Mike Bossy was a better goal scorer than Wayne Gretzky

[Staniowski]

I've noticed most arguments for Bossy make a better case for why he had a better shot rather than being a better overall goal scorer. Yes, he scored goals at a higher rate when he had scoring chances and didn't need as high % of chances as Gretzky to score goals due to his superior shot. But Gretzky's ability to create high % scoring chances at a unprecedented volume is more valuable than having a great shot. I do believe that Bossy's better shot would've given him better longevity as a goal scorer had he had a full career though.

No, the argument that I'm making is that Bossy was the better overall goal-scorer.....not that he merely had the better shot.

But, of course Bossy did have a much better arsenal of shots too.

 

[The Panther]

No, the argument that I'm making is that Bossy was the better overall goal-scorer.....not that he merely had the better shot.

But, of course Bossy did have a much better arsenal of shots too.

So... Why did Gretzky have a better shooting percentage?

 

[Staniowski]

I don't know for sure the temperature of the room in 1983-85, because I was in preschool around that time - but contemporary quotes about Bossy seem to call him "the best pure goal scorer". That's a nebulous term that drives a lot of us crazy, but what I believe it most often means is, out of all the players who mainly just score goals, he's the best one at it. I don't believe terms like that necessarily mean to include players who do so much more for their teams, like Gretzky and Lemieux. You often heard the term used to describe Rocket Richard - "Gordie is the better all-around player, but for pure goal-scoring, give me the rocket", or Pavel Bure, or Brett Hull, so I think that's a fair sense of what it means.

But I don't think it's accurate to say that there are a lot of contemporary opinions between 1981 and 1985 that "I know Gretzky scores about 33% more goals per game, but Bossy is the better goal scorer. I don't mean better PURE goal scorer, I mean ABSOLUTELY better!"



I don't. I see you've edited this since then, but just to be clear, I said he was better at enough of them to a large enough degree. It all depends on the degrees, really, it could just take one thing. If he could shoot the puck 130 mph, for example, that might override all other factors. I did include a few things in there that seemed to apply specifically to Gretzky more than anyone else, to help explain what I think made him a better goal scorer. I'm sure you can guess which ones.

That's the thing about Gretzky, certain things he did were simply off the charts. Anyone who has pondered making an all-time hockey video game or just rating all-time players in a number of key skill categories has probably noticed the same thing - that in order to make it so that Gretzky is one of the three best overall players in the game/thought experiment, some of his skills need to break the scale. If you give him a 7/10 in speed, a 6 in shot power, a 2 in physicality, a 4 in defense, there's just no way for him to make up ground on dozens of other players who either excel at everything or have no major weakness. How would he ever pull ahead of Bourque, Harvey, Howe, Orr, even Lemieux, who's basically a 10 in every offensive attribute? the answer is he has to be, like, a 15 in passing, in hockey sense, in offensive awareness or whatever it is you want to call it. He was not better than everyone at everything, but being so much better than everyone else at just a couple of things is what made him (probably) the best ever. And that's kind of how it is with his goal scoring too. It's all the mental parts of it, because it's not really his physical attributes that drive it, like most other great scorers.



I don't think there is much of a need to micromanage comparisons like this. I'm not concerned with cases where a player had 10-20% more goals or assists than another tipping the scales in a goalscoring or playmaking comparison. This only comes up with Gretzky because of his magnitude. There are very few players who were off the charts - Gretzky and Lemieux are obvious ones, Howe is right there too (I disagree Richard was a better goal scorer; similar to this discussion I think Howe was not only better at pure goalscoring, but also could have been even better because he also was the game's best playmaker while exceeding Richard's goalscoring exploits).

As it applies to 2008 Ovechkin, absolutely, it's entirely possible that OV at his absolute peak was so impactful that it made him a more effective playmaker than the rookie version of Backstrom , who had what is still the worst goal-scoring season of his career, as he probably deferred to OV much more. OV could just about do no wrong for about three seasons there, and he was able to score a boatload of goals while not seeing grossly disproportionate results from an assists or goals against standpoint, either. Of course, everything that happens on the ice affects everything else, and OV can no longer do all three effectively - he had to choose one. For the majority of their careers, of course, Backstrom has been the superior playmaker.

What you're saying is not true....most hockey people, in the early and mid '80s, thought Bossy was the better goal-scorer, even when Gretzky was scoring 92 goals. There were lots of people who thought Bossy was the best goal-scorer in NHL history (up to that point); almost nobody thought Gretzky was.

They thought Bossy was better for the same reasons that are being mentioned here....he scored always, against the toughest competition, in the playoffs, on Team Canada.

When they were teammates on Team Canada, few people had any doubt about who the best goal-scorer on the team was.

 

[Staniowski]

I think that's the most logical definition for the word, or at least the one that comes closest to justifying the need for such a distinction, but it goes in different direction when you hear people talking up someone as "the purest goal scorer in the game" as if it's a good thing to be. By your definition, the purest scorer in the game would be someone like Roman Oksiuta who's just completely useless on almost every square inch of the rink, but instead it seems to refer to a platonic idea of what the act of scoring goals should look like.

There's no particular definition for "pure goal scorer"....the people who use it might have their personal definition, but, generally, it means whatever you think it means. It wasn't any clearer in the 1980s than it is today.

I think it has been used to describe Bossy more than any other player, though.

 

[Staniowski]

The only way Bossy comes out on top here is if you define "pure goal scorer" as "a player who can score goals but is incapable of anything else."

But then it would be slightly unfair to Bossy because "Bossy-to-Trottier" passing play is 5th combo of all time.

Everybody knew what Bossy was - he was a goal-scorer. A very special goal-scorer.

But his passing was okay. He wasn't a naturally great passer, but he was very unselfish....and he passed the puck when it was the smart thing to do.

He also wasn't a great puck-carrier....but he was very cognizant of this. So, he passed the puck a lot, instead of trying to carry it great distances or around the opposition.

 

[The Panther]

I was not aware that Bossy's little brother lived in The Maritimes!

 

[Tobias Kahun]

Bossy scored goals in a wide variety of ways, maybe only Lemieux can compare among great goal-scorers (a few others, including Howe, could also score in many different ways).

Bossy had a great slapshot, snapshot, and wristshot. His shots were generally hard, and accurate, and released very quickly (which he was famous for).

He used his slapshot skating down the wing.

He was also famous for his excellent positioning in the slot, for getting open....and for using his quick release from there.

Great on 2 on 1 rushes, and other rushes.

Also great on breakaways....dekes and wristshots, which he got off quickly and which were difficult to read for the goalie.

Good backhand too.

You would think he would of scored more goals than Gretzky when their careers overlapped.

 

[Ben Grimm]

Be careful, on the main board you must say that OV is the 5th best all around player ever. I agree with the OP, but so what. There's more to hockey than goal scoring.

 

[Staniowski]

Be careful, on the main board you must say that OV is the 5th best all around player ever. I agree with the OP, but so what. There's more to hockey than goal scoring.

