Even-strength VsX

[JackSlater]

Nice placement for Norm Ullman, a player I find perpetually underrated. Interesting read overall.

 

[blogofmike]

Probably only relevant for these two players, but how do Gretzky and Howe do in VSX for years 8-14?

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

Probably only relevant for these two players, but how do Gretzky and Howe do in VSX for years 8-14?

With benchmarks normalized to 70, here are years 7-15:

Gretzky	EVPTS	Benchmark	Notes	VsX (EVPTS)	|	Howe	EVPTS	Benchmark	Notes	VsX (EVPTS)
85-86	143	87	(#3 Kurri, Orr rule)	115.1	|	52-53	67	47	(#3 Hergesheimer)	99.8
86-87	124	76	(#2 Kurri)	114.2	|	53-54	48	38	(#2 Richard)	88.4
87-88	91	74	(#2 Lemieux)	86.1	|	54-55	42	47	(#2 Beliveau)	62.6
88-89	100	83	(average of top 8)	84.3	|	55-56	42	45	(#3 Sloan)	65.3
89-90	96	71	(#3 Messier)	94.6	|	56-57	57	57	(#2 Howe)	70.0
90-91	103	73	(#3 Oates)	98.8	|	57-58	49	49	(#3 Howe)	70.0
91-92	63	74	(#2 Lemieux)	59.6	|	58-59	49	60	(#2 Beliveau)	57.2
92-93	38	87	(#2 Yzerman)	30.6	|	59-60	48	55	(average of top 8)	61.1
93-94	62	70	(#2 Jagr)	62.0	|	60-61	46	57	(#2 Beliveau)	56.5
Avg. (yrs. 8-14)				81.2	|	Avg. (yrs. 8-14)				67.8

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[blogofmike]

Thanks BGE. I should have been more clear. How do they look in their next best 7 years (I assume the best 7 years are cherry-picked for VSX?)

i.e. removing Gretzky and Howe's top 7 EV points years, would they still be competitive using their next best 7?

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

Thanks BGE. I should have been more clear. How do they look in their next best 7 years (I assume the best 7 years are cherry-picked for VSX?)

i.e. removing Gretzky and Howe's top 7 EV points years, would they still be competitive using their next best 7?

Whoops, I totally misunderstood you. Here are Gretzky and Howe's complete VsX logs:

Gretzky	EVPTS	Benchmark	Notes	VsX (EVPTS)	|	Howe	EVPTS	Benchmark	Notes	VsX (EVPTS)
84-85	146	85	(#3 Bossy)	120.2	|	52-53	67	47	(#3 Hergesheimer)	99.8
81-82	147	87	(#3 Trottier)	118.3	|	51-52	61	43	(#3 Mosienko)	99.3
85-86	143	87	(#3 Kurri, Orr rule)	115.1	|	50-51	70	50	(#2 Richard)	98.0
86-87	124	76	(#2 Kurri)	114.2	|	53-54	48	38	(#2 Richard)	88.4
83-84	135	90	(#2 Bossy)	105.0	|	56-57	57	57	(#2 Howe)	70.0
82-83	132	90	(#2 Stastny)	102.7	|	57-58	49	49	(#3 Howe)	70.0
90-91	103	73	(#3 Oates)	98.8	|	67-68	60	60	(#2 Howe)	70.0
89-90	96	71	(#3 Messier)	94.6	|	68-69	78	78	(#2 Howe)	70.0
87-88	91	74	(#2 Lemieux)	86.1	|	49-50	51	52	(#2 Ronty)	68.7
80-81	104	86	(#2 Dionne)	84.7	|	55-56	42	45	(#3 Sloan)	65.3
88-89	100	83	(average of top 8)	84.3	|	62-63	54	58	(#2 Bathgate)	65.2
79-80	100	91	(#2 Dionne)	76.9	|	61-62	51	55	(average of top 8)	64.9
97-98	60	64	(#2 Jagr)	65.6	|	54-55	42	47	(#2 Beliveau)	62.6
96-97	65	73	(average of top 6)	62.3	|	65-66	48	54	(#2 Hull)	62.2
93-94	62	70	(#2 Jagr)	62.0	|	59-60	48	55	(average of top 8)	61.1
91-92	63	74	(#2 Lemieux)	59.6	|	47-48	37	44	(#2 Richard)	58.9
95-96	54	76	(#2 Nedved)	49.7	|	64-65	40	48	(average of top 6)	58.3
94-95	23	42	(average of top 6)	38.3	|	63-64	43	52	(#2 Bathgate)	57.9
98-99	32	67	(#2 Sundin)	33.4	|	58-59	49	60	(#2 Beliveau)	57.2
92-93	38	87	(#2 Yzerman)	30.6	|	60-61	46	57	(#2 Beliveau)	56.5
					|	48-49	31	40	(#3 Lindsay)	54.3
					|	66-67	41	54	(#2 Hull)	53.1
					|	69-70	44	64	(#2 Balon)	48.1
					|	70-71	35	78	(average of top 6)	31.4
					|	46-47	22	50	(#2 Kennedy)	30.8
					|	79-80	36	91	(#2 Dionne)	27.7
Avg. (1-7)				110.6	|	Avg. (1-7)				85.1
Avg. (8-14)				79.2	|	Avg. (8-14)				65.5

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Basically, Gretzky's 8th-14th best years are somewhere between Jagr and Esposito's 7 best years. Howe's 8th-14th best years put him around the ballpark of Sakic, Dionne, or Kurri's 7 best years.

