Round 2, Vote 2 (HFNYR Top NYR Wingers All-Time)

[Greg02]

True, but if your placing more emphasis on goal scoring then why doesn't the fact that Graves led the tam in goal scoring 4 times matter more to you? Hadfield and Bun cann't make that claim.

I think there's a difference between weighing goals more than assists and weighing goals so much to the exclusion of assists.

Adjusted stats are useful to compare players of the same era, not for a comparison of players from different eras and to give you a point of reference for their place in the game back when they played. The fact is only one of those guys in the list above actually scored the goals attributed to them and that's Graves.

Why would adjusted stats be useful for comparing players of the same era? (I'm completely sincere, by the way). If they're from the same era, then can't we just use non-adjusted stats?

No one's taking away the fact that Graves scored X goals. But of course he's going to have scored more goals than someone who played in an era with shorter seasons. It's a bit disingenuous to compare them in the absolute sense like that.

 

[Chief]

Why would adjusted stats be useful for comparing players of the same era? (I'm completely sincere, by the way). If they're from the same era, then can't we just use non-adjusted stats?

What I should have said was that adjusted stats can give you a point of reference that raw numbers won't give you. A player scoring 30 goals in the O6 era might not sound like much - it's 30 goals - but using adjusted stats, you might find that a player's production was akin to a modern day player's and drawing a conclusion like, "he was the Pavel Bure of his era". It doesn't mean he would have scored as many goals as Bure in Bure's day, just that he was as dominant as Bure in his era. There's a distinction there which I think is important and ,hopefully, that makes more sense.

No one's taking away the fact that Graves scored X goals. But of course he's going to have scored more goals than someone who played in an era with shorter seasons. It's a bit disingenuous to compare them in the absolute sense like that.

Although I think there is merit to having compiled stats. I never said that Graves scoring x amount of goals was the only thing to look at. My main point was that Graves was the dominant winger on his Rangers teams for at least 4 seasons. I don't think Hadfield or Bun were.

The season Graves scored 52 goals, the next highest scorer was Messier with 26 - that's 26!!!

When Hadfield scored 50, Ratelle had 46 (in 15 less games) and Gilbert had 43.

Graves was much important to his team that season than Hadfield was to his team in the latter's 50 goal season. I'm drawing conclusions based on the Rangers teams themselves from each era. I am going to rate a player who was the best of his Ranger teams than a player who was #2 or #3 on his Ranger teams.

I don't think Jagr's accomplishments should be minimized either. His performance in his first full season was so dominant on a league-wide level that I think that moves him up a few notches. I don't know that any Ranger player was ever that dominant over the course of a season. But to be fair, you're really talking about two seasons. Jagr's third season was pedestrian by his standards. Drury equaled his goals and Gomez had one less point.

 

[Cake or Death]

Adjusted stats can be useful to compare players of the same era, and to give you a point of reference for their place in the game back when they played. I don't believe they should be used as a comparison of players from different eras. I don't believe Bun would have scored 77 goals the season Graves scored 52. The fact is only one of those guys in the list above actually scored the goals attributed to them and that's Graves.

Adjusted stats are specifically designed to compare different eras. They serve no other purpose. Take goals. Adjusted stats take average goals per game scored for every season. Total it, divide by number of years the league existed, get an average. If the total goal per game average is 5.00, and it was 4.00 in 1930 and 6.00 in 1998, goals in 1930 would be multiplied by 1.25 (5/4) and goals in 1998 would be multiplied by 0.83 (5/6). All seasons are then brought to an 82 game total, to give an era by era comparison.

It is, in my opinion, to be used as an indicator and taken with a grain of salt. Real numbers are real numbers. But it puts things in excellent perspective. For instance, look at two guys' first NYR seasons. Adam Graves scores 26 goals in an 80 game season in 1991-92. The average goals scored per game that season is 6.96. Bun Cook scores 14 goals in a 44 game season in 1926-27. The average goals scored per game that season is 4.00. Graves' season league wide goal scoring of 6.96 GPG is above norm, slightly, and Cook's season league wide goal scoring 4.00 GPG is well below norm.