Yes, there's more to hockey than goal-scoring.

But there's not more to hockey than scoring goals....as long as you're talking about both ends of the ice.

 

[Staniowski]

As a goal-scorer, Gretzky is more akin to guys like McDavid and Crosby. They're not really naturally great goal-scorers. They're really, really great hockey players who score lots of goals, especially when they are at their best, and sometimes at other times. And they are very good at scoring goals, just not great.

Lemieux and Howe, on the other hand, are really, really great hockey players who are also great goal-scorers. They were always great goal-scorers.

 

[ContrarianGoaltender]

It’s interesting that you mention 1981-82 as a season where Bossy scored more meaningless goals against the worst teams. I wasn’t aware of the splits, but I was going to say that if there was one season where Bossy was motivated by stats more than the others, it was that one. That’s the season where he scored 50 in 50, and he was definitely trying to reach that statistical milestone.

I don’t know if this is the case but it’s possible Al Arbour may have been on board with Bossy going for 50 in 50 as well and given him more opportunities.

Thinking of Arbour, I wanted to say that when we’re talking about Bossy and Gretzky’s scoring in different situations, the biggest factor may have been their respective coaches, the expectations they had of Bossy/Gretzky in different game situations, amd the opportunities they gave them to score. We’re really looking at Bossy/Arbour and Gretzky/Sather when we look at the raw stats.

Yeah, I think the coaching comparison is key to the argument that Bossy could have scored more. I also agree that Bossy was openly gunning for 50-in-50, if you watch interviews that was the thing he wanted above all else in terms of regular season accomplishments.

What makes Bossy a huge outlier among his top goal scoring peers is that he is the only one that wasn't a huge volume shooter, even though based on his skills there's no reason he couldn't have been putting as many pucks on net as anyone:

Top-3 finishes in shots:

Player	Actual	On Pace	Total
Alex Ovechkin	14	2	16
Bobby Hull	11	2	13
Gordie Howe	9*	0	9*
Pavel Bure	5	4	9
Phil Esposito	7	1	8
Brett Hull	6	1	7
Wayne Gretzky	6	0	6
Mario Lemieux	1	5	6
Mike Bossy	0	0	0

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

(*-Since 1959-60 only, could have been as many as 20 if we had shot data from every season)

There are two points in Bossy's career when it looks like he got the green light to go for individual stats, and as a result his shot totals climbed significantly. That was chasing 50 in 1980-81, and also towards the end of the 1981-82 season when the Islanders were pushing back against Gretzky and the Oilers grabbing all the attention in Edmonton's breakout year:

Period	GP	S	S/GP
1977-78 to 1979-80	228	760	3.33
First 10 GP in 1980-81	10	35	3.50
Next 40 GP in 1980-81	40	194	4.85
Final 29 GP in 1980-81	29	86	2.97
First 51 GP in 1981-82	51	177	3.47
Final 29 GP in 1981-82	29	124	4.28
1982-83 to 1985-86	302	1107	3.67

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Bossy scored a hat trick against the Habs in game 11 in 1980-81, and apparently decided at that point that 50-in-50 was within reach. The 1981-82 season stands out as well, because Bossy tended to tail off in scoring towards the end of the year (which I think was related to his team saving itself for the playoffs to some degree), and up until that point in his career he wasn't blowing out the worst teams in the league at all (against my definition of weak teams he only had a 1.35 PPG from 1978-1981, but in 1981-82 he went 24-27-27-54 for 2.25 PPG). The Isles went on a 15 game win streak in late Jan/early Feb, and then kept the pedal down to finish 14-3-4 and take first overall (with Bossy and Trottier both finishing high in the scoring race). From the middle of the streak until the end of the season, Bossy's shots and scoring stats again took a pretty major jump.

The 1981-82 season and especially the stretch run was probably the closest Bossy got to playing in an Oilers-type regular season environment where the team was going for it offensively every single night. And the 50-in-50 was definitely the only time that Bossy had the equivalent of an Ovechkin/Hull-type usage where the whole team was set up just to get him shooting opportunities, accounting for that crazy 58% jump in shots per game over the rest of his season.

Not surprisingly, Bossy's stats were pretty eye-popping when his utilization rate increased:

	GP	G	A	P	+/-	S
Chasing 50 in 1981	40	45	27	72	34	194
Stretch Run in 1982	29	28	36	64	28	124
Total	69	73	63	136	62	318
Per 80 GP	80	84	73	158	72	369

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I doubt Bossy could have maintained that assist rate over an extended period of time, but the goals side doesn't really look that unsustainable since he had only a 22.8% shooting percentage, not far out of line for a guy that averaged 21.5% for his career excluding 1986-87. If he played on a team that was set up to allow him to take ~5 shots a game, I think 80 goals was clearly within reach. This is one of the reasons I don't buy the argument by @GlitchMarner that Bossy's peak wasn't high enough to enter the GOAT goal scoring debate (the other is that people underestimate the difference in scoring environments between 1978-79 and the early '80s).

 

[Thenameless]

This is also why I believe he wouldn't fair as well as Lemieux in the modern era. I think he was the best in a wide open chaotic system (which makes perfect sense since his greatest gift was anticipating the play) but there's no way I would put my money on him outscoring a peak Lemieux in 1995-current day NHL. To be clear I mean total points as well, not just goals.

I'm well known around these parts as an unabashed Mario Lemieux supporter, but I would be careful with that last sentence. I watched both careers start to finish quite carefully, and one marked difference between the two was consistency in level of effort. When it came to scoring, Gretzky gave you everything he had every minute of every shift of every game, all season. If Lemieux was motivated or "chasing something" like Lafleur's junior record, then he gave you everything he had, but it didn't happen as often. In short, Lemieux could be lazy at times. Yes, Mario has the better physical tools for the modern game, but then again he had them back then too. Gretzky's advantages are more subtle, but I still give him credit. If he played today, he would obliterate McDavid in ten straight Art Ross races.

 

[overpass]

Sports Illustrated published two articles on Mike Bossy. One early in his career, from January 1979. And one a couple of years later after his 50 in 50. And then there were also several articles from the Islander playoff runs that weren't specifically about Bossy but had some good quotes.

I'll post some excerpts to give an idea of how Bossy was viewed at the time and how he played and scored goals. This isn't really part of my argument, just some colour and context.

This first article is interesting because it makes Bossy sound like a volume shooter, with his emphasis on just getting the shot off rather than aiming, but as @ContrarianGoaltender posted earlier, Bossy was maybe the one all-time great goal scorer who didn't score with a high shot volume, just high percentages.

January 22, 1979. This Man is an Islander Unto Himself.

Like the pickpocket, Bossy isn't overpowering, and you seldom realize he is even there. But then Bossy darts in from the deep slot, or cuts in from the wing, takes a pass and snaps a shot goalward with a handball player's reflexes and a putter's touch.

"I hardly ever look when I take a shot," he says. "I don't look for a goalie's weakness. If I shoot it quickly enough, it doesn't matter where he's strong or weak, it will end up in the net."

