Revisiting the greatest point and goal scoring races in NHL history; The 1992-93 season.

[alko]

@EM71 wtf? How many hours did you work on this?

 

[TheStatican]

The question would then be: Why didn't Lemieux put up comparable scoring numbers in 1990-91, 1991-92 or 1993-94 when he also had a comparable supporting cast?

The reason for the decline in his production those years is pretty obvious, it's because of his f'ed-up back. This was a grown man who could not even tie his own skate laces, in the middle of his prime. Seriously this man could brush off cancer like it was nothing but he's got the back of a 70 year-old. Makes me wonder how he's doing these days, back problems trend to only get worse not better over time.

from hockeydraftcentral;
First Major Back Injury; "Lemieux missed the remainder of the 1989-90 season(from Feb 14th on) and most of the 1990-91 season with a herniated disc and arthritic condition in his back. He played much of the 1989-90 season with the injury, which was not officially diagnosed until February 1990. He continued to play with the injury up until the pain became too great, and he was forced to leave Pittsburgh's Feb. 14, 1990, game vs. N.Y. Rangers after only two periods of limited ice time. By failing to score a point against the Rangers, he ended his Pittsburgh record streak of at least one point in 46 consecutive games. At the time he left, he was also the NHL's leading scorer with 121 points. After Lemieux failed to respond to two days of intense physical therapy, the Penguins flew him to Los Angeles, where he was examined by a noted spine specialist Dr. Robert Watkins. After consultation between Watkins, Penguins team physician Dr. Charles Burke and San Francisco back specialist Dr. Arthur White, it was determined that Lemieux would need a new form of treatment and should be held out of the lineup until he was clear of the problem without having to have potentially career-threatening surgery. He remained out while undergoing extensive physical therapy, and did not resume skating until March 22, 1990. He finally returned to action for Pittsburgh's March 31, 1990, regular-season finale vs. Buffalo. The Penguins needed to win the game to keep their playoff hopes alive, which was a major reason Lemieux was permitted to play a week before doctors expected him to be ready to return. Lemieux scored a goal and had an assist, but Buffalo won 3-2 in overtime on a goal by Uwe Krupp. Because the N.Y. Islanders had won their game, Pittsburgh was eliminated from the playoff race. Just over three months later, despite efforts to avoid it and the fact that he felt he was finally pain-free, Lemieux underwent surgery to remove part of the herniated disc on July 11, 1990. The 90-minute surgery, a micor-lumbar discectomy with bone decompression, was performed by Dr. Peter Sheptak at Montefiore Hospital in Pittsburgh. On July 13, Lemiueux was released from the hospital, and hoped to be ready for training camp. He resumed skating on Aug. 27, 1990, and said he would be ready for the last few preseason games and the season opener on Oct. 5, 1990. But the recovery took longer than he expected, and Lemieux bagan experiencing more pain. He left training camp on Sept. 24, 1990, to seek medical attention. A few days later, doctors found Lemieux had an infection in his back, which they said would keep him out of action for at least three months. The inflammation was not necessarily related to the surgery, and might have gone back to a fever Lemieux had in the weeks before surgery. Lemieux finally resumed skating on Dec. 30, 1990, and returned to practice in mid-January. He finally rejoined the lineup for Pittsburgh's Jan. 26, 1991, game vs. Quebec, and had three assists. He went on to scored two more goals and another assist before suffering a pulled groin during Pittsburgh's Feb. 2, 1991, game vs. Boston, due to his lack of conditioning. He quickly recovered from that injury, and after returning for Pittsburgh's Feb. 8, 1991, game vs. Winnipeg, he played regularly for the remainder of the regular season and then starred during the playoffs in leading the Penguins to their first Stanley Cup."


