Round 2, Vote 14 (HOH Top Centers)

[Hardyvan123]

That's a... pretty novel perspective.

Well we have somewhat limited information form that era to begin with but we do know that professional hockey players, nevermind potential ones didn't get any special treatment and a great deal of kids died in that war.

How much it affected the overall pool is impossible to tell but it obviously would be more than in WW2 and a lockout season one would think.

I doubt that many here will give it any serious thought though and that's not a good or bad thing just an observation on how things work here.

Maybe in some future time players from the 2000's will be long forgotten and the same benefit of the doubt will be given to them but it's hard to say as alot of the information will remain.

going to sleep on a couple of votes here, Zetts and Sundin are 1/2 for me althoguh the order might be switched form alst round and McGee, Primeau and Dunderdale won't make my top 8, the rest is really up in the air.

 

[Killion]

I'm also not sure if WW1 is the same as WW2 and the lockout in that NHL, or any hockey players getting special treatment, like in WW2 and how many young men died and possibly freed up the competition level for those post WW1 guys.

Negligible Hv. There were 3 pre-NHL'rs (NHA) that died during WW1 including One Eyed Frank McGee. Hobie Baker just after The Great War who I guess counts as a 4th but he hadnt played professionally. There were 2 NHL players killed during WW2. No idea what the numbers are for wounded & injured that may have prematurely ended careers.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Negligible Hv. There were 3 pre-NHL'rs (NHA) that died during WW1 including One Eyed Frank McGee. Hobie Baker just after The Great War who I guess counts as a 4th but he hadnt played professionally. There were 2 NHL players killed during WW2. No idea what the numbers are for wounded & injured that may have prematurely ended careers.

McGee had been retired from hockey for a good number of years before WW1 started and we can't really account for all of the players near or close or who would have become NHA/PCHA or even future NHL players as many farm kids, heck many kids in general went off to War and never came back. We just don't have detailed enough information on the era for the pro or semi pro leagues never mind where the players came from before then.

It's not unreasonable to suggest that more than just 3 guys had an impact (or rather never did in raising the quality of play) for that era.

we know the quality of play increased dramatically in the early 1900's, someone like Ian fife might have more info on that.

I'm about to sit down and read Stephen Harper's (yes that guy) book A great Game: the forgotten Leafs &The rise of professional Hockey that will hopefully give me some more insight into the conditions of the game at the time.

 

[tony d]

Just voted.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Voted as well just in case I can't get back to it tomorrow, some guys made my top 8 more because other players cases were weaker, some guys not eligible probably have stronger cases, if they manage to come up next round.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

When Sundin is praised for his consistency and his longevity, it is not because people compare him to players from the 1950s or World War 1; Sundin holds these advantages over his contemporaries. 15 70-point seasons is nothing to sneeze at. Only two players in the Dead Puck Era had a minimum of 70 points in all eight seasons: Jaromir Jagr and Mats Sundin. Joe Sakic and Mike Modano were the next closest with 6/8. It wasn't an era where star players stayed healthy and productive. Look at some of the biggest names of the era and the toll it took on their bodies: Bure, Forsberg, Kariya, Lindros, Selanne. Hell, Jagr was hitting his mark in spite of his health. The fact that Sundin was largely invincible is a major plus, because he offered Toronto reliability in an often unreliable era. Death, taxes, and 70-GP and 70-points.

Because of his health, Sidney Crosby has already played as many sub-70-point seasons as Sundin ever did. Zetterberg has doubled-up on that number. So have the aforementioned Centers Lindros and Forsberg. And Datsyuk. Adam Oates matched it before he even played his first 70-point season.

VsX7 does him a disservice because it takes away a rather noticeable advantage that kicks in when everyone starts to hit bumps in the road while Sundin keeps going strong despite starting in the league as a teenager. Best example is the offensive comparison between Sundin and Fedorov (yes, Fedorov's defense is better; that's why he was added to the list 24 spots ago...). Not a whole lot separating Sundin and Fedorov's top-seven seasons offensively. Then Sundin rattles off eight more 70-point seasons and a point-per-game lockout season while Fedorov doesn't breach 70 points again.

