Pavel Bure's place among NHL's all-time greatest goal scorers

[Starchild74]

Wait a minute here, if he was the best goal scorer over a 12 year period, and the NHL itself is not even 100 years old, how could he not even be a top 20 goal scorer of all time?

Not to mention, he's lead the NHL in goals 3 times, once by a fairly decent margin, and has also led the playoffs in goals.

Also Bure was a better goal scorer than Brett Hull IMO. The only reason he has the edge on Bure in goals there is because he was centered by a top 5 playmaker of all time during his prime in high scoring seasons Bure never saw in his prime. Hull had the definite edge when it comes to linemates and higher scoring seasons. Not saying it wasn't extremely close between them, but taking everything into context Bure was a bit better.

HE might have been the best goal scorer in a 12 year period and I was making a case for him in that time period however. Guys like Brett Hull, Teemu Selanne, etc... played more then just 12 years. Bure is up there but without making a list what I wrote is just a sample size for him being great at a cetain point in time

You might think that Bure was a better goal scorer then Hull and I will say he scored prettier goals then Hull at times. You can even argue that in their prime Bure was better but when you look at their careers overall no matter how much in some ways I rather have Bure on my team then Hull. Their is no way Bure is better then Hull. Which is tough for me to say because I hate Hull

 

[Starchild74]

It still wouldn't add up since he has 408g in 719 games.

1992-93 84gp 76g
1993-94 51gp 25g
1994-95 45gp 22g
1995-96 79gp 40g
1996-97 78gp 51g
1997-98 73gp 52g
1998-99 75gp 47g
1999-00 79gp 33g
2000-01 73gp 33g
2001-02 82gp 29g

719gp 408g

Those are his season totals. Since I did not know where to find out how to find the totals for 702gp just added up Selanne first 10 seasons which are those totals. It was late when I did the adding and might have mistyped or hit a wrong number somewhere

 

[sr edler]

bure when he first came to florida scored 13 goals in 11 games, then 58 goals in 74 games, that's 71 goals in 85 games, pretty good when your best centers is viktor kozlov and rob niedermayer

then he scored 59 goals in 82 games when the next best player hit 14 goals and 37 points, that team was so awful bure even led it in assists

and about the ice time, yes he played a lot on the panthers but he could handle the ice time too, he was one of the fittest players in the league, and he also played on the pk

 

[jepjepjoo]

bure when he first came to florida scored 13 goals in 11 games, then 58 goals in 74 games, that's 71 goals in 85 games, pretty good when your best centers is viktor kozlov and rob niedermayer

then he scored 59 goals in 82 games when the next best player hit 14 goals and 37 points, that team was so awful bure even led it in assists

and about the ice time, yes he played a lot on the panthers but he could handle the ice time too, he was one of the fittest players in the league, and he also played on the pk

He was indeed in very good shape, but the only reason why he could handle that ice time was that he rarely entered the defensive zone and sat back waiting for the puck. His sole purpose on the PK was to be a breakaway threat.

 

[Merya]

Bure is pretty much a poor mans version of Selänne. Impressive as he was to watch, he was the epitome of one dimensional hockeyplayer. And he didn't last long. And don't bring his % of goals in Florida in the comparison before you check Selänne % goals in Anaheim season by season.

ps. also don't bring the 5 goal game against Finland in 1998, bcs thats Finland...the only country that can go from 5-1 lead with one period to go to 5-6 loss. D:

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Bure is pretty much a poor mans version of Selänne. Impressive as he was to watch, he was the epitome of one dimensional hockeyplayer. And he didn't last long. And don't bring his % of goals in Florida in the comparison before you check Selänne % goals in Anaheim season by season.

ps. also don't bring the 5 goal game against Finland in 1998, bcs thats Finland...the only country that can go from 5-1 lead with one period to go to 5-6 loss. D:

I really disagree with the categorization as "a poor man's Selanne." There's a good argument that Bure was better at their respective peaks (no jepjepjoo, I don't feel like rehashing it ).


Selanne beats Bure badly in terms of longevity, which is why he's "better" in an all-time sense, but I personally find it hard to call player x "a poor man's y" when they were so close at their respective peaks.

