Is there really a case for Lemieux as the GOAT?

[bobholly39]

The "What if Lemieux never had his health struggles?" question is interesting, of course, but it needs to be said that Lemieux didn't have significant health struggles until late in the 1989-90 season. So, he had six years to try to keep pace with Gretzky, and he wasn't even close in any category.

Of course, at this point, the Mario-apologist will say, "But look at how bad his teams were! Gretzky played on a Dynasty!" Okay, so let's compare Mario's first six seasons with Gretzky's first two Edmonton seasons + first three seasons with L.A. (two winning clubs, three losing clubs) and then project each's sum to an 80-game season:

Gretzky
160 PTS (+22)
Lemieux
157 PTS (-4)

I mean, this is giving Lemieux every possible advantage (we're eliminating Gretzky's entire 7-year peak here), and Gretzky still comes out ahead in scoring and ES-goal differential.

Speaking of Even Strength:

Most ES points in one season:
1. 147 - Gretzky (Edm.)
2. 146 - Gretzky (Edm.)
3. 143 - Gretzky (Edm.)
4. 135 - Gretzky (Edm.)
5. 132 - Gretzky (Edm.)
6. 124 - Gretzky (Edm.)
7. 104 - Lafleur (Mon.)
8. 104 - Gretzky (Edm.)
9. 103 - Gretzky (L.A.)
10. 102 - Lemieux (Pitt.)
11. 101 - Yzerman (Det.)
12. 101 - Kurri (Edm.)
13. 100 - Gretzky (Edm.)
14. 100 - Gretzky (L.A.)
15. 100 - Bossy (NYI)

I mean, c'mon....


Besides stat-comparison with Gretzky, there is one big thing missing from Mario's legend, which is: He never dominated an NHL season and then won the Cup as leading scorer / best player / whatever. I mean, he never put it all together in one season. Gretzky did this at least three times, possibly four. Howe did it. Orr did it twice. Lafleur at least twice? Lemieux never did it. It's not necessarily his fault of course (injured in 1990-91 and 1991-92), but he never did it.

Lemieux didnt start out as strong as Gretzky. Team benefitted Gretzky maybe, certainly for playoffs - but he simply didnt start as strong. He really hit his stride around 88.

If Lemieux was going to match/near/surpass Gretzky all time, it would have been if he had been healthy past 88 and made up some of the gap in the long run.

Also - why focus on just ES points? Powerplay counts too.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I mean, OK, sure, and maybe Lemieux could have cleaned up the regular season awards in 1992 as well. But he didn't, and so by the standard being set...

The point is, again, that practically anything Lemieux did, Gretzky did as well or better and more often.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

1991: Lemieux also "runaway" winner. Can't find much explicitly, but it seems Barrasso would have been runner up to Lemieux. Funny anecdote to remind us not to take these awards votes too seriously lol:

my memory is the newspapers said 91 the runner up waas kevin stevens, 92 was barrasso

literally 30 year old memories though, so grain of salt.

 

[Troubadour]

Had Mario played the entire 92/93 season in the same/similar fashion to what he did after the cancer treatment, the case would be much stronger, because his what if factor is one of the most justified in the history of the game and the absolute peak matters. If he tops Gretzky's season max by twenty points or something, his what if factor gets a major boost. As it is, as others noted, even Mario's best numbers come slightly short of what Gretzky did with annoying regularity.

 

[barbu]

It's obvious the case can't be made - the body of work is just not there if you compare him with Gretzky, the best comparison.

That said, watching the semi finals and finals of both the 91 and 92 cups, I never saw anything quite like Lemieux then.

 

[The Panther]

Again, Lemieux played only 20 regular season after his cancer treatment in early 1993. This was his stat line in those memorable 20GP:
30G + 26A = 56PTS (+23)

So, then, I'm wondering, what is the "best" 20GP points' stretch in history? Just glancing at stat lists, I can find the following:

Gretzky 12.05.1985 to 1.15.1986:
17G + 51A = 68PTS (+24)

Gretzky 11.17.1981 to 12.30.1981:
31G + 36A = 67PTS (+27)

Gretzky 11.06.1983 to 12.18.1983:
22G + 43A = 65PTS (+31)

Lemieux 12.14.1988 to 1.25.1989:
26G + 39A = 65PTS (+21)

Gretzky 11.14.1981 to 12.23.1981:
24G + 39A = 63PTS (+27)

Gretzky 10.07.1983 to 11.19.1983:
26G + 37A = 63PTS (+33)

Gretzky 1.03.1984 to 2.25.1984:
33G + 27A = 63PTS (+29)

Gretzky 10.14.1984 to 11.27.1984:
24G + 38A = 62PTS (+36)

Gretzky 11.09.1984 to 12.26.1984:
23G + 39A = 62PTS (+34)

Gretzky 1.05.1986 to 2.16.1986:
12G + 48A = 60PTS (+17)

Lemieux 12.08.1988 to 1.21.1989:
27G + 33A = 60PTS (+15)

Lemieux 10.07.1988 to 11.25.1988:
23G + 37A = 60PTS (+15)

Lemieux 12.06.1988 to 1.20.1989:
26G + 32A = 58PTS (+9)

Lemieux 10.14.1995 to 12.09.1995
23G + 35A = 58PTS (+14)

Lemieux 10.07.1995 to 12.03.1995
22G + 35A = 57PTS (+6)

Gretzky 1.17.1982 to 3.31.1982:
23G + 33A = 56PTS (+27)

Gretzky 2.17.1982 to 4.04.1982:
22G + 34A = 56PTS (+23)

Lemieux 3.02.1993 to 4.14.1993
30G + 26A = 56PTS (+23)

Gretzky 12.14.1986 to 1.28.1987:
21G + 34A = 55PTS (+30)


These are just some that I found from glancing at stats. I'm sure someone out there can tell us the actual list of the top such 20-games stretches.

I don't think (not sure) anyone in NHL post-1920s' history besides Wayne or Mario has been able to score 55+ points in just 20 consecutive games, but I could be wrong.

