Old Gretzky and adjusted stats

[alko]

Wayne Gretzky Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

This website has the stats you're interested in

How is it calculated?

 

[daver]

How is it calculated?

With deep flaws.

Mike Bossy's 147 point season in 81/82 would have been good for 6th place in 98/99 after being "adjusted" (or more appropriately "corrected" as per the Shining).

 

[BobbyAwe]

The average SV% of goalies during the decade of the 1980's was .877. The average SV% of the last 10 years (thru last year) was .913. The SV% of the league LEADERS in SV% for each of the seasons of the entire 1980's was LESS than the league average for the last 10 years. (except for one season where the leader's SV% was only equal to the league average of the last 10 seasons).

That's pretty WILD. Either the shooters of the modern era suck compared to the shooters of the 80's OR the average goaltender of the 80's sucks by comparison to the modern goaltender. I think it's much more feasible that the average goaltender of the 80's was not nearly as good, although it may be MAINLY because of modern equipment, better training, and more evolutionary techniques that aid the modern goalie.

 

[Noldo]

With deep flaws.

Mike Bossy's 147 point season in 81/82 would have been good for 6th place in 98/99 after being "adjusted" (or more appropriately "corrected" as per the Shining).

Adjustment to the league scoring level ignores the changes in distribution of goals through the lineup and most likely end up overrating stars who played during low scoring eras (as they get disproportionate benefit) and underrating stars who played in especially high scoring seasons (result like Bossy’s 147 points season, at the time 3rd highest points ever and still 20th highest total ever, being equal to sixth best result during lower scoring era are highly suspicious).

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The average SV% of goalies during the decade of the 1980's was .877. The average SV% of the last 10 years (thru last year) was .913. The SV% of the league LEADERS in SV% for each of the seasons of the entire 1980's was LESS than the league average for the last 10 years. (except for one season where the leader's SV% was only equal to the league average of the last 10 seasons).

That's pretty WILD. Either the shooters of the modern era suck compared to the shooters of the 80's OR the average goaltender of the 80's sucks by comparison to the modern goaltender. I think it's much more feasible that the average goaltender of the 80's was not nearly as good, although it may be MAINLY because of modern equipment, better training, and more evolutionary techniques that aid the modern goalie.

Or team defense is a much bigger priority today.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Adjustment to the league scoring level ignores the changes in distribution of goals through the lineup and most likely end up overrating stars who played during low scoring eras (as they get disproportionate benefit) and underrating stars who played in especially high scoring seasons (result like Bossy’s 147 points season, at the time 3rd highest points ever and still 20th highest total ever, being equal to sixth best result during lower scoring era are highly suspicious).

As suspicious as bringing up Bossy's 147 points all-time rank, perhaps.
It is however the case that he is not the only player from the eighties that seem to suffer when using these adjusted stats, but it is also the case that we saw quite a few players score 130+ points in Bossy's era and that he often gets overrated when dismissing that fact. Most often as a goal scorer, but also that outlier point finish of 147.

 

[MadLuke]

How is it calculated?

Adjusted Statistics | Hockey-Reference.com

Their metric:
Adjusted Goals

We will use Gordie Howe's 1952-53 season as an example, a season in which Howe scored a career-high 49 goals.
The first step in this process is to calculate a schedule adjustment for each player. In order to do this, divide 82 by the number of scheduled games per team. In 1952-53 the NHL played a 70-game schedule, so the schedule adjustment is 82 / 70 = 1.17.
The roster size adjustment is computed by dividing the maximum roster size for the season in question by 18. Teams were allowed to carry a maximum of 16 skaters at home and 15 skaters on the road during the 1952-53 season, so the roster size adjustment is 15.5 / 18 = 0.86.
Next calculate the era adjustment, which we will do by dividing 6 by the league average goals per game without the player in question. In 1952-53 a total of 1006 goals were scored in 210 games. Without Howe this works out to (1006 - 49) / 210 = 4.56 goals per game, so our era adjustment is 6 / 4.56 = 1.32.
Finally, we put everything together. Take the player's actual goals and multiply by the adjustments we computed above. For Howe in 1952-53 this is 49 * 1.17 * 0.86 * 1.32 = 65 adjusted goals.