 

[Starchild74]

Bure is pretty much a poor mans version of Selänne. Impressive as he was to watch, he was the epitome of one dimensional hockeyplayer. And he didn't last long. And don't bring his % of goals in Florida in the comparison before you check Selänne % goals in Anaheim season by season.

ps. also don't bring the 5 goal game against Finland in 1998, bcs thats Finland...the only country that can go from 5-1 lead with one period to go to 5-6 loss. D:

I wouldn't go as far as saying that Bure is a poor man's verison of Selanne.

Both have a lot of similarities in their career. Both had times where they were injured. Selanne managed to play at times but was not fully healthy and the same is true for Bure

Both were one dimensional hockey players. Bure was more of a floater on the ice meaning he was always looking for the breakout pass. However Selanne was not that great defensively either in his early years. In the playoffs Bure did come back more but was still not that good defensively

The difference between Selanne and Bure is simple. Selanne managed to get healthy and keep on playing. He became a more all round player where he is no longer a liability in his own end and as turned into a leader or at the very least more of a leader then when he was younger.

Bure was much better then Selanne when it came to playoffs though that can't be argued.

Bure is not a poor man's anything he was super skilled and was great it is just that with him their are a lot of would have or could have or might have with him.

That doesn't take anything away from him. It is just like asking. How would Lindros have faired if not for his concusions?

 

[sr edler]

bure at his best was better than selänne at his best

not by super much or anything but he clearly was a little better

 

[Hardyvan123]

I really disagree with the categorization as "a poor man's Selanne." There's a good argument that Bure was better at their respective peaks (no jepjepjoo, I don't feel like rehashing it ).


Selanne beats Bure badly in terms of longevity, which is why he's "better" in an all-time sense, but I personally find it hard to call player x "a poor man's y" when they were so close at their respective peaks.

This was my 1st thought as well and I think very highly of Selanne.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Selanne vs. Bure is a pretty clear case of career overcoming peak.

 

[RECsGuy*]

When it comes to the object of the game, no one that I've seen in 20 years of watching NHL hockey has elicited more fear from the opposition's supporters and more excitement from his own team's fans than Pavel Bure. Most stars caused you "concern," whereas the Russian Rocket made you pee in your pants a little by simply hopping over the boards.

If I've got one game to play for my life, I'm taking Pavel Bure over just about every other player mentioned in this thread whose prime I was able to witness firsthand. Folks literally stood up, whether at home or at the arena, through the duration of his shifts. One of few players ever who the cliche, "worth the price of admission," is actually true of. Few players in the league's history entertained the way he did.

 

[Sens Rule]

Wait a minute here, if he was the best goal scorer over a 12 year period, and the NHL itself is not even 100 years old, how could he not even be a top 20 goal scorer of all time?

Not to mention, he's lead the NHL in goals 3 times, once by a fairly decent margin, and has also led the playoffs in goals.

Also Bure was a better goal scorer than Brett Hull IMO. The only reason he has the edge on Bure in goals there is because he was centered by a top 5 playmaker of all time during his prime in high scoring seasons Bure never saw in his prime. Hull had the definite edge when it comes to linemates and higher scoring seasons. Not saying it wasn't extremely close between them, but taking everything into context Bure was a bit better.

Bure wouldn't really benefit from a top playmaker. He was not a sniper he was a breakaway artist. Bure would have been best off with a great passing defenceman.

Bure was a different cat then most of his goal scoring peers. Probably not as helpful to his teams as many of the other goal scorers.

 

[overpass]

Bure has at least one goal-scoring record. He owns the record for most empty net goals in a season, since it became an official stat in 1988, with 9 empty net goals in 2000. He still led the league in non-EN goals that season, obviously.

 

[sr edler]

Bure has at least one goal-scoring record. He owns the record for most empty net goals in a season, since it became an official stat in 1988, with 9 empty net goals in 2000. He still led the league in non-EN goals that season, obviously.

good to dig up a 'negative' goal record on bure, like no one else scores en goals

but he has a better record than that

bure scored 29.5 per cent of the total goals on the florida panthers in 00-01, 59|200, which is an nhl record for most goals scored in proportion to the team, the old record was by brett hull, 27.7 per cent of the total goals on the st louis blues in 90-91, 86|310

 

[Infinite Vision*]

HE might have been the best goal scorer in a 12 year period and I was making a case for him in that time period however. Guys like Brett Hull, Teemu Selanne, etc... played more then just 12 years. Bure is up there but without making a list what I wrote is just a sample size for him being great at a cetain point in time