There are three basic requirements for a goal scorer. He must get open. He must shoot quickly. And he must shoot accurately. Conspicuously absent is the ability to shoot hard. "Boss is not overpowering," says Arbour, a bespectacled defenseman during his 12 seasons in the NHL and an expert on the subject of not-overpowering shots, having scored only 12 goals in his career. "Boss'll get the odd goal from far out. but his main strength is that he's exceptionally quick and accurate. He's the quickest I've ever seen at getting a shot off."

Thus the legend of Bossy as "the fastest hands in the East," with its implication of pickpocket moves from the cradle on. But Bossy has a different notion. "That's a lot of bull," he says. "I get the shot away fast because it's something I've always tried to work on. It's something I was taught to do. People ask if I was surprised to score 53 goals my first year. Yes and no. I was surprised at the time, but after the season was over, and I looked back on it, I wasn't surprised at all, remembering all the chances I had. I usually have five or six shots a game, and if I don't score, it's my fault."

It may seem remarkable that a player with Bossy's goal-scoring reputation gets so many chances, but there is nothing mysterious about it. It is a matter of smarts and hard work. "Boss gets himself in the open," says Arbour, "and he's got players who can get the puck to him."

"He has enough sense to keep from getting clogged up in the middle," says Resch. "He'll hang back on the perimeter of the slot and dart in and out. Gee, he gets on a loose puck fast. He'll slap at them blindly, but a lot of those go in. His success is based on the theory that the man without the puck is the most dangerous man in the play. Freddie Shero is always telling his teams that. Then when Boss does get it, he doesn't keep it very long."

Bossy doesn't keep it very long because he knows exactly what he will do with the puck before he gets it, if he is within a certain range. He will shoot—and shoot quickly. "I will fan on some shots and miss the net on many more," he says, "but I know that to have success in this league I will have to shoot quickly."

That is the advantage a natural goal scorer like Bossy has: he doesn't have to think and then react, he has only to react. There are many other facets to his game—he is a deceptively quick skater, a competent passer and checker, a somewhat elusive stickhandler—but the bottom line on Bossy is that he is a goal scorer.

"People try to compare me to Guy La-fleur," Bossy says. "I'll never try to do that. He's a spectacular player, and I'm not." It seems to be a contradiction but scoring goals Bossy's way is not spectacular. Don't expect any rink-long dashes from him, à la Hull or Lafleur. That's not his game. His game is to get open and to shoot the puck when it hits his stick. The pure scorer is a breed apart, and Bossy is the best of that breed.

As described here, Bossy's greatest strengths were his ability to find open space and his quick release on his shot.

We see Bossy described as a pure goal scorer halfway through his second season. Contrasted with (Bobby) Hull and Lafleur, who were dynamic puck carriers as well and would not be considered pure goal scorers.

The next article by Larry Brooks recognizes some of Bossy's other skills that could be underrated, but also repeats that his best skills were his shot release and his ability to get open.

January 19, 1981. The Phantom of the Rinks, by Larry Brooks.

Bossy stands 6'0" and weighs 185 pounds, and though he plays a finesse game, he also has the strength of a longshoreman. He's among the fastest skaters in the league and quite difficult to knock off his feet because his agility prevents an opponent from getting more than a glimpse of him head on; he skates at you in45° angles. But Bossy's greatest physical asset is his hand speed. His wrist shot, off which he scores three quarters of his goals, is lethal, but it's neither the velocity of the shot nor its accuracy that makes it so troublesome for goaltenders.

"You can't set up for Bossy's shot because he gets it off before the puck is on his stick," says Ranger Goaltender John Davidson.

"Mike's got the fastest hands I've ever seen," says Arbour, once a teammate of Gordie Howe and Bobby Hull.

"I know the hardest thing for a goalie is to stop something he can't watch coming," Bossy says. "If you stop to set up with the puck on your stick, then the goalie has time to get set. But if you can get it away fast, the goalie doesn't have time to react."

Most of the other great goal scorers have done their work in the open and with pizzazz. There was The Rocket, who would bull his way past two and three checkers, often carrying them along with him as he swept toward the net, eyes ablaze. There was Hull, the Golden Jet, flying down the left wing, puck in tow, then winding up for one of his glamorous screaming slap shots. There was the young Esposito, who would stand anchored in the slot and take slashes, crosschecks and elbows before receiving the puck. And there still is the dashing Lafleur, who weaves magic from one end to the other, leaving defenders strewn all over the ice behind him.

Bossy can carry the puck, and he has scored dozens of goals that defy description in 100 words or less, but most of his work is done without the puck as he circles and rotates from one side of the net to the other, much in the manner of a controlled gyroscope, waiting for his line-mates, Bryan Trottier and Clark Gillies, to get the puck to him.
"Technically, the greatest things about Mike are his anticipation and his ability to get into position to score," says (Phil) Esposito. Or as Bowman says, "Bossy seems to disappear through the ice and come up through the pipes. He comes out of nowhere, like a phantom."

The following quote points out how motivated Bossy was to score goals. So Bossy wasn't some sort of perfect selfless team player who didn't care about scoring...he was driven to score all the time.

"Mike may not even realize it," says Esposito, "but he's absolutely relentless in his pursuit of a goal." Sorry Phil, but Bossy does realize it. "Scoring goals is the thing I love most about hockey," he says. "When I score a goal, the feeling I get is something I'd wish on people." Bossy's psyche almost demands that he score. That's why his eyes can betray his lips on nights his team wins 9-3 but he comes up empty.

"People may think I'm not allowed to get angry in that kind of a situation, but that's a bunch of baloney," Bossy says. "When I don't score, it's almost never the goalie who stops me. I stop myself. So why shouldn't I be mad? That has nothing to do with the team; it doesn't take away my feeling for a victory. But maybe one of the reasons I do score so much is because I put so much pressure on myself every game, and getting angry when I don't is just part of that."

And these quotes point to Al Arbour and the Islanders' defensive style as a factor that held Bossy's scoring totals down, at least in Bossy's opinion.

Bossy wants to be recognized as an all-round player: for his excellent playmaking ability (last Tuesday night he failed to score a goal in the Islanders' 6-3 win over Toronto but nevertheless set a club record by assisting on all six goals) and his improved checking and defense as well as his goal-scoring. It bothers him that he has never been a first-team All-Star in the NHL, not even in 1978-79 when he had those 69 goals; La-fleur has been the All-Star right wing the last six seasons. Bossy believes he has the ability to dominate a game for shift after shift after shift, like Lafleur, but is convinced that the Islanders' defensive style restricts him.

Still, Bossy and many of his Islander teammates operate on different wave lengths. For instance, most people believe the Islanders depend far too much on the Trottier line; Bossy believes they don't rely enough on the line in important games. "It's that kind of ego that makes Mike the player he is," Torrey says. Also, until this season it always irked Bossy that he didn't receive more ice time from Arbour; in fact, his relationship with Arbour turned chilly the first time the coach removed him from a game for defensive reasons in his rookie season. Bossy has had more playing time this season, and he is even the Islanders' fifth penalty-killer; he scored the first shorthand goal of his career five weeks ago and says, "That's my biggest thrill this year."

