Gretzky's Difficulties In Scoring Goals Against Good Defenses, After The Mid-1980s.

[Randyne]

In the 80s goalies played almost naked, highlights from that era are not worthy even for amateur hockey.

 

[tabness]

For a contemporaneous take on the significant improvement of the league throughout the eighties leading to Gretzky's margin of dominance waning (on top of the wear and tear of his career thusfar) see his own entry in the Hockey Scouting Report after 1989-1990

 

[Crosby2010]

In the 80s goalies played almost naked, highlights from that era are not worthy even for amateur hockey.

So can you name the other players that scored 90+ goals in a season then? Because it ought to have been plenty. Or even 80. Or 70. Even Bossy never cracked 70. Gretzky scored at a ridiculous level and it is funny because he tends to get penalized for not doing it at that level for a longer period of time. He is the only player in NHL history to do this at that level and the argument against him is that eventually he didn't do it at that level.

 

[Staniowski]

So can you name the other players that scored 90+ goals in a season then? Because it ought to have been plenty. Or even 80. Or 70. Even Bossy never cracked 70. Gretzky scored at a ridiculous level and it is funny because he tends to get penalized for not doing it at that level for a longer period of time. He is the only player in NHL history to do this at that level and the argument against him is that eventually he didn't do it at that level.

The argument against Gretzky, and the reality, is that Gretzky could only score 90 goals (or anything close) in a very small window or years, which also happened to coincide with his best scoring years.

If he were 5 or more years younger, he wouldn't have come close to ever scoring 90 goals, and very likely would never have led the NHL in goals in any season. He obviously also would've faced better competition among goal-scorers if he were a few years younger.

 

[Staniowski]

Did this knee injury take place before or after the 1987 Canada Cup?

After the Canada Cup. It took place Dec 30th, 1987, and it wasn't a big factor on his goal-scoring in the big scheme of things. As was evident in the Canada Cup, he wasn't close to being hockey's best goal-scorer during those years.

 

[Staniowski]

I have always trusted what I saw with my own eyes. The main reason I believe Gretzky did not appear as good as Lemieux is simply because he wasn’t. He was more dominant against an inferior league and far more healthy. I don’t think there’s any chance prime Gretzky outscores a prime Lemieux in post 1995 NHL, goals or points.

Yes, that's definitely true. Lemieux was a much better goal-scorer than Gretzky, but also a better overall scorer.

Gretzky has a lot of fans, and many of them will never admit it...but it's true. Gretzky scored in a weaker league, and he didn't scored as well as Lemieux did in a stronger league. It's there for all to see.

 

[Crosby2010]

After the Canada Cup. It took place Dec 30th, 1987, and it wasn't a big factor on his goal-scoring in the big scheme of things. As was evident in the Canada Cup, he wasn't close to being hockey's best goal-scorer during those years.

Yet in 1987 he scored 62 goals and led the NHL in goals for the 5th time. I'm puzzled. The proof seems to be right in the pudding.

The argument against Gretzky, and the reality, is that Gretzky could only score 90 goals (or anything close) in a very small window or years, which also happened to coincide with his best scoring years.

If he were 5 or more years younger, he wouldn't have come close to ever scoring 90 goals, and very likely would never have led the NHL in goals in any season. He obviously also would've faced better competition among goal-scorers if he were a few years younger.

So if he was born in 1956 instead of 1961 he never hits 92 goals? He could only do it in the early 1980s? I'm sorry, but I just don't get this at all. Blaine Stoughton scored 56 goals in 1980 and led the NHL. Gretzky is 23-24 years old at this time in an alternate universe and you figure he can't do any better? In fact, in 1980 Gretzky is 18 and scored 51 himself. That's the thing with peaking so high like Gretzky did, you have to come down a lot harder than even a normal superstar. My question is, considering he is the only person to ever hit the goal totals in the history of the NHL that he did, and since he create his own standard for doing it, how long would you have wanted him to score those gaudy goal totals? There is a reason no one else did it.

 

[MadLuke]

So if he was born in 1956 instead of 1961 he never hits 92 goals?

you just made him 5 years older not younger (I to did struggle a bit with the years directions here and had to think)

Yet in 1987 he scored 62 goals and led the NHL in goals for the 5th time. I'm puzzled

Does this support that it did not affected his goalscoring very much or goes against that statement, did scoring 62 goes against the notion he could not score 80-90 goals in that league anymore ?

I feel a lot of people talk over each other, Gretzky can still win the Rocket even if he would have much harder time scoring, declined from quite the peak.

