GOAT goalscorer?

[Midnight Judges]

BTW I am not saying there can't be a cluster of talent. I just find it impossible to believe there was one in hockey in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, but not now.

 

[daver]

I support it in large part as an American...the whole greater population = more talent could be a thing, in theory, but in practice...meh...not convinced...talent, elite talent clusters randomly...environmental factors involved as well...

Assuming that the best currently is by default, better than the best of any previous era presumes that the "best" title will always be changing to whoever is the best at the time. I.E., you can put OV at the top for now but when he loses the goals title, then this line of thinking starts to apply.

It makes more sense in a discussion of the GOAT to assume that transcendent talent from any era would be similarly dominant in any era. One's relative dominance can be measured by a performance vs. peer analysis with consideration for league size.

I am not sure that you can fairly adjust to exactly consider league size so the term "arguably" should be applied liberally.

From strictly a statistical perspective, I think it is safe to say that a Top 5 or 10 placing in points or goals in the current NHL holds more value than the same from the O6.

 

[DitchMarner]

I support it in large part as an American...the whole greater population = more talent could be a thing, in theory, but in practice...meh...not convinced...talent, elite talent clusters randomly...environmental factors involved as well...

Mick Jagger born July 1943
John Lennon born October 1940
Paul McCartney born June 1942
Keith Richards born December 1943
Eric Burdon born May 1941

et cetera...

UK's population is up some 40% since that time and they haven't produced a God damn thing after 1978 except for Radiohead and, for a moment, Amy Winehouse...why is this? Isn't there more talent? Shouldn't they, ya know, not suck...?

No love for Coldplay?

 

[Midnight Judges]

Assuming that the best currently is by default, better than the best of any previous era...

I am certainly not saying that.

If someone else is making that case, you should quote them.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Lennon and McCarthy were hardly noteworthy outside of their careers together.

Yeah, and Mick and Keith were...?

Yes, there are "plenty of musicians all over the place" just like there are plenty of hockey players all over the place...and the hockey scene is corrupt too...short-shift game, sterilization of the game with too much money, unrestricted free agency after seven years of service, etc. Love of the game and love of team don't play as large of a role as they used to...

There just doesn't appear to be any noteworthy correlation between population explosion and elite talent production. I'd buy that the average player is more technically skilled today than the average player in 1970 or whatever, fine...but there is more to playing hockey than having hands. Skills have evolved and some have regressed...the game is currently too fast for its own good, that comes with its own set of problems...created a different breed of player. In 30 years, maybe we'll be saying something different...there's an evolutionary track to all of this, but it doesn't mean that everything on that track represents linear, positive growth...

 

[Canadiens1958]

BTW I am not saying there can't be a cluster of talent. I just find it impossible to believe there was one in hockey in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s, but not now.

Or, more than likely you cannot recognize it since you are looking for truly outstanding goalscorers.

Presently the NHL features its highest concentration ever of RHS defencemen and overall complete centers.

 

[DannyGallivan]

There just doesn't appear to be any noteworthy correlation between population explosion and elite talent production. I'd buy that the average player is more technically skilled today than the average player in 1970 or whatever, fine...but there is more to playing hockey than having hands. Skills have evolved and some have regressed...the game is currently too fast for its own good, that comes with its own set of problems...created a different breed of player.

Another good point (because I was about to bring it up). The game has changed, which is something that isn't addressed in the general population pool argument. Even the speed of the game has more to do with rosters getting larger, and the embracing of the 40 second shift.

Five minute shifts weren't uncommon for the best players in Hull's era, which gave the illusion of slower players. In fact, the strategy of hockey (it can be argued) was more cerebral then than it is today. Even though hockey was always the "fastest sport", today it's a straight ahead sprint, having more to do with reaction than creation.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Or, more than likely you cannot recognize it since you are looking for truly outstanding goalscorers.

Presently the NHL features its highest concentration ever of RHS defencemen and overall complete centers.

I would expect an overall complete center to range from very good to great as a goal scorer. All the ones we have today are getting utterly spanked by a winger.

 

[DannyGallivan]

It makes more sense in a discussion of the GOAT to assume that transcendent talent from any era would be similarly dominant in any era. One's relative dominance can be measured by a performance vs. peer analysis with consideration for league size.

I've subscribed to this theory... to a point. I think once the game was established (mid 1920's and up), that theory makes more sense.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I would expect an overall complete center to range from very good to great as a goal scorer. All the ones we have today are getting utterly spanked by a winger.

Connor McDavid says hi.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Connor McDavid says hi.

The same Connor McDavid who was soundly beaten by a 32 year old winger?

 

[Midnight Judges]

BTW I am not saying McDavid sucks at goal scoring. He's probably on par with Beliveau so far - or someone like that.

And that says a lot for Ovechkin really.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I know Judgey doesn't recognize Sidney Crosby...but he has led the league in goals twice this decade...in his six healthy seasons...two 7th place finishes in two others...

Stamkos has five top-2 finishes...Malkin three top-5 finishes...

Game has become simplified for many wingers...centers carry, but now defensemen do too...wingers like Perry, Ovechkin, post-accident Heatley, etc. they just gotta get open...

