The best goalscorers in the NHL-3
- Thread starter Namba 17
- Start date
The Panther
Registered User
I think we're all interested, but it's just a little reader-unfriendly (at least, on my Surface Pro, it's kind of hard to see the data). I'm not sure about other devices.
It's great that you expanded it to way back in time -- always interesting.
Do I understand that each item is based on individual seasons in isolation? (i.e., you're not considering eras or short-periods of time; just 1 season by itself? just checking.)
(By the way, there's an error where you're listing Gretzky 1983-84 as a "22 team" League, when it was 21.)
It's great that you expanded it to way back in time -- always interesting.
Do I understand that each item is based on individual seasons in isolation? (i.e., you're not considering eras or short-periods of time; just 1 season by itself? just checking.)
(By the way, there's an error where you're listing Gretzky 1983-84 as a "22 team" League, when it was 21.)
Namba 17
Registered User
- May 9, 2011
- 1,711
- 575
Yes, I understand and sorry about that. If smone teach me how to insert tables here in better way - I'll do it. Im too dumb to learn it myself.
Yes, each row is one season.
Yes, you right, thank you!
It didn't change anything in calculation though.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Yeah, sorry, namba...I don't totally understand what it's trying to say here. I know how to use Tableau, if I can figure out the end goal, I might be able to help with the data viz haha
Bear of Bad News
"The Worst Guy on the Site" - user feedback
- Sep 27, 2005
- 14,314
- 29,509
Namba 17
Registered User
- May 9, 2011
- 1,711
- 575
Ok, thanks.
So what did I do.
Im still running around with idea to estimate goalscorers of different epochs of the NHL.
To do this I made a table with:
1, Names of the #1 goalscorer of the NHL in each season since 46/47 and their results in corresponding season.
2. Amount of goals their teams scored in this season
3. % of goals of the team which #1 goalscorer scored in corresponding season
4. Amount of goals scored by all players of the NHL in correspondin season
5. % of goals of the whole NHL scored by #1 goalcorer
6. Avarage amount of goals scored by each player, who stepped on ice in corresponding season
7. Ratio between amount of goals by #1 goalscorer and average amount of goals of every player in corresponding season
8. Avarage amount of goals scored by each player, who scored at least 1 goal in corresponding season
9. Ratio between amount of goals by #1 goalscorer and average amount of goals of players, who scored at least 1 goal
10. % of goals, scored by team of #1 goascorer, of total amount of goals, scored by league in the correspondin season.
11. Ratio between share of goals of #1 goalscorer of his team's goals and share of goals of his team in total amount of goals, scored in the league.
Doing all this I found out that its almost impossible to compare players who played in different epochs of the NHL -epochs with different amount of teams.
Thats why I did one table, where I rated player by ratio between their goals scored and average amount of goals scored by players, who scored at least 1 goal (per one player) - 1st post.
Then I divided NHL by periods by amount of teams, played in each period (6 teams - one period, 12-14 teams - another etc) and rated players inside those periods - 2nd post
Then I rated players inside those periods by ratio between share of goals of #1 goalscorer of his team's goals and share of goals of his team in total amount of goals, scored in the league -3d post.
Thats what I want to share with community
If its sounds complicated - please, ask questions
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,783
- 6,275
My general first thought would be that give advice to do exactly like what I did to compare scoring accross era which would lead to boring similar result (but could catch my mistake)
i.e. focus more on what the top goal scorer did than league wide scoring, if someone played in a era that defenseman did not score that many goals versus someone else that played when it was popular to do so, should it say anything about how good they were at scoring goals ?
In an era where there was 12 skaters getting ice time versus an era where they rolled 18 ?
Going with league wide scoring seem to introduce all those issues and looking what the average goal scorer did among all skaters that scored goals is just a complicated way to get league wide scoring numbers + introducing a bigger issues when the amount of skaters by team change over time.
i.e. focus more on what the top goal scorer did than league wide scoring, if someone played in a era that defenseman did not score that many goals versus someone else that played when it was popular to do so, should it say anything about how good they were at scoring goals ?
In an era where there was 12 skaters getting ice time versus an era where they rolled 18 ?
Going with league wide scoring seem to introduce all those issues and looking what the average goal scorer did among all skaters that scored goals is just a complicated way to get league wide scoring numbers + introducing a bigger issues when the amount of skaters by team change over time.
Bear of Bad News
"The Worst Guy on the Site" - user feedback
- Sep 27, 2005
- 14,314
- 29,509
Gotcha - so if I can try to boil this down with an example:
In 2025-26, Mike Farkas is the leading scorer in the NHL and he plays for the HFBoards Historians. He scored 30% of the Historians' goals.
Overall for 2025-26 across all 32 teams, the team's leading scorer accounted for 24% of their teams' goals (this is the sum of goals by each team's leading scorer divided by the total goals in the league).
2025-26 would receive a "score" of 30%/24% or 1.25?
(And would it matter if the second-leading scorer in the NHL, Mad Luke, scored 32% of his team's goals?)
In 2025-26, Mike Farkas is the leading scorer in the NHL and he plays for the HFBoards Historians. He scored 30% of the Historians' goals.
Overall for 2025-26 across all 32 teams, the team's leading scorer accounted for 24% of their teams' goals (this is the sum of goals by each team's leading scorer divided by the total goals in the league).
2025-26 would receive a "score" of 30%/24% or 1.25?
(And would it matter if the second-leading scorer in the NHL, Mad Luke, scored 32% of his team's goals?)