Although Gretzky "wins" again here, it can be pointed out in Mario's defence that his 58 points in 20 games in autumn 1995 is surely the most by anybody in that decade... although I think he was sitting out back-to-back games in that period already. (I believe Gretzky's highest 90s' total was 50 points in 20 games, but I didn't check that closely. Of course, 1990-91 was the final year of Gretzky's prime.)

 

[TANK200]

I think that a potential argument for Lemieux as #1 is that he was near-equal to Gretzky in offensive domination relative to his peers, but his game and ability to remain a top goal scorer seemed to adapt better to a league that was becoming more defensive.

 

[buffalowing88]

I think there is a case to be made that prime-Mario, with hypothetical teammates, would kick prime-Gretzky's ass with the same hypothetical teammates, in a 7-game-series.

But that ignores just so many things that make Gretzky great and the totality of what he's done wouldn't have been replicated even if Mario stayed healthy.

I don't think there's anything to knock off Gretzky and Orr at this point. Howe can go down as he wasn't transcental like they were. But Lemieux tops out at 3-4 and there's no argument to change that as countless posters have proven on this thread and dozens others before.

 

[Troubadour]

I think there is a case to be made that prime-Mario, with hypothetical teammates, would kick prime-Gretzky's ass with the same hypothetical teammates, in a 7-game-series.

But that ignores just so many things that make Gretzky great and the totality of what he's done wouldn't have been replicated even if Mario stayed healthy.

I don't think there's anything to knock off Gretzky and Orr at this point. Howe can go down as he wasn't transcental like they were. But Lemieux tops out at 3-4 and there's no argument to change that as countless posters have proven on this thread and dozens others before.

That's a good example of the case that's really hard to make, since their H2H is so lopsided. Surely someone can repost the stats from the games they played against one another. I my memory serves right, Lemieux dominated in exactly one.

EDIT: I dug it up in an old thread from 2009:

Date Result
11/06/84 Oilers 3 @ Pens 3 Lemieux 0-1-1, Gretzky 1-0-1
1/12/85 Oilers 3 @ Pens 4 Lemieux 2-0-2, Gretzky 0-3-3
1/26/85 Pens 3 @ Oilers 6 Lemieux 1-0-1, Gretzky 3-1-4
1/22/86 Pens 7 @ Oilers 4 Lemieux 0-4-4, Gretzky 1-1-2
3/07/86 Pens 3 @ Oilers 5 Lemieux 0-1-1, Gretzky 0-2-2
3/26/86 Oilers 8 @ Pens 3 Lemieux 0-1-1, Gretzky 1-3-4
1/24/87 Pens 2 @ Oilers 4 Lemieux 0-1-1, Gretzky 1-3-4
11/20/87 Pens 1 @ Oilers 4 Lemieux 0-1-1,-2 Gretzky 0-2-2.+2
2/19/88 Pens 3 @ Oilers 7 Lemieux 0-1-1,Even Gretzky 0-0-0, Even
11/12/88 Pens 2 @ Kings 7 Lemieux 1-1-2,+3 Gretzky 0-1-1, Even
3/07/89 Pens 2 @ Kings 3 Lemieux 1-1-2,+2 Gretzky 0-2-2, +2
10/31/89 Kings 8 @ Pens 4 Lemieux 0-2-2,-3 Gretzky 3-3-6, +4
2/10/90 Kings 6 @ Pens 7 Lemieux 0-1-1,-1 Gretzky 0-1-1, Even
2/26/91 Pens 2 @ Kings 8 Lemieux 0-1-1,-3 Gretzky 0-3-3, +1
3/07/91 Kings 2 @ Pens 3 Lemieux 0-2-2,+2 Gretzky 1-1-2, +1
3/07/92 Pens 3 @ Kings 5 Lemieux 0-1-1,-1 Gretzky 1-2-3, +3
3/11/93 Kings 3 @ Pens 4 Lemieux 1-3-4,+2 Gretzky 1-1-2, Even
11/06/93 Pens 3 @ Kings 8 Lemieux 0-2-2,-2 Gretzky 0-4-4,+3
3/26/96 Blues 4 @ Pens 8 Lemieux 5-2-7,+3 Gretzky 0-1-1,-2
10/16/96 Pens 1 @ NYR 8 Lemieux 0-0-0,-2 Gretzky 0-2-2, +2
11/16/96 NYR 8 @ Pens 3 Lemieux 0-1-1,-1 Gretzky 1-1-2, Even
1/25/97 NYR 7 @ Pens 4 Lemieux 0-0-0,-1 Gretzky 0-3-3, +1
3/24/97 Pens 0 @ NYR 3 Lemieux 0-0-0,-2 Gretzky 1-1-2, +2

23 Total Games Lemieux 11-27-38, -13 Gretzky 15-41-56, +16
9 Oilers Games Lemieux 3-10-13, -2 Gretzky 7-15-22, +1
14 Post-Oilers Lemieux 8-17-25, -11 Gretzky 8-26-34, +15

Gretzky's team was 17-5-1 (.761) in these 23 games, 18-6-1 (.740) if the other two count.

Basically, post-Oilers Gretzky administered even worse punishment to a prime Mario than Gretzky-the-Oiler had. Without the 5-goal, 7-point night Mario enjoyed against the Blues, those stats would look baaad, but either way, what stands out is Mario's -13. It's safe to say Mario got scored on a ton when playing against Gretzky's teams. And since he is at -11 while Gretzky is at +15 post his Oilers tenure... This is not a good look.

 

[The Panther]

I think that a potential argument for Lemieux as #1 is that he was near-equal to Gretzky in offensive domination relative to his peers, but his game and ability to remain a top goal scorer seemed to adapt better to a league that was becoming more defensive.

This is an interesting question -- Ignoring missed games, was a healthy Lemieux as peer-dominant as Gretzky? I suspect if we look at this season-by-season, he isn't. But maybe in sum, he is...?