Second Major Back Injury: "Lemieux missed most of the 1993-94 season with an assortment of back injuries and chronic pain. His long chain of back trouble had started when he was forced to miss Pittsburgh's 1993 training camp and the start of 1993-94 season while recovering from off-season back surgery. During the 35-minute operation on July 28, 1993, Dr. Peter Sheptak repaired a muscle hernia and cleared out both scar tissue and a bone spur. After the surgery, Sheptak said Lemieux's back showed signs of arthritis, but he should be ready for the Penguins' season-opener. But by August, it was clear that Lemieux was far from healthy. He announced that he would skip Pittsburgh's 1993 training camp due to chronic back pain, and even though he planned to be ready for the Oct. 5, 1993, opener, he did not make his 1993-94 regular-season debut until Pittsburgh's Oct. 28, 1993, game vs. Quebec. He had two assists in the game, but also re-aggravated his back injury, forcing him to miss another game before returning for Pittsburgh's Nov. 2, 1993, game at San Jose. He had a goal and two assists in that game, but once again re-aggravated his back injury and missed another game before returning for Pittsburgh's Nov. 6, 1993, game at Los Angeles. He played again the following night at Anaheim, before missing a Nov. 9, 1993, game with the flu. Two nights later, on Nov. 11 in Chicago, he sat out the game with back pain. The following day, he took himself out of the lineup, saying he needed time to rest his back. He said he would not return until he was healthy enough to play without major pain. Pittsburgh general manager Craig Patrick expressed regret that the team had let Lemieux return from surgery before his back was at 100 percent. After coming out of the lineup on Nov. 12, Lemieux did not return to practice until late January 1994. He hoped to play in both Pittsburgh's Feb. 1, 1994, game vs. Florida or a Feb. 4, 1994, game at Detroit, but took himself out of the lineup before game time. Frustrated, he even talked about retiring from hockey for the first time in his career. He was finally able to rejoin the lineup for Pittsburgh's Feb. 12, 1994, game vs. Dallas. He had a goal and an assist in that game, and then came back the next night with two third-period goals in a 3-0 win at Philadelphia. But just when it seemed Lemieux had left his back trouble in the past, he suffered another re-aggravation in the Feb. 13, 1994, game and had to sit out a Feb. 15, 1994, game vs. Winnipeg and a Feb. 17, 1994, game vs. Hartford, while he underwent cortisone shots. He came back for Pittsburgh's Feb. 19, 1994, game at Montreal, and promptly re-aggravated his back injury. He did not return to action until Pittsburgh's Feb. 26, 1994, game vs. Buffalo. He later sat out Pittsburgh's March 6, 1994, game at Winnipeg. He returned to the lineup for Pittsburgh's March 8, 1994, game vs. Boston, but re-aggravated his injury during a March 12, 1994, game vs. N.Y. Rangers -- a game in which he scored two goals and added two assists. He did not return to action until Pittsburgh's March 22, 1994, game vs. San Jose. He later sat out Pittsburgh's March 27, 1994, game at Edmonton and Pittsburgh's April 8, 1994, game at New Jersey to avoid playing on back-to-back nights."


Honestly the Penguins blundered big time(though at least they owned up to it) that year by allowing him to comeback so many times intermittently instead of being firm and making him rest for an extended period of time. His entire season amounted repetitive instances of re-aggravated this followed by re-aggravated that and so on so forth.

 

[TheStatican]

So, what was with Brett Hull's decline to mere All Star level that season, when everybody else was going gangbusters? Hull had scored about a goal per game the previous season (in fact, for the previous three), but dropped to 54 in 1992-93.

The Blues had some discord as they fired the coach early in the season, and then maybe Bob Berry didn't click as well with Hull? I dunno. Craig Janney had 82 assists, which was almost the same pace as Oates' assists the previous year. (Also, Oates had missed 26 games the previous season, but that hadn't slowed down Brett.)

I've always wonder that myself. As a Pens fan I never really watched the Blues much so I had no idea why he suddenly declined from being a 70 goal-scorer to just a 50 goal.

Looking back it makes sense to think that clubhouse/coaching situation probably had something to do with it. That season he started off with 7 goals his first 18 games, while in each of the three years prior he already had 17, 19 & 16 by that point. So already he was 10 goals behind the 8-ball. 1990-91 was also an anomaly/his absolute prime, and unlike all-timers Gretzky and Lemieux he was never going to replicate that pace in another season. But still that slow start would cover only about half his drop off, he still should have been a 60 goal scorer. He did pick it up a lot after the slow start, scoring at a 70 goal pace for almost half a season with 29 in 33 games(a rate of exactly 70 goals in 80 games) but then he slowed down again with 18 in his final 29(a rate of 50 goals in 80 games).