So unless we're comparing him to an ironman of the 1950s or World War 1, Sundin's consistency and longevity should be given appropriate weight.




And I disagree with the idea that a team cannot win with Sundin as their best forward. I mean, really, what kind of statement is that? We've seen a team with Jamie Langenbrunner as its best forward win a Stanley Cup, and we've seen a team with Mario Lemieux as its best forward miss the playoffs. I'm not sure about there being such a strong correlation between #1 forward and playoff success to throw that one out there as if defense and goaltending don't enter the equation (which it certainly did in 1999 when Curtis Joseph had a rare bad playoff series in the Conference Finals). There are way too many factors to make a statement about how a 1st ballot HOF forward - alone - is too deficient for a team to win.

Maybe the Toronto Maple Leafs didn't win with Sundin as their best forward, but Sweden did. And I don't know why best-on-best games (30 of them in six tournaments; not at all a small sample size) seem to mean so little in the European NHL era that they don't warrant a discussion, but teams were capable of winning with Sundin as their best forward. But running into Belfour, Brodeur, Hasek, and Roy for 31 of his first 59 NHL playoff games probably wasn't the best way to rack up the gaudy numbers he had in his international games... which, again are kinda ridiculous (1.30 points-per-game). He's not Gretzky or Lemieux internationally, but that's a damn high number that would have gotten more attention had he been stuck behind the iron curtain.

Great post, that obviously supports what I've been saying and suggesting. I think he only missed something like 16 games total during the entire DPE, leading to him being the 2nd highest scorer over that period to Sakic... who was once out-scored by Sundin while playing on the same team in a more offensive-styled "system" (seemed more like just letting talented players figure it out to me)... despite being stuck on a team (Leafs) asking him to play a Sakic role in the absence of any support that's similar to some of the guys that we hold in even higher esteem...

As a Habs fan, I have absolutely no love for anything Leafs or Bruins related, but Sundin and Bourque are two guys that I find myself going out of my way to pump their tires a bit in discussions. Superlative players, obviously. After noticing that Modano already got in a few spots ago, it became one of those times.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Great post, that obviously supports what I've been saying and suggesting. I think he only missed something like 16 games total during the entire DPE, leading to him being the 2nd highest scorer over that period to Sakic... who was once out-scored by Sundin while playing on the same team in a more offensive-styled "system" (seemed more like just letting talented players figure it out to me)... despite being stuck on a team (Leafs) asking him to play a Sakic role in the absence of any support that's similar to some of the guys that we hold in even higher esteem...

As a Habs fan, I have absolutely no love for anything Leafs or Bruins related, but Sundin and Bourque are two guys that I find myself going out of my way to pump their tires a bit in discussions. Superlative players, obviously. After noticing that Modano already got in a few spots ago, it became one of those times.

Stats like that make it easy to distort reality though. On one hand, wow...only Sakic outscored him among centers! Yet on the other side of the coin, Doug Weight was only 80 points behind him over the course of those ten seasons. Point per game numbers being practically identical. So if one is going to say Sundin was at the head of the pack falling short to only to a top 40-ish all time player in Sakic, it must also be said that he failed to clearly separate himself from a player who will never be considered for the Hall of Fame for one solitary second.

 

[Sturminator]

Negligible Hv. There were 3 pre-NHL'rs (NHA) that died during WW1 including One Eyed Frank McGee. Hobie Baker just after The Great War who I guess counts as a 4th but he hadnt played professionally. There were 2 NHL players killed during WW2. No idea what the numbers are for wounded & injured that may have prematurely ended careers.

Are you remembering Scotty Davidson here? He was apparently the dominant right wing in hockey before he went off and got himself killed.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Stats like that make it easy to distort reality though. On one hand, wow...only Sakic outscored him among centers! Yet on the other side of the coin, Doug Weight was only 80 points behind him over the course of those ten seasons. Point per game numbers being practically identical. So if one is going to say Sundin was at the head of the pack falling short to only to a top 40-ish all time player in Sakic, it must also be said that he failed to clearly separate himself from a player who will never be considered for the Hall of Fame for one solitary second.