The Islanders' power play and Bossy's importance to it were described by E.M. Swift in this article from the 1981 Finals.

May 25, 1981, Power to Spare, by E.M. Swift

"How do they do it?" said Sonmer after Game 2. "They've got five players who can handle the puck, and all of them can shoot it. Our plan was to make someone other than Bossy score. Who's most apt to beat you on their power play? Bossy. We knew that. That's what's so disappointing."

In the Islander power play, Bossy, who normally plays right wing, sets up on the left, Trottier operates from behind the net and either Bourne or Clark Gillies is on the right side. Potvin plays the left point, Mike McEwen the right. In Game 1 the North Stars had stopped all three New York power plays by collapsing toward Potvin and Bossy and forcing McEwen and Bourne, who don't shoot as well, to make the plays. But in Game 2 the Minnesota penalty killers failed to execute the strategy. The Islanders, down 1-0 and a man up, tied the score when McEwen spotted Bossy cutting into the center and hit him with a diagonal pass. The North Stars were a step late reacting, which is more than enough time for Bossy. He took the pass and snapped it into the upper right-hand corner of the goal, beating 19-year-old Don Beaupre, who had replaced Gilles Meloche, the losing goaltender in Game 1, in the Minnesota net. It was Bossy's ninth power-play goal of the playoffs, another record.

The line of Wayne Merrick, Bob Nystrom and John Tonelli, supposedly a checking unit but one of the best two-way aggregations in the game, got the Islanders two more goals, and they led 3-1 after the first period. Minnesota tied the score, 3-3, in the opening seconds of the third period, but then the New York power play struck again. Potvin and Goring worked a perfect two-on-one inside the blue line that freed Potvin at the top of the slot. With Bossy attracting more than his share of attention in front, Potvin had time to fire a wrist shot through the screen for what proved to be the winning goal. The Islanders had just two power plays all night, and they scored on both.

May 24, 1982, The Islanders Stick it to 'Em, by E.M. Swift.

Indeed, of all the elements that make up the Islanders, Bossy's scoring touch may be the one they could least afford to lose. He finished the regular season, his finest ever, with 147 points, a total only Wayne Gretzky and Phil Esposito have surpassed. Yet, because of Gretzky's remarkable season, Bossy's achievements went largely unnoticed. In the final week of the regular season he tore cartilage and strained ligaments in his left knee. He was virtually immobile against Pittsburgh, and it's no coincidence that the Islanders very nearly lost that series. In a gallant show, they scored two goals in the last 5½ minutes of the deciding game to tie the Penguins, and Tonelli won it in overtime. Bossy, who kept the extent of his injury a secret, played with a heavy brace on his knee that restricted his skating. Still, he led all playoff goal scorers with 17, and had 27 points, second only to Trottier's 29. "You can never let Bossy have anything out there," said Canuck Forward Stan Smyl. "He's got such, marvelous talents, such quick hands."

"Other guys, if you make a mistake, you have time to recover," said Snepsts. "Not with Bossy."

Make no mistake, Bossy is far more than just a sniper, a fact that's often overlooked because he plays on a line with Trottier. The truth is, they need each other equally. Bossy has become an excellent corner worker, is sound defensively, and his mere presence on the power play opens up avenues for Potvin, Trottier and Stefan Persson. He also has learned to "operate in a closet"—a hockey term for making a play in heavy traffic—as was so brilliantly demonstrated by his goal in Game 3. "I've worked too hard in my career to let myself fall on my back in a situation like that," said Bossy. "I know I'm playing on a great team. I've known that since I've been here."

Some more on Al Arbour's coaching style.

Earlier in the playoffs, Brent Sutter gave up the puck in his own zone, and the Rangers converted his error into a goal. Arbour played Brent sparingly for a few games. When he returned against the Canucks, he played like a man possessed. Said Potvin, "Everybody sits—Bossy, Trottier, myself. We've all needed a little discipline at some time. Al has taken the talents and egos of all the individuals on this team and made sure that neither gets in the way of the team. Our character is based on his character: a cool, logical assessment of the game and a willingness to go out and work hard to correct things. He's the best of all our leaders, and we've got a number of them."

When Brett Hull retired, Michael Farber ranked him with Rocket Richard and Mike Bossy as the best pure goal scorers. I would guess he probably wasn't considering players like Gretzky, Lemieux, and Howe in this category. So again, this doesn't really address my argument about Bossy vs Gretzky as a goal scorer, it puts them in a different class of players.

Hull on Wheels

player on a par with Rocket Richard and Mike Bossy as the best pure goal scorer

 

[Staniowski]

Sports Illustrated published two articles on Mike Bossy. One early in his career, from January 1979. And one a couple of years later after his 50 in 50. And then there were also several articles from the Islander playoff runs that weren't specifically about Bossy but had some good quotes.

I'll post some excerpts to give an idea of how Bossy was viewed at the time and how he played and scored goals. This isn't really part of my argument, just some colour and context.

This first article is interesting because it makes Bossy sound like a volume shooter, with his emphasis on just getting the shot off rather than aiming, but as @ContrarianGoaltender posted earlier, Bossy was maybe the one all-time great goal scorer who didn't score with a high shot volume, just high percentages.

January 22, 1979. This Man is an Islander Unto Himself.







As described here, Bossy's greatest strengths were his ability to find open space and his quick release on his shot.

We see Bossy described as a pure goal scorer halfway through his second season. Contrasted with (Bobby) Hull and Lafleur, who were dynamic puck carriers as well and would not be considered pure goal scorers.

The next article by Larry Brooks recognizes some of Bossy's other skills that could be underrated, but also repeats that his best skills were his shot release and his ability to get open.

January 19, 1981. The Phantom of the Rinks, by Larry Brooks.





The following quote points out how motivated Bossy was to score goals. So Bossy wasn't some sort of perfect selfless team player who didn't care about scoring...he was driven to score all the time.



And these quotes point to Al Arbour and the Islanders' defensive style as a factor that held Bossy's scoring totals down, at least in Bossy's opinion.





The Islanders' power play and Bossy's importance to it were described by E.M. Swift in this article from the 1981 Finals.

May 25, 1981, Power to Spare, by E.M. Swift



May 24, 1982, The Islanders Stick it to 'Em, by E.M. Swift.



Some more on Al Arbour's coaching style.



When Brett Hull retired, Michael Farber ranked him with Rocket Richard and Mike Bossy as the best pure goal scorers. I would guess he probably wasn't considering players like Gretzky, Lemieux, and Howe in this category. So again, this doesn't really address my argument about Bossy vs Gretzky as a goal scorer, it puts them in a different class of players.

Hull on Wheels

When Arbour talks about Bossy's shot not being overpowering, he's referring to the way a lot of Bossy's goals were scored....which was the quick release.