1987, goals per games:
Lemieux: .86
Gretzky: .78
Kerr: .77

 

[Crosby2010]

you just made him 5 years older not younger

Fair enough. That being said Hull scored 86 goals in 1991 at 26 years old. Nicholls 70 in 1989. Yzerman 65 and then 62 in back to back years. Actually, Hull three years in a row had at least 70. My question is why couldn't a younger Gretzky have done this?

Does this support that it did not affected his goalscoring very much or goes against that statement, did scoring 62 goes against the notion he could not score 80-90 goals in that league anymore ?

I feel a lot of people talk over each other, Gretzky can still win the Rocket even if he would have much harder time scoring, declined from quite the peak.

1987, goals per games:
Lemieux: .86
Gretzky: .78
Kerr: .77

And he had more assists in 1987 than anyone else had points. I mean, do we really think that the 121 assists he got couldn't have turned into goals if he wanted to emphasize it more? We can see this in his shot totals. They were a lot higher in the early to mid 1980s. Then even in 1987 he was just 3rd. Then 6th in 1989. Then never in the top 10 again. He shot less, should we really be surprised that he scored less too?

 

[MadLuke]

My question is why couldn't a younger Gretzky have done this?

This is the whole thread and OP point he is trying to made, better defense taken away one of Gretzky favored way to score goals, very number of high chance from good spot on the ice shots he was able to get by the hundreds in a more open less good defense league.

That one theory why his goalscoring declined, others could be lost a quickstep (and will to pay the price) to get those chance versus before, getting more perimeter-playmaker and so on. (like you say abou that 121 assists comments).

He shot less, should we really be surprised that he scored less too?

Shooting less and scoring less can be saying the same thing, did he shoot less because defense did not gave him those nice scoring chance as much as before ? or for some other reasons. Gretzky taken 18% shoot was one of the best play in hockey history, changing that strategy without being forced is not necessarily a good one.

Imo goalscoring peaking before 25 is nothing special and does not require much explanation, Ovechkin "decline" was not necessarily the league getting better defensively or Yzerman decline around the exact same age.

 

[Crosby2010]

This is the whole thread and OP point he is trying to made, better defense taken away one of Gretzky favored way to score goals, very number of high chance from good spot on the ice shots he was able to get by the hundreds in a more open less good defense league.

That one theory why his goalscoring declined, others could be lost a quickstep (and will to pay the price) to get those chance versus before, getting more perimeter-playmaker and so on. (like you say abou that 121 assists comments).


Shooting less and scoring less can be saying the same thing, did he shoot less because defense did not gave him those nice scoring chance as much as before ? or for some other reasons. Gretzky taken 18% shoot was one of the best play in hockey history, changing that strategy without being forced is not necessarily a good one.

Imo goalscoring peaking before 25 is nothing special and does not require much explanation, Ovechkin "decline" was not necessarily the league getting better defensively or Yzerman decline around the exact same age.

I am of the thought that other than Ovechkin pretty much everyone's goal scoring declined after their 20s. Ovechkin is the rare breed of player who could score 50 goals regularly in his 30s. Esposito comes to mind as well I guess and Mario certainly could too although he retired in 1997 the first time. But in my mind it is a young man's game, Gretzky was not immune to this and I think this is partly why he focused on playmaking while still being a good goal scorer just not the best in the game. I think you judge yourself by your peers at the time. And it isn't as if anyone else was doing what he was doing in the first few years of his career. Not even Bossy.

 

[The Panther]

Okay, so let me try to figure out @Staniowski 's latest down-with-Gretzky argument. Here's a possible conversation between us:

ME: Gretzky's peak season for goal-scoring was 1984 (87 goals scored in 74 games), when no one except him scored more than 56 goals.
STANIOWSKI: "Had Gretzky been born 5 years later, he couldn't have scored anywhere near this number of goals."
ME: Five years later, in 1989, for the only time in NHL history, three players scored 65 or more goals... including Yzerman and Nicholls, both of whom Gretzky was a vastly better offensive player than.

Conclusion: Staniowski needs to go back and study hockey more.

1987, goals per games:
Lemieux: .86
Gretzky: .78
Kerr: .77

This is technically correct, but it's one of those stats that basically rewards Lemieux for missing games. The Oilers struggled (relatively) in the first half of 1986-87, and Gretzky completely dominated the team, and basically propped them up until mid-season, when Kurri, Anderson, Coffey etc. came around.

Lemieux was at almost .86 over 63 games, which was his season games' total. By comparison, here is how Gretzky did that season in goals-per-game:
after 39 GP: 1.03
after 50 GP: 0.96
after 63 GP: 0.86 (identical to Lemieux)
after 71 GP: 0.86 (identical to Lemieux)
Wayne then scored only 1 goal in the last 8 games of the season (which he mostly 'phoned in' as the team was gearing up for the playoffs). Sometimes there's a difference between "statistically the best" and "the best".