In real numbers, Cook scores 0.32 GPG, Graves scores 0.33 GPG. That looks similar, and era adjusting concurs in this case. That high scoring 1991-92 season (6.96 GPG) sees Graves adjusted down to 23 goals and that low scoring 1926-27 season (4.00 GPG) sees Bun Cook adjusted up to 24 goals.

Due to forward passing rules and only some primary assists awarded back in the 1926-27, the assists per goal were a staggeringly low 0.40 assists per goal, compared to the more modern norm of 1.67 assists per goal. In Graves' 91-92 seasons, assists are slightly above norm, and Graves' assists are adjusted down from 33 to 29. In Cook's 26-27 seasons, assists are waaaaaay below norm, and Cook, being an excellent playmaker, sees his assists adjusted up to 56. Adjusted numbers end up as follows:

Graves 23-29-52 pts
Bun Cook 24-56-80 pts

Again, it's an indicator and a method to compare different eras, nothing more. But it puts things in some perspective and enlightens us to how good some guys were in ultra low scoring eras. It also brings a bit of reality to some of the brutally inflated scoring we saw, say, during the 1980s. Works for goalies, too. It will take those ultra low scoring eras and, adjusted, it will bring those goalies' GAA higher... which makes total sense, cuz if they're in a ridiculously low scoring era, they're gonna have ridiculously low GAA's.

 

[Cake or Death]

True, but if your placing more emphasis on goal scoring then why doesn't the fact that Graves led the tam in goal scoring 4 times matter more to you? Hadfield and Bun cann't make that claim.

My problem is, I find the logic very flawed. Leading a team in goals as a forward is relative to the team a player is on and exactly what other forwards the player is outscoring. I'll use a dumb, but useful example to illustrate what I mean. Two teams, both play 82 game seasons.

• Team A has two forwards; one scores 55 goals, the other scores 47.
• Team B has two forwards; one scores 25 goals, the other scores 20.

Is the 25 goal scorer on team B better than the 47 goal scorer on team A simply because the 25 goal scorer led a weaker scoring team in goals? That's what I'm saying. Graves never, ever, ever had to compete in goals or points with guys like Bill Cook and Frank Boucher. In Graves' day, he simply needed to basically net over 30 to lead the NYR wings in goals. In contrast, Bun had to beat Bill, one of the very, very best goal scorers in NHL history. These are not close to the same things imho.

 

[Cake or Death]

As I feel this guy is being undeservedly under-rated, perhaps a bit taken for granted because of his linemates, I am going to make some points about Bun Book.

My Case for Bun Cook

While Bill Cook was clearly the superior goal scorer, and Frank Boucher the better playmaker, Bun Cook was an excellent combination of the two, and probably the best defensive player on the line. He was also a highly innovative hockey mind, engineering play at the NHL level, and also a guy who understood the game so well that he is also an unsurpassed Hall of Fame coach at the AHL level.

I am not sure of this modern notion that Bill Cook and Frank Boucher were so superior that they carried Bun Cook. The entire line was monstrously excellent and Bun wasn't in some other zip code in scoring. Career PPG on the NYR:

Frank Boucher – 0.77
Bill Cool – 0.77
Bun Cook – 0.68

In an era where average total goals scored in a game was around 4 goals, those are staggering numbers across the board for all three guys. And Bun more than carried his weight, leading the team in goals and assists one season each, and four times placing second in goals or assists. The dude could play D and the dude could score.