His quick-release goals were of several different types: the one -timer; pouncing on a loose puck; quickly shooting a rebound, etc.

These types of goals were often not hard shots, as the emphasis was the quick release.

But, Bossy did shoot very hard, generally, when he had time....he had a hard slapshot and a hard wrister. His slapshot wasn't Doug Wilson-hard, but it was pretty heavy.

 

[The Panther]

I love how players of that era, like Bossy, would actually say what they thought, unlike today's media-coached, protected automatons.

It is so crucial to be able to shoot a puck quickly before the goaltender (and defense, 'cause everyone today blocks shots) is ready. It was key to Bossy's goal scoring, and later to Brett Hull's. This seems utterly obvious, but I'm always amazed by how many NHL regulars don't seem to know it or practice this ability. Take Edmonton's Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, a former 1st overall -- not a pure goal-scorer by any stretch, but he still (after 11 years) feels the need to dust the puck off before shooting every time.

The Bossy shot that always amazes me (I've only seen them in highlights) is the overtime goal in game one vs. Vancouver in '82, when he intercepted Snepts' pass to score. I am positive that almost none of today's players could whip a shot that quickly and heavily with a heavy wooden stick, let alone place it in the top corner that quickly. It's quite a snipe:

 

[authentic]

I'm well known around these parts as an unabashed Mario Lemieux supporter, but I would be careful with that last sentence. I watched both careers start to finish quite carefully, and one marked difference between the two was consistency in level of effort. When it came to scoring, Gretzky gave you everything he had every minute of every shift of every game, all season. If Lemieux was motivated or "chasing something" like Lafleur's junior record, then he gave you everything he had, but it didn't happen as often. In short, Lemieux could be lazy at times. Yes, Mario has the better physical tools for the modern game, but then again he had them back then too. Gretzky's advantages are more subtle, but I still give him credit. If he played today, he would obliterate McDavid in ten straight Art Ross races.

I give him full credit for what he did back then, doesn't mean I need to believe he would do the same today. It's irrelevant to how he's actually ranked anyway and I could be totally wrong, but given how drastically his goal scoring dipped even before the 90s it's not a totally unwarranted opinion.

Lemieux showed he could put up those monstrous goal totals with the assists to boot after butterfly goaltending took over, so we atleast see for sure that the skill was there to do so. Heck he even did this as a 35 year after not playing in the NHL for nearly 4 years (when goalies like Patrick Roy and Hasek were playing with bigger equipment than goalies wear today), so I don't buy that Gretzky just aged or decided to focus more on playmaking (well technically he did, but it's because he couldn't score as much himself is the point.) It's still possible he finds other ways if given the modern advantages, but a difference of opinion is not something I feel I have to be careful with, and I personally don't believe he would be obliterating any modern NHL superstar to the tune he did in the early-mid 80s.

 

[Thenameless]

It's still possible he finds other ways if given the modern advantages, but a difference of opinion is not something I feel I have to be careful with, and I personally don't believe he would be obliterating any modern NHL superstar to the tune he did in the early-mid 80s.

For sure. It wouldn't be 200+ vs low 100's. What I see today if Gretzky is the same age as McDavid is the 170 range. McDavid early on was pacing for 150, and Gretzky is just head and shoulders above him. McDavid can peak in that Kucherov range of 130, maybe 140. So, considering that scoring races are tighter nowadays, being able to gap someone by 30 to 40 points would be effectively obliterating them. Remember, Gretzky sometimes had the Art Ross won by January or February. In today's game, I figure he's a runaway winner by early March.

 

[DitchMarner]

The only definition of a good goal-scorer is a player who scores against good competition. You can proceed to discuss certain attributes that make a good goal-scorer, if you wish, but it's essentially just a player who can score goals.

All the guys you mentioned are good goal-scorers. Garbage goals are good, flashy goals are good, goals scored by great playmakers are good....they're all good. As long as you can do it against good defense, etc.

I don't agree with this, but I don't blame you for putting more emphasis on goals scored against stiff competition. If a player is exceptional at scoring goals against the best competition but only average at scoring against mediocre and bad competition, that doesn't automatically mean he is a better goal scorer than someone who scores at a very and roughly equal rate against all types of defenses and competition.

If goal scoring against the best competition is the only thing you personally care about, that's fine. But that is your personal preference and there is no rule that only goals against the best competition matter.

 

[DitchMarner]

Yeah, I think the coaching comparison is key to the argument that Bossy could have scored more. I also agree that Bossy was openly gunning for 50-in-50, if you watch interviews that was the thing he wanted above all else in terms of regular season accomplishments.

What makes Bossy a huge outlier among his top goal scoring peers is that he is the only one that wasn't a huge volume shooter, even though based on his skills there's no reason he couldn't have been putting as many pucks on net as anyone:

Top-3 finishes in shots:

Player	Actual	On Pace	Total
Alex Ovechkin	14	2	16
Bobby Hull	11	2	13
Gordie Howe	9*	0	9*
Pavel Bure	5	4	9
Phil Esposito	7	1	8
Brett Hull	6	1	7
Wayne Gretzky	6	0	6
Mario Lemieux	1	5	6
Mike Bossy	0	0	0

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

(*-Since 1959-60 only, could have been as many as 20 if we had shot data from every season)

There are two points in Bossy's career when it looks like he got the green light to go for individual stats, and as a result his shot totals climbed significantly. That was chasing 50 in 1980-81, and also towards the end of the 1981-82 season when the Islanders were pushing back against Gretzky and the Oilers grabbing all the attention in Edmonton's breakout year:

Period	GP	S	S/GP
1977-78 to 1979-80	228	760	3.33
First 10 GP in 1980-81	10	35	3.50
Next 40 GP in 1980-81	40	194	4.85
Final 29 GP in 1980-81	29	86	2.97
First 51 GP in 1981-82	51	177	3.47
Final 29 GP in 1981-82	29	124	4.28
1982-83 to 1985-86	302	1107	3.67

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Bossy scored a hat trick against the Habs in game 11 in 1980-81, and apparently decided at that point that 50-in-50 was within reach. The 1981-82 season stands out as well, because Bossy tended to tail off in scoring towards the end of the year (which I think was related to his team saving itself for the playoffs to some degree), and up until that point in his career he wasn't blowing out the worst teams in the league at all (against my definition of weak teams he only had a 1.35 PPG from 1978-1981, but in 1981-82 he went 24-27-27-54 for 2.25 PPG). The Isles went on a 15 game win streak in late Jan/early Feb, and then kept the pedal down to finish 14-3-4 and take first overall (with Bossy and Trottier both finishing high in the scoring race). From the middle of the streak until the end of the season, Bossy's shots and scoring stats again took a pretty major jump.

The 1981-82 season and especially the stretch run was probably the closest Bossy got to playing in an Oilers-type regular season environment where the team was going for it offensively every single night. And the 50-in-50 was definitely the only time that Bossy had the equivalent of an Ovechkin/Hull-type usage where the whole team was set up just to get him shooting opportunities, accounting for that crazy 58% jump in shots per game over the rest of his season.