Taking Gretzky's best/prime years as 1980-81 to 1987-88, and then adding 1990-91 as the 9th season, while taking Lemieux's best/prime years as 1985-86 to 1996-97 (ignoring 1990-91 and 1993-94 and 1995 as he barely played) to make his 9 seasons, and then ignoring each other as competition (i.,e., it's imagining Gretzky without the existence of Lemieux and Lemieux without the existence of Gretzky), I come up with the following (all stats are points-per-game and rankings are only for players with min. 50% of seasonal games played):

Gretzky
1981: 1. Gretzky 2.05 / 2. Dionne 1.69 / 3. Nilsson 1.64 / 5. Chouinard 1.60 / 10. Lafleur 1.37
1982: 1. Gretzky 2.65 / 2. Bossy 1.84 / 3. Stastny 1.74 / 5. Trottier 1.61 / 10. Ciccarelli 1.39
1983: 1. Gretzky 2.45 / 2. Stastny 1.65 / 3. Savard 1.55 / 5. Anderson 1.44 / 10. Goulet 1.31
1984: 1. Gretzky 2.77 / 2. Kurri 1.69 / 3. Bossy 1.76 / 5. Goulet 1.63 / 10. Messier 1.38
1985: 1. Gretzky 2.60 / 2. Kurri 1.85 / 3. Hawerchuk 1.63 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Federko 1.36
1986: 1. Gretzky 2.69 / 2. Coffey 1.75 / 3. Kurri 1.68 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Naslund 1.38
1987: 1. Gretzky 2.32 / 2. Messier 1.39 / 3. Kurri 1.37 / 5. Ciccarelli 1.29 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.25
1988: 1. Gretzky 2.33 / 2. Savard 1.64 / 3. Yzerman 1.59 / 5. Stastny 1.46 / 10. Loob 1.33
1991: 1. Gretzky 2.09 / 2. Oates 1.89 / 3. Hull 1.68 / 5. Cullen 1.41 / 10. Fleury 1.32
PPG Averages (based on per season, not per game [I do not have time....!])
Gretzky 2.44 / 2nd - 1.71 / 3rd - 1.63 / 5th - 1.50 / 10th - 1.34
Gretzky's competition expressed as % of his total
Gretzky - 100 / 2nd - 70.0 / 3rd - 66.8 / 5th - 61.5 / 10th - 54.9

Lemieux:
1986: 1. Lemieux 1.78 / 2. Coffey 1.75 / 3. Kurri 1.68 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Naslund 1.38
1987: 1. Lemieux 1.70 / 2. Messier 1.39 / 3. Kurri 1.37 / 5. Ciccarelli 1.29 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.25
1988: 1. Lemieux 2.18 / 2. Savard 1.64 / 3. Yzerman 1.59 / 5. Stastny 1.46 / 10. Loob 1.33
1989: 1. Lemieux 2.62 / 2. Yzerman 1.94 / 3. Nicholls 1.90 / 5. Coffey 1.51 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.28
1990: 1. Lemieux 2.08 / 2. Messier 1.63 / 3. Yzerman 1.61 / 5. Nicholls 1.42 / 10. Tocchet 1.28
1992: 1. Lemieux 2.05 / 2. Lafontaine 1.63 / 3. Stevens 1.54 / 5. Sakic 1.36 / 10. Leetch 1.28
1993: 1. Lemieux 2.67 / 2. Lafontaine 1.76 / 3. Oates 1.69 / 5. Yzerman 1.63 / 10. Robitaille 1.49
1996: 1. Lemieux 2.30 / 2. Jagr 1.82 / 3. Lindros 1.58 / 5. Sakic 1.46 / 10. Messier 1.34
1997: 1. Lemieux 1.61 / 2. Lindros 1.52 / 3. Jagr 1.51 / 5. Selanne 1.40 / 10. Sakic 1.14
PPG Averages (based on per season, not per game)
Lemieux 2.11 / 2nd - 1.68 / 3rd - 1.61 / 5th - 1.45 / 10th - 1.31
Lemieux's competition expressed as % of his total
Lemieux - 100 / 2nd - 79.6 / 3rd - 76.3 / 5th - 68.7 / 10th - 62.1

______________________________________________________________________________

9 seasons: Challengers to Gretzky vs. Challengers to Lemieux
to Gretzky --- 70.0 / 66.8 / 61.5 / 54.9
to Lemieux -- 79.6 / 76.3 / 68.7 / 62.1
______________________________________________________________________________

So, based on these 9 seasons I've selected, it's quite clear that Gretzky was considerably more peer dominant in the scoring race than Lemieux was.

But then, I thought, for "peak" purposes, what if we take the top-3 seasons by each? So, then, it would be (I guess) Gretzky '82, '84, '87 vs (I guess) Lemieux '88, '89, '93. It comes out like this:

PPG Averages (based on 3 "peak domination" seasons)
Gretzky 2.58 / 2nd - 1.64 / 3rd - 1.62 / 5th - 1.51 / 10th - 1.34
Lemieux 2.49 / 2nd - 1.78 / 3rd - 1.73 / 5th - 1.53 / 10th - 1.37

______________________________________________________________________________

Peak-domination 3 seasons: Challengers to Gretzky vs. Challengers to Lemieux
to Gretzky --- 63.6 / 62.8 / 58.5 / 51.9
to Lemieux -- 71.5 / 69.5 / 61.4 / 55.0

______________________________________________________________________________

So, based on the 3 peak-domination seasons I've selected, it's yet again quite clear that Gretzky was considerably more peer dominant than Lemieux.


*****************************


To the other point made by @TANK200: While I personally do consider Lemieux the greatest goal-scorer in NHL history, I think the frequently seen argument that he "adapt(ed) better to a league that was becoming more defensive", in comparison to Gretzky, is a bit overblown. Gretzky's prime ended in September 1991. That season, he'd been 4th in ES goal scoring, so he could still get it done, goals-wise. And while his 45-ish goals pace his first three years in L.A. was a fall off from early/mid-80s' Edmonton, it wasn't because the League was becoming more defensive in 1988-89, for example (when four players scored 150 points!). In other words, Gretzky's fall off in goal production happened because his prime ended (for a few reasons), regardless of League defensive changes.

