjusted stats

Everyone here has heard of them, but many have also come to realize how poorly adjusting by average scoring works to do the job.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Again, Jagr was a memory mistake but Hull was not. He played the whole DPE by the way

And regarding the Orr argument... I mean Gretzky was not the only good player on the Oilers.

Help me understand the logic:

• Gretzky scored more goals than Hull by a wide margin (894-741)
• We can't attribute that to longevity, since Gretzky scored more goals per game (0.60 vs 0.58). Yes, it's close, but Gretzky is still ahead, and he maintained that higher average over an extra 200+ games.
• Gretzky led the league in goals more often (5 times vs 3 times)
• Gretzky beat Hull's career high in goals twice
• It's surprisingly close if we're counting number of 70 goal seasons (it's only 4-3 for Gretzky), but Gretzky pulls ahead if we're looking at number of 50 goal seasons (9-5)
• It's close if we're looking at number of years in the top ten (it's only 9-8 for Gretzky), but Gretzky is ahead by a wide margin if we're looking at years in the top five (8-4)
• In the playoffs, Gretzky scored more goals (122-103), more goals per game (0.59 vs 0.51) and tied/exceeded Hull's career high three times
• Gretzky did all this while (generally) looking to pass first. When Hull was scoring 70+ goals, he had 45, 41 and 39 assists. When Gretzky scoring 70+ goals, he had 135, 125, 120 and 118 assists.

If we use adjusted stats from hockey-reference.com, Gretzky still has more goals (758-738). And none of the "relative" metrics would change (Gretzky would still be up 5-3 in goal scoring titles, he's still up 8-4 in years in the top five, etc). Hull would pull ahead in terms of adjusted goals per game, but you'd have to really emphasize that one statistic, given that Gretzky is ahead in every other category.

 

[wetcoast]

Everyone here has heard of them, but many have also come to realize how poorly adjusting by average scoring works to do the job.

It's not perfect, nothing is after all, but it's a good counterpoint to consider against raw stats and gives some context and anyone who is relying too heavily on one over the year needs to have their motivations questioned as the absolute use or near use of one over the other is a red flag in subjective player comparisons.

 

[BraveCanadian]

It's not perfect, nothing is after all, but it's a good counterpoint to consider against raw stats and gives some context

adjusted stats may be a bit better for context in some cases but they ignore a ton of context themselves which is why people came up with better methods years ago

 

[wetcoast]

adjusted stats may be a bit better for context in some cases but they ignore a ton of context themselves which is why people came up with better methods years ago

Maybe because I'm tired after a couple of really long days to end my week but other than adjusted stats what methods are people using to compare season to season by different players from different seasons?

Since expansion so for over 50 years it does a very good job overall in providing context in comparing scoring from any 2 players one each from each season.

I think the problem is pre expansion with smaller rosters and less teams makes adjusted stats in that time period more tricky but here we are basically comparing mostly modern post 67 expansion players so the problem is minimal.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Maybe because I'm tired after a couple of really long days to end my week but other than adjusted stats what methods are people using to compare season to season by different players from different seasons?

Since expansion so for over 50 years it does a very good job overall in providing context in comparing scoring from any 2 players one each from each season.

I think the problem is pre expansion with smaller rosters and less teams makes adjusted stats in that time period more tricky but here we are basically comparing mostly modern post 67 expansion players so the problem is minimal.

On the history board we tend to use VsX which compares players to their peers. That takes changes in ice time, PP opportunities etc. into account automatically but then you still have to eyeball the outliers.

 

[wetcoast]

On the history board we tend to use VsX which compares players to their peers. That takes changes in ice time, PP opportunities etc. into account automatically but then you still have to eyeball the outliers.

Sure I'm familiar with those and they are good but they are measuring 7 year time frames not seasons to seasons and that's what adjusted stats do is adjust for season using the parameters they use.

Others, Mad Luke off the top of my head and Black Magic Extractor or something like that is genius when he posts and probably has his own formula which is better.

When we are comparing players seasons from different seasons adjusted stats (some formulas are slightly better than Hockey reference but they have a good baseline) is still the best way to go to get groundwork on context then other factors can be looked at as well.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Sure I'm familiar with those and they are good but they are measuring 7 year time frames not seasons to seasons and that's what adjusted stats do is adjust for season using the parameters they use.

Others, Mad Luke off the top of my head and Black Magic Extractor or something like that is genius when he posts and probably has his own formula which is better.

When we are comparing players seasons from different seasons adjusted stats (some formulas are slightly better than Hockey reference but they have a good baseline) is still the best way to go to get groundwork on context then other factors can be looked at as well.

No, VsX 7 is just a common denominator used to look at what has often been a players prime number of years across eras.

imo, VsX is still better to compare between years than adjusting by average but there is still additional context to keep in mind.