Not surprisingly, Bossy's stats were pretty eye-popping when his utilization rate increased:

	GP	G	A	P	+/-	S
Chasing 50 in 1981	40	45	27	72	34	194
Stretch Run in 1982	29	28	36	64	28	124
Total	69	73	63	136	62	318
Per 80 GP	80	84	73	158	72	369

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I doubt Bossy could have maintained that assist rate over an extended period of time, but the goals side doesn't really look that unsustainable since he had only a 22.8% shooting percentage, not far out of line for a guy that averaged 21.5% for his career excluding 1986-87. If he played on a team that was set up to allow him to take ~5 shots a game, I think 80 goals was clearly within reach. This is one of the reasons I don't buy the argument by @GlitchMarner that Bossy's peak wasn't high enough to enter the GOAT goal scoring debate (the other is that people underestimate the difference in scoring environments between 1978-79 and the early '80s).

I do really like your approach to making arguments. A lot of people on this site (and on the internet in general) aren't nearly as good at going this in-depth and bringing to light things to support their claims.

Certainly I can entertain some of these ideas.

That said: Isn't it possible to apply similar hypotheticals to some of the other notable goal scorers in history?

This point has been brought up, but what if Gretzky himself had focused more on scoring goals and less on playmaking? What could some of his goal scoring outputs look like in this case? What about Mario? He was a natural and gifted goal scorer. What if his puck skills hadn't been quite as good and he had focused more on shooting and trying to score goals? What if Pavel Bure had played with more talent and an elite playmaker during his time in FLA? Could he have approached 70 goals in the Dead Puck Era?

Also, as far as volume shooting is concerned: I know the ability to put a lot of pucks on net doesn't sound as "sexy" as being able to pick corners with a high degree of accuracy, but shot volume is also an integral part of goal scoring. Your post illustrates that Ovechkin is a shot volume beast and obviously that has had a lot to do with his success. Obviously in recent years WSH has catered to him and tried to maximize his ability to put pucks in the net, but when he was younger and at his peak, the guy was able to generate a high volume of shots because of his individual skills. If peak Bossy wasn't as explosive a skater or as good at carrying the puck through the neutral zone and then firing it on net, aren't those inherent shortcomings that he had in comparison to a guy like Ovechkin? There is more to firing a ton of pucks on net than simply wanting and trying to do so. While Bossy's actual shooting abilities were outstanding, maybe some of the other aspects of his game prevented him from being a more prolific goal scorer. Maybe it wasn't simply a matter of not caring or trying as hard to pad his stats as some others did.

 

[Sentinel]

As a goal-scorer, Gretzky is more akin to guys like McDavid and Crosby. They're not really naturally great goal-scorers. They're really, really great hockey players who score lots of goals, especially when they are at their best, and sometimes at other times. And they are very good at scoring goals, just not great.

Lemieux and Howe, on the other hand, are really, really great hockey players who are also great goal-scorers. They were always great goal-scorers.

I am surprised this thread is allowed to go on. Turns out, one of the greatest goalscorers in NHL history by peak and total numbers was "not really naturally a great goalscorer."

 

[johan f]

All these twisting and twirling to push for other players been better than Gretzky comes from going against narrative and having problem accepting the common take. Typical millenials and sore asses.

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

Bossy vs Gretzky in their playoff peaks by situation, table 1

Situation	Mike Bossy	Wayne Gretzky	Bossy/82	Gretzky/82	Difference
5-on-5	33	24	33	26	26%
5-on-4	27	14	27	15	76%
4-on-4	6	9	6	10	-39%
4-on-5	0	5	0	5	-100%
5-on-3	0	0	0	0	#DIV/0!
4-on-3	1	2	1	2	-54%
3-on-3	0	2	0	2	-100%
3-on-4	0	3	0	3	-100%
3-on-5	0	0	0	0	#DIV/0!
Empty Net	0	3	0	3	-100%
Total	67	62	67	68	-1%

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

First of all, I would like to express my appreciation for how much work you put into this, because it must have been a pain to compile this data.

Bossy vs Gretzky in their playoff peaks by situation, table 2

Situation	Wayne Gretzky	As a % of team	Mike Bossy	As a % of team
Game Tying Goals	6	11.3%	10	20.0%
Go ahead goals	15	16.0%	26	21.0%
1st Period	26	21.1%	27	22.3%
2nd Period	19	16.2%	24	19.0%
3rd Period	16	12.7%	14	12.3%
3rd period of wins	14	13.1%	12	10.5%
3rd period of losses	2	10.5%	2	12.5%
Overtime	1	20.0%	2	14.3%

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

In terms of situational goal-scoring, I suspect that some of this difference is due to the fact that the Oilers generated their goal differential through incredible depth scoring (when Mark Messier and Glenn Anderson are second-liners on your team...) while the Islanders generated their goal differential primarily through a tough defensive game and Mike Bossy scoring a metric ton of goals.

Following up on ContrarianGoaltender, I did a hypothetical scenario by picking a range of teams that Bossy, Gretzky, and Lemieux could have scored against that would overlap with the difficulty of scoring in 2018-19 (2.98 goals per team per game, first-liners tallying roughly 33.3% of all points). Looking at their best 6 seasons, with the teams selected each season averaging close to the difficulty of scoring in 2018-19,