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Here's a rough (and the keyword is "rough") approximation of Gretzky's normalized ES scoring:

I don't think there's anything too surprising here. Gretzky's prime was from 1980 to 1991 (ages 19 to 30). His absolute peak was from 1982 to 1986 (ages 20 to 25).

There are two points that contradict the "Gretzky gradually did worse as the league improved around him":

1. His production plummeted between 1991 and 1992, which has an obvious cause (the Gary Suter hit at the Canada Cup tournament in fall 1991). If Gretzky was struggling to keep up with the league, as the talent pool increased, we'd expect to see a slow and steady decrease in his production - not a sudden drop caused by one specific event.
2. If Gretzky struggled to adapt to the changing league, it's unlikely he would have been able to score at an elite level as late as 1998, at age 37 (Dead Puck Era with lots of defensive systems and European talent).

To be clear, this chart shows total ES production. Gretzky's ES goal-scoring clearly drops off faster than his ES playmaking.

 

[MadLuke]

People are really talking about each other and do not want to engage with the actual point I feel like.

100% of the @Staniowski point is before 1991.

Gretzky scored a bit over a goal per games between 82 and 85, 1.03
86-91, pre Suter incident it was, 0.64

a ~40% drop in goal scoring.

According to him, if Gretzky peak of 21-24 years old season happen say between 88 and 92, he does not score 1.03 goal per games, beat Lemieux-Hull to be the best goalscorer per game played, etc... Not just because overall goalscoring went down a bit, but that style of tight defense will have took is favored away to score more than others.

People seem to not even start the conversation from a place that Gretzky goalscoring dropped (and explain it for other reason than league defense, like your regular lost of speed, willingness to go in those zone, etc...), they go in the years where it was super normal post list of injury and after 30 years old that was not mentionned, wave it away to more assists (which sound legit for the 163 assists season, he did score more goals the next year after all).

Or things like he was still really good, of course we are talking about the decline of someone that was scoring close to 85 goals per 82 games pace, being still very good, near the top is not an argument that no decline in goal scoring occured.

The he scored less only because he took less high scoring chance shots for example, that just repeating the point made (that team achieved to take those aways)

 

[BraveCanadian]

What do we make of his goalscoring across 2 of his final 3 playoff runs?

We try to ignore it because it completely invalidates our theory.

 

[Staniowski]

People are really talking about each other and do not want to engage with the actual point I feel like.

100% of the @Staniowski point is before 1991.

Gretzky scored a bit over a goal per games between 82 and 85, 1.03
86-91, pre Suter incident it was, 0.64

a ~40% drop in goal scoring.

Yes, nobody in the thread has made any real argument to try to counter the subject of the thread, for the simple reason that there is no counter argument.

If anybody has an argument, let's hear it.

Good luck!

 

[MS]

I don't see why this is so controversial.

Gretzky was a player who was ahead of his time both as a goal scorer and a playmaker. As the league changed significantly in the late 1980s (better goalies, shorter shifts, better defense/systems) his playmaking skill proved that it could stand the test of time across eras while his goal scoring did not, and his goal numbers fell pretty consistently from their peak in 83-84 right through the end of his career.

In 1983, you could be an elite goal scorer by being a clever player with quick hands who could fake a goalie or pick holes. By 1990 or 1993, elite goal scorers were pretty exclusively guys with explosive physical skills - size, skating, shot - that Gretzky simply didn't have.

 

[Minar]

I don't see why this is so controversial.

Gretzky was a player who was ahead of his time both as a goal scorer and a playmaker. As the league changed significantly in the late 1980s (better goalies, shorter shifts, better defense/systems) his playmaking skill proved that it could stand the test of time across eras while his goal scoring did not, and his goal numbers fell pretty consistently from their peak in 83-84 right through the end of his career.

In 1983, you could be an elite goal scorer by being a clever player with quick hands who could fake a goalie or pick holes. By 1990 or 1993, elite goal scorers were pretty exclusively guys with explosive physical skills - size, skating, shot - that Gretzky simply didn't have.

Because your argument is so black and white. It's not that simple. There are other factors. Mainly age. It was common for players of that era to drop off some after 25. As Gretzky aged his style changed to preserve himself. He wasn't going to the net as much. The argument is that the league got better and so his goals dropped. That might be partly true but age and injuries is another factor. There were other players with quick hands and could fake. But they weren't getting 92 goals. And there were explosive physical players with good shots in the 70s and 80s that weren't getting 92 goals. Look what happened in 85 when Gretzky decided to try to average 2 assists a game. His goals dropped. And that is what happened in general as he transitioned into primarily a playmaker.