Has one big issue, do not take into account scoring distribution, maybe that in average it will adjust everyone scoring in a good way, but I feel it could get much better if there algorithm would be comparing top scorer to other top scorer, bottom 6 vs bottom 6, defense vs defense, etc..

It seem if power play / ice time change a lot over time, it would hurt player's that had lesser power play's.

It does nothing to evaluate the strength of the peers, but that is nearly impossible and not what they are trying to do here.

 

[Nathaniel]

Is it really that difficult to measure relative dominance over one's respective peers rather than "adjusting"?

It is obvious Wayne and Mario stood out among their peers as obvious as it was they played in a higher scoring era that allowed that gap to be perhaps inflated.

No one has come within 44 points of Mario’s 199. That’s not inflation

 

[MadLuke]

Rather than take a cheapshot at my mental health, state your argument.

the highest scoring season in the 80s was before the Oilers won their first cup.

30	1989-90	NHL	840	3.68	0.95	4.58	20.77	79.23	30.2	26.6	.881	3.56
31	1988-89	NHL	840	3.74	1.06	5.04	20.99	79.01	30.3	26.6	.879	3.63
32	1987-88	NHL	840	3.71	1.11	5.46	20.29	79.71	30.4	26.8	.880	3.62
33	1986-87	NHL	840	3.67	0.90	4.30	20.98	79.02	29.9	26.3	.880	3.56
34	1985-86	NHL	840	3.97	1.02	4.62	22.08	77.92	31.0	27.1	.874	3.87
35	1984-85	NHL	840	3.89	0.89	4.01	22.20	77.80	30.5	26.7	.875	3.79
36	1983-84	NHL	840	3.94	0.92	4.20	21.91	78.09	30.5	26.7	.873	3.84
37	1982-83	NHL	840	3.86	0.89	3.87	22.92	77.08	30.5	26.7	.875	3.80
38	1981-82	NHL	840	4.01	0.91	4.00	22.85	77.15	31.1	27.1	.873	3.95
39	1980-81	NHL	840	3.84	0.96	4.25	22.53	77.47	30.4	26.7	.876	3.78
40	1979-80	NHL	840	3.51	0.77	3.50	21.86	78.14	29.3	25.9	.882	3.46

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I would like to heard your argument as well ? Considering that scoring was going up for a while, reach almost the ultimate peak before Gretzky started to get those 200 points season and didn't went up but down once Oilers formula proved could win cups.

What is the argument that Gretzky influence was the reason scoring was that high, how much lower than 80-81 league wide 3.84 goal by game in 80-81 it reached would have it been for the next 5 year's if he would have been a Jagr level instead of Gretzky level star ?

 

[GreatGonzo]

the highest scoring season in the 80s was before the Oilers won their first cup.

30	1989-90	NHL	840	3.68	0.95	4.58	20.77	79.23	30.2	26.6	.881	3.56
31	1988-89	NHL	840	3.74	1.06	5.04	20.99	79.01	30.3	26.6	.879	3.63
32	1987-88	NHL	840	3.71	1.11	5.46	20.29	79.71	30.4	26.8	.880	3.62
33	1986-87	NHL	840	3.67	0.90	4.30	20.98	79.02	29.9	26.3	.880	3.56
34	1985-86	NHL	840	3.97	1.02	4.62	22.08	77.92	31.0	27.1	.874	3.87
35	1984-85	NHL	840	3.89	0.89	4.01	22.20	77.80	30.5	26.7	.875	3.79
36	1983-84	NHL	840	3.94	0.92	4.20	21.91	78.09	30.5	26.7	.873	3.84
37	1982-83	NHL	840	3.86	0.89	3.87	22.92	77.08	30.5	26.7	.875	3.80
38	1981-82	NHL	840	4.01	0.91	4.00	22.85	77.15	31.1	27.1	.873	3.95
39	1980-81	NHL	840	3.84	0.96	4.25	22.53	77.47	30.4	26.7	.876	3.78
40	1979-80	NHL	840	3.51	0.77	3.50	21.86	78.14	29.3	25.9	.882	3.46

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I would like to heard your argument as well ? Considering that scoring was going up for a while, reach almost the ultimate peak before Gretzky started to get those 200 points season and didn't went up but down once Oilers formula proved could win cups.