 

[blogofmike]

It's astounding that Gretzky would still be 2nd (or 3rd counting himself) omitting his best years.

For Howe, he could make the list a 3rd time, with a VSX(15-21) score in the Alex Delvecchio range (57.75). Gretzky was on pace to make the list a 3rd time, but not having a 21st season yields a zero pointer that kills his average and leaves him about 10 VSX ES points back.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Does anyone have the benchmarks prior to 1960?

 

[The Panther]

It would be interesting to see more comparisons of ES "points-per-game", just within specific eras, say:
1930-1945
1946-1967
1968-1979
1980-1996
1997-2015
2016-now

 

[jigglysquishy]

Can't believe I missed this thread when it got posted.

The Gretzky domination is just eye-popping. And helps my case for Jagr as #2 winger.

 

[The Macho King]

Can't believe I missed this thread when it got posted.

The Gretzky domination is just eye-popping. And helps my case for Jagr as #2 winger.

*struggles to keep mouth shut*

 

[jigglysquishy]

*struggles to keep mouth shut*

Howe should be the unanimous #1.

I think an argument can be made for any of Jagr, Ovechkin, Hull, and Richard in the 2-5 spot. I don't think there's any wrong answers there.

The recent work on adjusted +/- and even strength scoring is really demonstrating that Jagr was more dominant offensively and possession wise than we earlier gave credit for. Having an Even Strength VsX that is second in the last 60 years isn't some minor detail. I think we've seen some work too showing that while clearly behind Howe and Richard, Jagr has a decent argument for #3 playoff performer of that 1-5 group.

Time has softened the moody Jagr of 2001-2004. Watching Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, and McDavid has made us appreciate how crazy his peak was offensively. And I think we are also recognizing that while he only has 1 Hart, the circumstances of his era play into is as much as his play.

I don't think Jagr at #2 for wingers is outrageous. But I also wouldn't find him at #5 to be crazy.

 

[authentic]

VsX is merciless towards players who don't play full seasons. It's a per-season metric, not a per-game metric.



Jagr's numbers are impressive indeed, but he didn't exactly play on teams that made it hard to put up offensive numbers.

What do these rankings look like if it’s just on a per game basis? I assume Lemieux would be comfortably in 2nd but would he have much of a lead on Jagr?

 

[Hockey Outsider]

What do these rankings look like if it’s just on a per game basis? I assume Lemieux would be comfortably in 2nd but would he have much of a lead on Jagr?

Yes he would - see post #21. (Generously) assuming no missed games for Lemieux, his result is approximately 91 (well ahead of Jagr who would drop to 3rd - but, maybe surprisingly, still closer to Jagr than to Gretzky).

 

[The Macho King]

Howe should be the unanimous #1.

I think an argument can be made for any of Jagr, Ovechkin, Hull, and Richard in the 2-5 spot. I don't think there's any wrong answers there.

The recent work on adjusted +/- and even strength scoring is really demonstrating that Jagr was more dominant offensively and possession wise than we earlier gave credit for. Having an Even Strength VsX that is second in the last 60 years isn't some minor detail. I think we've seen some work too showing that while clearly behind Howe and Richard, Jagr has a decent argument for #3 playoff performer of that 1-5 group.

Time has softened the moody Jagr of 2001-2004. Watching Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, and McDavid has made us appreciate how crazy his peak was offensively. And I think we are also recognizing that while he only has 1 Hart, the circumstances of his era play into is as much as his play.

I don't think Jagr at #2 for wingers is outrageous. But I also wouldn't find him at #5 to be crazy.

God he might end up 8th on my list?

Howe
Hull
Richard
Lafleur
Cook
Ovi
Lindsay

....

Yeah that feels right to me.

First - Jagr excelled in an era where a) talent pool for forwards was pretty meh, and b) said talent pool tended to miss time. Him staying mostly healthy gave him a leg up in those circumstances.

Second - you're getting zero defense with him. Zero intensity. Zero physicality. His stat sheet is all he brings to the table.

Third - no signature playoff runs. Not entirely his fault, but he doesn't have any deep runs post Mario.