Namba 17
Registered User
- May 9, 2011
- 1,711
- 575
I didn compare each team best scorers. I took only #1 results.
In 2025-26, Mike Farkas is the leading scorer in the NHL and he plays for the HFBoards Historians. He scored 30% of the Historians' goals.
Then we'll see how many goals his team scored and find % of total amount of all goals scored in the season (by all teams), say, its 15%.
Then we divide 30 on 15. The result itself doesnt mean much. But we compare it to the same result of the best goalscorers of the NHL, who played in the NHL in different seasons but as long, as there are 32 teams in the NHL.
Im not sure I got your point
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,783
- 6,275
As roster get bigger, it will be natural for top scorer share of goals to get down (but it will not be linear) considering this what does their share of league goals tell us ?
And because it will not be linear, we cannot adjust (like hockey reference do by doing a simple that year roster size / 18 ratio type).
You risk really strongly to end up doing exactly what hockey reference do, average team scoring, some roster size ratio, which is not bad per say but already available.
Namba 17
Registered User
- May 9, 2011
- 1,711
- 575
Thats why I compare result only inside time periods with the same amout of teams in the League.
I havent see anything like what i did but if anybody already did this i wont complain
But to say if its the same or not - people should see what i did. and it seems that thats the main problem
If you know how to put tables here I can send my results to you, if you wish and you will post them here in better shape
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,783
- 6,275
I was more talking about the number of players that play for a team, nhl roster size changed constantly.
The history of roster sizes
I've searched a decent amount on this, but haven't been able to find any concrete answers. Since many of you guys have access to incredible resources, and many of you guys are incredible resources yourselves, I figured I'd ask here and give it a shot. Obviously, in the NHL today the roster...
- 1925-26 - Teams to dress a maximum of 12 players for each game from a roster of no more than 14 players.
- 1928-29 - Exclusive of goaltenders, team to dress at least 8 and no more than 12 skaters.
- 1938-39 - Maximum number of players in uniform increased from 14 to 15.
- 1942-43 - Player limit reduced from 15 to 14. Minimum of 12 men in uniform abolished.
- 1949-50 - Clubs allowed to dress 17 players exclusive of goaltenders.
- 1951-52 - Number of players in uniform reduced to 15 plus goaltenders.
- 1952-53 - Teams permitted to dress 15 skaters on the road and 16 at home.
- 1952-53 - Teams permitted to dress 15 skaters on the road and 16 at home.
- 1954-55 - Number of players in uniform set at 18 plus goaltenders up to December 1 and 16 plus goaltenders
- 1960-61 - Number of players in uniform set at 16 plus goaltenders.
- 1965-66 - Teams required to dress two goaltenders for each regular-season game.
- 1971-72 - Number of players in uniform set at 17 plus 2 Goaltenders.
- 1982-83 - Number of players in uniform set at 18 plus 2 goaltenders.
Even in the 06 era, roster shift quite a bit.
In 52-53 if you are not Red Kelly and play defense, you will not score many goals, all the Ds in the nhl scored combined 95 goals (19 of those from Kelly)
There was 1006 goals scored that year, a bit less than 9.5% of them by Ds, by 66-67 they scored 155 goals in a league that scored 1252, they share increased to 12.4%.
That would naturally decrease the percentage of goals of forward scorer, should this impact how good they are considered at scoring ?
Namba 17
Registered User
- May 9, 2011
- 1,711
- 575
Interesting point, but it didnt affect numbers (or almost didn't), while changing of amount of teams definately did. And you can see it in my tables alsoI was more talking about the number of players that play for a team, nhl roster size changed constantly.
The history of roster sizes
I've searched a decent amount on this, but haven't been able to find any concrete answers. Since many of you guys have access to incredible resources, and many of you guys are incredible resources yourselves, I figured I'd ask here and give it a shot. Obviously, in the NHL today the roster...forums.hfboards.com
- 1925-26 - Teams to dress a maximum of 12 players for each game from a roster of no more than 14 players.
- 1928-29 - Exclusive of goaltenders, team to dress at least 8 and no more than 12 skaters.
- 1938-39 - Maximum number of players in uniform increased from 14 to 15.
- 1942-43 - Player limit reduced from 15 to 14. Minimum of 12 men in uniform abolished.
- 1949-50 - Clubs allowed to dress 17 players exclusive of goaltenders.
- 1951-52 - Number of players in uniform reduced to 15 plus goaltenders.
- 1952-53 - Teams permitted to dress 15 skaters on the road and 16 at home.
- 1952-53 - Teams permitted to dress 15 skaters on the road and 16 at home.
- 1954-55 - Number of players in uniform set at 18 plus goaltenders up to December 1 and 16 plus goaltenders
- 1960-61 - Number of players in uniform set at 16 plus goaltenders.
- 1965-66 - Teams required to dress two goaltenders for each regular-season game.
- 1971-72 - Number of players in uniform set at 17 plus 2 Goaltenders.
- 1982-83 - Number of players in uniform set at 18 plus 2 goaltenders.
Even in the 06 era, roster shift quite a bit.
In 52-53 if you are not Red Kelly and play defense, you will not score many goals, all the Ds in the nhl scored combined 95 goals (19 of those from Kelly)
There was 1006 goals scored that year, a bit less than 9.5% of them by Ds, by 66-67 they scored 155 goals in a league that scored 1252, they share increased to 12.4%.
That would naturally decrease the percentage of goals of forward scorer, should this impact how good they are considered at scoring ?