What is the argument that Gretzky influence was the reason scoring was that high, how much lower than 80-81 league wide 3.84 goal by game in 80-81 it reached would have it been for the next 5 year's if he would have been a Jagr level instead of Gretzky level star ?

Take Gretzky and Lemieux out of the game completely and the 80s are still higher scoring, but the level changes drastically. Gretzky and Lemieux also had big time influences on their own teammates who were also scoring a lot.

Scoring doesn’t look nearly as high during their days without Gretzky and Lemieux having those video game looking numbers sticking out and lapping the competition. That’s why many still say they are products of their time, but the time they played in as a “high scoring era” was still heavily influenced on the numbers they put up.

Without those two, We might be talking about guys like Dionne, Trottier, Stastny, Bossy, Savard, and even Yzerman as being the top offensive talents of the 80s and early 90s. But even then, their numbers aren’t as exaggerated by the time frame they played in. Yzerman topped at 155 which is the most by any player not named Gretzky or Lemieux. Is that really different from the 128 points we saw last year or the 125 post lockout?

 

[Irato99]

Interesting fact about Hockey reference's adjusted stats: Gretzky's second to last season, at 37 years old, is more productive than each of Crosby's last five seasons, and it would place him 5th in adjusted scoring for last season.

 

[MadLuke]

Take Gretzky and Lemieux out of the game completely and the 80s are still higher scoring, but the level changes drastically. Gretzky and Lemieux also had big time influences on their own teammates who were also scoring a lot.

One team do not change league average that much, single player even less.

Scoring got lower with Lemieux than before he entered the league. Scoring was higher before Gretzky scored those 200 pts season and Edmonton becoming a powerhouse.

Top end scoring / records was influenced by how special those 2 are, same for Orr/Coffey and defense offensive record, not necessarily league scoring (yet to see an argument supporting this)

 

[GreatGonzo]

One team do not change league average that much, single player even less.

Scoring got lower with Lemieux than before he entered the league. Scoring was higher before Gretzky scored those 200 pts season and Edmonton becoming a powerhouse.

Top end scoring / records was influenced by how special those 2 are, same for Orr/Coffey and defense offensive record, not necessarily league scoring (yet to see an argument supporting this)

I’m saying that scoring 200+ points and nearly 100 goals year after year would make the times appear MORE high scoring than it actually was. It was higher, but Gretzky and Lemieux made it Cartoonish in a lot of ways.

My point is take those two out and scoring is still higher, but it doesn’t have that negative stigma attached to it because the players outside of Lemieux and Gretzky weren’t putting up crazy numbers or lapping the competition either. High end scoring was still high, but compared to the league it wasn’t as crazy.

Take ‘87 for example. Gretzky our up 183 points, 75 more points than the second best, his own linemate, Kurri. Take Gretzky and Lemieux away, I’m sure Kurri doesn’t score 108 points without Gretzky....we are looking at a possible Art Ross winner with a little over 100 points.

Gretzky and Lemieux also changed the way we play the game and the influence they had on the generation after them and so on. Scoring would have been a lot different in the 80s and 90s without them leading the way.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i think maybe the thing about gretzky's NYR years is they were a bounce back from his (relatively) meh last two LA years.

1994: so he wins his last art ross with "just" 130 points. not a single hart vote and by even the standards of post-peak gretzky it was a bad year.

1995: then in the lockout year, he goes exactly one point/game. misses the playoffs for the second straight year. 19th in league scoring. by gretzky standards this is an embarrassment.

1996: then his forgotten last 100 point season. 102 points split between LA for most of the year and STL at the end. 12th, two points behind doug weight. so that gives you a sense of where post-art ross gretzky was. you could say that if gretzky hadn't been traded to STL he might have finished higher, but even if he'd never played for keenan he was still "only" on pace for 107 points at the time of the trade, which would put him on pace to tie fedorov and mogilny's respective second best seasons for 9th, one point behind kariya/selanne in probably their third and fourth best years, respectively. sakic, forsberg, and lindros are way ahead, and mario and jagr are in another galaxy.

1997: then scoring drops precipitously. gretzky bounces back to finish 4th, with 97 points.

1998: then he finished 3rd, with 90 points as league-wide scoring continues to plummet.

he goes from being almost 50 points behind jagr in 1996 to just 12 points back in 1998. that's kind of a selanne-esque late career bounce back. but for lots of reasons—raw numbers in a lower scoring era, his own legacy, general disdain for NYR ringers—nobody noticed or cared to celebrate it the way they did when selanne did his second stint in anaheim.