And then I went though his scoring logs and it became pretty obvious what actually happened.
Oates had been his main trigger man during his peak seasons and when he was traded Craig Janney assumed the role. Janney was indeed a competent replacement for Oates for the remainder of that first season together but unfortunately for Hull he wasn't the primary recipient of Janney's passes thereafter. It seems the Blues decided it was time to try a different approach the following year, perhaps because the old approach of loading up the top line was not helping in the playoffs? And so they split the two of them up in 1992-93.

In 1991-92 Oates assisted on 29 of Hulls goals(he had 54 at the time) in 54 games, 20 at even strength 9 on the powerplay. Janney meanwhile assisted on 10 of Hull's goals in 18 games(Hull had 15 goals in those games), 6 at even strength 4 on the powerplay. All together that's 39 of Hull's 69 goals in games they all played together, 26 at even strength.

The following year Janney assisted on just 18 of Hull's 54 goals and only 5 of those came at even strength, the other 13 were on the powerplay. It's quite clear that instead of putting Janney with Hull they put him with Shanahan, as he assisted on 33 of Shanahan's 51 goals, 21 at even strength, 12 on the powerplay.

Instead of having Oates or Janney feeding him the bisket, other than on the powerplay, he had players like Nelson Emerson and Ron Sutter trying to dish him the puck instead. You can see why his numbers would take such a huge hit, he went from scoring 45, 57 & 45 even strength goals during his peak years to just 25.

 

[The Panther]

Its fairly obvious that while Gretzky was still an incredible player in 1989 he was past his prime. Again yes his prime was from 1982-1986 when he averaged 2.5-2.7 ppg (see the 3rd to 7th data points). 1989 he had 2.15 ppg. An impressive rate but not prime Gretzky.

View attachment 593861 Please make an argument that the Gretzky of 1989 is prime Gretzky, I am all ears.

In 1989, Gretzky was still in his prime, yes. But (as I pointed out above), he was in his "late prime".

You're putting a bit too much emphasis on points-per-game, above. There are other considerations. For example, in1986-87 scoring suddenly dropped across the board in the NHL, and the League had the most parity in, like, 50 years or something. Yet Gretzky won the scoring race by the largest percentage-rate of his entire career, with 187 points to 108 (and, really, he would have had more points if not for basically giving up on the last four or five games of the season as he was getting ready for the playoffs).

All the Oilers' stars were peaking in 1985-86, while they were not in 1986-87. Kurri slumped early on, Anderson's numbers were half of the year prior and there was talk of him being traded, Coffey was injured and wasn't producing like old. Two months into the season, the Oilers were vying for second and third in their division, while the year prior (1986) the Smythe had been so weak that they'd just beat up on other teams all year. Yet check out the 1986-87 scoring race 49 games into the Oilers' season:
1. Gretzky 48G + 74A = 122PTS (+59)
2. Messier 21G + 51A = 72PTS (+16)
3. Kurri 28G + 37A = 65 PTS (+24)
4. Ciccarelli 35G + 29A = 64PTS (-1)
5. Hawerchuk 31G + 33A = 64PTS (-2)

Check out not only the points differential (he's 50 points clear of #2 in January) but the plus/minus results compared to Gretzky's own teammates! (How is that even possible?)

Gretzky "won" the scoring title on January 17th, 1987, which I think is the second fastest such of his career (only beaten by 1983-84).

Similarly, 1987-88 was still Gretzky's peak, for sure. He played in only 64 games (really, 63 as I recall his second injury being his first shift in a game) and then 19 (really, 18 and change, as we recall the Boston lights going out) in the playoffs. That makes 83 games played (though really only 81 or 82). Yet, he scored 192 points in those 81 or 82 games.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Its fairly obvious that while Gretzky was still an incredible player in 1989 he was past his prime. Again yes his prime was from 1982-1986 when he averaged 2.5-2.7 ppg (see the 3rd to 7th data points). 1989 he had 2.15 ppg. An impressive rate but not prime Gretzky.