League defense, for example, was not a factor in 1992-93 (L.A. was a very high scoring team that year, 21 players scored 100+ points, and a rookie scored 76 goals), yet Gretzky's goal scoring fell off the map that 1/2 season. This had nothing to do with League defense.

 

[TANK200]

This is an interesting question -- Ignoring missed games, was a healthy Lemieux as peer-dominant as Gretzky? I suspect if we look at this season-by-season, he isn't. But maybe in sum, he is...?

Taking Gretzky's best/prime years as 1980-81 to 1987-88, and then adding 1990-91 as the 9th season, while taking Lemieux's best/prime years as 1985-86 to 1996-97 (ignoring 1990-91 and 1993-94 and 1995 as he barely played) to make his 9 seasons, and then ignoring each other as competition (i.,e., it's imagining Gretzky without the existence of Lemieux and Lemieux without the existence of Gretzky), I come up with the following (all stats are points-per-game and rankings are only for players with min. 50% of seasonal games played):

Gretzky
1981: 1. Gretzky 2.05 / 2. Dionne 1.69 / 3. Nilsson 1.64 / 5. Chouinard 1.60 / 10. Lafleur 1.37
1982: 1. Gretzky 2.65 / 2. Bossy 1.84 / 3. Stastny 1.74 / 5. Trottier 1.61 / 10. Ciccarelli 1.39
1983: 1. Gretzky 2.45 / 2. Stastny 1.65 / 3. Savard 1.55 / 5. Anderson 1.44 / 10. Goulet 1.31
1984: 1. Gretzky 2.77 / 2. Kurri 1.69 / 3. Bossy 1.76 / 5. Goulet 1.63 / 10. Messier 1.38
1985: 1. Gretzky 2.60 / 2. Kurri 1.85 / 3. Hawerchuk 1.63 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Federko 1.36
1986: 1. Gretzky 2.69 / 2. Coffey 1.75 / 3. Kurri 1.68 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Naslund 1.38
1987: 1. Gretzky 2.32 / 2. Messier 1.39 / 3. Kurri 1.37 / 5. Ciccarelli 1.29 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.25
1988: 1. Gretzky 2.33 / 2. Savard 1.64 / 3. Yzerman 1.59 / 5. Stastny 1.46 / 10. Loob 1.33
1991: 1. Gretzky 2.09 / 2. Oates 1.89 / 3. Hull 1.68 / 5. Cullen 1.41 / 10. Fleury 1.32
PPG Averages (based on per season, not per game [I do not have time....!])
Gretzky 2.44 / 2nd - 1.71 / 3rd - 1.63 / 5th - 1.50 / 10th - 1.34
Gretzky's competition expressed as % of his total
Gretzky - 100 / 2nd - 70.0 / 3rd - 66.8 / 5th - 61.5 / 10th - 54.9

Lemieux:
1986: 1. Lemieux 1.78 / 2. Coffey 1.75 / 3. Kurri 1.68 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Naslund 1.38
1987: 1. Lemieux 1.70 / 2. Messier 1.39 / 3. Kurri 1.37 / 5. Ciccarelli 1.29 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.25
1988: 1. Lemieux 2.18 / 2. Savard 1.64 / 3. Yzerman 1.59 / 5. Stastny 1.46 / 10. Loob 1.33
1989: 1. Lemieux 2.62 / 2. Yzerman 1.94 / 3. Nicholls 1.90 / 5. Coffey 1.51 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.28
1990: 1. Lemieux 2.08 / 2. Messier 1.63 / 3. Yzerman 1.61 / 5. Nicholls 1.42 / 10. Tocchet 1.28
1992: 1. Lemieux 2.05 / 2. Lafontaine 1.63 / 3. Stevens 1.54 / 5. Sakic 1.36 / 10. Leetch 1.28
1993: 1. Lemieux 2.67 / 2. Lafontaine 1.76 / 3. Oates 1.69 / 5. Yzerman 1.63 / 10. Robitaille 1.49
1996: 1. Lemieux 2.30 / 2. Jagr 1.82 / 3. Lindros 1.58 / 5. Sakic 1.46 / 10. Messier 1.34
1997: 1. Lemieux 1.61 / 2. Lindros 1.52 / 3. Jagr 1.51 / 5. Selanne 1.40 / 10. Sakic 1.14
PPG Averages (based on per season, not per game)
Lemieux 2.11 / 2nd - 1.68 / 3rd - 1.61 / 5th - 1.45 / 10th - 1.31
Lemieux's competition expressed as % of his total
Lemieux - 100 / 2nd - 79.6 / 3rd - 76.3 / 5th - 68.7 / 10th - 62.1

______________________________________________________________________________

9 seasons: Challengers to Gretzky vs. Challengers to Lemieux
to Gretzky --- 70.0 / 66.8 / 61.5 / 54.9
to Lemieux -- 79.6 / 76.3 / 68.7 / 62.1
______________________________________________________________________________

So, based on these 9 seasons I've selected, it's quite clear that Gretzky was considerably more peer dominant in the scoring race than Lemieux was.

But then, I thought, for "peak" purposes, what if we take the top-3 seasons by each? So, then, it would be (I guess) Gretzky '82, '84, '87 vs (I guess) Lemieux '88, '89, '93. It comes out like this:

PPG Averages (based on 3 "peak domination" seasons)
Gretzky 2.58 / 2nd - 1.64 / 3rd - 1.62 / 5th - 1.51 / 10th - 1.34
Lemieux 2.49 / 2nd - 1.78 / 3rd - 1.73 / 5th - 1.53 / 10th - 1.37

______________________________________________________________________________

Peak-domination 3 seasons: Challengers to Gretzky vs. Challengers to Lemieux
to Gretzky --- 63.6 / 62.8 / 58.5 / 51.9
to Lemieux -- 71.5 / 69.5 / 61.4 / 55.0

______________________________________________________________________________

So, based on the 3 peak-domination seasons I've selected, it's yet again quite clear that Gretzky was considerably more peer dominant than Lemieux.