 

[MadLuke]

but it doesn’t have that negative stigma attached to it because the players outside

Oh yes that right, the subjective perception on how higher scoring was among the top liner forward is skewed by many that didn't look much into it and has just seen almost just those Gretzky/Lemieux numbers of the pass, but that was not at all what was claimed and that I was responded too.

 

[Minar]

Interesting fact about Hockey reference's adjusted stats: Gretzky's second to last season, at 37 years old, is more productive than each of Crosby's last five seasons, and it would place him 5th in adjusted scoring for last season.

 

[Minar]

Interesting fact about Hockey reference's adjusted stats: Gretzky's second to last season, at 37 years old, is more productive than each of Crosby's last five seasons, and it would place him 5th in adjusted scoring for last season.


Bingo! And that was the point of this whole thread!

 

[Boxscore]

I think we tend to put way too much emphasis on stats vs. adjusted stats, plus other analytics that attempt to create a hypothetical outcome to a story. I'm a firm believer that nothing beats the eyes when it comes to determining the greatest players. "Adjusted stats" cannot paint the full picture, but watching players like Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux, Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin, etc. during their careers do.

Only the eyes can show us:

• How dominant players were on the ice each night vs. their peers
• How the fans would jump to their feet and cheer in amazement based on a player's performance
• How certain players seemed to be "scary" every time they stepped on the ice
• How certain players seemed to be on the verge of creating a goal every time the puck touched their stick
• The intangibles, heart, penchant for clutch plays, and historic, dramatic endings to plays and games
• Which players performed like demigods and which ones performed as excellent humans

I don't care what "advanced stats" say, I know for a fact what my eyes have confirmed. Players like Orr, Gretzky and Mario were a complete level above the rest of the mortals, even the very best ones. What these guys did on the ice was absolutely magical--it was art, it was pure prodigy level stuff. Stuff you can't practice, learn in a drill, or obtain in a weight room.

Yes, Gordie, Beliveau, Rocket, Messier, Crosby, Ovechkin, Hull Sr., etc. were all among the elite of the elite, but the stuff they did on the ice wasn't levels above their peers in terms of talent. Sure, Gordie had the full meal game to go with awesome skills and longevity (which made him a legend) but in terms of raw talent alone, he wasn't light years above the pack, in my honest opinion.

In terms of jaw-dropping, "whoa did I just really see that?!" talent, the only ones that even come close to Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux have been Jagr, Lafleur and McDavid for me. Forsberg doesn't belong here, but he had "moments" like these, although not nearly enough to be placed on this pedestal.

In response to some posts in this thread--yes, goalies and goalie pads alike were smaller in the 70's and 80's. And, yes, there was also a ton of more whacking, clutching, hooking, grabbing, and abuse those players needed to battle through night in and night out. They were also playing with sticks that were as heavy as logs compared to today's hi-tech launchers, and long, heavy gloves and skates that contained water during a game. Point being, when you start making a list of pros vs. cons, they will eventually come out in the wash.

Demigods like 4, 99 and 66 would be better than the rest, regardless of era, planet, hemisphere, arena, etc. There are no hypothetical stats that will convince me otherwise.

 

[The Panther]

Either the shooters of the modern era suck compared to the shooters of the 80's OR the average goaltender of the 80's sucks by comparison to the modern goaltender.

I don't think the key point is either of those two extremes. I think the key point is that scoring chances were of a much higher quality, on average, in the 1980s than today (or, even more so, compared to five/six years ago).

All shots on net are not equal. Today, there might be one point-blank shot from the low slot among every 10 shots on net, whereas in 1984 maybe there were two or three. There were certainly far more breakaways and odd-man rushes in 1984 than today, and certainly it wasn't as difficult to get clean shots on net (less obstruction in front).

I think that is the largest factor in the difference between an .877 and a .913 or whatever it was recently.