View attachment 593861 Please make an argument that the Gretzky of 1989 is prime Gretzky, I am all ears.

He was 27 years old and had just scored 43 points in 19 playoff games. Smells like prime to me

 

[McPoyle]

He was 27 years old and had just scored 43 points in 19 playoff games. Smells like prime to me

He was also scoring 50ish less points per season than he had during his best years. As for the playoff run, I guess I shouldn't be surprised a Mario booster is fixated on small sample sizes lol. He was 28 during the 89 year as well.

Either way if you want to directly compare Lemieux's best year (199 points) to Gretzky's 7th best (168 points) and claim this is enough to make Lemieux the better player, go for it. Its a weak argument but I can't stop you.

 

[Ace36758]

Amazing write up, thoroughly enjoyed it. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

He was also scoring 50ish less points per season than he had during his best years. As for the playoff run, I guess I shouldn't be surprised a Mario booster is fixated on small sample sizes lol. He was 28 during the 89 year as well.

Either way if you want to directly compare Lemieux's best year (199 points) to Gretzky's 7th best (168 points) and claim this is enough to make Lemieux the better player, go for it. Its a weak argument but I can't stop you.

He was scoring less because league gpg was steady dropping every season past 86
Defence was evolving and goaltending which took a toll on Wayne's game. It's hard but it's the truth.

 

[jigglysquishy]

He was scoring less because league gpg was steady dropping every season past 86
Defence was evolving and goaltending which took a toll on Wayne's game. It's hard but it's the truth.

We know it's the Suter hit

Gretzky outproduced Lemieux at even strength every single (except 1989 where Lemieux was on pace for 107 EVP to Gretzky's 103) until the 1991-92 season where Gretzky had a broken back.

That's 11 of his first 12 years leading the league in EVP. Gretzky broke his back four months before his 31st birthday.

Gretzky's 103 EVP in 78 games in 1991 is better than any Lemieux season besides 1989 and 1993.

You can see the steady decline of peak Gretzky (1982-1985) to his late 80s prime. That's what you would expect as someone enters their late 20s.

And then the plummet in 1991. But make no mistake. Gretzky's even strength domination until the Suter hit was still so high that it's only been topped twice in NHL history.

 

[Hockey Stathead]

Such a fun year offensively. Nothing like it since then.

 

[MadLuke]

He was scoring less because league gpg was steady dropping every season past 86
Defence was evolving and goaltending which took a toll on Wayne's game. It's hard but it's the truth.

Also because virtually every player ever that start to accumulate a lot of hockey from a big jump young start to score less around that age (if not before)?

Looking at players that did not peak relative to their pears before turning 29, they usually have reason (St-Louis for example) later start has offensive star LeClair, Sedin, Marchand, Naslund or their peers quality went down or team situation changed (Bucyk, Blake, Turgeon, Sakic, Forsberg, Fleury)

Peaking between 21 and 26 is quite normal.

By the time Gretzky became a Kings he had played 776 professional hockey regular season games, 133 pro hockey playoff games, 3 Canada Cups and others intl tourney, that more than players like Peter Forsberg whole North America career or Lindros already, with a high ice time by games and high opposition focus from the start.

 

[Ralph Malfredsson]

Just wanted to say this was a riveting and nostalgic post, really well done. Enjoyed it so much.

 

[McPoyle]

He was scoring less because league gpg was steady dropping every season past 86
Defence was evolving and goaltending which took a toll on Wayne's game. It's hard but it's the truth.

Even if you era adjust 89 was well below his true prime years. Its not a truth friend, is a dishonest comparison.

 

[plusandminus]

Mario
Going Down Fast
2001-02 (barely played)
2002-03

I'm not saying you're wrong. Just want to point out that Mario started the 2002-03 season great, at least on the power play, playing with some other great teammates. Then they lost star player after star player and went from being like best team in the league to becoming the worst.