He has 93 more points (12 points per year) than Doug Weight from 1996-97 to 2003-04 and just 31 fewer points than Joe Sakic, so your eyeball number of 80 points was a little off (as was your estimation that the DPE was 10 seasons... come on). More than that, had Doug Weight continued at his 0.94 point-per-game pace in the DPE instead of dropping to 0.75 for the remainder of his career (kind of like how Sundin - rather than dropping from his 0.98 point-per-game pace in the DPE - was a 1.04 player in the other 707 games of his career), then Doug Weight probably would be a HOFer and thus wouldn't be a very good name for you to use to try to lower Sundin's stock.

I mean, really... Doug Weight's 7-season VsX falls right between Pat LaFontaine's and Henrik Zetterberg's. He had his moments. His inability to perform well outside of a window that perfectly coincided with the DPE does not invalidate the achievements of those who performed well at the same time - especially when their careers obliterate Weight's outside of that overlap.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

He has 93 more points (12 points per year) than Doug Weight from 1996-97 to 2003-04 and just 31 fewer points than Joe Sakic, so your eyeball number of 80 points was a little off (as was your estimation that the DPE was 10 seasons... come on). More than that, had Doug Weight continued at his 0.94 point-per-game pace in the DPE instead of dropping to 0.75 for the remainder of his career (kind of like how Sundin - rather than dropping from his 0.98 point-per-game pace in the DPE - was a 1.04 player in the other 707 games of his career), then Doug Weight probably would be a HOFer and thus wouldn't be a very good name for you to use to try to lower Sundin's stock.

I mean, really... Doug Weight's 7-season VsX falls right between Pat LaFontaine's and Henrik Zetterberg's. He had his moments. His inability to perform well outside of a window that perfectly coincided with the DPE does not invalidate the achievements of those who performed well at the same time - especially when their careers obliterate Weight's outside of that overlap.

I took the DPE to be 1995-2004, hence 10 years.

My point wasn't to compare Doug Weight to Sundin though, it was to show that a lot of "Player X had the most points in [insert selected time frame chosen to show player in the best possible light]" just don't pass the smell test.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

He has 93 more points (12 points per year) than Doug Weight from 1996-97 to 2003-04 and just 31 fewer points than Joe Sakic, so your eyeball number of 80 points was a little off (as was your estimation that the DPE was 10 seasons... come on). More than that, had Doug Weight continued at his 0.94 point-per-game pace in the DPE instead of dropping to 0.75 for the remainder of his career (kind of like how Sundin - rather than dropping from his 0.98 point-per-game pace in the DPE - was a 1.04 player in the other 707 games of his career), then Doug Weight probably would be a HOFer and thus wouldn't be a very good name for you to use to try to lower Sundin's stock.

I mean, really... Doug Weight's 7-season VsX falls right between Pat LaFontaine's and Henrik Zetterberg's. He had his moments. His inability to perform well outside of a window that perfectly coincided with the DPE does not invalidate the achievements of those who performed well at the same time - especially when their careers obliterate Weight's outside of that overlap.

Sundin is only close to Sakic over the time frame because of some injuries to Sakic in the late 90s.

In terms of PPG over the timeframe, Sundin's 0.98 is way behind Forsberg (1.27) and Sakic (1.16). Also behind Lindros (1.06), Demitra (1.00), and Modano (0.99). http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points And those are just the centers: I mean, credit to Sundin for staying healthy and all, but over the time frame specified, Sakic was runner up for the Art Ross twice and also finished 5th, 5th, and 8th in scoring. Sundin's top 10 finishes are 4th and 7th

I mean, I know you don't actually think Sundin is close to Sakic, but my point is that these long time frame measures are kind of questionable.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Stats like that make it easy to distort reality though. On one hand, wow...only Sakic outscored him among centers! Yet on the other side of the coin, Doug Weight was only 80 points behind him over the course of those ten seasons. Point per game numbers being practically identical. So if one is going to say Sundin was at the head of the pack falling short to only to a top 40-ish all time player in Sakic, it must also be said that he failed to clearly separate himself from a player who will never be considered for the Hall of Fame for one solitary second.