 

[daver]

BTW I am not saying McDavid sucks at goal scoring. He's probably on par with Beliveau so far - or someone like that.

And that says a lot for Ovechkin really.

Which is it? There are no great all around centres today because they cannot beat OV, your standard goalscoring winger or OV is an all-time great goalscorer that makes other goal totals look average?

 

[daver]

Perhaps the best way to get around the era issue is to judge how strong a player was in their era, where everyone else had to play in a 6 team, 12 team,30 team, etc... league.

For example, off the top of my head, Richard's, Howe's and Hull's peak seasons seem to be in the same neighborhood when looking at their totals vs. the other Top Ten scorers. OV and Stamkos have the two clear best goalscoring seasons in their eras and I think we can safely go back to Bure to find a similarly dominant season.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Which is it? There are no great all around centres today because they cannot beat OV, your standard goalscoring winger or OV is an all-time great goalscorer that makes other goal totals look average?

I think chances are there are far more elite players today than there were in 1960, and this makes it more difficult to stand out from the pack.

I think chances are there are MORE great all around centers today than ever before.

I think if there were 3 Beliveau-caliber players in the 60s, then chances are there would be double that today, if not more. Whether or not that actually came to fruition is obviously up for debate. The volatility among elites in small numbers can result in extremely high variances.

I doubt there is a drought of goal scorers that just so happens to correspond with Ovechkin's career. I think if Ovechkin had never been born, then Stamkos would be regarded as an all time great goal scorer, and Crosby more so than he currently is.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Game has become simplified for many wingers...centers carry, but now defensemen do too...wingers like Perry, Ovechkin, post-accident Heatley, etc. they just gotta get open...

Right, it is so easy. And yet nobody else can do what Ovechkin does because...

 

[Michael Farkas]

He's one of the greatest goal scorers in the history of the game...?

Is someone contesting this somewhere...?

 

[Canadiens1958]

I think chances are there are far more elite players today than there were in 1960, and this makes it more difficult to stand out from the pack.

I think chances are there are MORE great all around centers today than ever before.

I think if there were 3 Beliveau-caliber players in the 60s, then chances are there would be double that today, if not more. Whether or not that actually came to fruition is obviously up for debate. The volatility among elites in small numbers can result in extremely high variances.

I doubt there is a drought of goal scorers that just so happens to correspond with Ovechkin's career. I think if Ovechkin had never been born, then Stamkos would be regarded as an all time great goal scorer, and Crosby more so than he currently is.

Centers in the sixties that could compete with Beliveau, 8 to 10.

Skaters 12 to 15.

Not if but where.

 

[Midnight Judges]

He's one of the greatest goal scorers in the history of the game...?

Is someone contesting this somewhere...?

No he’s one of the best players in the history of the game.

 

[Sentinel]

I support it in large part as an American...the whole greater population = more talent could be a thing, in theory, but in practice...meh...not convinced...talent, elite talent clusters randomly...environmental factors involved as well...

Mick Jagger born July 1943
John Lennon born October 1940
Paul McCartney born June 1942
Keith Richards born December 1943
Eric Burdon born May 1941

et cetera...

UK's population is up some 40% since that time and they haven't produced a God damn thing after 1978 except for Radiohead and, for a moment, Amy Winehouse...why is this? Isn't there more talent? Shouldn't they, ya know, not suck...?

Wow. How did you manage to miss Black Sabbath Dio-years, Ozzy, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, late 80s Queen, Def Leppard, Depeche Mode, The Cure, Billy Idol, and Skyclad? Man, that's one big rock you live under!

 

[Sentinel]

Lennon and McCarthy were hardly noteworthy outside of their careers together. You think that crappy Christmas song Paul McCartney wrote would have gotten air time had he not been in the friggin Beatles?!?

There are plenty of great musicians all over the place - especially if you are willing to look beyond the corrupt commercial music scene. They don't get famous anymore because a) rock n roll is basically dead and b) people would rather look at hot women shaking their asses while lip syncing. That's what sells.

Four years ago I had a privilege of seeing McCartney live, and I tell ya: he blows most of the modern rock stars away.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Wow. How did you manage to miss Black Sabbath Dio-years, Ozzy, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, late 80s Queen, Def Leppard, Depeche Mode, The Cure, Billy Idol, and Skyclad? Man, that's one big rock you live under!

Haha not to drag this discussion out...I was just taking HOF level players...every generation has something as good or better than Billy Idol or Judas Priest, with all due respect...I'm not about to call Nicklas Backstrom or Anze Kopitar a generational talent because it hurts my point...almost no generation can lay claim to something like Mick Jagger...

 

[daver]

I think chances are there are far more elite players today than there were in 1960, and this makes it more difficult to stand out from the pack.

This opens the door to nothing but complete speculation on how a player would do in another era rather than base opinions on real stats.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Haha not to drag this discussion out...I was just taking HOF level players...every generation has something as good or better than Billy Idol or Judas Priest, with all due respect...I'm not about to call Nicklas Backstrom or Anze Kopitar a generational talent because it hurts my point...almost no generation can lay claim to something like Mick Jagger...

HHOF players could be generational(Howe, Orr level), foundational(Kopitar,Nicklas Backstrom) or valuable(Boivin, Stanley, Housley).