 

[MS]

Because your argument is so black and white. It's not that simple. There are other factors. Mainly age. It was common for players of that era to drop off some after 25. As Gretzky aged his style changed to preserve himself. He wasn't going to the net as much. The argument is that the league got better and so his goals dropped. That might be partly true but age and injuries is another factor. There were other players with quick hands and could fake. But they weren't getting 92 goals. And there were explosive physical players with good shots in the 70s and 80s that weren't getting 92 goals. Look what happened in 85 when Gretzky decided to try to average 2 assists a game. His goals dropped. And that is what happened in general as he transitioned into primarily a playmaker.

Of course there are always lots of moving parts when discussing something like this.

But the main thrust of things is that the game changed *massively* between 1984 and 1990 (while Gretzky was still in the prime of his career) and it became much more difficult to score the sorts of goals he scored from 1981-84.

His playmaking, on the other hand, still worked at an all-time level across eras. His playmaking dominance was timeless. His goalscoring dominance was of the era and tied to the era and not sustainable against tighter checking, faster players, and better goaltending.

 

[The Panther]

It seems to me we are talking about two things here, one of which is correct (if rather obvious and didn't require a thread) and one of which is highly debatable:
1) Gretzky's goal-scoring declined from his 1981-82 through January 1987 peak goal-scoring period. (We already know this, as anyone can look at the stats.)
2) The reasons Gretzky's goal-scoring declined. The issue I take with the thread premise is the argument that the goal scoring decline happened because of better overall League defense, goaltending, depth, etc.

Let me briefly deal with each of these points, and then I'll be done with the thread... until Stanowski's next one. (Just kidding! Maybe.)

1) Gretzky's goal-scoring volume definitely did decline from around February 1987 through the end of his prime, September 1991.
During Wayne's last 1.5 years in Edmonton and his first 3 years in L.A., he ranked as follows in goal-scoring:
-- Total goals = 9th
-- Even-strength goals = 6th
-- Goals-per-game (min. 200 GP) = 8th (0.59 GPG)
In terms of goals-per-game, Wayne in this period is well below Mario, Hull, and Yzerman... but that's it. He's on par with Neely, Nieuwendyk, Robitaille, and Lafontaine. (I'm too lazy to calculate ES goals-per-game, but from a glance he's behind Mario and Hull and Yzerman, but he might be 4th.)

So, before we get into WHY he declined from lapping the entire field by record amounts in goals to being only the 5th or 6th or 7th-best goal scorer for the last 4.5 years of his prime, let's pause to keep one thing in mind: He was a playmaking center who was injured three times and traded once in his period. If you disregard his goal-scoring prowess from 1981-82 through January 1987, his Feb. 1987 to Sept. 1991 goal-scoring is remarkably good from this considered perspective. (But that's getting a bit off-topic.)

We should also bear in mind about this period:
1986-87: Gretzky was 1st in goals
1987-88: Gretzky was 2nd in goals on Dec. 30th when he got injured.
1988-89: Gretzky scored 50 goals in 66 games
1990-91: In the first half of the season, Gretzky scored 25 goals and was third in ES goals (during his fall-off goals-wise in the latter half, he had 72 assists and L.A. was the #1 team in the NHL).

So, during this period of relative slow-down goals-wise (while still being an elite goal-scorer), Gretzky was still capable --- as in 1985-86 --- of "turning on and off" the goals-tap, to some extent.

2) The reasons Gretzky's goal-scoring declined.
Gretzky's goal-scoring slow-down (down to the same levels he was at in 1980 and 1981) from Feb. 1987 to Sept. 1991 was NOT due to NHL defense, player depth, or goaltending.

As has been shown, Gretzky at any given time in this period (first half of 1987-88, first 66 games of 1988-89, first half of 1990-91) could jump up to the top of the League's goal-scoring ranks. This wouldn't be possible over fairly long stretches of 35 or 66 games if he were being limited by an overall better NHL defensive game.

Further to the point, 1986-87 was the lowest-scoring season of the entire 1980-81 through 1989-90 period (one player -- guess who? -- scored more than 107 points), and Gretzky won the scoring title by the largest margin of his (or anyone's) career and led the NHL in goals.

Again, in 1988-89 Gretzky (on a new team, at that) scored 50 goals in 66 games. This is the final (or next-to-last, depending on how you do it) season of the 1980s, and this goals-pace through 66 games was better than he'd done in 1980-81 or 1985-86, and about the same as he'd done in 1982-83 (when he scored 71 goals in total). So, if better NHL defences was slowing down his goal-scoring, I'm not seeing it...