Uh... 10 seasons? How long do you think the DPE was? Clearly it ended in '03/04, and I've personally been using '97/98 as the cut off due to the start of <220 GF scoring. Backing up to where I first jumped in, and you'll find another suitable comparison (Modano) who was also in his prime (loosely defined as age 24-32, which is actually kinda long - don't the VsX guys usually use a 7 year cut-off?) at pretty much the exact same time, and was voted in some time ago. Just to make sure we're using the same lists (narrowed down to centres for this discussion), here they are:

DPE points among centres
DPE PPG among centres

Looking at those names, if you were going to cherry-pick a name to try to make a point, you probably should have gone with someone like Yashin, Lang, or Allison. But again, what gets lost in those numbers, is how long you go down on the list before finding any of Sundin's support scorers vs how long it takes to find those of most everyone else in those tables when you run it for all forwards. And I think it's fairly impressive that only Marleau and Ronnie Franchise remained healthier through that entire stretch.

Obviously though, Sundin, as a 1st ballot hall of famer, easily distinguished himself from those who will never be considered by the hall for one solitary second, so that would be a really weird way to choose to interpret the data.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Sundin is only close to Sakic over the time frame because of some injuries to Sakic in the late 90s.

In terms of PPG over the timeframe, Sundin's 0.98 is way behind Forsberg (1.27) and Sakic (1.16). Also behind Lindros (1.06), Demitra (1.00), and Modano (0.99). http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points And those are just the centers: I mean, credit to Sundin for staying healthy and all, but over the time frame specified, Sakic was runner up for the Art Ross twice and also finished 5th, 5th, and 8th in scoring. Sundin's top 10 finishes are 4th and 7th

I mean, I know you don't actually think Sundin is close to Sakic, but my point is that these long time frame measures are kind of questionable.

And that line in bold is basically my point. ted1971's argument that Sundin's longevity and consistency means less because of modern medicine isn't fair, because Sundin was always healthy at a time when few were.


Though I do find it weird that you said that last part about "long time frame measures" being questionable...

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=55952391&postcount=83

...because that happened.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

And that line in bold is basically my point. ted1971's argument that Sundin's longevity and consistency means less because of modern medicine isn't fair, because Sundin was always healthy at a time when few were.


Though I do find it weird that you said that last part about "long time frame measures" being questionable...

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=55952391&postcount=83

...because that happened.

So in 2012, you apparently bookmarked a post where I used career point totals to talk about a player's HHOF case. Well done?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Sundin is only close to Sakic over the time frame because of some injuries to Sakic in the late 90s.

In terms of PPG over the timeframe, Sundin's 0.98 is way behind Forsberg (1.27) and Sakic (1.16). Also behind Lindros (1.06), Demitra (1.00), and Modano (0.99). http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points And those are just the centers: I mean, credit to Sundin for staying healthy and all, but over the time frame specified, Sakic was runner up for the Art Ross twice and also finished 5th, 5th, and 8th in scoring. Sundin's top 10 finishes are 4th and 7th

I mean, I know you don't actually think Sundin is close to Sakic, but my point is that these long time frame measures are kind of questionable.

Yes, in terms of PPG, he's behind Sakic and Forsberg. Who else do I see in that top 50... Palffy and Robitaille, Kariya and Selanne, Lindros and Recchi and Leclair, Bure and Naslund and Whitney, Demitra and Hull and Turgeon and Tkachuk (who was also with Roenick earlier in Phx) and Weight, Modano and Hull and Nieuwendyk and Guerin, etc, etc, etc.