21 GP, 11+34 = 45 pts. 2nd best was Joe Thornton with 29 pts in 21 gp.

NHL Stats

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

www.nhl.com

Also

Spoiler

28 GP, 16+39 = 55 pts. 2nd best was still Joe Thornton, now with 40 pts in 30 gp.

NHL Stats

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

www.nhl.com

Still leads but now not scoring at same pace.

35 GP, 18+46 = 64 pts in 35 gp. Teammate Kovalev 48 pts in 35 gp. Thornton 48 pts in 36 gp.

NHL Stats

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

www.nhl.com

Still leads but now not scoring at same pace.

So Mario still had offensive greatness in 2002. But OK, in 2003 it went downwards fast and he also missed plenty of games.

Going back to the topic of the thread, Gretzky definitely was far below his prime during 1992-93, while Mario was more close to peak, so to summarize I overall agree with you.

Finally, great thread by the OP!

 

[Staniowski]

Savard is the biggest surprise here. He had 28 points in his first 19 games, and Habs fans must have thought they finally - FINALLY! - got the Savard that they expected when they traded Chelios for him.

But he followed that torrid pace up with just 27 points in the next 58, including playoffs.

If you include the end of 1991-92, in which he had 43 points in the last 34 games, including playoffs, Savard had 71 points in a 53-game stretch, which is, adjusted and on a per-game basis (1.34), as impressive as anything he did during the higher scoring 1980s (save 87-88). But he had just 138 in 195 (0.71) in Montreal outside of that stretch.

What the hell happened?

By '92-'93, for most Habs fans, there wouldn't have been any significant expectations for Savard, because they had been watching him play for a couple years, and it was easy to see that he wasn't a great player.

Initially, there were expectations.

Savard still had skills when he was in Montreal, but his game had declined some, injuries were affecting him some, and the improvements in defense throughout the NHL were affecting him some, as well.

And also, Montreal - with their focus on defense - was especially not a good fit.

In those years, Savard was benched by Keenan in Chicago, and by Burns and Demers in Montreal.

And Kirk Muller was a much better C than Savard.

Savard could still score a decent amount of points if he got a lot of quality ice-time....but is the team better, in that case?

 

[frisco]

Some marks that haven't been hit since 92-93:

Goals-Mogilny/Selanne 76
Assists-Oates 97
Points/Game-Lemieux 2.67
Goals/Game-Lemieux 1.15
Assists/Game-Lemieux 1.52
D-man Points-Housley 97
D-man Assists-Housley 79

Mario had 161 points in 1995-96, one more than he had in 92-93.

There were six 130-point scorers in 92-93 (Lemieux, LaFontaine, Oates, Yzerman, Turgeon, Selanne). There have been three since then (Gretzky 1993-94, Lemieux and Jagr 1995-96).

My Best-Carey

 

[jigglysquishy]

In addition, the only other players to even play at a 130 point pace since 1993.

Lemieux 97
Lemieux 01
Crosby 11
McDavid 21

The latter 3 all functionally have an asterix to them. Goes to show how rare it is.

 

[MadLuke]

In addition, the only other players to even play at a 130 point pace since 1993.

Lemieux 97
Lemieux 01
Crosby 11
McDavid 21

The latter 3 all functionally have an asterix to them. Goes to show how rare it is.

Since 1996 I imagine, but if we consider people achieving it after the first 41 games like 11 Crosby maybe some other would pop up.

Jagr had 80 points after 50 games in 98-99 for example, a 131.2 in 82 game pace, Crosby had 82 points after 50 games in 2006-2007.

After the first 50 games they are the only others example since 96 I think.

 

[TheStatican]

Since 1996 I imagine, but if we consider people achieving it after the first 41 games like 11 Crosby maybe some other would pop up.

Jagr had 80 points after 50 games in 98-99 for example, a 131.2 in 82 game pace, Crosby had 82 points after 50 games in 2006-2007.

After the first 50 games they are the only others example since 96 I think.

Theres three others more recently, Draisaitl had 110 in 68 in 2019-20, Kucherov 117 in 72 in his big year and Ovi with 96 in 60 in 2009-10

 

[seventieslord]

You can see the steady decline of peak Gretzky (1982-1985) to his late 80s prime. That's what you would expect as someone enters their late 20s.

