MXD
Partying Hard
- Oct 27, 2005
- 51,675
- 17,533
Points not seasons?
I'm pretty sure it was a point factor.
Points not seasons?
My God.....
I mean really.
Fantastic work. Out of curiosity are you doing this manually, or is there a place to easily track this? I tried looking in the past for international results but didn't have as much luck.
So one Ottawa season equals 2-3 on the longevity scale.
Yes it is really almost unbelievably weak to go from scoring 14 points in 15 games at the group stage level to scoring 1 point in 8 games at the knockout stage. There are different ways to lose. You can go out fighting and with your head held high and you can go out like Ovechkin often has done throughout his international career.
Fun fact. Nikita Kucherov has already scored more best-on-best tournament knockout stage points (2 pts in 1 gp) than Ovechkin has done throughout his career.
I did it manually by going through the boxscores.
Note: Like seventieslord's valuing of the WHA years at 0.5 (two great years there equivalent to one in the NHL - a formula I used on Bobby Hull), so I join many on this History board in seeing pre-consolidation NHL And PCHA as a two-seasons-for-one value deal.
Whoa whoa whoa, let's show down here. It's 0.7, and that's with regards to points. A 100 point WHA season is worth a 70 point season in the same year in the NHL... Approximately, of course.
As for the PCHA, if it even was behind the NHA\NHL between 1913 and 1921, it wasn't by much. There's no way it's comparable to the WHA on the sense that it was a weaker league needing discounting. All you need to remember is that any scoring finish (in the pcha, nha, NHL, wchl) should be multiplied by two, to get a reasonable estimation of its post-1926 equivalent. A player cannot finish 10th in points in the pcha twice and then be deemed to have "the equivalent of one top 10 season" - that would greatly overstate his value.
Got it.All you need to remember is that any scoring finish (in the pcha, nha, NHL, wchl) should be multiplied by two, to get a reasonable estimation of its post-1926 equivalent.
Lol. Yeah. I've detailed his multiple all-star selections at three world championships in the 1980's (three medals for his country), winning games at the 1988 Olympics in Calgary, backstopping a tie against Canada in the 1987 Canada Cup, giving up only goals engineered by Gretzky, Messier, Lemieux and Bourque.
Do we give weight to the pre-NHL play of Soviets? Are there any career Czechoslovakians on top120 lists?
Makarov, Kharlamov, Tretiak, Fetisov, Mikhailov, Firsov... what they did at the world championships will be given weight. Why shouldn't Hasek's three all-star world championships? (Heck. he played AGAINST the mighty Soviets!)
86-90 + 93-02 ... that's 15 years of greatness.
From being the youngest ever Czechoslovakian national team member (1984 Canada Cup) to winning the Stanley Cup 18 years later...
How did you come up with the WHA to NHL point conversion?
Yzerman and Forsberg EARNED their Selke trophies through commitment to the grunt work of physically checking the puck carrier.
Messier is the closest this round. He with Tikkanen checked as effectively as Modano with Lehtinen. In both cases, the winger got Selke voting attention but they were effective as duos.
Apropos the issue of Morenz vs. Messier in a defensive capacity, can we at least agree that Morenz was a more effective defender in his time than Messier was in his(?)
Whoa whoa whoa, let's show down here. It's 0.7, and that's with regards to points. A 100 point WHA season is worth a 70 point season in the same year in the NHL... Approximately, of course.
As for the PCHA, if it even was behind the NHA\NHL between 1913 and 1921, it wasn't by much. There's no way it's comparable to the WHA on the sense that it was a weaker league needing discounting. All you need to remember is that any scoring finish (in the pcha, nha, NHL, wchl) should be multiplied by two, to get a reasonable estimation of its post-1926 equivalent. A player cannot finish 10th in points in the pcha twice and then be deemed to have "the equivalent of one top 10 season" - that would greatly overstate his value.
Forsberg earned his Selke trophy votes (2nd to Peca) and Sakic, yeah, runner-up to Madden.Forsberg never won the Selke even though he was close, as was Sakic.
Nighbor's offensive record is also overly inflated due to playing in Ottawa. Last word on topic. Don't imply that I'm lacking in knowledge.
I don't see how Crosby wins a believable Selke...Bergeron seems to be better than ever, Barkov is on the up, Couturier, Marchand, O'Reilly, (Kopitar (awful so far but...)) and so on. I happen to consider Yzerman's Selke to be very much of a 'we recognize you were great, tough **** about Gretzky and Lemieux, but here, your transformation will be duly noted and praised'. Crosby doesn't have that case. But, I never count him out so if he decides to go that way 100% then maybe...
I agree that he raises his game significantly in that regard in the PO's but his RS is mostly 'responsible', pretty good today.
Yzerman and Forsberg EARNED their Selke votes through commitment to the grunt work of physically checking the puck carrier.
Messier is the closest this round. He with Tikkanen checked as effectively as Modano with Lehtinen. In both cases, the winger got Selke voting attention but they were effective as duos.
How did you come up with the WHA to NHL point conversion?
yes, absolutely. At least three people that I know, including myself, have taken a much more granular approach to the problem of the pre 1926 leagues. What I quoted to you today, is just a very simple rule of thumb for people who want something quick and dirtyI remember this.
What I can't remember is : was there some provision to have a "1" finish somewhere, when a player had a REALLY good season?