Then, Sundin and ... Gilmour for a season if we count '96/97? Loading up of Leetch (and Johansson, I suppose), Nieuwendyk, and Francis at the very end of their careers for one season in '03/04? A couple of years of Mogilny at the end of his career? Other examples also flesh out the definite trend in there (Leafs investing too heavily in the "experience" of past-their-prime stars as bandaid solutions to their depth in trying to build a "playoff team", and disintegrating patience from Leafs nation going into the lockout). But basically, each guy from the list got as much support from just one of those "wing men" as Sundin got from all the names just listed above in aggregate.

 

[Hobnobs]

Sundin had the best teammates a center can wish for I mean how do you not win the Art Ross with HoFers like Berezin, Modin, Höglund, Thomas, King, Tucker, Renberg, Mogilny and so on.. Seriously..

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Uh... 10 seasons? How long do you think the DPE was? Clearly it ended in '03/04, and I've personally been using '97/98 as the cut off due to the start of <220 GF scoring. Backing up to where I first jumped in, and you'll find another suitable comparison (Modano) who was also in his prime (loosely defined as age 24-32, which is actually kinda long - don't the VsX guys usually use a 7 year cut-off?) at pretty much the exact same time, and was voted in some time ago. Just to make sure we're using the same lists (narrowed down to centres for this discussion), here they are:

DPE points among centres
DPE PPG among centres

Looking at those names, if you were going to cherry-pick a name to try to make a point, you probably should have gone with someone like Yashin, Lang, or Allison. But again, what gets lost in those numbers, is how long you go down on the list before finding any of Sundin's support scorers vs how long it takes to find those of most everyone else in those tables when you run it for all forwards. And I think it's fairly impressive that only Marleau and Ronnie Franchise remained healthier through that entire stretch.

Obviously though, Sundin, as a 1st ballot hall of famer, easily distinguished himself from those who will never be considered by the hall for one solitary second, so that would be a really weird way to choose to interpret the data.

As I said above, I was of the understanding that the dead puck era meant the ten seasons in between lockouts, 95-04. Even though scoring didn't totally go into the tank until 1997 or 1998.

Anyway, yeah Sundin vs Modano. I just don't see it as that close, to be honest. Sundin was his equal in regular season production and lasted longer at a 1st-line level. But Modano was just so much more dynamic and dangerous, at least in my eyes. He matched Sundin's production during their peak years in the late 90's/early 00's while being a much better defensive player playing in a stifling defensive system on awful Reunion Arena ice. Had to compete against likewise centers in Sakic, Forsberg, Yzerman, Fedorov, in the tough western conference during his peak years. Sundin certainly caught a break in terms of matchups after Toronto moved east, the regular nightly competition being guys like you mention...Yashin, Allison, emerging Thornton...not exactly on the same level.

Sundin's consistency is nice for sure, but I just don't see it having much weight against other guys who played full careers. Against a guy like Lindros that missed large chunks of every season, for sure. But Modano only missed significant time during one of his prime seasons (and he had a long prime), he was extremely healthy and consistent as well. So Sundin's one significant advantage over most players is pretty much negligible when compared to Modano.

 

[quoipourquoi]

So in 2012, you apparently bookmarked a post where I used career point totals to talk about a player's HHOF case. Well done?

No... I used the search function, because I remembered where you used the same method starting with the DPE (only going beyond 2004 and into the lockout era) to prop up Alfredsson.

It just strikes me as being somewhat of an about-face given the similarities of Ohashi Jouzu's argument and your previous pro-Alfredsson post, especially given that 8 years is a much smaller range than 15. It's much less likely to misrepresent the durable scorers of the era (like for instance, using 1997-2012 to compare Alfredsson to several players whose careers did not overlap those 15 seasons) because many of the stars like Jagr, Sakic, Bure, Modano, Kariya, Selanne, Forsberg, Fedorov, Lindros, Weight, etc. started their careers before the DPE started destroying their bodies and ended their careers after the DPE did its damage. Because of his durability in an era that really tested the star players, Sundin provided a pretty strong sample of points, and that has a lot of merit.