Spoiler: Bossy

Season	Team	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	PIM	EV	PP	SH	GW	S	S%		Oppo. GA/GP	Top line scoring%	Top line scoring per 3 games
1978-79	Buffalo Sabres	4	2	2	4	0	0	0	2	0	0	19	10.5		3.29	31.8%	3.14
1978-79	Boston Bruins	5	8	2	10	4	0	3	5	0	1	16	50.0		3.38	31.8%	3.23
1978-79	Montreal Canadiens	4	2	5	7	3	2	2	0	0	0	11	18.2		2.55	31.8%	2.43
1978-79	Philadelphia Flyers	8	8	7	15	7	15	6	2	0	1	21	38.1		3.10	31.8%	2.96
1978-79	Toronto Maple Leafs	4	3	6	9	4	2	2	1	0	0	18	16.7		3.29	31.8%	3.14
1980-81	Buffalo Sabres	4	1	4	5	3	0	1	0	0	0	10	10.0		3.13	30.7%	2.88
1980-81	Boston Bruins	4	3	2	5	-2	2	0	3	0	0	14	21.4		3.40	30.7%	3.13
1980-81	Los Angeles Kings	4	1	5	6	-2	2	0	1	0	0	16	6.3		3.56	30.7%	3.27
1980-81	Minnesota North Stars	4	5	1	6	2	2	1	4	0	0	13	38.5		3.29	30.7%	3.03
1980-81	Montreal Canadiens	4	3	1	4	-1	0	2	1	0	1	14	21.4		2.90	30.7%	2.67
1980-81	St. Louis Blues	4	4	3	7	7	0	4	0	0	0	18	22.2		3.51	30.7%	3.23
1980-81	Philadelphia Flyers	4	1	3	4	-4	0	0	1	0	0	9	11.1		3.10	30.7%	2.85
1981-82	Montreal Canadiens	3	1	3	4	2	2	1	0	0	0	11	9.1		2.79	31.4%	2.62
1981-82	Boston Bruins	3	4	1	5	-1	0	2	2	0	1	11	36.4		3.56	31.4%	3.35
1981-82	Buffalo Sabres	3	1	0	1	2	0	1	0	0	0	7	14.3		3.41	31.4%	3.21
1983-84	Washington Capitals	7	7	3	10	-1	0	5	2	0	1	18	38.9		2.83	31.3%	2.65
1983-84	Buffalo Sabres	2	1	1	2	1	2	1	0	0	0	7	14.3		3.21	31.3%	3.01
1983-84	Quebec Nordiques	3	1	2	3	-5	0	1	0	0	0	5	20.0		3.48	31.3%	3.26
1983-84	Boston Bruins	3	2	1	3	1	0	2	0	0	0	10	20.0		3.26	31.3%	3.06
1984-85	Buffalo Sabres	3	1	3	4	3	4	1	0	0	0	9	11.1		2.96	30.8%	2.74
1984-85	Washington Capitals	7	4	5	9	4	6	3	0	1	0	19	21.1		3.00	30.8%	2.78
1984-85	Philadelphia Flyers	7	6	5	11	4	0	5	1	0	0	34	17.6		3.01	30.8%	2.78
1984-85	Montreal Canadiens	3	4	1	5	1	2	4	0	0	0	12	33.3		3.28	30.8%	3.03
1984-85	Quebec Nordiques	3	1	1	2	0	0	1	0	0	0	9	11.1		3.44	30.8%	3.18
1984-85	Boston Bruins	3	2	0	2	-1	0	1	1	0	1	12	16.7		3.59	30.8%	3.32
1985-86	Philadelphia Flyers	7	5	12	17	3	2	4	1	0	1	27	18.5		3.01	30.6%	2.76
1985-86	New York Rangers	7	4	3	7	3	4	4	0	0	0	18	22.2		3.45	30.6%	3.16
1985-86	Washington Capitals	7	5	5	10	4	0	3	1	1	0	21	23.8		3.40	30.6%	3.12
	TOTAL	124	90	87	177	41	47	60	28	2	7	409	22.0		3.20	31.0%	2.98
	PACE	82	60	58	117	27	31	40	19	1	5	270	22.0		3.20	31.0%	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Spoiler: Gretzky

Season	Team	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	PIM	EV	PP	SH	GW	S	S%		Oppo. GA/GP	Top line scoring%	Top line scoring per 3 games
1981-82	Montreal Canadiens	3	1	6	7	1	0	1	0	0	0	7	14.3		2.79	31.4%	2.62
1981-82	Buffalo Sabres	3	4	2	6	4	0	3	1	0	2	22	18.2		3.41	31.4%	3.21
1981-82	New York Islanders	3	2	7	9	1	0	2	0	0	1	8	25.0		3.13	31.4%	2.94
1982-83	Boston Bruins	3	1	3	4	-2	4	1	0	0	0	5	20.0		2.85	30.7%	2.62
1982-83	Buffalo Sabres	3	2	5	7	4	0	2	0	0	0	9	22.2		3.56	30.7%	3.28
1982-83	Chicago Black Hawks	3	2	5	7	-1	0	1	1	0	0	9	22.2		3.35	30.7%	3.09
1982-83	Montreal Canadiens	3	3	5	8	3	0	1	2	0	0	18	16.7		3.58	30.7%	3.30
1982-83	New York Islanders	3	1	3	4	-4	0	0	1	0	0	10	10.0		2.83	30.7%	2.61
1982-83	Philadelphia Flyers	3	1	4	5	-1	10	1	0	0	0	10	10.0		3.00	30.7%	2.76
1982-83	Washington Capitals	3	4	3	7	0	2	2	1	1	1	9	44.4		3.54	30.7%	3.26
1983-84	Boston Bruins	2	0	2	2	0	4	0	0	0	0	8	0.0		3.26	31.3%	3.06
1983-84	Buffalo Sabres	3	0	4	4	2	0	0	0	0	0	6	0.0		3.21	31.3%	3.01
1983-84	New York Islanders	2	1	2	3	-5	0	0	1	0	0	9	11.1		3.36	31.3%	3.15
1983-84	Washington Capitals	2	3	6	9	7	0	1	1	1	0	9	33.3		2.83	31.3%	2.65
1984-85	Buffalo Sabres	3	3	4	7	0	2	2	1	0	0	9	33.3		2.96	30.8%	2.74
1984-85	Boston Bruins	3	2	4	6	6	2	2	0	0	0	11	18.2		3.59	30.8%	3.32
1984-85	Montreal Canadiens	3	2	2	4	-1	0	2	0	0	1	9	22.2		3.28	30.8%	3.03
1984-85	Philadelphia Flyers	3	2	4	6	-3	0	2	0	0	0	15	13.3		3.01	30.8%	2.78
1984-85	Quebec Nordiques	3	3	6	9	8	2	3	0	0	1	14	21.4		3.44	30.8%	3.18
1984-85	Washington Capitals	3	2	7	9	6	2	1	0	1	1	20	10.0		3.00	30.8%	2.78
1985-86	Philadelphia Flyers	3	3	2	5	2	0	3	0	0	1	15	20.0		3.01	30.6%	2.76
1985-86	Washington Capitals	3	1	3	4	-8	0	0	1	0	0	17	5.9		3.40	30.6%	3.12
1986-87	Philadelphia Flyers	3	3	1	4	4	0	3	0	0	1	11	27.3		3.06	30.5%	2.80
1986-87	Detroit Red Wings	3	2	9	11	7	2	2	0	0	0	6	33.3		3.43	30.5%	3.14
1986-87	Hartford Whalers	3	1	4	5	-2	0	1	0	0	0	17	5.9		3.38	30.5%	3.09
1986-87	Winnipeg Jets	8	8	8	16	5	4	7	0	1	1	29	27.6		3.39	30.5%	3.10
1986-87	Montreal Canadiens	3	2	4	6	0	2	0	2	0	0	7	28.6		3.01	30.5%	2.75
	TOTAL	83	59	115	174	33	36	43	12	4	10	319	18.5		3.22	30.8%	2.98
	PACE	82	58	114	172	33	36	42	12	4	10	315	18.5		3.22	30.8%	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Spoiler: Lemieux