You might think that Bure was a better goal scorer then Hull and I will say he scored prettier goals then Hull at times. You can even argue that in their prime Bure was better but when you look at their careers overall no matter how much in some ways I rather have Bure on my team then Hull. Their is no way Bure is better then Hull. Which is tough for me to say because I hate Hull

Interesting, other than 'I might think Bure was better than Hull' and 'Bure scored prettier goals', what are you're reasons for thinking Hull was a better goal scorer?

bure when he first came to florida scored 13 goals in 11 games, then 58 goals in 74 games, that's 71 goals in 85 games, pretty good when your best centers is viktor kozlov and rob niedermayer

then he scored 59 goals in 82 games when the next best player hit 14 goals and 37 points, that team was so awful bure even led it in assists

and about the ice time, yes he played a lot on the panthers but he could handle the ice time too, he was one of the fittest players in the league, and he also played on the pk

This! Not too mention this guy brought it in the playoffs, extremely underrated in terms of physicality/strength, and defensive play as well.

 

[begbeee]

For me is Bure easily TOP10 member and I would say he is closer to above five than bottom five.

 

[Starchild74]

Interesting, other than 'I might think Bure was better than Hull' and 'Bure scored prettier goals', what are you're reasons for thinking Hull was a better goal scorer?

Why was Hull a better goal scorer then Bure?

Brett Hull was born to score goals. When the game was on the line or his team needed a goal he was their to do it. When I was younger and used to watch Mike Bossy score I thought I would never see a guy who could score the way he did. Then Brett Hull came around. He is everything you want in a pure goal scorer. He always seems to find the open ice and be ready for a shot. He was pretty consistent too. I mean yes he had his big peaks but later on his career even though his skating declined and wasn't the same player he used to be he was for sure still deadly

You see a goal is a goal. No matter if it is a pretty goal or a garbage goal. Brett Hull might not have deked out 5 guys and then scored, or stickhandle like Bure but in the end it is about putting the puck in the net. That is what Brett Hull was paid to do and he did it better then many. Brett Hull was so good that he could make an average center look good passing because Hull was able to anticipate the play and know where to go to get the best oppertunity to score.

His one time was awesome and without making a list his one timer is one of the best ever. I am just talking about regular season here. In the playoffs he was even more clutch. So as far as a career goes Bure can't touch him.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i agree that hull was the better goal scorer, peak, prime, and career. and bure is my favourite player.

i don't want to disparage hull, the man could score whether it was with 70+ goals with oates or 40+ with peter zezel or young datsyuk. but the advantage bure has is that he can create his own chances if you get him the puck in the neutral zone. this doesn't make him the better goal scorer, but their very different styles necessitated different supporting players to be at their best. bure was best with a puck-moving defenseman. he had his greatest success with jeff brown and robert svehla. imagine if he had ever played with phil housley or, can you even imagine, paul coffey. whereas hull worked best with a passing center who knew how to get him the puck when he found open ice in the offensive zone. he had an ideal guy in oates, but i think he was better off with a pass-first guy like zezel than he would have been with a more "skilled" scoring center with lesser offensive vision, like say nieuwendyk or sundin.

 

[Starchild74]

Bure was amazing but top 10 all time for the greatest goal scorers really?

In no particular order here are who I would put ahead greatest scorers in the history of the NHL

These are guys that Bure can't even be compared to

Rocket Richard
Mike Bossy
Brett Hull
Bobby Hull
Mario Lemieux
Gordie Howe
Phil Esposito
Guy Lafleur

Also 2 guys who as far as history goes were considered two fo the best in their day

Howie Morenz
Cy Denneny

Wayne Gretzky
Marcel Dionne
Mike Gartner
Jaromir Jagr
Jari Kurri
Teemu Selanne

are players that have an argument for being placed ahead of Bure based on career numbers

Now I might have missed a few players because I am just going off the top of my head but the question is where does Bure place against the NHL's all time socrers not just guys who played while he did.

There is an argument that Pavel Bure is not even a top 5 goal scorer in the last 30 years. So how in the history of the NHL could he be top 10 when there are still over 60 years of players to compare him to.

 

[markrander87]

This thread gave me a great laugh. Bure played on some of the worst teams of the decade in Florida. He had no help offensively, other teams new that if they shut him down, they shut down the Panthers. Wake up and realize we cant just take simple statistics and go from those. All of these comparisons are situational based on what the players involved were dealing with.