*****************************


To the other point made by @TANK200: While I personally do consider Lemieux the greatest goal-scorer in NHL history, I think the frequently seen argument that he "adapt(ed) better to a league that was becoming more defensive", in comparison to Gretzky, is a bit overblown. Gretzky's prime ended in September 1991. That season, he'd been 4th in ES goal scoring, so he could still get it done, goals-wise. And while his 45-ish goals pace his first three years in L.A. was a fall off from early/mid-80s' Edmonton, it wasn't because the League was becoming more defensive in 1988-89, for example (when four players scored 150 points!). In other words, Gretzky's fall off in goal production happened because his prime ended (for a few reasons), regardless of League defensive changes.

League defense, for example, was not a factor in 1992-93 (L.A. was a very high scoring team that year, 21 players scored 100+ points, and a rookie scored 76 goals), yet Gretzky's goal scoring fell off the map that 1/2 season. This had nothing to do with League defense.

Excellent post, but the statistical comparison somewhat relies on the assumption that points per game is the appropriate metric for comparing offensive performance. I tend to prefer a metric like goals created per game, which places more value on goals than assists. That is a whole different discussion, but I struggle to accept the notion that G = 1A = 2A and 3A = nothing. I think that Gretzky still comes out ahead even comparing goals created per game, but the gap narrows.

I don't really think that Gretzky's decline in goal scoring was simply attributable to being past his prime. If you look at who I consider the top 5 goal scorers of all-time (Richard, Howe, Hull, Lemieux, and Ovechkin), none had a similar decline in goal scoring late in their career. Gretzky didn't register more than 25 goals in any of his last 5 seasons, despite many of his lesser contemporaries (Yzerman, Sakic, Selanne, etc.) continuing to be effective goal scorers. I rank Gretzky as #1 all-time, but his decline in goal scoring raises the question of whether he was a product of his era moreso than other comparable players.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Can't we point to a very real goal scoring decline for Lemieux too?

After the 2001 season, he scored 48 goals in his last 128 regular season games. That's a 27 goal pace per 82.

He scored 6 goals in 18 games in his only post 97 playoffs. That's a 27 goal pace per 82.

He scored 3 goals in 11 international games after 97. That's a 22 goal pace per 82.

It's a far cry from mid 90s Lemieux or 2001 Lemieux.

 

[TANK200]

Can't we point to a very real goal scoring decline for Lemieux too?

After the 2001 season, he scored 48 goals in his last 128 regular season games. That's a 27 goal pace per 82.

He scored 6 goals in 18 games in his only post 97 playoffs. That's a 27 goal pace per 82.

He scored 3 goals in 11 international games after 97. That's a 22 goal pace per 82.

It's a far cry from mid 90s Lemieux or 2001 Lemieux.

Certainly his goal scoring declined somewhat later in his career, but he scored 28 goals in 67 games in his only reasonably healthy season after that point. I have a hard time projecting his 6 goals in 24 games in 2001-2002 to be only ~20 goal season when he scored 35 goals in 43 games the season before and 28 goals in 67 games the year after. And the sample sizes in his last two "seasons" are so small to really seem meaningful.

 

[MadLuke]

After the 2001 season

He became an assist heavy scorer:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

But in 2002 and 2003 he was scoring goals at the pace of old Sakic- young Gaborik, nothing Mario like specially with that amount of ice time, but still quite high.

A bit of the same can be said for 36-37 year's old Gretzky season, 48 goals for the 2 season's is good enough for barely missing the Top 40 in the league and Top 66 pace wise, still scoring goals like a median first liner, while putting 10 in 15 games in the playoff.

Those 2 still leading the league in assists mixed by how rare goals got can make their goalscorings look more pedestrian than it was for their age, that said when you are used to see them not only 1-2 but with a large separation from everyone else, it is nothing special for them

Best adjusted goal scoring for players 36 and 37 year's old season (using hockey reference age january 31 of the current season age system), adjustment is made using a ratio versus the 7th best canadian goal scorer during the respective season, weighted by game played each season:

FullName	Games	Goals	Points	GPG	PPG	weightedGoalRatio	weightedPointRatio
Teemu Selanne	108​	60​	117​	0.56​	1.08​	1.12​	0.9​
Jean Beliveau	128​	64​	150​	0.5​	1.17​	1.09​	1.09​
Gordie Howe	140​	58​	151​	0.41​	1.08​	1.02​	1.17​
Bill Cook	96​	41​	76​	0.43​	0.79​	1​	1​
Maurice Richard	70​	32​	72​	0.46​	1.03​	0.99​	1​
Brett Hull	161​	69​	142​	0.43​	0.88​	0.95​	0.88​
Joe Pavelski	138​	52​	132​	0.38​	0.96​	0.86​	0.81​
Jarome Iginla	160​	59​	120​	0.37​	0.75​	0.86​	0.79​
Mark Messier	153​	58​	144​	0.38​	0.94​	0.85​	0.89​
Joe Sakic	164​	68​	187​	0.41​	1.14​	0.84​	0.96​
Mario Lemieux	91​	34​	122​	0.37​	1.34​	0.84​	1.37​
Mike Knuble	151​	56​	100​	0.37​	0.66​	0.82​	0.65​
Phil Esposito	160​	76​	156​	0.48​	0.98​	0.82​	0.73​
Johnny Bucyk	156​	72​	176​	0.46​	1.13​	0.82​	0.94​
Pavel Datsyuk	129​	42​	114​	0.33​	0.88​	0.79​	0.99​
Mats Sundin	115​	41​	106​	0.36​	0.92​	0.78​	0.86​
Patrick Marleau	164​	52​	94​	0.32​	0.57​	0.77​	0.64​
Bill Guerin	158​	59​	100​	0.37​	0.63​	0.77​	0.54​
Didier Pitre	45​	30​	47​	0.67​	1.04​	0.77​	0.86​
Mike Gartner	164​	67​	117​	0.41​	0.71​	0.77​	0.6​
Dino Ciccarelli	141​	57​	103​	0.4​	0.73​	0.77​	0.62​
Martin St. Louis	125​	42​	134​	0.34​	1.07​	0.74​	1.05​
Tomas Holmstrom	121​	39​	82​	0.32​	0.68​	0.72​	0.67​
Phil Goyette	132​	44​	139​	0.33​	1.05​	0.71​	1.01​
Alex Delvecchio	146​	47​	153​	0.32​	1.05​	0.71​	0.97​
Joe Mullen	129​	54​	107​	0.42​	0.83​	0.68​	0.69​
Shane Doan	117​	36​	74​	0.31​	0.63​	0.67​	0.6​
Owen Nolan	132​	41​	78​	0.31​	0.59​	0.67​	0.58​
Rod Brind'Amour	137​	45​	133​	0.33​	0.97​	0.67​	0.82​
Jean Ratelle	158​	58​	178​	0.37​	1.13​	0.66​	0.95​
Daniel Alfredsson	149​	44​	145​	0.3​	0.97​	0.65​	0.96​
Joe Nieuwendyk	144​	39​	95​	0.27​	0.66​	0.65​	0.7​
Nels Stewart	81​	22​	48​	0.27​	0.59​	0.65​	0.71​
Wayne Gretzky	164​	48​	187​	0.29​	1.14​	0.65​	1.09​
Mike Modano	141​	43​	100​	0.3​	0.71​	0.64​	0.62​
Scott Mellanby	148​	40​	88​	0.27​	0.59​	0.64​	0.62​
Patrik Elias	113​	32​	89​	0.28​	0.79​	0.63​	0.75​
Jeff Carter	130​	36​	75​	0.28​	0.58​	0.62​	0.49​
Ray Whitney	162​	45​	135​	0.28​	0.83​	0.6​	0.82​

Ovechkin should become number one with a giant margin after this season, the players with the best adjusted by game point production at those age are
Lemieux
Howe
Gretzky
Beliveau
St.Louis

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

I've never seen any compelling evidence to support the idea that Gretzky's goal scoring declined at a different rate than the rest of his offensive performance, which is what would have happened if he was truly unable to adapt his goal scoring to a different environment. The theory that Gretzky declined as an overall offensive player after the Suter hit is obviously better at explaining the relevant data.

If you look at every season of Gretzky's career, and calculate the percentage of his even strength points that were goals, the lowest was naturally his last, where he scored just 6 even strength goals in 70 games. The season with the second-lowest percentage, though? Surprisingly it was 1985-86, the year he hit his career high in points. How does that make any sense, if old Gretzky apparently couldn't score on the newfangled butterfly goalies? It actually turns out that his rate of even strength points that were goals was surprisingly stable over his career after 1984-85.

It was a similar story on the power play, where at age 24 in 1984-85 Gretzky was already at only 18% of his PPP being PPG, reflecting his usage changing from being a shooter to a outright playmaker. He would maintain that role for the rest of his career (from 1986 to 1999 combined his PPG/PPP rate was 19%).

See this chart of Gretzky's ESG% and PPG% from age 25 (1985-86) to age 37 (1997-98), excluding his final campaign where he did legitimately decline in terms of goal scoring. The trend line for his even strength rate is perfectly flat. Again, if there was something about the improving league defensive structure or improved goaltending that impacted his goal scoring more than the rest of his game, that simply would not be the case, especially given that these major changes mostly took place when Gretzky was in his early thirties.

Gretzky was already an out-and-out playmaker by the mid-'80s, and he continued to be the same type of player for the remainder of his career. He was just so good at creating offence, and league scoring was still relatively high, that he ended up with a lot of goals anyway. But when he got Sutered and league scoring started to drop, it had a huge impact on his overall scoring totals, but certainly not his goal scoring uniquely. This is why it is a misinterpretation of the data to say that he couldn't maintain his goal scoring (he did in fact maintain his goal scoring just as consistently as he maintained any other aspect of his offensive game).

If you want to question any part of Gretzky's goal scoring resume, question whether his peak would translate to other eras, because there you actually have good arguments to bring to the table (the "Bossy was a better goal scorer than Gretzky" thread has most of the good ones).

In contrast, if you want to know what it looks like when a player actually hits a wall in terms of even strength goal scoring, Mario Lemieux is a great example. Mario had a super hot streak of 10 even strength goals in 13 games to start off the 2000-01 season, and then he fell off a cliff for the entire rest of his career:

Year	Type	Age	GP	ESG	ESA	ESG%	#10 in NHL	Adj ESG	Adj ESG/GP
1996​	REG	30​	70​	31​	43​	42%​	0.341​	27.3​	31.9​
1996​	PO	30​	18​	7​	7​	50%​	0.341​	6.2​	28.1​
1997​	REG	31​	76​	32​	47​	41%​	0.341​	28.1​	30.3​
1997​	PO	31​	5​	3​	1​	75%​	0.341​	2.6​	43.2​
2001​	REG (1st 13 GP)	35​	13​	10​	6​	63%​	0.317​	9.5​	59.7​
2001​	REG (Rest)	35​	30​	6​	19​	24%​	0.317​	5.7​	15.5​
2001​	PO	35​	18​	5​	5​	50%​	0.317​	4.7​	21.6​
2002​	REG	36​	24​	4​	13​	24%​	0.317​	3.8​	12.9​
2003​	REG	37​	67​	14​	32​	30%​	0.293​	14.4​	17.6​
2004​	REG	38​	10​	1​	4​	20%​	0.268​	1.1​	9.2​
2006​	REG	40​	26​	4​	12​	25%​	0.293​	4.1​	12.9​
1996-Jan 2001	Both	30-35	182​	83​	104​	44%​		73.6​	33.2​
Jan 2001-2006	Both	35-40	175​	34​	85​	29%​		33.8​	15.8​

For Lemieux, we see not only his overall rates drop, but his percentage of goals drops from 44% to 29%, something that never happened to late-career Gretzky other than during his final season. Era-adjusted, those last 175 games for Lemieux are barely better than old Gretzky (age 35-38, Gretzky had 14.7 adjusted even strength goals per 82 based on the same calculations as above).