I mean, obviously if you're acknowledging the flaws with that type of analysis now, you won't find me in too strong of disagreement. But I do try to remember where people are coming from when they make their arguments. If Hardyvan were to suddenly stop being a "career guy," we'd notice that too. This one just stuck out, is all, since Ohashi Jouzu's cumulative report was much less egregious. The DPE time-frame itself is what caused the varying levels of GP of the star players; not the years when they were born.

 

[quoipourquoi]

As I said above, I was of the understanding that the dead puck era meant the ten seasons in between lockouts, 95-04.

Doug Weight's 10-best seasons in terms of raw points-per-game. 676 points in 697 games (0.97) from 1995-2004, but only 357 points in 541 games (0.66) outside of it. If one wanted to cherry-pick for Weight (obviously you weren't - Ohashi picked the seasons; you just saw the name and went with it), this would be the time to do it, hence why he looks so damn good.

But it's not like it's a perfect cherry-pick for Sundin though, and it wasn't meant to be. 672 points in 686 games (0.98) from 1995-2004, and 677 points in 660 games (1.03) outside of it. He's every bit as good outside the DPE as he was in it. The reason the DPE was the relevant selection, however, was because the era tested players' durability. Sundin proved to be towards the top of the class in that regard, and the raw points over the eight/ten/however many seasons are fairly good evidence of it.

Again... this started in response to ted1971 questioning the importance of Sundin's longevity in this project.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Sundin had the best teammates a center can wish for I mean how do you not win the Art Ross with HoFers like Berezin, Modin, Höglund, Thomas, King, Tucker, Renberg, Mogilny and so on.. Seriously..

You know, most of those guys were reasonably successful NHL players outside of Toronto/Sundin.

Seriously, you list Mogilny and Thomas as poor linemates? Two guys with 900 NHL goals between them?

There were 54-60 first line wingers in the NHL during the years you've plucked those teammates from. It's not like every other team had all-star caliber players populating their first line.

Sundin played with a long list of linemates of varying abilities over the course of his long career. And he always produced at a very similar level. Seems like one of those guys that was going to go out and get his 80 points regardless of who he played with. Shouldn't he have seen a big spike in production when given an all-star caliber teammate in Mogilny instead of a stiff like Hoglund?

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

As I said above, I was of the understanding that the dead puck era meant the ten seasons in between lockouts, 95-04. Even though scoring didn't totally go into the tank until 1997 or 1998.

Anyway, yeah Sundin vs Modano. I just don't see it as that close, to be honest. Sundin was his equal in regular season production and lasted longer at a 1st-line level. But Modano was just so much more dynamic and dangerous, at least in my eyes. He matched Sundin's production during their peak years in the late 90's/early 00's while being a much better defensive player playing in a stifling defensive system on awful Reunion Arena ice. Had to compete against likewise centers in Sakic, Forsberg, Yzerman, Fedorov, in the tough western conference during his peak years. Sundin certainly caught a break in terms of matchups after Toronto moved east, the regular nightly competition being guys like you mention...Yashin, Allison, emerging Thornton...not exactly on the same level.

Sundin's consistency is nice for sure, but I just don't see it having much weight against other guys who played full careers. Against a guy like Lindros that missed large chunks of every season, for sure. But Modano only missed significant time during one of his prime seasons (and he had a long prime), he was extremely healthy and consistent as well. So Sundin's one significant advantage over most players is pretty much negligible when compared to Modano.

And yet, over the time frame we're talking about, these two guys are about as close as it comes "overall" in terms of Hart and post season all-star voting, with Sundin actually having the edge in 2nd team all-star berths (and an olympic all-star berth, which wasn't even his gold medal winning olympics, but I digress).

Now, I would consider Modano to be the "better" talent/player between them, techincally, and I have a lot of respect for the competition he faced and the player he developed into as he (got) slowed down, but I think Sundin makes up a lot of ground when it comes down to this kind of "Top X Whatever" project with all the "context" exploration, etc.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Seems like one of those guys that was going to go out and get his 80 points regardless of who he played with.