Fourth - Hart record is really bad for a guy with all that hardware. For an award that is biased as hell to forwards, losing twice to a goalie and once to a defenseman during your peak says a lot to me.

Edit: 9th if we include Makarov

 

[authentic]

Yes he would - see post #21. (Generously) assuming no missed games for Lemieux, his result is approximately 91 (well ahead of Jagr who would drop to 3rd - but, maybe surprisingly, still closer to Jagr than to Gretzky).

Yeah I figured he would still be closer to Jagr. He beefed up on the powerplay more so than any other player.

I wonder now how consistent these rankings would be in the playoffs and if there would be any notable changes.

 

[Dingo]

do 5 yr, please, if possible!

love this, btw

 

[Matsun]

God he might end up 8th on my list?

Howe
Hull
Richard
Lafleur
Cook
Ovi
Lindsay

....

Yeah that feels right to me.

First - Jagr excelled in an era where a) talent pool for forwards was pretty meh, and b) said talent pool tended to miss time. Him staying mostly healthy gave him a leg up in those circumstances.

Second - you're getting zero defense with him. Zero intensity. Zero physicality. His stat sheet is all he brings to the table.

Third - no signature playoff runs. Not entirely his fault, but he doesn't have any deep runs post Mario.

Fourth - Hart record is really bad for a guy with all that hardware. For an award that is biased as hell to forwards, losing twice to a goalie and once to a defenseman during your peak says a lot to me.

Edit: 9th if we include Makarov

I'm not an expert on hockey history but how does point 1 and 3 apply to Jagr and not to Cook? Cook only once tied for the team lead in postseason scoring and had a teammate double him in scoring both times he won a cup.

 

[Overrated]

Howe should be the unanimous #1.

I think an argument can be made for any of Jagr, Ovechkin, Hull, and Richard in the 2-5 spot. I don't think there's any wrong answers there.

The recent work on adjusted +/- and even strength scoring is really demonstrating that Jagr was more dominant offensively and possession wise than we earlier gave credit for. Having an Even Strength VsX that is second in the last 60 years isn't some minor detail. I think we've seen some work too showing that while clearly behind Howe and Richard, Jagr has a decent argument for #3 playoff performer of that 1-5 group.

Time has softened the moody Jagr of 2001-2004. Watching Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, and McDavid has made us appreciate how crazy his peak was offensively. And I think we are also recognizing that while he only has 1 Hart, the circumstances of his era play into is as much as his play.

I don't think Jagr at #2 for wingers is outrageous. But I also wouldn't find him at #5 to be crazy.

Jagr > Howe

He did it in the most competitive era ever, an era more competitive than now. Howe did it in the 50s back when not even most of his Canadian peers ever played hockey.

 

[Overrated]

God he might end up 8th on my list?

Howe
Hull
Richard
Lafleur
Cook
Ovi
Lindsay

....

Yeah that feels right to me.

First - Jagr excelled in an era where a) talent pool for forwards was pretty meh, and b) said talent pool tended to miss time. Him staying mostly healthy gave him a leg up in those circumstances.

Second - you're getting zero defense with him. Zero intensity. Zero physicality. His stat sheet is all he brings to the table.

Third - no signature playoff runs. Not entirely his fault, but he doesn't have any deep runs post Mario.

Fourth - Hart record is really bad for a guy with all that hardware. For an award that is biased as hell to forwards, losing twice to a goalie and once to a defenseman during your peak says a lot to me.

Edit: 9th if we include Makarov

Jagr played back when forwards were better than ever before or after unlike Lafleur who wasn't even clearly better than Balderis

 

[The Panther]

It would be interesting to see more comparisons of ES "points-per-game", just within specific eras, say:
1930-1945
1946-1967
1968-1979
1980-1996
1997-2015
2016-now

All right, I'm gonna try to do this for a few periods here. I'm not going to count short-handed points, as I guess that skews it a bit towards offensive players who kill penalties (also I'm too lazy). The NHL.com site only has ES / PP / SH division of points going back to 1933-34, but that's probably a good place to start anyway, since from roughly that point we have a fairly stable set of rules, sizes of rinks, etc. (at least compared to prior).

So, to begin, this is the best I can do (apologies if any errors or oversights) for the...

Top ES point-scorers per game from 1933-34 to 1944-45 (min. 100 games played):

1.07 Maurice Richard (note: only 112 games played)
1.00 Bill Mosienko (note: only 114 games played)
0.99 Elmer Lach
0.94 Bill Cowley
0.90 Ted Kennedy (note: only 100 games played)
0.84 Syl Apps
0.81 Doug Bentley
0.81 Roy Conacher
0.80 Buddy O'Connor
0.78 Ab DeMarco Sr. (note: only 116 games played)
0.76 Toe Blake
0.76 Bryan Hextall Sr.
0.76 Gordie Drillon
0.76 Max Bentley (note: only 122 games played)
0.75 Milt Schmidt
0.75 Joe Carvath
0.74 Bobby Bauer
0.72 Clint Smith
0.71 Sweeney Schriner
0.71 Billy Taylor Sr.
0.71 Syd Howe


Someone who knows more than me about this era could interpret these results... Basically, as you'd expect, the "young guns" who played only a few years into the mid-40s, and particularly those (Richard, Lach, Bentley) who feasted on the war-weakened League early in their careers, do very well here. Conversely, someone like Milt Schmidt, who fought in the war, probably looks a bit worse than he would he had played right through those prime years (he still does very well).