The "Mario was better at adapting as a DPE goal scorer" seems to handwave away a lot of evidence (particularly playoff evidence), while really boiling down to a theory that is almost entirely based on a half-season of play in 2000-01. It's probably still a defensible claim to some degree, but I think it's vastly overstated in most cases and definitely not something that gets Lemieux even remotely close to a GOAT case.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Lemieux 02-03 is really a case of two different Lemieuxs.

First 40 GP
20 G 48 A 68 P

Pace of 41 G 98 A 139 P

Naslund is the closest with 56 points in 43 games.

Remaining 27 games
8 G 15 A 23 P

Pace of 25 G 46 A 71 P

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Lemieux 02-03 is really a case of two different Lemieuxs.

First 40 GP
20 G 48 A 68 P

Pace of 41 G 98 A 139 P

Naslund is the closest with 56 points in 43 games.

Remaining 27 games
8 G 15 A 23 P

Pace of 25 G 46 A 71 P

Here's a day-by-day summary of the 2003 scoring race (quoting myself from an old thread):

Lemieux was by far the best scorer in the NHL in 2003, before he got injured. This might be one of his most under-appreciated seasons. But he missed most of the month of January, and really slowed down once he came back. (It didn't help that the Penguins were horrendous). Either way, Lemieux was clearly more of a playmaker than a shooter in 2003.

 

[bobholly39]

That's a good example of the case that's really hard to make, since their H2H is so lopsided. Surely someone can repost the stats from the games they played against one another. I my memory serves right, Lemieux dominated in exactly one.

EDIT: I dug it up in an old thread from 2009:



Basically, post-Oilers Gretzky administered even worse punishment to a prime Mario than Gretzky-the-Oiler had. Without the 5-goal, 7-point night Mario enjoyed against the Blues, those stats would look baaad, but either way, what stands out is Mario's -13. It's safe to say Mario got scored on a ton when playing against Gretzky's teams. And since he is at -11 while Gretzky is at +15 post his Oilers tenure... This is not a good look.

Individual head to head comparison in a team game makes no sense whatsoever imo

Im sure i can find an example of a random 4th liner doing better head to head against a star player. Doesn't mean anything

 

[Overrated]

Here's a day-by-day summary of the 2003 scoring race (quoting myself from an old thread):

View attachment 606967

Lemieux was by far the best scorer in the NHL in 2003, before he got injured. This might be one of his most under-appreciated seasons. But he missed most of the month of January, and really slowed down once he came back. (It didn't help that the Penguins were horrendous). Either way, Lemieux was clearly more of a playmaker than a shooter in 2003.

It's a pity Jagr didn't stick around in Pittsburgh. I feel like he could have done much more in his career,

 

[MadLuke]

Lemieux was by far the best scorer in the NHL in 2003

I think I remember nhl.com having a special mario Lemieux tracker window on their website that season before the injury.

Not sure if he had sustained it if they keep the Kovalev around and no injury, but that 139 pts pace, when the art Ross was won at 106 pts (96 the year before and 94 the year after) was a bit nuts.

 

[authentic]

That's a good example of the case that's really hard to make, since their H2H is so lopsided. Surely someone can repost the stats from the games they played against one another. I my memory serves right, Lemieux dominated in exactly one.

EDIT: I dug it up in an old thread from 2009:



Basically, post-Oilers Gretzky administered even worse punishment to a prime Mario than Gretzky-the-Oiler had. Without the 5-goal, 7-point night Mario enjoyed against the Blues, those stats would look baaad, but either way, what stands out is Mario's -13. It's safe to say Mario got scored on a ton when playing against Gretzky's teams. And since he is at -11 while Gretzky is at +15 post his Oilers tenure... This is not a good look.

Pretty crazy really

 

[Michael Farkas]

It's obvious the case can't be made - the body of work is just not there if you compare him with Gretzky, the best comparison.

That said, watching the semi finals and finals of both the 91 and 92 cups, I never saw anything quite like Lemieux then.

Welp...again...that second paragraph is the case...

 

[authentic]

Welp...again...that second paragraph is the case...

What specifically do you think Lemieux did during those games that made him better than Gretzky ever was?

 

[Michael Farkas]

This isn't my opinion, as I stated upthread, but this is what's happening...

"How is there a case for Lemieux? I mean, sure, he was purely the best hockey player I ever saw at his best, but..."

Whether you like that idea or not, the case becomes clearly in focus at that point...it becomes viable...

 

[buffalowing88]

This is an interesting question -- Ignoring missed games, was a healthy Lemieux as peer-dominant as Gretzky? I suspect if we look at this season-by-season, he isn't. But maybe in sum, he is...?