"While Bill was known as the goal scorer and Boucher the playmaker, Bun was known as a bit of both." –Joe Pellitier

"Bun Cook was a defensive specialist who could skate, shoot and score. Although overshadowed by the exploits of his linemates, Bun Cook proved to be very much their hockey peer. During the ten seasons he played with the Rangers (1926 to 1936), Bun outscored Frank Boucher in goals and earned more assists than his brother Bill." –Hockey Hall of Fame​

Bun was also considered a highly innovative player and thinker of the game:

"Men who would know credit Bunny Cook with the introduction of the passing attack. The Cook-Boucher line introduced a style of attack completely their own." –Frank Selke

"When Bun Cook is hot, he is one of the most amazing players in hockey. At such moments, he attempts plays that stagger the imagination. At his peak, there is no player so enjoyable to watch." –Ed Sullivan in an article when he was still a writer

Bun is also credited with being the innovator of the drop pass. "I had a dream about the drop pass one night and at our next practice, I told Frank and Bill about it," explained Bun. "They thought I was crazy, but they decided to humour me. By gosh, it worked! I'd cross over from left wing to centre as I moved in on defense. I'd fake a shot and leave the puck behind and skate away from it, with Frank or Bill picking it up. We got a lot of goals off the crisscross and drop pass."​

To further illustrate Bun Cook's understanding of the game, he is in the AHL Hall of Fame as a coach, and the AHL Hall of Fame has this to say about Cook:

"Cook retired in 1937 and became head coach of the AHL’s Providence Reds, leading the team to the Calder Cup championship in his first season. Two years later, Cook’s Reds won another Calder Cup.

In 1943, Bun Cook took over behind the bench of the Cleveland Barons and soon solidified his reputation as one of the most popular and successful teachers in the sport. His 13 seasons in Cleveland saw the Barons dominate as a perennial power in the AHL, including seven first-place finishes in the regular season and five more Calder Cup championships.

Cook retired from the AHL in 1956, following his 11th trip to the Calder Cup Finals. He led his team to the postseason in 18 of his 19 seasons and finished with a record of 636-413-122 (.595), still leaving him as the winningest head coach in league history. His incredible seven Calder Cup championships are by far the most ever by an AHL coach; no one else in league history has won more than three." –AHL Hall fo Fame​

While broadcasting the 1972 Summit Series in 1972, the highly skilled Soviets reminded legendary broadcaster Foster Hewitt of the Cook-Boucher line:

"There aren't many people around to remember, but the way the Russians play reminds me of the old Rangers, especially the line of Boucher and the Cooks. They were even better than the Russians. When Frank, Bill and Bunny were on the ice, it always seemed to me they had the puck on the string."​

In closing: Bun Cook, nicknamed Bunny originally because of his speed, could skate, pass, score, play D and was physical as all can be. And when Frank Selke says, "Men who would know credit Bunny Cook with the introduction of the passing attack," something has to be said about the guy's level of play and how well he thought the game. His unparalleled AHL coaching career certainly seems to confirm this.

Bun Cook was a total package. A thinker with an excellent skill set, an exciting player who, in his day, had the respect of Lou Gehrig and was referred to by Ed Sullivan, who saw him play, as "one of the most amazing players in hockey," and a player that "attempts plays that stagger the imagination." He was also an excellent defensive player, who innovated, complemented and offensively held his own with two of the best players in NHL history, and two of the very best the NY Rangers have ever seen.

It is only in some strange modern twist, always from people who have never actually seen Boucher or the Cook brothers play, that Bun has taken on this modern role as the guy the other two greats sort of carried. Yet, when you read the words of anyone who actually watched all three play, the talk was never like this and is always centered on how amazing and dominant the entire line was.

Bun Cook scored circles around most anyone left on our list, was a total package player and key component on the best line this team ever iced, appeared in 4 finals in 6 years, winning two Cups. You could argue that he benefited from his line mates. But I would argue right back that the same was true of his RW and C. If that were not the case, we would never see this quote from Frank Selke that "Men who would know credit Bunny Cook with the introduction of the passing attack. The Cook-Boucher line introduced a style of attack completely their own."

Yes, Bun Cook played with two of the Rangers best ever players, and he every bit complemented them as much as they complimented him. Bun, in my opinion, deserves serious consideration.