Season	Team	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	PIM	EV	PP	SH	GW	S	S%		Oppo. GA/GP	Top line scoring%	Top line scoring per 3 games
1987-88	Montreal Canadiens	3	3	4	7	6	2	2	0	1	1	11	27.3		2.98	32.2%	2.88
1987-88	Boston Bruins	2	0	1	1	-4	2	0	0	0	0	11	0.0		3.14	32.2%	3.03
1987-88	Washington Capitals	6	8	7	15	3	18	2	4	2	2	32	25.0		3.11	32.2%	3.00
1988-89	Boston Bruins	3	2	3	5	-1	2	0	2	0	0	12	16.7		3.20	32.0%	3.07
1988-89	Calgary Flames	3	3	5	8	-3	0	1	1	1	0	7	42.9		2.83	32.0%	2.71
1988-89	Minnesota North Stars	3	1	5	6	4	6	1	0	0	0	10	10.0		3.48	32.0%	3.34
1988-89	Montreal Canadiens	2	1	3	4	1	2	1	0	0	1	10	10.0		2.73	32.0%	2.62
1988-89	Washington Capitals	7	7	6	13	-3	16	2	2	3	0	17	41.2		3.24	32.0%	3.11
1988-89	Vancouver Canucks	3	3	6	9	4	12	2	0	1	1	10	30.0		3.16	32.0%	3.03
1989-90	Boston Bruins	3	2	4	6	-1	2	2	0	0	0	10	20.0		2.90	32.9%	2.86
1989-90	Buffalo Sabres	3	2	1	3	-6	0	0	2	0	0	11	18.2		3.10	32.9%	3.06
1989-90	Montreal Canadiens	2	0	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0.0		2.93	32.9%	2.89
1991-92	Chicago Blackhawks	1	0	1	1	-1	4	0	0	0	0	3	0.0		2.95	32.8%	2.91
1991-92	Detroit Red Wings	2	1	3	4	2	0	1	0	0	0	10	10.0		3.20	32.8%	3.15
1991-92	Montreal Canadiens	2	1	1	2	0	0	1	0	0	0	7	14.3		2.59	32.8%	2.55
1991-92	New Jersey Devils	6	2	8	10	0	14	0	1	1	0	9	22.2		3.24	32.8%	3.19
1991-92	New York Rangers	5	4	6	10	2	2	4	0	0	1	21	19.0		3.08	32.8%	3.03
1991-92	Vancouver Canucks	1	2	4	6	4	0	2	0	0	0	6	33.3		3.13	32.8%	3.08
1991-92	Winnipeg Jets	2	1	1	2	1	0	1	0	0	0	5	20.0		3.05	32.8%	3.00
1992-93	Boston Bruins	3	2	2	4	3	0	2	0	0	1	12	16.7		3.19	34.1%	3.26
1992-93	Chicago Blackhawks	1	1	1	2	-2	0	1	0	0	0	5	20.0		2.74	34.1%	2.80
1992-93	Toronto Maple Leafs	2	2	1	3	1	2	1	0	1	0	12	16.7		2.87	34.1%	2.94
1995-96	Calgary Flames	2	1	4	5	-1	2	0	1	0	0	5	20		2.93	34.7%	3.05
1995-96	Chicago Blackhawks	2	2	3	5	0	0	0	0	2	0	11	18.2		2.68	34.7%	2.79
1995-96	Colorado Avalanche	2	3	1	4	-3	0	0	2	1	0	11	27.3		2.93	34.7%	3.05
1995-96	Detroit Red Wings	2	1	2	3	-1	2	1	0	0	1	8	12.5		2.21	34.7%	2.30
1995-96	Florida Panthers	4	4	2	6	-1	4	1	2	1	0	17	23.5		2.85	34.7%	2.96
1995-96	Mighty Ducks of Anaheim	2	1	4	5	-1	6	0	1	0	0	14	7.1		3.01	34.7%	3.13
1995-96	Montreal Canadiens	5	4	4	8	-5	4	2	2	0	0	22	18.2		3.02	34.7%	3.14
1995-96	New Jersey Devils	3	4	2	6	1	2	2	2	0	1	16	25		2.46	34.7%	2.56
1995-96	New York Rangers	3	2	2	4	-5	2	1	1	0	1	16	12.5		2.89	34.7%	3.01
1995-96	Philadelphia Flyers	3	5	5	10	3	2	4	1	0	0	13	38.5		2.54	34.7%	2.64
1995-96	St. Louis Blues	1	5	2	7	3	0	2	2	1	1	7	71.4		3.02	34.7%	3.14
1995-96	Tampa Bay Lightning	4	1	11	12	1	2	1	0	0	0	13	7.7		3.02	34.7%	3.14
1995-96	Toronto Maple Leafs	2	0	4	4	-2	0	0	0	0	0	11	0.0		3.07	34.7%	3.19
1995-96	Washington Capitals	2	3	0	3	0	0	2	1	0	1	10	30.0		2.49	34.7%	2.59
	TOTAL	102	84	121	205	-1	110	42	27	15	12	407	20.6		2.98	33.3%	2.98
	PACE	82	68	97	165	-1	88	34	22	12	10	327	20.6		2.98	33.3%	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

TOTALS

Player	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	PIM	EV	PP	SH	GW	S	S%		Oppo. GA/GP	Top line scoring%	Top line scoring per 3 games
Bossy	124	90	87	177	41	47	60	28	2	7	409	22.0		3.20	31.0%	2.98
Gretzky	83	59	115	174	33	36	43	12	4	10	319	18.5		3.22	30.8%	2.98
Lemieux	102	84	121	205	-1	110	42	27	15	12	407	20.6		2.98	33.3%	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

PACE

Player	GP	G	A	PTS	+/-	PIM	EV	PP	SH	GW	S	S%		Oppo. GA/GP	Top line scoring%	Top line scoring per 3 games
Bossy	82	60	58	117	27	31	40	19	1	5	270	22.0		3.20	31.0%	2.98
Gretzky	82	58	114	172	33	36	42	12	4	10	315	18.5		3.22	30.8%	2.98
Lemieux	82	68	97	165	-1	88	34	22	12	10	327	20.6		2.98	33.3%	2.98

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Staniowski]

I don't agree with this, but I don't blame you for putting more emphasis on goals scored against stiff competition. If a player is exceptional at scoring goals against the best competition but only average at scoring against mediocre and bad competition, that doesn't automatically mean he is a better goal scorer than someone who scores at a very and roughly equal rate against all types of defenses and competition.

If goal scoring against the best competition is the only thing you personally care about, that's fine. But that is your personal preference and there is no rule that only goals against the best competition matter.

There's no formula or statistical metric that's going to tell you who the best goal scorers are....but of course a good goal scorer will be somebody who scores against good competition- how could it be otherwise?

A good goal scorer will score against good competition...and they'll be able to score in a variety of ways....and they'll score all the time, etc.

 

[Staniowski]

I am surprised this thread is allowed to go on. Turns out, one of the greatest goalscorers in NHL history by peak and total numbers was "not really naturally a great goalscorer."

Of course you can call all of these players "great" goal-scorers....but everything is relative - Gretzky and McDavid are not as good at scoring goals as Lemieux and Howe.

 

[Sentinel]

Of course you can call all of these players "great" goal-scorers....but everything is relative - Gretzky and McDavid are not as good at scoring goals as Lemieux and Howe.

Gretzky was better at scoring goals than Lemieux and Howe.