I need to go on a mini rant about the definition of "all time".

SladeWilson23

I keep my promises.
Sponsor
Nov 3, 2014
26,817
3,357
New Jersey
I don't want to diminish a lot of the milestones that have happened this season already.

  • Malkin 500 goals
  • McDavid 1000 points
  • Oliver Ekman Larsson 1000 games
  • Soon to be Crosby 600 goals
  • Potentially Ovechkin breaking all time goal record.
What we call all time is really just regular season records. Why can't ALL TIME truly be all time and include playoffs as well?

It's just a pet peeve of mine.
 

Realgud

Jersey ads are a disgrace
Nov 4, 2013
5,548
6,859
realguddraftsimulator.com
I agree but I think the argument would be that the playoffs game played is too team dependent and isn't a fair competition for pure stats compilation. But I personally can't help but much prefer playoffs for evaluating players. It's where all the best teams are and where everyone is trying their hardest.
 

Zeeker

Registered User
Feb 15, 2016
3,204
4,571
I don't want to diminish a lot of the milestones that have happened this season already.

  • Malkin 500 goals
  • McDavid 1000 points
  • Oliver Ekman Larsson 1000 games
  • Soon to be Crosby 600 goals
  • Potentially Ovechkin breaking all time goal record.
What we call all time is really just regular season records. Why can't ALL TIME truly be all time and include playoffs as well?

It's just a pet peeve of mine.
I appreciate your argument.

I would like to hear your thoughts on other interesting topics, like the impact of OTLs on winning/losing streaks.
 

westc2

Registered User
Nov 2, 2015
1,211
533
St. Louis, MO
I agree with this...in a player's career stats, postseason games should be included. This would not be great news for Ovechkin though since he's at 938 total career goals and Gretzky is at 1016. Do playoff goals just not count?

It only makes sense to exclude post-season games when calculating things like the Rocket Richard Trophy and such, for obvious reasons.
 

WarriorofTime

Registered User
Jul 3, 2010
31,464
20,468
Playoff Stats are counted separate. Every team is awarded the same amount of games to play each regular season, playoffs are more circumstantial. Like 2009-10 through 2014-15, Kane, Toews, Keith, Sharp, Hossa are 1st through 5th in Cumulative Playoff Points. Not because they are the best offensive players in the League, they are just on the team that's winning the most in that window.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guttersniped

Guttersniped

Satan’s Wallpaper
Sponsor
Dec 20, 2018
22,826
51,147
I agree with this...in a player's career stats, postseason games should be included. This would not be great news for Ovechkin though since he's at 938 total career goals and Gretzky is at 1016. Do playoff goals just not count?

It only makes sense to exclude post-season games when calculating things like the Rocket Richard Trophy and such, for obvious reasons.

Postseason games count in playoff records, go look at those.

It makes sense to have them separate.

Every player can theoretically play all regular season games but only a handful of players can play multiple rounds in the playoffs.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
86,660
144,148
Bojangles Parking Lot
Attempting a serious answer — implicitly, we’re using these numbers to compare players to each other. Playoff stats mess up the comparison, as players get into a wildly different number of games and in a wildly different set of circumstances.

We do track playoff stats and if you really want to, you can add them up to create combined RS+playoff numbers. But the question is, what purpose are you using those numbers for?

It would only be interesting for a very small number of players at the very top of the list, like noting that Ovechkin is actually still 78 goals short of Gretzky’s total, not 28. But other than those two guys, when would you ever bring this up?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stealth JD

Herregud

Registered User
Feb 7, 2010
3,301
983
Washington, DC
All-time in this case very clearly implies all-time regular season. As others have said, it makes zero sense to skew stats in favor of including a format in which half (more or less) of the players in the league simply won't make it for any of a myriad of reasons.

Drafted to a team with awful management? Too bad, you suck.
Awful coaching? Git gud.
Average age of the rest of the guys in the room is 72 because you stumbled into an organization that prides itself on loyalty? Ha. Loser.
Etc.
 

JimmyH

Registered User
May 19, 2018
206
252
Texas
midget is pretty universally considered a pejorative
No. It is not. The term "midget" is derived from the name "Bridget" and so it is today regarded as an emasculating term (hence the perceived offense) when used to refer to a male under 4-feet 4-inches tall regardless of it's definitional correctness. "Midget" is just fine, there's nothing wrong with that word. How will you excuse your faulty statements?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad