Was Mike Gartner underrated?

[Yozhik v tumane]

How many other players have their career rank in a major category (goals - 8th all time) higher than all but one single season finish (5th, 9th, 9th, 9th, 10th are best finishes).

That would have to be extremely rare and make a clear comparable difficult.

Had a look at Dave Andreychuk. Currently sits at 15th in goals scored all-time, however he retired 11th. Has seasons finishing 4th, 9th and 12th in league goal scoring, so he clears it.

Edit: Shanahan, Selänne, Jagr and Ovechkin are the players who’ve surpassed Andreychuk since.

 

[sr edler]

None of that is relevant to his consistency in goal scoring.

Gartner has more 40 goal seasons, than Bure has 20 goal seasons for comparison.

Bure's got point scoring finishes that reads 2nd, 3rd, 5th and 7th, in the league, two of those while missing a bunch of games. I don't know what Gartner's best point scoring finish is, but apparently his best goal scoring finishes are 5th, 9th, 9th, 9th and 10th? Bure's 1st, 1st, 1st. He also had a 1st in the best-on-best 1998 Olympics, voted best forward. He scored 16 (1st) in the playoffs once, where he also had a 16-game point streak which is the longest of all-time outside of Gartner's high-flying 80s (only behind Trottier and MacInnis).

I don't know why we're even doing this, comparing Bure and Gartner, outside of wasting this site's precious bandwidth (perhaps forcing yet another one of its many software updates?). vadim asked up-thread "why señor?" and I agree with him. This is a highly pointless discussion because Gartner vs Pacioretty really is a much more valid comparison.

 

[MadLuke]

Did not follow the plot but is seem to be that some strawman is going on.

Has anyone suggested that through their respective career Bure was more consistant at scoring a total amount of goal during that season ?

Gartner could be a top 3 most consistent goal scorer of all time (with Bossy and few that would compete), about all is season are around 35 adjusted goals +/- 8 type except the last one and a lock-out year.

I doubt there some people the other side of that debate, the obvious Bure > Gartner argument is not build on career total consistency.

 

[sr edler]

At least no-one's called Gartner "the Ned Flanders of hockey" in the thread yet, which happened in OP's prior Gartner thread here on HOH, some 2+ years ago.

How good was Mike Gartner?

 

[Gorskyontario]

Bure's got point scoring finishes that reads 2nd, 3rd, 5th and 7th, in the league, two of those while missing a bunch of games. I don't know what Gartner's best point scoring finish is, but apparently his best goal scoring finishes are 5th, 9th, 9th, 9th and 10th? Bure's 1st, 1st, 1st. He also had a 1st in the best-on-best 1998 Olympics, voted best forward. He scored 16 (1st) in the playoffs once, where he also had a 16-game point streak which is the longest of all-time outside of Gartner's high-flying 80s (only behind Trottier and MacInnis).

I don't know why we're even doing this, comparing Bure and Gartner, outside of wasting this site's precious bandwidth (perhaps forcing yet another one of its many software updates?). vadim asked up-thread "why señor?" and I agree with him. This is a highly pointless discussion because Gartner vs Pacioretty really is a much more valid comparison.

If Pavel Bure was so good, why did he peak at 110 points in similarly high scoring era as Gartner?

 

[CTHabsfan]

Mike Gartner was a very good hockey player who didn't play on very good teams. He only played 122 playoff games in 19 seasons.

 

[sr edler]

If Pavel Bure was so good, why did he peak at 110 points in similarly high scoring era as Gartner?

You're doing the classic mainboard mistake of focusing on totals, instead of looking at scoring clips and surroundings. In 92–93 (110 points) he scored at a 1.32 clip but next season he had 107 points in 76 games, which is a 1.40 clip. This is also the season no-one scored as much as Bure from the turn of the new year and the end of the season.

Also, ironically enough, when Bure had his 107-point season in 93–94 the closest teammate (Geoff Courtnall, same guy Gartner couldn't separate himself from scoring wise during his last season with WSH) had 70 points, which is a 37 point gap. When Gartner scored 102 points the closest teammate (Bobby Carpenter) had 7 fewer points, and 3 more goals. So who really played with better line-mates. Bure for half of that season carried around Gino Odjick on his line.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

At least no-one's called Gartner "the Ned Flanders of hockey" in the thread yet, which happened in OP's prior Gartner thread here on HOH, some 2+ years ago.

How good was Mike Gartner?

funnily enough, in 2016 i also had previously called gartner “ned flanders.” only it wasn’t in reference to him being meek, but because he has a moustache and is extremely religious.

receipts

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

Indeed seventeen 30-goal seasons (2nd most all time) and nine 40-goal seasons (tied 5th all time with Bossy).

Bossy's 9 straight 50 goal seasons, right?

 

[Gorskyontario]

You're doing the classic mainboard mistake of focusing on totals, instead of looking at scoring clips and surroundings. In 92–93 (110 points) he scored at a 1.32 clip but next season he had 107 points in 76 games, which is a 1.40 clip. This is also the season no-one scored as much as Bure from the turn of the new year and the end of the season.

Also, ironically enough, when Bure had his 107-point season in 93–94 the closest teammate (Geoff Courtnall, same guy Gartner couldn't separate himself from scoring wise during his last season with WSH) had 70 points, which is a 37 point gap. When Gartner scored 102 points the closest teammate (Bobby Carpenter) had 7 fewer points, and 3 more goals. So who really played with better line-mates. Bure for half of that season carried around Gino Odjick on his line.

I didn't say Gartner was a better goal scorer than Bure(obviously he was more consistent).

What I said was at their peaks, the caliber of player they were wasn't a huge disparity. 110 vs 102 points.


Canucks fans like to pretend Bure averaged 140 points a year.

 

[MadLuke]

What I said was at their peaks, the caliber of player they were wasn't a huge disparity. 110 vs 102 points.

110 pts was Bure second season in the league, only 21, not sure if he peaked yet.

Career
Goals.: 5-8-9-9-9-10
Points: 10th
PPG...: no top 10

vs
Goals.: 1-1-1-3-5
Points: 2-3-5-7
PPG...: 3-7-7-8

In the playoff Bure scored at an 45 goals - 90points by 82 games pace during his career and his peak was a strong Smythe winning run, Gartner in his career scored at a 29 goals - 63 points pace.

Peak Bure is 5 goals in an Olympics medal round game, outscoring all the league in goals, huge is subjective but it is more significant than 110 vs 102 I feel like.

When Gartner had 102 pts the average non Gretzky Top 10 players had 115, when Bure scored 107 in 1994 winning the Rocket it was 107, when he scored 94 in 2000 it was 86.

 

[Gorskyontario]

110 pts was Bure second season in the league, only 21, not sure if he peaked yet.

Career
Goals.: 5-8-9-9-9-10
Points: 10th
PPG...: no top 10

vs
Goals.: 1-1-1-3-5
Points: 2-3-5-7
PPG...: 3-7-7-8

In the playoff Bure scored at an 45 goals - 90points by 82 games pace during his career and his peak was a strong Smythe winning run, Gartner in his career scored at a 29 goals - 63 points pace.

Peak Bure is 5 goals in an Olympics medal round game, outscoring all the league in goals, huge is subjective but it is more significant than 110 vs 102 I feel like.

When Gartner had 102 pts the average non Gretzky Top 10 players had 115, when Bure scored 107 in 1994 winning the Rocket it was 107, when he scored 94 in 2000 it was 86.

Ok, all that is fine and I'm not saying Gartner was a better offensive catalyst than Bure.

Bure's peak came during a similarly high scoring era. The best he managed was 110 points, which is obviously really good but only 8 more points than Gartner's best.

 

[MadLuke]

Yes 92-93 if anything was higher scoring for elite players than 1985 (or at least would not surprise me), but that was only Bure second season, not sure it was his peak, 94 could have been (the oldest he got pre injury).

 

[Dingo]

I think he doesn't QUITE meet the requirement as stated, because he didn't make the HHOF and it could be argued that his spike year happened by riding the coattails of a MUCH better D-Men (but he also peaked higher than 10th so it's somewhat mitigated), something Gartner never quite did, but like Gartner, he was also arguably never the best player at his position on his own team WHEN PLAYING ON A NOT TERRIBLE TEAM (and I mean forward here, not RW), despite sometimes being the better scorer, while probably hovering around 20th best in the NHL. Was also statistically productive for a long time because he could do one thing really well, that thing being offence.

Meet Matthieu Schneider.

Just looking at Ryan Suter, who is now 40

Many, many times considered a top 10 dman, whereas Gartner one time was a top 10 point accumulator.

I think that points to Suter being a better dman than Gartner a forward, but he has 690 'points' and no Norrises to show for it, so.....

I think we are undervaluing dmen by weighing on point totals (ESPECIALLY from higher scoring eras)

Yes 92-93 if anything was higher scoring for elite players than 1985 (or at least would not surprise me), but that was only Bure second season, not sure it was his peak, 94 could have been (the oldest he got pre injury).

yes, i dont think he was yet his best offensively.

He was broken for much of prime, and those Panther years were late prime, but those are some underrated years, specifically because he didnt crack 100pts... but so few did (Jagr)

 

[MXD]

Just looking at Ryan Suter, who is now 40

Many, many times considered a top 10 dman, whereas Gartner one time was a top 10 point accumulator.

I think that points to Suter being a better dman than Gartner a forward, but he has 690 'points' and no Norrises to show for it, so.....

I think we are undervaluing dmen by weighing on point totals (ESPECIALLY from higher scoring eras)

I'm not even sure that needed to be pointed out honestly. Anyone?

Like, my Matthieu Schneider comparison was probably a bit mean to Gartner, but Gartner is definitely closer to Schneider than to Suter.

I'm still sticking to Wesley. Both could do the things expected from wingers and D-Men, respectively, for a rather long period of time, while being great skaters. It's just that doing these things as forwards will make you a HHOFer if played in the right timespan, while Wesley is just remembered as a solid contributor, albeit a somewhat forgettable one in the grand scheme of things.