seventieslord
Student Of The Game
- Offensively: Tikkanen has to take this. Even though adjusted points tend to favour DPE players (which Lehtinen very much was), he was decidedly better at scoring points on an era-adjusted basis: 66, 65, 62, 61, 61, 53, 49 are his 7 best seasons, compared to 59, 56, 54, 51, 49, 48, 45 for Lehtinen. On a per-game level, it's the same story. They both missed 25-35 games in their best 7 seasons.
- Offensive help: One counterpoint to the above is that Tikkanen had much more help scoring his points compared to Lehtinen. A quick look at the help they had throughout their careers indicates that Tikkanen's time with Gretzky and on more checking oriented lines tends to wash out with Lehtinen's status as Modano's longtime linemate. Tikkanen was typically scoring at 85% the rate of the players collaborating on goals with him; Lehtinen was 87% as good. that's close enough that it's within the margin of era, and shows that linemate strength need not be a major consideration.
- Defensive play: Based on defensive reputation, I think Lehtinen has a slight edge here. Selke voting seems to agree. 1-1-1-2-3-3 in selke voting is just outstanding, as opposed to a very strong 2-2-2-3 for Tikkanen. However, it's possible that some of this is very competition-influenced at the top end. (for example, Craig Ramsay becomes a four-time winner in a Bob Gainey-less NHL)
- Playoffs: This is the area in which they are the most different. Even if you just arbitrarily slash off 15% of Tikkanen's points to adjust for era, he has 112 points in 186 games, which is 63 more points than Lehtinen in 78 more games.
- Other: Tikkanen is one of the greatest agitators of all-time. He also earned about 1100 more PIM than Lehtinen during his career, which was likely due to about 400 extra minor penalties, probably 300 of which resulted in PPs for the opposition, which is worth about 60 more goals against over the long run. That shouldn't be forgotten.
Overall, you could make the superficial arguments that the offense and defense wash out, and the agitation and penalty arguments wash out, leaving Tikkanen's far better playoff record as the tiebreaker.
- Offensive help: One counterpoint to the above is that Tikkanen had much more help scoring his points compared to Lehtinen. A quick look at the help they had throughout their careers indicates that Tikkanen's time with Gretzky and on more checking oriented lines tends to wash out with Lehtinen's status as Modano's longtime linemate. Tikkanen was typically scoring at 85% the rate of the players collaborating on goals with him; Lehtinen was 87% as good. that's close enough that it's within the margin of era, and shows that linemate strength need not be a major consideration.
- Defensive play: Based on defensive reputation, I think Lehtinen has a slight edge here. Selke voting seems to agree. 1-1-1-2-3-3 in selke voting is just outstanding, as opposed to a very strong 2-2-2-3 for Tikkanen. However, it's possible that some of this is very competition-influenced at the top end. (for example, Craig Ramsay becomes a four-time winner in a Bob Gainey-less NHL)
- Playoffs: This is the area in which they are the most different. Even if you just arbitrarily slash off 15% of Tikkanen's points to adjust for era, he has 112 points in 186 games, which is 63 more points than Lehtinen in 78 more games.
- Other: Tikkanen is one of the greatest agitators of all-time. He also earned about 1100 more PIM than Lehtinen during his career, which was likely due to about 400 extra minor penalties, probably 300 of which resulted in PPs for the opposition, which is worth about 60 more goals against over the long run. That shouldn't be forgotten.
Overall, you could make the superficial arguments that the offense and defense wash out, and the agitation and penalty arguments wash out, leaving Tikkanen's far better playoff record as the tiebreaker.