Bingo. It's semantics I guess, but I prefer this terminology too. His "peak" was 1981-1985. His prime lasted until 1991, But peak and prime are different things (for most of us at least).

Go to Gretzky's hockey-reference page. You see all those years where everything is bold? Goals, assists, points, ESG, SHG, +/-, shots? That's what we call a peak. Gretzky was not only every bit as smart and cerebral as always, but at that time he was in the best physical condition he'd ever be in, and it was like he was everywhere at once.

All those other years where Gretzky "only" led the league in points, and usually assists but nothing else, years that would be the peak years of a mere generational talent, that's just the rest of Gretzky's prime. But it's not his peak.

 

[wetcoast]

he was injured right?

ok i looked it up

up to november 16, he had 28 pts in 19 games

this is from hockeydraftcentral —

Missed parts of 1992-93 season with the flu, contracted on Nov. 22, 1992, with sprained knee, suffered in Montreal's Jan. 2, 1993, game at Los Angeles, and with separated shoulder, an injury suffered during Montreal's Feb. 17, 1993, game vs. Boston . ... Suspended one game by NHL during 1992-93 season for involvement in a spearing duel with Viacheslav Fetisov in Montreal's Jan. 22, 1993, game at New Jersey. Savard received an major and a game misconduct for the incident, and he was given the automatic one-game suspension because it was his second stick-related major of the season. He served the suspension on Jan. 23, 1993. ... Missed remainder of 1993 Stanley Cup playoffs with broken right foot, suffered while playing for Montreal during Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Finals vs. Los Angeles on June 1, 1993.​

so maybe after november it was just a domino effect of ailment after ailment until finally he was done for the year.

This website is a hidden gem.

Bingo. It's semantics I guess, but I prefer this terminology too. His "peak" was 1981-1985. His prime lasted until 1991, But peak and prime are different things (for most of us at least).

Go to Gretzky's hockey-reference page. You see all those years where everything is bold? Goals, assists, points, ESG, SHG, +/-, shots? That's what we call a peak. Gretzky was not only every bit as smart and cerebral as always, but at that time he was in the best physical condition he'd ever be in, and it was like he was everywhere at once.

All those other years where Gretzky "only" led the league in points, and usually assists but nothing else, years that would be the peak years of a mere generational talent, that's just the rest of Gretzky's prime. But it's not his peak.

This reminds me of a more innocent time when as a child I saw the back of Bobby Orr's rookie card and it seemed impossible.

 

[Overrated]

Actually a 95-96 was just as good as Wayne's 200 point years. Gretzky was scoring those season when league gpg was 8.00 gpg or close to it. Lemieux having 161 in 70 games which is 189 points in 82 games in a 6.29 gpg league is just as absurd. That is very similar to last seasons scoring environment. Even on a domination level he beat prime jagr, who was a better offensive player than anyone Gretzky ever faced in his big years by 12 points on 12 less gp and paced for 40 more than him given the same games. That is a prime Jagr were talking about. In third was Sakic with 120 points 41 less than mario even with 66 missing 12 gp. N not to mention how much league had evolved defensively and goaltending wise, butterfly, equipment etc

That’s statistically the greatest season ever but I think it’s due to him raking in so many points on power plays with prime Jagr.

 

[The Panther]

That’s statistically the greatest season ever but I think it’s due to him raking in so many points on power plays with prime Jagr.

How do you figure...? (Also Jagr wasn't quite at the prime yet in 1992-93.)

 

[Overrated]

How do you figure...? (Also Jagr wasn't quite at the prime yet in 1992-93.)

I was talking about the 95-96 season (just like the guy in the post I was quoting) which was the highest ever in adjusted PPG. As others have pointed out Lemieux had a lot of points on power plays that season. Jagr wasn't on his regular line but he was there for the power plays.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I was talking about the 95-96 season (just like the guy in the post I was quoting) which was the highest ever in adjusted PPG. As others have pointed out Lemieux had a lot of points on power plays that season. Jagr wasn't on his regular line but he was there for the power plays.

He was also over a ppg with ev scoring and led the league in sh points. So it wasn't like he was just a pp specialist