And regarding original 6 era players, can we please factor in that they played roughly what 40-50 mins a game.

 

[sr edler]

Why was Hull a better goal scorer then Bure?

Brett Hull was born to score goals. When the game was on the line or his team needed a goal he was their to do it. When I was younger and used to watch Mike Bossy score I thought I would never see a guy who could score the way he did. Then Brett Hull came around. He is everything you want in a pure goal scorer. He always seems to find the open ice and be ready for a shot. He was pretty consistent too. I mean yes he had his big peaks but later on his career even though his skating declined and wasn't the same player he used to be he was for sure still deadly

You see a goal is a goal. No matter if it is a pretty goal or a garbage goal. Brett Hull might not have deked out 5 guys and then scored, or stickhandle like Bure but in the end it is about putting the puck in the net. That is what Brett Hull was paid to do and he did it better then many. Brett Hull was so good that he could make an average center look good passing because Hull was able to anticipate the play and know where to go to get the best oppertunity to score.

His one time was awesome and without making a list his one timer is one of the best ever. I am just talking about regular season here. In the playoffs he was even more clutch. So as far as a career goes Bure can't touch him.

brett hull was a machine but he did play with some really good centers on the st louis blues in adam oates and craig janney, two pass first players who never looked for a shot but only to feed hull, oates recorded 90 assists in 61 games the season hull scored 86 goals and won his hart, in 82 games that's projected to about 123 assists

and later on dallas and detroit were full of good centers for hull to play with like modano, nieuwendyk, fedorov, datsyuk, yzerman, larionov

but i guess he could make average centers look good too, only curious to know who exactly

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

brett hull was a machine but he did play with some really good centers on the st louis blues in adam oates and craig janney, two pass first players who never looked for a shot but only to feed hull, oates recorded 90 assists in 61 games the season hull scored 86 goals and won his hart, in 82 games that's projected to about 123 assists

and later on dallas and detroit were full of good centers for hull to play with like modano, nieuwendyk, fedorov, datsyuk, yzerman, larionov

but i guess he could make average centers look good too, only curious to know who exactly

as mentioned before, he played a lot with zezel in his first year in st. louis (41 goals), and if memory serves correctly also for at least part of his 72 goal year. oates was definitely the center on the number one PP unit during the 72 goal year though.

also, i don't remember who centered hull in st. louis after oates left, but my recollection is that janney played mostly with shanahan on the "janney and shanny" line.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

This thread gave me a great laugh. Bure played on some of the worst teams of the decade in Florida. He had no help offensively, other teams new that if they shut him down, they shut down the Panthers. Wake up and realize we cant just take simple statistics and go from those. All of these comparisons are situational based on what the players involved were dealing with.

And regarding original 6 era players, can we please factor in that they played roughly what 40-50 mins a game.

This makes no difference when comparing players to how much they dominated their peers which is what pretty much everyone on this board does.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Bure was amazing but top 10 all time for the greatest goal scorers really?

In no particular order here are who I would put ahead greatest scorers in the history of the NHL

These are guys that Bure can't even be compared to

Rocket Richard
Mike Bossy
Brett Hull
Bobby Hull
Mario Lemieux
Gordie Howe
Phil Esposito
Guy Lafleur

Also 2 guys who as far as history goes were considered two fo the best in their day

Howie Morenz
Cy Denneny

Wayne Gretzky
Marcel Dionne
Mike Gartner
Jaromir Jagr
Jari Kurri
Teemu Selanne

are players that have an argument for being placed ahead of Bure based on career numbers

Now I might have missed a few players because I am just going off the top of my head but the question is where does Bure place against the NHL's all time socrers not just guys who played while he did.

There is an argument that Pavel Bure is not even a top 5 goal scorer in the last 30 years. So how in the history of the NHL could he be top 10 when there are still over 60 years of players to compare him to.

I think you are underrating Gretzky here. He should easily be in the first category. There aren't many guys who have led the league in goal scoring 5 times. Just because age and injuries forced him to concentrate primarily on playmaking later in his career does not take away what he did earlier.

 

[markrander87]

This makes no difference when comparing players to how much they dominated their peers which is what pretty much everyone on this board does.

...Please quote me where I mentioned anything in relation to peers?

Your preaching to the choir JohnnyD.