Well, he was already that as a 20 year, when he played on the same team as Sakic. And outscored Sakic the next year by almost 10 points. He was that and even more when he joined Gilmour in his early days as a Leaf, and then he really started to get leaned on like we would get used to seeing for pretty much another decade following that. It's (semi-unfortunately) pretty impressive.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

No... I used the search function, because I remembered where you used the same method starting with the DPE (only going beyond 2004 and into the lockout era) to prop up Alfredsson.

It just strikes me as being somewhat of an about-face given the similarities of Ohashi Jouzu's argument and your previous pro-Alfredsson post, especially given that 8 years is a much smaller range than 15. It's much less likely to misrepresent the durable scorers of the era (like for instance, using 1997-2012 to compare Alfredsson to several players whose careers did not overlap those 15 seasons) because many of the stars like Jagr, Sakic, Bure, Modano, Kariya, Selanne, Forsberg, Fedorov, Lindros, Weight, etc. started their careers before the DPE started destroying their bodies and ended their careers after the DPE did its damage. Because of his durability in an era that really tested the star players, Sundin provided a pretty strong sample of points, and that has a lot of merit.

I mean, obviously if you're acknowledging the flaws with that type of analysis now, you won't find me in too strong of disagreement. But I do try to remember where people are coming from when they make their arguments. If Hardyvan were to suddenly stop being a "career guy," we'd notice that too. This one just stuck out, is all, since Ohashi Jouzu's cumulative report was much less egregious. The DPE time-frame itself is what caused the varying levels of GP of the star players; not the years when they were born.

I believe in that post of mine from 2 years ago about whether Daniel Alfredsson should be a HHOFer, I was trying to come up with a proxy for career point totals that took into account the sharp decline in scoring in the mid 90s. Since career point totals have always been important to the HHOF.

Maybe I jumped too hard on OJ's measure - measuring total accumulated points over 7-10 years (have we decided what it is yet?) based on an "era" is somewhat arbitrary, but it's not nearly as much of a cherrypick as measuring how a player did over the course of his career vs other players who didn't share those same career years. I still think "#2 among centers in total points over X span" is somewhat arbitrary though.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Seriously, you list Mogilny and Thomas as poor linemates? Two guys with 900 NHL goals between them?

Well, yeah. Because beyond them no one else even really compares (whether it be because of peformance/production, the stage of their career, or having only 1 season or less on the same team). Even those guys scored, what, 14% of their career goal totals beside Sundin, while playing as past-their-prime players in their mid-30s? They didn't even overlap. Gilmour, in his early 30s, represented the "high water mark" of Sundin's support talent-wise, but opening up the boundaries to include '96/97, here's the list of most points by a forward in a Leafs uniform between then and '03/04: List. That's quite a supporting cast, all in all.

Just doing some quick math there, it looks like Sundin, by himself, represented almost 17% of the Maple Leafs' offensive production from forwards over that entire 8 year period. Decided to compare that to Modano over the same time and got this: List. Was surprised that Modano still represented as much as 16% of Dallas' forward production. You don't want to see the defensemen list, though.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Doug Weight's 10-best seasons in terms of raw points-per-game. 676 points in 697 games (0.97) from 1995-2004, but only 357 points in 541 games (0.66) outside of it. If one wanted to cherry-pick for Weight (obviously you weren't - Ohashi picked the seasons; you just saw the name and went with it), this would be the time to do it, hence why he looks so damn good.

But it's not like it's a perfect cherry-pick for Sundin though, and it wasn't meant to be. 672 points in 686 games (0.98) from 1995-2004, and 677 points in 660 games (1.03) outside of it. He's every bit as good outside the DPE as he was in it. The reason the DPE was the relevant selection, however, was because the era tested players' durability. Sundin proved to be towards the top of the class in that regard, and the raw points over the eight/ten/however many seasons are fairly good evidence of it.

Again... this started in response to ted1971 questioning the importance of Sundin's longevity in this project.

I guess I'm of the belief that Sundin managing to stay a little healthier than most of the other great players of his era just isn't that important in an era of 82 game seasons. It's really only a big point in his favour against players who had similar per-game value yet consistently missed chunks of games. His total amount of seasons wasn't unusual for the era.