Then, what about goaltending slowing him down? As I've already shown earlier in the thread, Wayne's shooting-percentage his last three seasons in Edmonton and his first three seasons in L.A. are basically identical. Considering that NHL goaltending was indeed getting better, and considering that he was transitioning to be more of a perimeter attacker in this period (i.e., more shots from distance; fewer from close range), this actually suggests to me that he was better at beating goalies at the end of the 80s/early-90s than he was from 1985-86 to 1987-88.

In fact, in the first half of 1990-91, Gretzky's shooting percentage was higher than Brett Hull's, who was on the way to an 86-goal season.
_________________

So, if Gretzky was doing all this, why did he fall to being the 5th or 6th or 7th-best goal scorer during this 4.5 year period that ended his prime? Two reasons:

1) Higher high-end competition from Mario and Brett Hull. In any scenario, the best goal-scoring finish Wayne could have hoped for in this period was third, as Mario was right at his peak and Hull was just reaching his. Those guys' peak seasons are better (in goals) than any competition Wayne had from Bossy or Kerr or whoever. (Now, of course, if Wayne had been 21 or 23 in this period, it might be a different story...)

2) Wayne's drop-off later in seasons. This might be related to aging, or fatigue, or maybe just his not caring as much about goals-totals later in seasons anymore (I don't know), but there's a definite pattern going back as far as 1984-85 when Wayne's goal-scoring dropped-off during the final 10 or 20 or 30 games.
1984-85: First 50 games = 51 goals / lLast 30 games = 22 goals
1985-86: First 45 games = 35 goals / Last 35 games = 17 goals
1986-87: First 49 games = 48 goals / Last 30 games = 14 goals
1987-88: First 37 games = 30 goals / Last 27 games = 10 goals
1988-89: First 66 games = 50 goals / Last 13 games = 4 goals
1989-90: (Exceptional season)
1990-91: First 40 games = 25 goals / Last 38 games = 16 goals

The only season later in his prime that isn't still quite impressive from a goal-scoring perspective is 1989-90... he was quite consistent all season, but never reached an elite goal-scoring level (still scored 40 goals in 73 games, though).

That is all.

 

[Crosby2010]

You know you have to be pretty damn great when there are complaints about you when you still hold the all-time record for goals. You still are likely to hold the record for regular season+playoffs in goals (honestly, I can't see Ovechkin catching that) you have the all-time most short handed goals where the active leader is literally only halfway to you and near the end of his career. And that you have the most even strength goals of all-time, another record Ovechkin won't break.

To have all of that and then have a post complaining that "he wouldn't do this if he were 5 years younger" is crazy.

 

[Crosby2010]

Yes, nobody in the thread has made any real argument to try to counter the subject of the thread, for the simple reason that there is no counter argument.

If anybody has an argument, let's hear it.

Good luck!

I think with your argument it is purely hypothetical, where as the arguments defending Gretzky are based on what he actually did and what he accomplished vs. his peers. So I am not sure how you think there needs to be a counter argument, if anything you have to show that there is an argument on your end, I think. We are talking about a guy who has more even strength points in a season - as a King in 1991 (!) - than anyone else in NHL history. Never mind his Oiler years, one of them where he peaked with 105 even strength assists in a season! I am talking about him in his last season before the Suter hit and he was still moping the floor with the NHL. Does it really matter if he "only" had 41 goals that year? He had 122 assists and there is no doubt in my mind if he wanted to focus on goals more than he could have done just that. But the burden of proof isn't on me, because he already did this in his career prior to that. And he mopped the floor in the goal scoring department against some pretty darn good goal scorers at that time in Bossy, Dionne and even Kurri who obviously benefits from Gretzky.

 

[GrumpyKoala]

Isn't the argument usually that throughout the entire 1980s and early 90s there was an explosion of the amount of talent? I think that is indeed very true.

Yea that is to be accounted,

however the easiest time to be an nhler have to be the 90-00 decade.
9 new team added in 10 years diluted that right back to where it was. Many players where grinders, enforcers, or simply playing because they where good enough to neutralize plays without being able to make them.

Also add, that while forward and defensive talent evolved at fast pace, goaltending was stuck in dark ages, where you have to wait until the end of that decade for them to figure it out through a more modern approach.

This is why you watch Lemieux highlights and you realize how difficult it was in that era to separate yourself, beat defenders and get a shot on net, and how easy the shot actually went in, Goaltending hasn't just arrived yet.