Charlie Conacher doesn't make the list (quite), but I suspect he would if the available stats didn't cut off a couple of his early prime seasons. His brother, Roy, does very well here.

Of course, my cut off point of 1945 is arbitrary, and it cuts right into the primes of people like Elmer Lach.

Anyway, it is what it is...

 

[The Panther]

Next:

Top ES point-scorers per game from 1945-46 to 1966-67 (min. 200 games played):

0.76 Bobby Hull
0.75 Henri Richard
0.71 Gordie Howe
0.71 Doug Bentley
0.71 Stan Mikita
0.68 Jean Béliveau
0.68 Maurice Richard
0.66 Roy Conacher
0.64 Andy Bathgate
0.63 Norm Ullman
0.62 Bernie Geoffrion
0.61 Frank Mahovlich
0.61 Phil Esposito
0.60 Dickie Moore

Interesting how Doug Bentley does equally well on either side of the war... Phil Esposito sneaks in at the 0.60 cut-off, despite not arriving in Boston yet... As has been noted on this ES scoring lists before, Henri Richard looks very good...

 

[The Panther]

Next:

Top ES point-scorers per game from 1967-68 to 1978-79 (min. 150 games played):

0.95 Guy Lafleur
0.91 Bryan Trottier
0.87 Bobby Orr
0.86 Phil Esposito
0.83 Mike Bossy (note: only 153 games played)
0.82 Marcel Dionne
0.82 Bobby Hull
0.80 Jean Ratelle
0.78 Peter McNab
0.76 Daryl Sittler
0.75 Pierre Larouche
0.75 Gordie Howe
0.74 Gilbert Perreault
0.74 Steve Shutt
0.73 Bobby Clarke
0.73 Frank Mahovlich
0.73 Ken Hodge
0.73 Danny Gare
0.72 Jacques Lemaire
0.72 Jean Béliveau
0.71 Stan Mikita
0.71 Rod Gilbert
0.70 Dennis Maruk

Note Howe and Béliveau both making it again, late in their careers... Orr is the only defenceman on the list and is in 3rd place, which is hard to believe... I did NOT know Peter McNab was that prolific an ES scorer...

 

[The Panther]

Next:

Top ES point-scorers per game from 1979-80 to 1995-96 (min. 150 games played):

1.33 Wayne Gretzky
1.13 Mario Lemieux
1.02 Mike Bossy
1.00 Eric Lindros
0.87 Jaromir Jagr
0.82 Steve Yzerman
0.81 Marcel Dionne
0.80 Jari Kurri
0.78 Peter Stastny
0.78 Teemu Selänne
0.77 Luc Robitaille
0.77 Mark Messier
0.77 Adam Oates
0.75 Sergei Fedorov
0.75 Gilbert Perreault
0.74 Alexander Mogilny
0.74 Pat Lafontaine
0.74 Blaine Stoughton
0.74 Joe Sakic
0.73 Mark Recchi
0.72 Bernie Federko
0.72 Brett Hull
0.71 Charlie Simmer
0.71 Real Cloutier
0.70 Bryan Trottier
0.70 Denis Savard
0.70 Dale Hawerchuk
0.70 Kent Nilsson
0.70 Pavel Bure


Michel Goulet, Pierre Turgeon, and Rick Middleton failed to make the 0.70 cut-off by the narrowest of margins... Gary Roberts didn't miss by much (Bobby Clarke, too... what a great ES producer he was!)... Gretzky was at a staggering 1.54 per game up to 1991, but then fell back... list shows how impressive Lindros's first four seasons were, when he was healthy... easy to forget Blaine Stoughton!

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

First - Jagr excelled in an era where a) talent pool for forwards was pretty meh, and b) said talent pool tended to miss time. Him staying mostly healthy gave him a leg up in those circumstances.

Which were the Art Rosses Jagr conceivably would have lost had the competition been healthier than him? I feel as if we’re looking at Lindros’ two games missed in 1995 and that’s it.

 

[The Macho King]

Which were the Art Rosses Jagr conceivably would have lost had the competition been healthier than him? I feel as if we’re looking at Lindros’ two games missed in 1995 and that’s it.

I was referring to VsX being somewhat ballooned, not him losing Art Rosses. I'm not interested in trophy counting.