Taking Gretzky's best/prime years as 1980-81 to 1987-88, and then adding 1990-91 as the 9th season, while taking Lemieux's best/prime years as 1985-86 to 1996-97 (ignoring 1990-91 and 1993-94 and 1995 as he barely played) to make his 9 seasons, and then ignoring each other as competition (i.,e., it's imagining Gretzky without the existence of Lemieux and Lemieux without the existence of Gretzky), I come up with the following (all stats are points-per-game and rankings are only for players with min. 50% of seasonal games played):

Gretzky
1981: 1. Gretzky 2.05 / 2. Dionne 1.69 / 3. Nilsson 1.64 / 5. Chouinard 1.60 / 10. Lafleur 1.37
1982: 1. Gretzky 2.65 / 2. Bossy 1.84 / 3. Stastny 1.74 / 5. Trottier 1.61 / 10. Ciccarelli 1.39
1983: 1. Gretzky 2.45 / 2. Stastny 1.65 / 3. Savard 1.55 / 5. Anderson 1.44 / 10. Goulet 1.31
1984: 1. Gretzky 2.77 / 2. Kurri 1.69 / 3. Bossy 1.76 / 5. Goulet 1.63 / 10. Messier 1.38
1985: 1. Gretzky 2.60 / 2. Kurri 1.85 / 3. Hawerchuk 1.63 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Federko 1.36
1986: 1. Gretzky 2.69 / 2. Coffey 1.75 / 3. Kurri 1.68 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Naslund 1.38
1987: 1. Gretzky 2.32 / 2. Messier 1.39 / 3. Kurri 1.37 / 5. Ciccarelli 1.29 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.25
1988: 1. Gretzky 2.33 / 2. Savard 1.64 / 3. Yzerman 1.59 / 5. Stastny 1.46 / 10. Loob 1.33
1991: 1. Gretzky 2.09 / 2. Oates 1.89 / 3. Hull 1.68 / 5. Cullen 1.41 / 10. Fleury 1.32
PPG Averages (based on per season, not per game [I do not have time....!])
Gretzky 2.44 / 2nd - 1.71 / 3rd - 1.63 / 5th - 1.50 / 10th - 1.34
Gretzky's competition expressed as % of his total
Gretzky - 100 / 2nd - 70.0 / 3rd - 66.8 / 5th - 61.5 / 10th - 54.9

Lemieux:
1986: 1. Lemieux 1.78 / 2. Coffey 1.75 / 3. Kurri 1.68 / 5. Bossy 1.54 / 10. Naslund 1.38
1987: 1. Lemieux 1.70 / 2. Messier 1.39 / 3. Kurri 1.37 / 5. Ciccarelli 1.29 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.25
1988: 1. Lemieux 2.18 / 2. Savard 1.64 / 3. Yzerman 1.59 / 5. Stastny 1.46 / 10. Loob 1.33
1989: 1. Lemieux 2.62 / 2. Yzerman 1.94 / 3. Nicholls 1.90 / 5. Coffey 1.51 / 10. Hawerchuk 1.28
1990: 1. Lemieux 2.08 / 2. Messier 1.63 / 3. Yzerman 1.61 / 5. Nicholls 1.42 / 10. Tocchet 1.28
1992: 1. Lemieux 2.05 / 2. Lafontaine 1.63 / 3. Stevens 1.54 / 5. Sakic 1.36 / 10. Leetch 1.28
1993: 1. Lemieux 2.67 / 2. Lafontaine 1.76 / 3. Oates 1.69 / 5. Yzerman 1.63 / 10. Robitaille 1.49
1996: 1. Lemieux 2.30 / 2. Jagr 1.82 / 3. Lindros 1.58 / 5. Sakic 1.46 / 10. Messier 1.34
1997: 1. Lemieux 1.61 / 2. Lindros 1.52 / 3. Jagr 1.51 / 5. Selanne 1.40 / 10. Sakic 1.14
PPG Averages (based on per season, not per game)
Lemieux 2.11 / 2nd - 1.68 / 3rd - 1.61 / 5th - 1.45 / 10th - 1.31
Lemieux's competition expressed as % of his total
Lemieux - 100 / 2nd - 79.6 / 3rd - 76.3 / 5th - 68.7 / 10th - 62.1

______________________________________________________________________________

9 seasons: Challengers to Gretzky vs. Challengers to Lemieux
to Gretzky --- 70.0 / 66.8 / 61.5 / 54.9
to Lemieux -- 79.6 / 76.3 / 68.7 / 62.1
______________________________________________________________________________

So, based on these 9 seasons I've selected, it's quite clear that Gretzky was considerably more peer dominant in the scoring race than Lemieux was.

But then, I thought, for "peak" purposes, what if we take the top-3 seasons by each? So, then, it would be (I guess) Gretzky '82, '84, '87 vs (I guess) Lemieux '88, '89, '93. It comes out like this:

PPG Averages (based on 3 "peak domination" seasons)
Gretzky 2.58 / 2nd - 1.64 / 3rd - 1.62 / 5th - 1.51 / 10th - 1.34
Lemieux 2.49 / 2nd - 1.78 / 3rd - 1.73 / 5th - 1.53 / 10th - 1.37

______________________________________________________________________________

Peak-domination 3 seasons: Challengers to Gretzky vs. Challengers to Lemieux
to Gretzky --- 63.6 / 62.8 / 58.5 / 51.9
to Lemieux -- 71.5 / 69.5 / 61.4 / 55.0

______________________________________________________________________________

So, based on the 3 peak-domination seasons I've selected, it's yet again quite clear that Gretzky was considerably more peer dominant than Lemieux.


*****************************


To the other point made by @TANK200: While I personally do consider Lemieux the greatest goal-scorer in NHL history, I think the frequently seen argument that he "adapt(ed) better to a league that was becoming more defensive", in comparison to Gretzky, is a bit overblown. Gretzky's prime ended in September 1991. That season, he'd been 4th in ES goal scoring, so he could still get it done, goals-wise. And while his 45-ish goals pace his first three years in L.A. was a fall off from early/mid-80s' Edmonton, it wasn't because the League was becoming more defensive in 1988-89, for example (when four players scored 150 points!). In other words, Gretzky's fall off in goal production happened because his prime ended (for a few reasons), regardless of League defensive changes.

League defense, for example, was not a factor in 1992-93 (L.A. was a very high scoring team that year, 21 players scored 100+ points, and a rookie scored 76 goals), yet Gretzky's goal scoring fell off the map that 1/2 season. This had nothing to do with League defense.

What a swerve. I really expected you to go with Gretz and Gretz alone. Now you're out here givivng everyone new perspectives. Really cool. Really appreciated, too.