 

[The Panther]

Last season's scoring leaders looked like this:
128 - Kucherov
116 - McDavid
110 - Kane

This is how I GUESS the 1980s' scoring leaders would have looked (for eleven seasons) if the two greatest offensive talents ever (Wayne & Mario) hadn't been alive or played hockey (I say "guess" because I have to reduce scoring totals somewhat for players who played a lot with them):

1979-80
137 - Dionne
125 - Lafleur
106 - Perreault
1980-81
135 - Dionne
131 - Nilsson
119 - Bossy
1981-82
147 - Bossy
139 - Stastny
136 - Maruk
1982-83
124 - Stastny
121 - Savard
118 - Bossy
1983-84
122 - Goulet
119 - Stastny
118 - Bossy
1984-85
130 - Hawerchuk
126 - Dionne
117 - Bossy
1985-86
123 - Bossy
122 - Stastny
118 - Coffey
1986-87
105 - Gilmour
103 - Ciccarelli
100 - Hawerchuk
1987-88
131 - Savard
121 - Hawerchuk
111 - Robitaille / Stastny
1988-89
155 - Yzerman
115 - Nicholls
110 - Mullen
1989-90
129 - Messier
127 - Yzerman
113 - Hull

Even here, there are question marks: Would Messier have able to push himself to 129 points without ever having had the "Gretzky influence" or being motivated to get back at Wayne after the 1989 playoffs? (Probably not.) Would Hawerchuk / The Jets have played that much of an aggressive, offensive style if the Oilers had never had Gretzky to show that championships can be won with that style? Maybe not.

Anyway, we can see that Kucherov's raw point total last season (128) would have made him the NHL scoring leader in 1983, 1984, 1986, 1987, and maybe 1990 as well.

 

[The Panther]

To add to my post above, the point I was going to make is: The Hockey Reference "adjusted stats" formula is obviously flawed in that it doesn't take into account the fact that scoring distribution is far narrower today than in the mid-80s or whenever. That is, 2nd and esp. 3rd and 4th-liners score a disproportionately lower percent of goals today than back then.

I think my post above sort-of proves that scoring, say, 125 points in the 1980s was just as difficult as doing it today, with the possible exception of 1980-81 and 1981-82. It's just that Wayne and Mario being there pushed the upper levels of themselves and some teammates higher.

 

[daver]

I think my post above sort-of proves that scoring, say, 125 points in the 1980s was just as difficult as doing it today, with the possible exception of 1980-81 and 1981-82. It's just that Wayne and Mario being there pushed the upper levels of themselves and some teammates higher.

From 79/80 to 88/89, there were 27 players who had a 125 pts/82 games pace (min. of 40 games), since 2005/06, there have been four players who had this pace.

If you are trying to claim that Wayne or Mario could hit 200 points in today's league or even close to 200, there is nothing statistically to make this anywhere close to reasonable.

 

[Minar]

Except the fact that an old broken down Lemieux scored 76pts in 43 games in a low scoring time like today. What could a prime Lemieux or Gretzky do? Probably get closer to 200 than you think.

 

[Thenameless]

Except the fact that an old broken down Lemieux scored 76pts in 43 games in a low scoring time like today. What could a prime Lemieux or Gretzky do? Probably get closer to 200 than you think.

A lot of people think I'm crazy, but I'm pretty sure that Gretzky and Lemieux would still put up around 170 points in today's game.

If you look at how much better than their peers they were it's not outlandish. Even looking at their performances in a tougher-to-score-in-league at an advanced age they were still ahead of most guys.

 

[MadLuke]

A lot of people think I'm crazy, but I'm pretty sure that Gretzky and Lemieux would still put up around 170 points in today's game.

On this message board, if we are talking this season with scoring getting quite up again, maybe not that many I would think.

3.09 goal a game isn't far from 1995-1996 3.14 goal a game when a returning to hockey Lemieux scored at a 185-190 pts pace, Power plays are drastically down and that specially for Lemieux would be a big factor, but what a younger peak one instead of an bit older one after long break from Hockey.

Imagine giving Gretzky some 3 on 3 overtime hockey..... considering what he did with 4 on 4 hockey.

I would not be surprised if a significant amount of player outscore every non Pens of that 95-96 season and some by a good amount:

1.	Mario Lemieux* • PIT	161
2.	Jaromir Jagr • PIT	149
3.	Joe Sakic* • COL	120
4.	Ron Francis* • PIT	119
5.	Peter Forsberg* • COL	116

[TBODY] [/TBODY]